Meeting participants approved an authorization list for the county’s TextStar and TextPool messaging services, adding the investment committee and two named individuals to the approved users list.

Speaker 2, Meeting participant (role not specified), introduced the agenda item and said: “Item number 15 is to approve the authorized users for our TextStar and TextPool.” Speaker 4, Meeting participant (role not specified), explained who was to be added: “I’ve added the investment committee, Lloyd, myself, and Dana to be approved for Yes. Both.” Speaker 1, Meeting participant (role not specified), moved the approval, and the motion was recorded with the meeting calling for a vote; the transcript records “All in favor, aye. Aye.”

Nut graf: The county added the investment committee plus Lloyd and Dana to the authorized user lists for two county mass-notification systems. The transcript records the administrative approval but does not provide job titles for Lloyd or Dana or specify the scope of each user’s permissions within TextStar or TextPool.

Details: The item was presented as routine administration of access to messaging systems. The transcript does not describe any limitations on the authorized users’ access levels nor does it indicate which department will manage the accounts. The names Lloyd and Dana were stated with no additional identification in the provided transcript.

Ending: The motion to approve the authorized users for TextStar and TextPool was carried according to the transcript; the meeting did not record further details about account administration or permissions.