Good morning to everybody. Let's, get started. Roll call. Miss Pena? Yes. Mister Alfred? Present. Mister Bryant? Here. Miss Here. Mister Robert? Here. Mister Barnes? Present. Mister Blaylock? Present. Mister Campos? Present. Mister Morris? Here. Miss Burgess? We do have a quorum? We have a quorum. I'd like to invite, Clay Reid, lead pastor of Southlake Baptist Church to the podium to lead us in the invocation. Good morning. Let's pray. Lord, we give thanks for our time together.
We pray blessing over this meeting. We pray for help for people who are leading it. Lord, we pray for the employees who work in this office today. We just pray that you would give them grace and help as they talk to citizens and make decisions. We pray for peace and for blessing and for help for them. You tell us in scripture that if any of us lack wisdom, we can ask you and you give it to us. And so today, on behalf of this board and the people who work here, we pray for wisdom, for integrity, and, Lord, that you would bless them as they make
decisions and work together. Fill this room with peace, protect this place, and be with this group as they lead. Thank you, Jesus, most of all for what you've done for us on the cross. And it's in Jesus' name we pray. Amen. Amen. To join me in the, pledges. First, The United States. I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America, and to the Republic for which Thank you.
Be seated. Well, thanks for being here this morning. Some of the board members, I see you out and about. Those who I don't see, it's good to see you when we get the chance to come together. This is my favorite time of the year. The weather has finally changed a little bit. We're third week of college football season, which is the best time of the year. And, dove season opens, so it's a pretty good time as well. However, I was driving over here this morning, and I saw somebody putting up their Christmas lights already. And I'm like, come on. Give me a break. This is a little bit fast. But, it's good to see everybody. We'll get started with the, agenda.
First taxpayer liaison, doctor McLean. Thank you so much. You know, there's a society that, gives us a mantra, and it's called, may you live in interesting times. Now, you might spend some time deciding if that's a blessing or a curse, but we always have interesting times dealing with TAD, dealing with, our modern societal issues. Not a lot of, topical growth in any, specific category of comment or need for information or complaint, following up the normal formal season, except for, and I think you'll
find this interesting, in military disability documentation. And I'm always impressed by some of those, inquiries civilian lives. And finding good, attractive, affordable housing is something that is so meaningful for them. And sometimes as, as workers, we we look at it as face value.
And certainly, we can't for them because it is that had quite an uptick during this last month of activity. I can't tell you exactly why. It's kind of an outlier piece of data that I thought I'd share with you today, but it's one that I fully appreciate. Now there are no, pending complaints, with the board. I thought you'd find that good news. And like you, Chairman Barnes, I'd like to say welcome to the cool weather, dove season, football season, and all of the fun things.
Nice patio time, if nothing else, that that make this time of year a wonderful time. Thank you for listening. Any questions? Thank you. Thank you for what you do. Mister Bobbitt. Yes, sir. Starting off, we have an update on the True Roll, Homestead audit and exemption process. And so we have, received 36,000 roughly, homestead applications just through the normal course of business. These weren't ones that we asked them to reapply. It's just due to deeds and other kind of changes, people have have reached out
to us and applied. Out of those, we've we've approved 31,000. There's been 2,700 that been denied, and there's, about 1,900 that's still pending. The True Roll system, 56% of the applications we receive, it recommends that we approve them. There's enough information in the system that it can basically validate that the person lives there and that is their primary residence. 44%, it recommends that we need additional information or there's some sort of flag that may indicate that the person may not be this may not be their primary residence. Investigate these in the individual applications. On the decisions, out of the ones that it recommends or had told us we
need additional information on, 92% still get approved and 8% end up being finally denied. On the next page, there's 651,000 parcels that that are eligible for a homestead. There's 420,000 parcel that actually received the exemption, the homestead exemption, as of August 27. And so far, we've removed due to the audit. We removed 10,677 exemptions that were erroneous or not the person was not entitled to
it. That ended up being about $65,000,000 in in total taxable value recovered to the to the system and about $1,400,000 that actually came back in levy to the entities. Out of that, like there's out of the 420 something thousand, most of them have been validated by the system. There's roughly, 28,000 that has flagged in some manner. So that limits normally, if had we gone through our normal process that we were doing previously, we would have mailed 90,000 letters and made 90,000 people reapply and and
start the whole process over. And roughly a third of those people would never have responded to us and we would remove their exemption and cause this this big process with yank their exemptions and then having to reapply them later. And so now we're only having to touch a third of people that we would have, and these are almost almost guaranteed to be invalid to begin with. So it this whole process, I think that the cost was around $420,000 and it returned 1,400,000.0 to the end. So almost a three to one, return on investment. So we're pleased with this product and it it will come up later as an
action item for the board to renew. On the next, camera conversion, these are the top 25 entities based on size and and levy. And so right now, at the county, between true prodigy, the new system, and the current system, we're off by $75. So out of $400,000,000,000 roll, we're off $75. We we think that is pretty phenomenal at this point. We're moving forward. The staff are all really excited about it. It brings a lot of capabilities to us. And so, right now, we think we're in a good place to to make the change over in January.
Do you have a good idea where that $75 is? We can probably give you the the properties that it's off. Can you just take the collection for it? Yeah. It's on your house here. You owe a little bit more. I can donate the 25¢ if needed to to cover that. But we have it by property, and so we're we're pleased with with the results at this point. And I believe that is the end of my report unless you all have questions. Any other questions? Thank you. Committee reports, budget, Kelly? I don't have any issues. IT, Allen? So I think my life.
Yep. I think Joe Don kinda covered. We've had, numerous conversations related to the camera conversion and, the numbers look promising. We're in a much better place than we were, at our last meeting. And all four entities that are involved in the conversion, TAD, County, Group Prodigy, and Spindle Media that handles part of their communications are all in agreement, all bought, all in. We're we're full forward go. Everyone is committed to making this making this occur.
I'll ask Fred to speak for a moment because he's been far more intimately involved in portions of this than me. But but I think we're in a really good place right now. I'll just echo what's already been said. You know, conversions are really difficult. They always start out kind of crazy, and then they start coming together. We are definitely in coming together. They've made metamorphic improvements over the last thirty days. Definitely on board that we'll make January, and we have all the right people communicating and I think files are gonna come across to the Tarrant County even faster.
So I feel very confident we're gonna be fine by January. Any questions? Thank you. Rules, Mike, is on the agenda for later, so we'll hold that, till we get there. Action items, consent agenda. We have four items on the well, three items on the consent agenda. First is action regarding approval of Board Director Meeting Minutes from August 12. Second is action regarding approval to submit application to Text Pool. And then three is action regarding permission for Chief Appraiser to enter into an internal legal agreement with the Tarrant County Sheriff's Department. Is there any questions about any of those?
I move to approve. Yeah. I move to approve the consent agenda. Is there a second? Second. There's second. All in pair they need discussion? All in all in favor, say aye. Oh, well, did what you gotta do on here. Sorry. Motion carries unanimously. Next addition. Our next item on the agenda is action items. Action item A is approved renewal of contract with True Roll for Homestead Audit Services. Mr. Bobbitt? So, like I said, we recommend we lock in a multi year contract.
So is this our first year with True Roll? Yes, sir. I mean, if we look at the numbers going forward, do we think we're going to discover a lot more? Where's our win going forward? And again, it was a great job. Yeah. Great job, but It it does a couple of things. So one service it provides to taxpayers, it makes has online applications so they can apply easier, quicker, and get quicker turnarounds. Otherwise, we have a three week turnaround as we try to process these app applications manually. So especially when it gets to, like, February, January, people want their want their exemption
applied before the tax bill becomes due, they want to see that quick return around. It allows us to validate them. So if if somebody's no longer loses eligibility, if they move out of the house or somebody passes away, the quicker we can find that and remove it, it prevents Yeah. Oh, the microphone's off. So can you repeat all that? Yes. I'll I'll put a motion on the floor to approve the multi year contract. It's been moved that we approve Second. Four a has been seconded. This is a public hearing. I do not see any public speakers. Do you?
Sure. I that's alright. Go. Come on up. Alright. I really appreciate this. Just wanna mention that I've had several calls in the my office from people that have, received these notices losing homestead exemptions or, other types of exemptions. I think that the appraisal district and the the technology is doing a great job like it or not. It's doing a great job. I just want to tap the brakes a little bit and bring this caution. There are some people that are getting their homestead their exemptions removed, and they shouldn't
be. We've had a couple of cases this go around where they received a notice and they said, hey. The notice said, we think that you're dead. And, the people call our office and they say, quote, that's BS. Robin and I are both alive and well. Or somebody says, good morning, mister Crouch. It's definitely a mistake. My wife and I are very much alive and well. There must have been some kind of mistake. Anyway, it goes on and on. I just wanna mention, that kind of in the legal system, the way that our government chooses to run is that if there's any chance that it might be legitimate
or you're not guilty of a crime, then you're running free. And it it's it's cringey because we know that people run free that are guilty of crimes, but that's the way that we work in America. So I'm just saying the oversight that Tad has on this contract, I think, is important. If there's any kind of adjustment that could be made to maybe provide some evidence as to what the scenario was that caused you guys to think that the exemption wasn't okay, that might help. I don't know. I just I I see the consumer into this. I'm I'm sure y'all are getting plenty of notices, as well as the taxpayer liaison.
I just thought I'd mention that. I also wanna say this. In Denton County, the turnaround time for getting exemptions approved is absolutely horrendous. It's, like, more than six months. So this three week turnaround time is an absolute service to the public. It's a good thing. So it's kind of a mixed bag. It's just something to think about. It's not like you just stamp it, approve it and go and it's all good. It's going to require some oversight and I would love to see Terry County continue to be a leader, as we go forward on this software as, you know, we have in other areas. Thank you.
Appreciate the stuff. We can make some refinements. Just note for the record that mister Krausch does have the ability to communicate with the dead. So that's it also must be how some of them vote during elections. The, is there any further there's no other speakers. I'd, entertain a motion to close public hearing. Motion is made to close public hearing. Is there a second? All in favor, closing public hearing. That's all we're doing right now. We're waiting on you now. You don't have to close public hearing. You could just the discussion of the branch closed. Okay. I can send it for both now. All in favor of closing public hearing, say aye.
Aye. Approve. Now back to the main motion. We have a motion to approve four a with a second. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor vote on your screen. What's the previous vote there? Is this where are we current now? You can see yes. It's It's passed. I don't know which screen I'm supposed to be looking at when. I'll tell you that passed. Four b, amend the tab, board of directors policy. So this is Mike. Yeah. Initially, I will say in the board packet, there's some confusion right now because we have got a what was supposed to have been a clean and a red line
version of the policy that made it out of the committee. The red line version that is the second one is the version that made out of the committee. It is a more condensed version. It is only eight pages, but the one that precedes that is is not the one that I put together. It's not the one that I revised. So, I'm not sure why that is even in the packet, for the first one. So the second one is the one that I'll be talking about, and that is
the quote unquote red line version. It is substantially the same as what was previously proposed through the committee, but it's been updated because of the legislative changes to include, a revision for the notice requirements to be at least three business days, which is what mister Tepper talked about, during the last meeting and advising us that it's no longer three days. It's now three business days for notice for items, on our agenda.
There are a few other minor changes in here where we have, enlisted mister Tepper's help to define a complaint for, certain items in here. So the red line version the other one, I I don't honestly, I don't know why it's there and reject that one. That is not one that that, I intended to be up for even discussion. So, that's where we stand on it.
I'm happy, Rick, for the other members of the committee, Fred and Gloria, to give any comments that they may have if they so choose. I can. We also added that the change of the mandatory training that was passed by the September 1 law. And I will tell you the version he's talking about that's coming out of committee is now the very first time in two years that we have been up to date with what the way we need to operate and the laws of the state of Texas. So I'm glad that that's finally happening. So it's so so that's fine.
I'm questioning what we're what we're talking about then. Are we talking about which version? Where did the second version read the first version. Where did the second version even come from? It was the original The first version is not there because it is the currently adopted version for your Harrison Lane. Thank you. Okay. And I had I just went being side by side. So So the red line version is the version that we're talking about right now at the committee. Okay. Correct. Alright. This, Eric, did you have a question? I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Okay. I just want a clarification.
So the first under item b, BOD policy 2025, that's what we currently And then the second one is the proposed. Yes. That's what we're currently under. And I just want clarification. The second one that's proposed, Mike, are you saying this is the one you proposed or is this or are you saying this is the one that you didn't know where it came from? I'm confused. I'm not sure what I'm looking at here. Yeah. Let me clarify. Okay. The, the second one that has got kind of the red line changes with the red in there and so forth, the additions, that is the one that not only
myself but the committee are endorsing that that we have approved out of committee. Okay. The the first one that is said that says BOD policy twenty twenty five dot o one dot fifteen, I now I did not understand. So my apologies if I created confusion, but apparently, that is the one that got adopted at the very first meeting, of the year and is the one that is currently in existence. So, the second one, the one that the committee is proposing will replace the first
one from earlier this year. Okay. So just clarification, proposed tag board policies, the second file, you you are recommending this? Correct. Which I'll okay. Just clarification. Thank you. And I will say also, I do believe that in a page, policy is much more efficient, takes out a lot of the ambiguity and vagueness in the much lengthier one. It's more direct and to the point. It's straightforward. And, like Gloria said, it is now it's consistent with, you know, updated law with
regard to what we're supposed to be doing here. So this also is a public hearing. There's nobody signed up to speak. So we will still think Wendy has it. Yes, ma'am. So, it we're talking, you said red line. So it's the one that has, red and blue Multiple copies. Text. Correct. And so what I would propose that if this passes today, we would sorry to get kinda technical in word and so forth, but we would accept those revisions and
then and this, the version that the committee is recommending has been reviewed by our attorney. It's out of committee, so it comes out as a motion. Is there a second? I'll second. It's been moved and seconded that we approve this. I got questions. Questions? So we're just point me to because I I read the first version not knowing what it was and marked it up. Where is the confirmation that we're in line then with the new law on when
meetings have to be called? Just give me a like, is it a, b, c, d? It is, a let's see. Developing board at meeting agendas under a one. Page two. Yeah. Page two? Whoever said that. Okay. Good. And then so Gloria said something about the training. Where is that in here? That is immediately above developing board meeting agendas. It's in the purple. Anniversary. Okay. Good. The original version got specific about where we were gonna do that training and that
training has not been determined as what it even includes yet. So to tell us specifically where we're gonna do anything, it was interesting that that frankly even passed because they just told every appraisal district in the state of Texas that you have to go through training but there's no training. So, we'll get to that whenever they choose to get to that which will come out of the comptroller's office. Okay. Good. It's been moved to second that we approve this red line version and then we'll make it non red line. Any further discussion? Yes, ma'am. I have a question on, a two with the eight business days.
I've we've talked about this so many times. I remember that there was a reason for it, but, can you, remind me what it is? Because we've, broached this subject so many times. What was the reason for moving it from, the however many number of days it was before to eight days prior, to the meeting? You know, Wendy, it's a good question. I've slept since then and I forgot what the motivation I mean, what is this? The fifth meeting we've tried to go through this and I think that was an
initial iteration, from five months ago. Part of my logic on that was I do a I do a meeting with the with the chief appraiser and executive secretary prior to our meetings to make sure we're actually ready to talk about what's on the agenda and we need that time to have that meeting. That's what that was about. I thought this was vague enough that it gave us some variance. That's why I thought it was acceptable. I kinda feel like people are kinda reading their red lines, so I'm gonna give this a moment. If we wanna look at other things in here. I'll just add Wendy from entities perspective.
Usually, a a week and a day is pretty standard for getting items onto the agenda. I know other, CADs, it's, it's much less time. So I just I was just asking globally for, the industry standard. Anything else? Seeing none, I'd entertain a motion. I mean, no. We have a motion. Seeing no further discussion, please vote. Passes unanimously. Thanks to those committee members. That was good work. Thank you. Thank you to Fred and Larry. Thanks to the whole board for us finally getting that done. That's been on the agenda since the history of time.
Where are we? Four c, action regarding award of contracts for medical, dental, vision, life, disability, and related insurance for TAD employees for 2026. Mister Bobbitt? We went out to to bid for health insurance. The the bids came back, basically to renew with our current provider, takes association of counties through Blue Cross Blue Shield. The renewal is a 9% increase, which is slightly bit more than what we actually budgeted. We did ask them for an alternate plan which included a health reimbursement allowance. It's a higher deductible but the increase in deductible, the district would would basically take
the risk of and we would set aside money to pay the extra $1,500 if if it actually incurred because we realized we'd we'd bought a really low deductible but most of the employees weren't using it. And so we were paying for a a benefit that was rarely being used. So by taking on the HRA, it it took we took on a little bit more risk but it saves us, roughly $30,000 upfront, we're expected. So it still provides a good benefit to the employee, some cost savings to the district. The difference is with the HRA, we did talk we do have two of our
vendors here. We have from TAC Lacy and then Monica from Hub, if you have more questions. But with HRA, when a cost is incurred, the employee has to come up with their normal deductible that they had originally. So up to $1,500 that they have to pay that they would have already had to pay. And then once they spend that $1,500, then we need an explanation of benefits from the insurance provider to show that what additional cost they have incurred and then the district will reimburse them the additional $1,500. And right now, we've got confirmation from Blue Cross Blue Shield through WEX, who'll be
the HRA provider, that they can set up a file feed and a direct deposit. So the money once we get that eel explanation of benefits from the insured provider, it'll flow directly to the HRA provider, and it'll automatically initiate a a payment to the staff. There could be some instances where it's just a little bit delayed, but for the most part, if it's if you go to the emergency room, you pay your deductible upfront and then you basically get reimbursed. Because usually the hospital comes back, you know, two months later with the itemized bill and all the other fun stuff.
And at that point, they get reimbursed. I just want some quick clarification. Is this increasing their out of pocket because you said 1,500, deductible? It goes up 1,500 also but it offsets by the HRA. So basically, what they actually see out of pocket would be the same. Okay. You said a second 1,500. Well, it's the same 1,500. So basically Okay. The deductible and the out of pocket both went up 1,500 roughly. Okay. And so the district is offsetting that. And so it's the same 1,500 that is covering both. So they're not out 3,000 instead of 15?
Yes ma'am. Okay. I have This is the public hearing. There's no speakers signed up to speak on this topic. Is there any discussion? Yes ma'am. Okay. So, this is gonna have to be a hard sell for me. And that's because, yes they'll get reimbursed, but what's the delay time? You're telling me three days, but when, I don't know if you all have ever been in the emergency room, but when you get there, the very first thing they do is slap that bill and say this is how much money you gotta come up with. So let's say it's $1,500 okay, fine, that might be a struggle to come up
with. But if they tell you you have to come up with $4,000 and then you have to wait three days to get it, but most hospitals will say they can't admit you unless you come up with this money. So does that patient have to wait three days? I mean, I don't think three days is soon enough. So I need a hard sell on how we're gonna help the employees to come up with this money when they have to have a large amount that they put down. And any one of the Do y'all wanna y'all can come up to the podium.
So maybe more detail on how this is supposed to help the employee. Yeah. So similar to the way that Hey. Introduce yourself so you will. Oh, I'm so sorry. My name is Monica Blakely. I'm with Hub. I'm, the insurance consultant. So the same way the medical plan is structured today, we'll take the middle plan because you have approximately 150 employees enrolled in that middle PPO plan. So currently, there's a 1,500 deductible. So to date, if someone goes into the hospital, outpatient surgery, they're already responsible for
that first 1,500. The next 1,500 is where the district would then pick up. From a a provider standpoint, I I do know that in some instances for like outpatient surgery, they're wanting the member portion upfront. However, they can work with that provider or that facility to structure a payment plan. Hospitals are very good at that. Until they can get the reimbursement, the EOB being processed, to get the money to them pay the balance that they would have incurred if they were state responsible for
that for all the 3,000 that they're trying to collect for that hospital stay. So what's the delay? So the delay ends up being on the provider's end. So normal, you know, kind of standard services are auto adjudicated, so those claims are processed fairly quickly. When it comes to the hospital claims, though inpatient particularly, those tend to take a little bit longer. Those are itemized claims. So, those need to go through the proper, you know, claims processing, whether there's an
audit, missing information from the provider over to the Tupelo Cross or payment. Those kind of things do happen on occasion, but those are typically the only ones that we would see. It's typically the inpatient type services. So they would have to delay their surgery if it's, inpatient, because they can't get reimbursed until Not necessarily. They would just need to schedule and I've done this from a personal level. You schedule a payment plan with the hospital. You might need to put a deposit, whether it's a couple $100 down, and then
schedule a monthly, reimbursement to the facility. By then, you would hope that you've already received that reimbursement back. So then you can discontinue the monthly payments hospital based on your HRA reimbursement. I don't like the hope part about that. I'm I'm just concerned for the employees and what they're gonna have to and I understand we had an employee committee that reviewed this, so I'd like to hear from the committee. What what input did they get from the employees that say that this would be acceptable? Because if I were if I were were at the lower end of the pay
scale here and I had to come up with all this money, it would be of great concern to me, to have to come up with this. And, you know, I don't have to worry about that personally, but I have been there. And so I'm worried about the employees. Yeah. I I mean, education, of course, is gonna be key and our team is prepared to assist the employees with that education. We would hope there you know, if there is an instance where an employee is struggling, they have upcoming surgery, they could reach out to our team and we can work with that provider to get that scheduled into a payment plan versus an upfront
payment. Is there any further discussion? I'm a move approval for c. Is there a second? Second. It's seconded. Any further discussion at this time? So just to be clear to repeat what she said, you're saying that they may not be out of pocket more that y'all can work with them to provide a payment plan to not have any additional upfront cost for all their waiting. Yep. That's correct. I don't like hope and I don't like me. I want certainty. Yeah. I I would just Yeah. As somebody who sells insurance, you're never gonna get it.
I'd lost it. Insurance certainty. You're never ever gonna but you're also a hospital that declines service to you because you can't come up with cash out of your pocket, you need to find a better hospital. That's why I'm I'll tell you that flat out. Either I've always had good insurance and my parents have always had good insurance or this, that, that doesn't happen, one or the other. Because I've never ever run into a situation where you're in an emergency room, and they say tough luck. You gotta walk back out the door because you can't come up with the money. It doesn't work that way.
There's a motion on the table, a second. Is there further discussion? All in favor, please vote. Motion carries eight to one. Thank you. Thank you. Four d, action on request to waiver a penalty of interest for late allocation payment from City of Richland Hills, miss Bob. Oh, we do have one speaker. On this topic. Yes, sir. Mister Crouch. Mister Crouch. Yeah. I've I should probably know more about this before I speak on it, because I
understand the details could matter. But it seems to me like this is just part of the same topic that's come up now. I don't know. I think it's seven times. Is this the seventh time? Okay. Same for me. And last time, I did have to leave the meeting early and understand it kinda didn't go the way that I would have hoped. I just wanna say this, like, we're living in a day and age where all this crazy Epstein stuff is going on, neither party is has their hands clean. We're getting lied to right and left by elected officials, and it doesn't stop at
the federal level. We're seeing that on the local level where we've got absolutely, absurd issues being taken up by one party or the other, and we're told that we're not conservative enough or liberal enough if we don't agree with this wacky issue that is neither conservative or liberal or whatever. And and people the government officials are shoving it down our throat. So we're in this kind of environment as a citizen. We're facing the government who's supposed to be the representative of the people, and now
we're giving special favors to people that or to to other government officials. And I see I see government officials commit crimes and just walk and nothing happens to them. You know? And I'll just say where where's my top? There we go. I I wasn't planning on speaking about this but, man, some the last meeting, Joe Bennett brought up the fact that we're doing bit we as in Tad is doing business with EECU And Randy Armstrong is sitting on the board at EECU, and Tad's
doing business with him. My opinion is that dude belongs in jail. And we're doing business with him after all the mess that happened in Tarrant County? Give me a break. And now this kind of junk? Like, seriously, guys, you are the government. You can adjust the due dates and figure out how to make sure that you're not having to give special favors. Like, that is kind of a special favor. But whenever I have to go talk to a lady who got her exemption revoked, because Tad had some evidence that said that she was renting out her house, so
they just revoked the 65 exemption. And then she has to fight to get it back on, but her tax bill is due and she has to pay the full tax bill. Her ceiling is gone, and, like, that's the environment we have. Like, this kind of thing just looks really bad. It gives me the e b g b's, b's, and this has gotta stop. This is just crazy. This is crazy. It's crazy. Come on. I wanna say, mister Bryant, thank you so much. You have consistently stood up time and time again, unwavering. It is a principal issue, and if you're a principal people, you have to stand up on this issue. The end. Thank you.
Four d relates to a letter that you have in your packet from the, who is this? From the director of finance new director of finance in Richland Hills. Is there discussion or a motion? I will look forward to motion to deny this request. I'll second that. I think this has been well discussed over many, many meetings and we arrived at a clear policy at our last meeting. It's been moved and seconded to deny, the per the request in four d's for further discussion. Hearing none, please vote. Oh, well, I just put the wrong thing.
Sorry. So I wanna clarify. A four vote is to deny Four and a vote is to deny. That's correct. Sorry. Four is to deny. Right? Yes. Yes. I did it right. Sorry. Motion carried, unanimously. Next thing on the agenda is for e, authorize chief appraisal spend committed reserve funds for services, software, and or hardware related to appraisal software for 2026 tax year. Mister Bobby? In the for the past month, we've entered into, like, a one month trial period with XTR, which is the ex Thompson Rotor employees who specialize in converting from Momentum
into other systems. So we've brought them on because we were having some some troubles balancing and getting the data out of Momentum. That has been helping with the conversion speed of conversion up. True Prodigy has also brought in additional resources that have experience with Momentum. And so together, that has been moving. We've been catching up with our our our conversion. And so what we'd like to do, is continue this for the next six months until we go live and and get an appraisal notices out. So with true, with XTR, it'd be at most a $100,000 and with true Prodigy,
it'd be 212,000. It's been working so we like to continue this. We're bringing it to you now because it's beyond my purchasing limit or or spending authorization. So basically, it's just to ensure our our continued success moving to the new system. Discussion. Nobody chose to speak on this one? No, sir. Yes, sir. I'll jump in. Obviously, you heard earlier that the CAD conversion is going well and kind of escalated it to make sure that we make our January deadline. This is absolutely needed to to make sure that we stay on target.
And IT the IT committee has been very involved and we're I I don't wanna speak on bare behalf, but I'm pleased with what's going on. I'll I'll speak to that as well. And thanks for mister Dodson, who is also very helpful. Yeah. Is there a motion? Move to approve. It's been moved. Is there a second? Second. Second. Moved to a second. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none. Vote. Four e carries unanimously. Next thing on the agenda is public comments. Only we have one speaker, mister Crouch. Whatever you forgot to say.
Yeah. No. I appreciate what you said at all. This is great. I love the format. Mister Barnes, thank you so much for the format. This is good stuff. So, time is running. I have stood up here and kinda given my own little taxpayer liaison, citizen representative, report, and, I just ran out of time. There's one group of folks that deserve some high fives and accolades, and that is the residential department, specifically the folks that interface with agents. Ever since I got started let's see. A few years after I got started, actually, they're they're these guys started to implement
a process to make it, it's it's not overly complex. It's just simple, practical, and it just works. The communication level, the responsiveness is just great, and I just wanna say that, I appreciate their work, and I'm not naming people, I don't think, anymore. Right? Getting yes. But those people know who they are in that department. So I just wanna say thank you to them. Also, I now understand that, I may not have been looking at the right board,
agenda board policy. So, so I don't know if this comment is out of place or not, but I did see where there was a number moved. It went from, where previously, if any contractor expense exceeded $50,000, it would be required to be board approval, or it would have to come before the board for approval. Now that number's moved to a $100,000, is that in the new packet? I I just wanna say, if it is, the reason it was set at $50,000
is because there was an ongoing payment paid to the district attorney that was, like, $50,000 a month or something crazy like that, and it just kept getting renewed without approval. And that's the reason it was set at that level, was because it was there was an egregious sin that had occurred. And so I just wanted to give you all the history on that. Let's move to the next thing here, which is probably the most important. Now we've got a brand new exemption for that that's coming into play. Seniors are gonna get more benefit through the new exemption.
When the 65 exemption, the homestead exemption were improved in previous years, there was a problem where seniors got left high and dry. They didn't go back and adjust the tax ceilings. The next time they improved the exemption, they corrected that, and they did go back for the seniors and adjust the tax ceilings. This time, nobody knows if the 65 benefits are going to adjust the tax ceilings. And I don't want to call any individual out by name. We just picked up the phone and called people at the appraisal district, at the
tax assessor's office, at the comptroller's office, the lieutenant governor's office, and now we've got a message into Bettencourt's office, and not one single person knows if that tax ceiling is gonna be adjusted that we've talked to. I probably should have called the chief appraiser and the tax assessor, but I didn't. Anyway, I just thought I would throw that out there. That's something that needs to be clarified. I thought saying it on this microphone might help, push that one. Thank you so much. I'm pretty sure it does. I believe last time they passed that law with built in an MCR compression and
that's we calculate the the ceilings each time tax rates or stuff gets compressed. So we recalculate calculate the ceilings now. I think we should hear from the attorney. Yeah. That's exactly right. When they did it two years ago, they made it so that anytime that there is an adjustment to the homestead exemption, you now automatically recalculate it. You're right in the past, it always had to be a part of the legislation, they forget it, then they come back two and four years later and redo it again, but now that is a permanent part of Texas law. So We have no further speakers under public comment.
Next thing on the agenda is recess to executive session. The closed session will pursue it to the following parts of the Texas Open Meeting Act, government codes, chapter five fifty one, section five fifty one, 71, 72, 74, and o 76. We will return from the executive session if we have any agenda items to bring it back to the body. All right. We're back from executive session. We have nothing to report out of that meeting. Is there anything else from board members? Next meeting is on the schedule for November 12, and we will see people then.
Appreciate it. Thank you. Is there a motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourn. It's been moved.