1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Budget Workshop
Wednesday, August 17, 2005
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge
H A."BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4
O
dO
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I N D E X
August 17, 2005
PAGE
--- Visitors' Comments 3
Review and discuss FY 2005-06 budgets for various
County departments including, but not limited to:
Road and Bridge 12
Information Technology 60
District Clerk 119
Tax Assessor/Collector 139
--- Adjourned 142
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
On Wednesday, August 17, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., a budget
workshop of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in
the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse,
Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in
open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me call to order the
Commissioners Court workshop -- budget workshop scheduled
for this date and time, Wednesday, August 17th, 2005, at
9 a.m. It's a bit past that time now. We've -- the agenda
is couched in a manner that we've listed some County
departments, but we -- I purposely couched it "various
County departments including, but not limited to" listed
departments, and Mr. David Dozier with K.I.S.D. Board of
Trustees is here and he has some solutions with respect to
our juvenile facility. So, we'll be glad to hear what you
have to offer on that, Mr. Dozier.
MR. DOZIER: Well, I think really all I
wanted to say, Judge, was that -- that we have some teachers
over there, and this year it's costing us about $150,000 to
have them over there, and so that's taxpayers' money. So
when y'all talk about $750,000, you have to add in $150,000,
and it's $900,000 of taxpayers' money. And Mr. Tomlinson
said last week that K.I.S.D. was just raking in money over
there, and that's an absolute falsehood. And -- and if --
8-17-05 bwk
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
if our -- our budget is kind of fixed. It's not like
y'all's, and have to worry about getting people in there and
all that. But -- but we need about 45 people to break even.
So, when y'all come up with all these solutions, it seems to
me like y'all were leaning towards 36, and 75 percent of 36
is more like 20-something.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me ask you, you
said it's costing you $150,000, but then you said you'd need
some number to break even?
MR. DOZIER: Our number is probably about 45.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. So if we got
the population up, you could get rid of your $150,000 cost?
MR. DOZIER: Yes. It's between --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
MR. DOZIER: We get back something like 5,000
or 6,000. Maybe 500. I'm not -- I don't know the exact
number, but it's -- but we get back a number around 5,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: State aid?
MR. DOZIER: Right. And, see, they do get a
multiplier, so if the A.D.A. is 2,500, well, we do get,
like, 5,000 or something like that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If we didn't have a
local juvenile facility, that 150,000 would be erased?
Would you absorb those teachers back into your system?
MR. DOZIER: Well, yeah, we would absorb
8-17-05 bwk
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
them. We have them under contract for this year.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Would the costs be
eliminated?
MR. DOZIER: Well, it --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Would your costs go
down 150,000 if --
MR. DOZIER: At least 150.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay.
MR. DOZIER: Right. But -- unless you can
get -- unless you can get 45 people in there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question, David, what
does K.I.S.D. do with the kids -- I mean, if they're -- I
guess if we don't have a facility, they go out of county and
it's some other school district's responsibility to educate
them; is that correct?
MR. DOZIER: Yeah, like what y'all have been
talking about.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So if we
MR. DOZIER: I guess they go through Judge
Tinley, and Judge Tinley sends them somewhere.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But if they go
to -- say they're in Gillespie County; then Gillespie ISD
has to figure out how to educate the kids. It's no longer a
Kerr County problem, and that money isn't passed back to the
county where they come from? I'm asking the question.
8-17-05 bwk
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Tommy's shaking his head.
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't think so. I think
the A.D.A. goes to the -- to the county where the kid
resides. That's my impression.
MR. DOZIER: Oh, if they live in the juvenile
facility over there? Yeah, that's probably right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the money goes there.
But, I mean, we lose -- K.I.S.D. has no responsibility if
the kids are housed in another county.
MR. DOZIER: Right.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And the other --
MR. TOMLINSON: But they still have the
teachers.
MR. DOZIER: For -- they're under contract
for a year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: For a year. So -- but
after that, you --
MR. DOZIER: And we can absorb them, and then
we can -- well, we could --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Reduce through attrition
or something?
MR. DOZIER: Yeah. We always have "X"
number; 20 -- 20, 30, something like that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The other key
learning here is that K.I.S.D. taxpayers are paying to
8-17-05 bwk
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
educate children from other counties.
MR. DOZIER: Right now.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. And so we're
paying to house and feed children from other counties.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that quid pro
quo extends all over this -- this juvenile spectrum. If we
send a kid out of county and their cost to house that kid is
greater than our per diem, the County is taking -- picking
up the difference just like we do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we get the state
revenue for the kids from other counties, so it's kind of --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah.
MR. DOZIER: Well, I guess what I really was
thinking of first, besides what Tommy said, was that
Commissioner Letz	said	that --	that	if we	were	to send	them
out of county, we	would	lose -	- it	would	cost	$200,000	or
something -- some number.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. DOZIER: Well, that's not too far from
what K.I.S.D. is losing right this minute.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does K.I.S.D. not put
some of their --
JUDGE TINLEY: Expelled?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- expelled kids -- kids
25 ~ that go out there that aren't part of the facility?
8-17-05 bwk
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's that
summertime program.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought it was.
MR. DOZIER: I'm not sure what the expelled
kids -- I know Dr. Troxel has worked with y'all, and we have
some slots that -- that we keep available and we pay for.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. DOZIER: But that's, like, four slots or
something like that.
JUDGE TINLEY: It's a -- it's a smaller
number. The advantage is that we've got the end -- end-game
result that these children that are trying to work their way
out of the system where they don't have to go to school at
all are looking at the end result, they'll be going to
school out there.
MR. DOZIER: Right. And it's a good
deterrent.
JUDGE TINLEY: Saves them from being thrown
out.
MR. DOZIER: It's really good to take the kid
out there and say, "Look, how would you like to live here?"
And -- and if you -- you're not going to be expelled and you
can go down and live at McDonald's or wherever you go --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And they pay us a
whopping $22.18 a day or something like that.
8-17-05 bwk
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Something like that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, David, what you're
basically saying is that from K.I.S.D.'s just dollar
standpoint alone, you're better off either having no
facility in Kerr County or having 45 kids?
MR. DOZIER: Yeah. For -- if we're not
talking about -- we're trying to take care of kids.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just pure dollars. It's
either nothing or 45. Otherwise, it's costing the
taxpayers.
MR. DOZIER: Yes. If it's 43, it's costing
some number. May be only $10,000. But -- but I think when
I was thinking of it, you said it would cost 200,000 or
something just to send those 10 out or whatever they are.
And -- and if you did, we wouldn't get money for those 10.
But we wouldn't -- but we would absorb those teachers into
the school somewhere.
COMMISSIONER LETZ:
MR. DOZIER: Yeah.
would drift them out through attr
encouraging y'all to do anything,
the facts. And -- and when Mr. -
said, that was very irritating to
For one year.
And then we would -- we
ition. And so I'm not
but I want you to know all
- when Tommy said what he
me. And --
MR. TOMLINSON: My point, sir, was that you
8-17-05 bwk
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. DOZIER: But you said we're raking in the
MR. TOMLINSON: I think that's a false
statement, sir. I didn't -- I didn't imply that.
MR. DOZIER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The reason I --
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't want to be accused of
something like that. You understand me?
MR. DOZIER: I understand.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. And my point was, is
that we get the A.D.A. from the kids that come from other
counties. Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The reason I was
asking the question about whether or not K.I.S.D. was
subsidizing out-of-county children, other counties'
children, and the point that we are, I made that point
because an editorialist said we ought to be happy to help
solve these other counties' problems by incurring these
costs to house their children, and I -- I reject that. I
don't think we -- we can barely afford to take care of our
own children, let alone incur costs to take care of somebody
else's children.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think -- and also,
I think an interesting point is there's been a lot of talk
about having a preadjudication facility in the county only.
8-17-05 bwk
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
From a K.I.S.D. standpoint, that's a bad option. A very bad
option.
MR. DOZIER: Well, unless you do -- I was
thinking the number might be 60, and take 75 percent of
that, and that's 45.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But if it's
preadjudication only, we're probably looking at about 20
maximum.
MR. DOZIER: Twenty, we lose -- we lose in
the neighborhood of half of 262,000, which is 135,000,
140,000. And this year alone, we're going to lose about --
we don't have all of our numbers in, but it looks like it's
going to be in the neighborhood of 150,000, so I just wanted
y'all to -- to have all the facts together.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And this is just a
general -- you're president of the school board?
MR. DOZIER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is this just -- I know,
because of the way boards are -- is this your opinion, or is
this your statement or the school board's?
MR. DOZIER: This is my opinion. We talked
about it at the school board last night, and I think I've
got my facts clear. But it's my opinion. It's not --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The board didn't direct
25 ~ you to come?
8-17-05 bwk
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. DOZIER: We didn't have a resolution
saying come over here and tell y'all that or thinking like
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. DOZIER: I've been thinking about it for
a week, so --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I just wanted to
get that clear. I know boards --
MR. DOZIER: No, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. DOZIER: Thank you, Commissioners.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Appreciate you
being here.
MR. DOZIER: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move into the -- the
first budget to be reviewed, Road and Bridge. Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Good morning.
JUDGE TINLEY: Morning, sir.
MR. ODOM: Alive and well.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Road and Bridge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Number 20.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Number 20.
MR. ODOM: Number one in your scorecard,
right?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Before we get started,
8-17-05 bwk
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
one thing that we talked to him about which relates to -- we
talked a lot about at our last meeting, mowing at the
airport. A recent -- I'm not saying I agree with it --
recent opinion from the City Attorney's office is that the
City entered into a five-year contract there, which I'm not
quite sure how you do that, but they have done it, and they
have obligated the City and the County for funding that
contract for five years. And because of that, the City
Attorney's office feels that there is a potential -- if we
were to cancel the contract and do it ourselves, there is a
potential for a lawsuit, and the damages in such lawsuit
would be the profit that the individual currently doing it
would probably very easily -- or the way I read the opinion,
was he could quite easily get that profit.
I have a real problem with how they can
contract -- one, how they entered into a contract without
the County knowing anything about it, and two, how you
contract for and commit future budget years. They did say
there's an out if we don't fund it, and that may be an out.
But it appears at this time that that's a battle I'm not
willing to really fight for about a $10,000, $15,000
savings. I'm going to ask the Airport Board to really look
very seriously at all the original charges coming out of the
city management contract for the next year, and we'll look
at this same topic next year, but I want to take that off
8-17-05 bwk
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the table for this year. I think we just have too much else
going. And with that legal opinion out there -- Rex has not
looked at the legal opinion, his input into it. But I don't
want to bring up another controversy at this point with the
City of Kerrville.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I wonder if they
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, they did.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, they did,
and --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'd have bid on it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think this contract
was let before the new Joint Airport Board was -- was formed
and populated, which changed the balance of -- of power down
there on that matter. And it also -- the contract, I think,
Commissioner, contains what they call a reserve clause, I
believe, that -- something to the effect that if either of
the governing bodies fail to appropriate funds, then -- then
the contract is canceled or whatever. However, the reserve
for the reserve clause is that it has to be that you don't
have the money to fund it, as opposed to not being willing
to fund it. There's a material difference here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And especially if we were
going to take it on ourselves, obviously, we'd have money to
do part of it, even if we could save money.
8-17-05 bwk
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, we're stuck with
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It would look that
way.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It appears at the moment,
but I would like, during the -- in October, let the County
Attorney look at that contract. I have some questions
about, one, the contract that was entered into prior to -- I
mean, in a whole different legal scheme than what the -- the
way the airport's currently being operated, and during a
period when the City opinion is that they had authority
under -- being the managing partner prior to the current
system to enter into contracts on behalf of the County.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I suspect there will
be more discussions at the Airport Board.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But my -- the bottom line
is, from a Road and Bridge standpoint, you can -- you don't
need to worry about mowing that airport this year, because
that's not going to be happening.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But next time the
contract comes up, we'll bid on it.
MR. ODOM: I got it. In other words, I'm low
bid, right? We can handle that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, Line 1,
Engineer's Salary. Requested 73. Is that the same amount
8-17-05 bwk
16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that was in this present budget, or is there an increase?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's the same --
well, no.
JUDGE TINLEY: The present budget was
adjusted -- and the Auditor, I think, can tell us, because
we made some adjustments going into last budget year when we
put the engineer on contract services, and -- but we made
adjustments because of floodplain and -- and matters such as
that. And the -- the 73,370 is the current budget for what
was classified then as the assistant's salary, who became
the Road Administrator in charge of the entire thing. If --
if I'm incorrect in any manner, you gentlemen let me know.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's right. We moved -- we
moved his administrative assistant into Line Item 103.
MR. ODOM: 103.
MR. TOMLINSON: And --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see that.
MR. TOMLINSON: And his goes into Line 102.
MR. ODOM: 102.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that changed
the designation, because it's not the engineer.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's my next
question.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
MR. ODOM: Yeah. I have administrative
8-17-05 bwk
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
salary, is what we submitted as 102.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the way it
should read.
MR. ODOM: That's the way we thought it --
but I don't have any control.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that was really
the reason for my question.
MR. ODOM: 102 was administrative salary.
That's what I submitted to the Judge by -- of course, what
you see is the old one, but we even marked through the
administrator up there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, the answer to my
question, 73,370 is the same number in the present budget.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, with all the --
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- moving. Okay, very
good. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just a clarification.
That includes -- that includes compensation for doing --
JUDGE TINLEY: Floodplain.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- floodplain and --
and land use?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
8-17-05 bwk
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Looking at 105,
there's a big change there. Is that connected with the
reorganization?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I think the first
one's Len, the second one's Truby, the third one's Barbara.
MR. ODOM: Barbara.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, there were two
people in 105 --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- previously, and
now they're --
MR. ODOM: That's right. We're going to one.
JUDGE TINLEY: There were some adjustments to
the assistant last year also because of some -- some
additional duties that were put on the -- what is now the
Assistant Administrator's position.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, 56 goes up to
Line 2, right?
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. Essentially, that's
what happens.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And what is --
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, no.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 34.
JUDGE TINLEY: 34 goes up to Line 2. And the
breakout, 2197, to Line 3.
8-17-05 bwk
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's the only change that
really needs to be made there, is where it says "Engineer,"
just provide the administrator, and then everything else
kind of --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Falls into --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- falls into place.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Tell me about fuel costs,
Mr. Odom.
MR. ODOM: I think I have $8,000 left, and
we're running around 7,000 every two weeks, so we think that
we will be right at -- I think when I made that adjustment
this year, that I was saying that I might be a little bit
short there in September, but we feel like that we will get
into the middle of September, and then the bill will
probably be at the last there, and so if there's any
savings, we'll see where we're at. But right now -- last
time I looked at our printout that we carry, that I had
8,000-something on -- on fuel, so we think we'll be close
with the next billing and all at the end of this month, and
we'll just see.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, did you move to --
MR. ODOM: I moved 25,000.
8-17-05 bwk
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, I'm asking what page
we're on. All of a sudden, we were -- I'm on Page 75, and
all of a sudden I don't see --
MR. ODOM: Probably 611 is what he's talking
about, the second page -- well, I'm sorry. I'm not quite
sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Page 77, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. ODOM: The 611 budget that he's talking
about.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. ODOM: We think we will hold the same. I
don't see a lot of difference in fuel. What they're saying
is that I think that we're definitely going to see $70 -- I
don't put my life on it, but I believe sincerely that $70 is
there, and should there be something else, they say that --
they're throwing out the number 100, and they do that a lot,
just flyers, what I've been reading. But we can possibly
get to $80, so I don't see it coming down.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What line?
MR. ODOM: '07, yes, I think we can look at
something.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What line is this?
JUDGE TINLEY: Fuel Oils, 331 on Page 77.
MR. ODOM: So, I think the 100,000 that I
8-17-05 bwk
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
tried to adjust to -- what we adjusted this year on this
year's budget,
little bit the
But if we run
the other day,
$3 a gallon in
night on -- on
the current one, and
re on this new budget,
-- you're going to see
and 30 days ago I was
California, and I saw
a deal. So ...
then I've adjusted a
and we'll just see.
$3. I saw 3.09 on TV
seeing projections of
3.09, I think, last
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Under the current
budget, Len, you only had -- you had nine -- I shouldn't say
"only" -- had $99,000 budgeted for fuel oil; is that
correct?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's right.
MR. ODOM: I believe so.
JUDGE TINLEY: Started out with 70, and we
adjusted that upward.
MR. ODOM: Started out with 70.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Up to 99, but now you
want 102 for the ensuing year?
MR. ODOM: Well, I added 25 to this. We've
been running 66. And that shows you how much fuel has --
has impacted us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can we go back up to the
beginning of this, up to Crew Salaries?
MR. ODOM: Crew Salaries?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How many individuals are
8-17-05 bwk
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in that line item?
MR. ODOM: I believe that there should be --
taking three -- 22, I believe.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 22?
MR. ODOM: I think there's 25 all together.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And a few years ago,
it was up around 30.
MR. ODOM: 30, 34.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 34.
MR. ODOM: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Something like that.
So, through the years, he has really scaled that thing down.
MR. ODOM: I've come down. As a matter of
fact, what, a year or so ago, I gave up one position.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. Year before last.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Len, you have done a
good job of holding down payroll costs, and yet I see that
we're a relatively expensive county overall compared to
other counties, and that we staff relatively heavy compared
to other counties. I don't have any question that you -- I
know how your people operate. They're efficient,
hardworking out there, do a good job. One question. Is
there any technology or machinery that -- any capital
8-17-05 bwk
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
expenditures that you can make that would tend to displace
MR. ODOM: I have one in mind that I wanted
as we got to Capital Outlay. However, to answer that
honestly, I can't say that it would replace it, but I think
it could keep it from increasing. I'm -- there may be the
possibility, when I look at Maintenance, to -- if I don't
get the new equipment, I'm seeing this year that we're
beginning to hold the line. Even with the increases, that I
have less downtime. And that's a key there, is how much
maintenance I do. So, it sort of fluctuates with our growth
and all. I hate to give anything up, but I do have a
specific thing that I'm using in your area, Commissioner, on
Skyview up there. I had to go out to a contractor, and if
y'all will allow me to talk a little bit on it, this is
called a zipper, and it's a reclaimer, which is a smaller
machine that I can put on my loader, and it picks up base
failures without having -- it cuts down the time. I mean,
it just -- I can add cement on top of the ground, I can add
base on top of the ground where the wheel wells sink down in
there, like Ranchero, where we're trying to level up in
areas. And it just -- in 5 or 10 minutes after you get the
material down that you want, that area is --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do you have one of
those now? Or it's something you --
8-17-05 bwk
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: It's something that I want to
discuss with you, that I could pick up without costing us
anything this year, because what I'm doing now is
17,000 square feet. It's costing me $17,000 to have
somebody do this.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're utilizing this machine
MR. ODOM: That's correct. And I've got
miles -- I've got Tatsch Road that needs to be reclaimed out
there. I got Weatherby out there. That whole area in there
is just -- it's a unique area with very cold stratas, and
makes the concrete -- everything just decay very quick, and
so we look at that. If I just use the example I've got with
Mr. Cummings for 17,000, it pays for itself. Now, I was
talking to Tommy before we started, that there's an
opportunity to pick this up on H.G.A.C., to put off the
payments like I did the chip spreader until this year, and
that over a three-year period, the chip spreader will be
paid for. And that I just -- I wouldn't have to make a
payment until October of '06, and then after that, I can pay
for it out of what I see right now that I want in this new
budget; I'll have special project money and can make the
payment without increasing anything. And that once -- in
three years, that equipment's paid off that I just bought,
that we took that municipal loan on. That other one's paid
8-17-05 bwk
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
for without hurting the budget at all. It is a way that I
don't have to increase; I can do my maintenance more
efficiently. I can take things, and we don't have to -- you
know, it will cut down the time tremendously. But it -- I
can't say that I can release people, but -- 'cause I just
got three-man crews. I couldn't do it with two-man crews.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You'd either get
more miles out of it --
MR. ODOM: That's right, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- or lower costs.
MR. ODOM: Lower costs to the taxpayers.
That's the way I see it. More efficient.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's what I wanted
to hear.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On Item 460 under
Equipment Rental --
MR. ODOM: All right, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- you've got, it
appears, a new piece of equipment.
MR. ODOM: A new piece of equipment. That is
the 910 loader. There was two of them I bought -- the Court
bought in 1991 or 1990, and I've had that one, and I have --
I don't have anything except those old W-11 loaders, and
they're on their last leg. They're obsolete. So, what we
wanted to do was to lease a 914, which is equivalent of a
8-17-05 bwk
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
910, and move that 910 into the Spur 100 yard to load with.
Because that W-11, it just -- just doesn't have the power.
Parts are difficult, and that's throwing good money after
bad. We just felt like we would go like we have on the
other heavy equipment, other loaders, five-year lease, put
it in there. And you notice I did do that, but we didn't
increase our budget. I think my budget's $300 less off --
item-to-item, taking out the $84,000 payment for the chip
spreader and that distributor. So --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What items am I --
I'm looking at 460 and what else?
MR. ODOM: Pardon me? 460 is the one that
Jonathan --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And what other
item -- you were saying you lowered another item?
MR. ODOM: Well, the total budget was $300
less than --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Oh.
MR. ODOM: -- this year. But I had to add
in -- if you go back to the sheet -- I think you have
that -- the payment for the chip spreader is 84,040 that we
have a payment this year on.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that under 460
already?
MR. ODOM: I think -- well, we have -- 570 is
8-17-05 bwk
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
a new item that the Auditor put down.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, that's capital,
570.
MR. ODOM: But I think it's going to be a
separate -- 570 is that list of items that -- under Capital
Outlays, but there's a separate item that Mindy told us
that -- that we were going to be charged loan repayment or
something like that, and I don't know what that item is.
And that was 84,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question is, I don't
understand the -- if you're -- if the -- what's the
difference between 646 and 570? If you're putting the new
loader under Equipment Rental, then you also have a Capital
Outlay item -- it seems that the new loader should be under
Capital Outlay, not under rental.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, it's not a
purchase.
MR. ODOM: It's not a purchase; it's a lease.
Capital Outlay would be purchase.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought we did
capital lease.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're doing a lease on
the chip spreader?
MR. ODOM: No, we purchased the chip
spreader. We took a municipal loan for -- three years?
8-17-05 bwk
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TOMLINSON: Three years.
MR. ODOM: Three years. And the
distributor -- and that's another item that I don't have
here, and they -- that's the reason I showed it up here
under 570, but it's -- to our knowledge, it is a separate
line item, whatever they're going to put it under.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I separated the
payments out of the Capital Outlay for recording purposes.
It's just easier for us, for GASB purposes, to have that --
the debt payment separate from any cash expenditures for --
for capital purchases.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, capital leases
will always, from this point on, be 460, and capital
purchases 570?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, if we look at
those two together, we see 460 going down by 100,000 -- I
mean going up by 100,000, and we see 460 going down by
280,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- under 460, the
balance of that -- the requested was 92. The recommended's
176.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's the payment on the --
the last two pieces of equipment, the chip spreader and the
8-17-05 bwk
29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
distributor.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wait a minute.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The chip spreader, you
said, is under 570.
MR. TOMLINSON: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We purchased that.
MR. TOMLINSON: The payments on the chip
spreader are in 460. $84,000. That's what Leonard's
talking about.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we have the -- the 460
is the new loader and the lease payment on the chip
spreader.
MR. ODOM: The purchase of the chip spreader.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, Tommy just said
that that payment's in here. I mean, it's saying here,
"rental." That's my confusion, is we're calling it rental,
but you're telling me you're buying it. It doesn't seem
that's the right spot for it.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, it should -- I mean,
it's a lease payment, is what it is, not really a rent --
rental.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is it a lease-purchase?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So it's a lease, but we
end up owning it after three years of lease payments. And
8-17-05 bwk
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
what's in 570?
MR. ODOM: Well, I've got to go -- let me --
570?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 108,000.
MR. ODOM: Capital Outlay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Less than last year.
MR. ODOM: Capital Outlays is going to be a
9-cubic-yard hatch-cab, extended-cab, four-wheel drive,
steel track for skid loader, and two bat wings.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hold on. We didn't get a
copy of that. I didn't get a copy of it, anyway. It's a
Capital Outlay --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't have it,
either.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is the
recommended number for 570?
MR. ODOM: 108,200 is what I have for Capital
Outlay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's what I
have, too. So, you would run -- or you're going to buy a
new dump truck, and what's --
MR. ODOM: Dump track, half-ton extended cab,
four-wheel drive. Shop analyzer, steel track with a skid
loader, and two bat wings.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: For $108,000?
8-17-05 bwk
31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: For 108,200.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That list is -- that's
what Kathy's copying right now, that list, and the price
breakdown.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I didn't know you
could buy anything for $108,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're getting ready to
see the -- just like the way -- here's the breakdown.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I saw the light.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It may not be a light;
may be a haze.
MR. ODOM: There's no haze. It's always
open, commissioner. I'm as open as any book you've ever
read.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I tell you, I'll have
to -- Leonard and I met with one of the more difficult
constituents that I have. He charmed her. Unbelievable.
Unbelievable. I was quite impressed.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wish I could have seen
it.
MR. ODOM: I'm capable of a lot.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He made everyone else
look bad. There was four other people there, all wearing
hats. He arrives and tips his hat. It was all over from
then on. (Laughter.)
8-17-05 bwk
32
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Of course, it blinded
COMMISSIONER LETZ: She was impressed.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They learn that over
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Miss Salvatore thinks
that he hung the moon; we can do nothing -- no wrong out
there as long as Leonard's involved in the project. So,
thank you, Leonard. She is a difficult constituent
sometimes.
MR. ODOM: I hear that, yeah. Nice lady.
JUDGE TINLEY: Patience is a virtue, isn't
it?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. There's nothing -- I
have $108,200, okay? That is capital outlays. That is
off -- what I'm showing off my sheet is 570. And that --
that list, I did turn in there, so --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We got it.
MR. ODOM: And that is for the dump truck at
52,000, the -- another one-half-ton extended cab hopefully I
can buy for 25, and a shop analyzer for 4,200, 5,000, and
22,000 is 108. Now, last year, what I was talking about,
the same question Commissioner Nicholson asked me; can I use
another 100,000? I didn't use it, but my answer is yes, I
can. Because that's where we were coming back with the chip
8-17-05 bwk
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
33
spreader and the asphalt distributor, which matched together
to make a more efficient operation, and we were going to
amortize that over three to five years, and it ended up with
a three-year amortization. So, that's where the -- and I
didn't have to pay this budget year. It was first of
October, so that's where the extra 84,000 is. The question
was -- is where do I put it, and there was going to be a
line item that was separate. That's the reason I showed it,
to make sure that you saw it. But if you took that out --
and my budget was $300 less than what I had this year, and
then you add in what I was asked that I needed, and that was
that 84,000. So, my dollars that -- to make the budget work
for my capital outlays.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. ODOM: And I've reduced -- the capital
outlays are reduced this new budget year versus this year
what I've spent, 130-something.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: $278,000 worth.
MR. ODOM: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, Leonard, you said
a couple of times that bottom line here, that you -- your
budget is reduced by $2,000.
MR. ODOM: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 200,000.
MR. ODOM: $300.
8-17-05 bwk
34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 300?
MR. ODOM: Uh-huh. That's what I calculated.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Your bottom line?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My math doesn't work
that way. But --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I see bottom line of
$200,000 less.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do too.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I think what's being
referred to is the current budget, by virtue of some
amendments, has your current budget up to 2 million 4-plus.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: And your going-in budget was
2,161,850. Your proposed budget for the -- requested budget
for the coming year is 2,161,550. That's the $300 you're
talking about.
MR. ODOM: That's the 300 I'm talking about.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're 300 under what you went
in last year.
MR. ODOM: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Subtract that from
there.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 200 under actual.
MR. ODOM: Under actual.
8-17-05 bwk
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm, yeah. Two -- about
240.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But this -- well, two
things. My recollection of last year is that we had a
fairly heavy capital outlay last year, you know, so that's
why we're coming down. It was a higher-than-usual year last
year because we did some equipment, I think -- actually, I
believe we accelerated some equipment forward and bought
some things that were -- you know. So, I mean, I'm not --
that number was real high, so I hate to go off last year for
the capital outlay items and saying we've reduced the
budget, because last year was an extraordinary year for
capital outlays --
MR. ODOM: That's true.
COMMISSIONER LETZ:
So, I think that's -- you need to
to your capital outlay list here,
item -- and I can kind of look at
if we had to defer one for a year
would pick the half-ton truck. W
-- in your department.
remember that. Going back
if you had to cut an
one of them, to me, the --
to lower this some, I
hat would you pick?
MR. ODOM: Well, if I had to go -- that's my
truck. I have 184,402 miles on it right now.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Long way to go still on
that truck.
8-17-05 bwk
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
36
MR. ODOM: Well, I hope you're right. And I
just discussed it with the shop, "What is the possibility of
upgrading some different things on it, U-joints and stuff
like that? Can I make another year?" And, so, I -- if I
had to, I would go that way. The only -- you know, I --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean --
MR. ODOM: -- I think I got a quarter of a
million maybe out of it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You likely would have --
I would say to delete that, you really should probably put
$5,000 in repairs, because you're likely to go through a
transmission this year.
MR. ODOM: I'm going to guess 4,000 or 5,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that would give you a
couple more years. That would defer this probably two
years.
MR. ODOM: Probably two years on the truck.
I don't know if I could even buy one for 25,000, to be
honest with you. I haven't seen it in the market. But with
this new stuff going on, maybe there's something that's
stripped down I could pick up, and that's what I thought.
But I don't even know if I could do it. If I couldn't do it
for that, I --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What year model is
8-17-05 bwk
37
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: I think it's a 2001. I think I
picked it up in 2000. I ordered it sometime like that, and
I don't think I got it till January of '01.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other item, the
zipper is not in -- is in here or not?
MR. ODOM: No, sir, it is not in here. It is
something I wanted to discuss.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What does a zipper cost?
MR. ODOM: H.G.A.C. was 79,119. And what
they -- here's -- Jonathan, here is this.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's all right. I can
just --
MR. ODOM: Okay. This -- it says that --
that this could be picked up, and a five-year
lease-slash-purchase is approximately 18 to 19 thousand
dollars a year. And for 17,000 square feet, it's too -- you
know, that -- that is probably less than a half a mile of
roadway to start, and I'm spending that in just having a
contractor come in here and tell me how wonderful this
machine is, which I already know about. If I had the big
machine, it would be no problem. But he's wanting to do the
same thing with the same piece of equipment, and I can
control the job, and I can't get him on the job right now.
I mean, it's --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: New equipment or
8-17-05 bwk
38
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
used?
MR. ODOM: This is new equipment.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we approved that,
would you reduce contract fees, then?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He has.
MR. ODOM: Well, we were talking about the
truck. That's -- I would say yes, I would. I'd give up my
truck and drive it till it drops.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, will you give up
your truck? Will you give up some of the 85,000 in contract
fees if we put in this --
MR. ODOM: Oh, in contract fees?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Long as it's not in
Precinct 1.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or 2.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Dave, your turn.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Guess what?
MR. ODOM: Hang on a second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All going to be in
Precinct 3.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The second part of that
question is, what is included in this contract fees? What
projects?
MR. ODOM: Do you have this sheet here?
8-17-05 bwk
39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't see it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think so.
MR. ODOM: Here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me amend his
question. How much of the contract fees is in Precinct 3?
That may be where you want to start the cut.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, if you buy the
zipper, don't the contract fees go down?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. That's what he
just told us. So you don't -- you need less money if you
buy the zipper.
MR. ODOM: I said the productivity would go
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Productivity goes up?
MR. ODOM: Productivity goes up; means I can
do a little bit more. And that, in itself, is conducive to
less fuel, less wear and tear on equipment. That's what the
chip spreader's going to show, and this distributor over the
next two years. We're already beginning to see a little
bit, just the productivity is there. That means less wear
and tear. There's less wear and tear on your men in
104-degree weather, and being through. And I -- there's a
savings, but what that is right now, I don't --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We'll, we're waiting for
8-17-05 bwk
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
40
the backup on the contract fees on the Mountain Home yard.
You have a new 35,000. What's that for?
MR. ODOM: Sir, I don't think so. I think
that -- she's got it. Let me look and see. That should be
reduced 35,000. I tell you what's happened is that I marked
this, and I don't get it changed on the computer, so that's
not the same.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's down 35,000?
MR. ODOM: I have -- 588 is Upper Turtle
Creek.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wait. Where are we?
JUDGE TINLEY: On Town Creek.
MR. ODOM: Town Creek Crossing -- which one
do you have?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have -- I don't have --
I have Mountain Home Yard, 35,000 requested.
MR. ODOM: That is Town Creek Crossing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's not Mountain
Home Yard?
MR. ODOM: No, sir. And we mark through it;
when we get it back, it still stays there. That is Town
Creek Crossing, and what I was trying to do there is, we're
looking at trying to get some engineering done this year to
see if I can't do some of that work. That's part of that
$110,000 for Hermann Sons --
8-17-05 bwk
41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, okay.
MR. ODOM: -- that we agreed to do over --
that's what I've been trying to do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, see, now it's moved
into my precinct instead of Dave's. Much more important.
MR. ODOM: But there is an obligation we took
on with the Highway Department, and that's part of it.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's the in-kind --
MR. ODOM: That's the in-kind.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- that we got to meet?
MR. ODOM: That's -- and they're looking at
now with the crossing over there, Mr. Baldwin, at -- I
believe that's yours.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Town Creek?
MR. ODOM: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
MR. ODOM: And right at Morris Boulevard
right there, we're looking at that small, narrow crossing
now, right-of-way and some engineering. We looked at it in
2000, I think it was, and I had some preliminaries done
there, but now we're trying to finalize something and see if
we can get a no-rise out of it to widen that structure. Not
elevate it, just widen. And then we'll look at the next
budget year. You know, if I have enough to buy the box and
do some stuff, then we'll do it. And then we'll look down
8-17-05 bwk
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
toward the other -- toward the old Highway 41 down there;
we'll address that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: With the upgrade of
the loops and new bridges and new roads and all that the
City and the State's doing, I think it's an absolute must
that you do that.
MR. ODOM: Well, I think you've got
3,500 acres sitting there; it's vacant. And then whatever
that project is that they've got going across to Harper
Road, I just see -- I envision that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is part of the
whole --
MR. ODOM: K.I.S.D. That will explode --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. ODOM: -- in there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the Holdsworth
issue.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. Okay, that
one. Let's go back to contract fees, now that we've got
this list.
MR. ODOM: 85,000 is what I have.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Where's
Weatherby?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I-10, on the western
end.
8-17-05 bwk
43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: Off Lower Reservation. It
intersects -- it's up there and comes off the feeder road up
there at I-10, goes to the county line of Kimble County.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where's Artlet?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 1340. Right or wrong?
Leonard, are you with us?
MR. ODOM: No, I'm sorry, I was looking at
the -- I thought he was talking to you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Artlett's up on 1340.
MR. ODOM: Artlet? It's off 1340, yes, sir.
That's 4 miles of dirt road. We won't take that on, but
we'll look at a mile or two right there, the -- maybe try
and scorify and seal.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Could we use -- on Artlet
and Weatherby, could we use some of the Schreiner Trust for
those projects?
MR. ODOM: Probably -- probably both of them,
but I -- if this -- the one on Weatherby, this is where that
machine will come into excellent --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, I'm trying
to find money for your machine.
MR. ODOM: Right, I understand. Yes, I don't
see why not.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy, do we have enough
funds in the Schreiner Trust to take those two projects and
8-17-05 bwk
44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
put them out of the Schreiner Trust?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That thing's pretty
close to being depleted, I know that.
MR. TOMLINSON: I didn't bring my -- I
brought my budget, but I didn't bring the current
financials. I can go get it real quick.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't you? 'Cause if
we can just get, like, 20,000 out of the Schreiner Trust or
something, if there's that much in it.
MR. ODOM: There's more than 20 there. I
think we left the principal -- the principal was left at
100,000-plus.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. ODOM: And then the interest has accrued
over that time. So, I just
last time we used it was on
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
those funds -- I would much
fund for projects if we --
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
-- it's been several years, but
Sheppard Rees up there.
BALDWIN: Couple of years.
LETZ: I just think it's one of
prefer to use that dedicated
when they're eligible.
WILLIAMS: In your precinct.
LETZ: Are these both in your
precinct?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, they're in his.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Schreiner Trust is
8-17-OS bwk
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
eligible for 1 and 4.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We get reminded every
time we ask for it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know. Can't have
it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sorry.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I drive by Artlet
Road every day, but I've never been down it. Are there a
lot of residents down there?
MR. ODOM: No, sir. That's the reason it's
been put off at the last. Maybe five or six people. But
this is -- you know, we've already done the last -- what was
Clark, I just finished. If you look in proportion, there
was more people on Artlet, but the mileage was shorter,
1.6 miles versus 4 miles. So, it's one of those that I put
off for 15 years to --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay.
MR. ODOM: -- to get around, get everybody
else that had more traffic and more count -- you know, the
cost per vehicle or cost per residence is greater in Artlet
than it was the other stuff out there. That's how I looked
at it.
MR. TOMLINSON: There's 81,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Available?
8-17-05 bwk
46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's over and above
the --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Principal.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's a trust
that's 100,000? This is available?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, that's what's in our
account. 150,000 stays with the trustee. So that's moneys
that we have, yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I recommend we take
50,000 out of that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, you jumped from
20 to 50 there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 'Cause there's 80. I
could have easily gone for 80 out of it, but I think it's
better to leave a little bit more for next year. But if we
take -- if you take 50 out, you can lower contract fees to
35, 000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And that just got him
a zipper, didn't it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then we can go with a
zipper.
MR. ODOM: Are you asking me to give you
absolution? That's tight.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But you can do it.
8-17-05 bwk
47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: Huh?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But you can do it.
JUDGE TINLEY: When can you -- you had
mentioned acquiring this zipper with the -- with the
obligation to make the first lease -- lease-purchase
payment --
MR. ODOM: It would not be until October of
'06.
JUDGE TINLEY: Which will be the next budget
year.
MR. ODOM: The next budget year.
JUDGE TINLEY: When would you take possession
and have the use of that zipper?
MR. ODOM: They said if they received a P.O.
now, that I would avoid -- 1st of October, there would be a
price increase; that they could take -- have the P.O. now,
that I would lock in that H.G.A.C. price at 79,116,
something like that. And that I -- they would -- they would
give us a municipal loan like we did on the chip spreader
and that distributor, and we could stretch it out and the
first payment would be October of '06. So, I don't need any
money this budget year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When do you take
possession of the machine?
MR. ODOM: 1 October, anytime after that, or
8-17-05 bwk
48
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
whatever the availability is. I couldn't take it till the
1st of October anyway.
JUDGE TINLEY: What kind of price increase
are they quoting effective 1 October?
MR. ODOM: I think that they said 6 to
10 percent. They weren't quite sure on the -- on the price
of steel and all.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I like that
alternative. I think the zipper would improve productivity,
and we -- three or four years from now, we'll be glad we had
it.
MR. ODOM: I believe we would. And that's
the way I looked at it, that it wouldn't affect my capital
outlays; I could still get the things I need.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean --
MR. ODOM: Or contract fees.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, shifting the
funds -- the money down out of the Schreiner Trust for those
two projects, or 50,000 of it. 50,000 goes to the Schreiner
Trust.
MR. ODOM: That's right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's money that's
dedicated; that doesn't affect the tax rate.
MR. ODOM: I see I'm still at the same --
same deal. Okay, that covers me.
8-17-05 bwk
49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So it gives us -- it will
appear like your budget's even reduced further.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Why don't we pencil
that in?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine with me.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 50,000 out of
capital trust, and buy this equipment.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, Tommy, you ask the
trustee for permission to do that, do you not?
MR. TOMLINSON: We don't have to have
permission to use this money.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: If we -- if there's moneys
in -- with the trustee beyond -- that exceeds the 150,000 --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
MR. TOMLINSON: -- we have to get permission
from them to get that money.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It just -- I think -- to
add a comment, I think this is the type -- both Weatherby
and Artlet are the purpose of the Schreiner Trust. It's
exactly what that trust was intended for.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Except it should be
used more in Precinct 1 than 4.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You got Sheppard Rees.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's my only point.
8-17-05 bwk
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
50
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But you had eight
years to get it. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. So, contract
fees is 35,000, then 50,000 will go out of Schreiner Trust.
MR. ODOM: That's fine. I can make it work.
Now, may I ask, is that a direction of the Court? Do I need
to come back on this zipper for an agenda item?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
MR. ODOM: For authorization to go out or
issue a -- a P.O. for that? I can buy it off the H.G.A.C.,
so there's not a formal bid.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Can we get that on
Monday's meeting?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
MS. MITCHELL: Mm-hmm.
MR. ODOM: My deadline's passed. I'll --
okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Kathy doesn't have
deadlines; she can do whatever she wants to do.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Now, the first -- the
first installment on the zipper doesn't come until the next
budget year?
MR. ODOM: Till next budget year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: '06-'07 budget year.
8-17-05 bwk
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
51
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. And then by then, we'll
have some of these special projects done and over with, and
then there's no increase. I see that as working without
hurting my budget and staying within the line.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That'll work.
MR. ODOM: And I'll verify that, but that's
what I was told personally by the manager of the department
-- corporation. They came down and demonstrated it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It could either -- I
mean, you can get on this agenda. It could also probably be
on the next one, but go ahead and get it on this one so you
can make --
MR. ODOM: What about capital outlays? Is it
possible -- do I have to put that on the agenda, or is this
meeting here to verify that I can go out to start to locate
this?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not -- we can start
locating it, but just don't buy it till we approve the
budget.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I just want to make
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
MR. ODOM: Yes, before the price increases,
8-17-05 bwk
52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
goes up. And I've got to check to make sure -- sometimes
they go up on 1 September.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, but still, until we
approve the budget, the capital outlay is not available to
use.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But this doesn't
affect capital outlay in this budget year, anyhow.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He's talking about the
other items. The zipper, I don't have a problem with coming
in special and doing that, 'cause that's not going to affect
the budget.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That would give him
the authority to issue the P.O.
MR. ODOM: P.O. for that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is the one-half-ton
extended cab in or out?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Out.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Got to make do with
the old one, then.
MR. ODOM: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then add 5,000 to
repairs. Or --
MR. ODOM: 5,000 to repairs.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's pretty
reasonable. That transmission is going to need an overhaul
8-17-05 bwk
53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
this year.
MR. ODOM: How would I -- to add that into
Equipment Repairs, another 5,000 there?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. And if you don't
need it, I mean, great, but I just think you need to -- it's
a pretty good likelihood you're going to need some front-end
work on that truck.
MR. ODOM: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: To keep going.
MR. ODOM: Okay. Equipment Repair -- yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: That goes to 100.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: And --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Goes to 100? What goes
to 100?
JUDGE TINLEY: Equipment and Repairs, from 95
to 100.
MR. ODOM: Goes to 100,000.
JUDGE TINLEY: And looks like --
MR. ODOM: I'm reducing Capital Outlays by
25, so that's --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 83,2?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which one? Which
line?
8-17-05 bwk
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 570.
JUDGE TINLEY: 570.
MR. TOMLINSON: Got it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, okay, I
understand.
JUDGE TINLEY: And, of course, Contract Fees,
553, goes down to 35.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: What else for Road and Bridge?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a general -- or a
question. I notice that floodplain is all zeroed out. Is
all -- that floodplain was just moved into your
administration budget?
MR. ODOM: I'm sorry, what's the question?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Floodplain
administration. There's nothing on any of those pages; it
was all zero. All of that money was moved into the
administration portion of your budget? The unit system?
Where did the floodplain money go?
MR. ODOM: I didn't know I had any floodplain
money.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, you --
there are some expenses going to floodplain.
MR. ODOM: Well, we absorbed that into it. A
lot of this is my time --
8-17-05 bwk
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. ODOM: -- to do this, or Truby on the
computer and all, so it's printouts. We've just looked
at -- to try to absorb it, to see what other costs would be,
but a lot of it's just time or questions and that, trying
to --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, it was just absorbed
into unit administration?
MR. ODOM: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 15-611-011 is no
longer --
MR. TOMLINSON: Nothing there.
MR. ODOM: See, I think we have 25 in
Engineer, so if I needed anything -- I think we had 5,000
this year, and I moved that down to 2,500 as far as the
engineer outside.
JUDGE TINLEY: Question.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir?
JUDGE TINLEY: What is the $9 expenditure
this year for this contract --
MR. ODOM: You asked me that, and I think
that was postage for something we had to send out. That
sounds like more of a postage thing. I just forgot to --
JUDGE TINLEY: Or maybe a copy of a plat that
you had to get.
8-17-05 bwk
56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: Could have been something. But I
take it, more than anything, it was probably a certification
-- a letter that we had to send out, and she probably
charged it off to that. But as far as -- as far as an
engineer or something, I -- I wish could I get them for $9
and some-odd cents. But that's all I know, Judge, is
probably, you know, something registered or something I sent
out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- you know,
I don't have a real problem with reducing contract engineer
to 2,500, but I think that's an unrealistic number. I think
there's going to be -- once we get our Subdivision Rules
finally redone, I think there's going to be more places for
it. And I think there's -- but we can address that as a
budget amendment down the road. I just think that that's
something that is needed, and there's some areas that I
think we're really on a little bit thin ice under our
current rules and not having an engineer, I mean, just the
way it's currently worded.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, wasn't the
majority of that your bridge? I mean, wasn't that --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, it was in there to
make up for the fact that we don't have an engineer on staff
any more. And when someone needs to look at, like, drainage
studies and things of that -- I'm a little uncomfortable
8-17-05 bwk
57
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
having a non-engineer recommending to the Court. I mean,
we're taking the -- we're just basically right now taking
the word of the developers, their engineers. If we ever
question that, we're going to have to have an engineer to
question it. Leonard, I mean --
MR. ODOM: I mean, I'm not certified.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- is not a certified
engineer.
MR. ODOM: Not getting paid to run behind an
engineer to check him up. But if we do change the rules up,
though, Commissioner, that engineer -- these developers will
start using engineers to do their own inspections, to sign
off on it. Then you don't -- I don't need a P.E.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But if we ever are to
challenge it, if we ever have a question, only an engineer
-- I mean, I think we're on thin ice if we have a
non-engineer questioning an engineer's work.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's why we put the
money in there to begin with.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And we haven't
even ever used it, you know. It's just one of the things --
you may not need it, and that's why 2,500, I don't have a
real problem with that, but I think that's getting low.
If -- for example, if we get -- if you disagree with what an
engineer tells you, and there's -- you know, that's quite
8-17-05 bwk
58
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
likely that could happen.
MR. ODOM: Sure it is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're going to have to
get an engineer to look at it and give us a third opinion,
and that's what the money was for. But it's just -- I'm
just pointing it out, that we're getting low in that area.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But I think most of us
are in agreement that when their engineer signs off on it,
that it's a --
MR. ODOM: He's put his seal on the line.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- a real deal.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And there's Contingency
there. There's money in Contingency.
MR. ODOM: Well, Contract Fees is a
catch-all. That's where I've had it before, that if I
really needed that, then Professional Services, I would go
there. Or the engineering. Of course, that had to do more
with surveying than it did anything.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Had to do with
hydrology, too. Stormwater takeoff and runoff and all that
kind of stuff, calculations to go with that. If we had to
challenge somebody's Stormwater plan, for example, 'cause we
thought it was inadequate, we're hard-pressed to challenge
it if we don't have an engineer doing that challenge.
8-17-05 bwk
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, a year ago, we
saw two different engineers put their seal on a thing, and
one of them said it's in the floodplain; the other one said
it's not. So, if -- if that were to come push to shove, and
just what Jonathan says; we can't pick and choose between
those two. We've got to have another.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's right.
MR. ODOM: And I have talked to some other
engineers, would they be willing to do that; Herm, Doug.
I've talked to Lee Lines. He's qualified to do that for
Vordenbaum. So there's different people out there that do
that. We need to do it, but, of course, at this point I
don't know what other rules -- you know, what you're -- how
the changes are going to be. But there are people out there
saying that they would be willing to do that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure.
MR. ODOM: The question would be, what would
we pay them to do -- you know, I haven't got that far with
it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. ODOM: Of course, I'm not qualified to
sit up here and argue.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Plug it in the
middle. It was at 5 and recommended to 25. Why don't we
increase to it 35?
8-17-05 bwk
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have a problem
with leaving it at 25, because there is a Contingency fund,
and there's Contract Fees, two other areas that we can draw
from if we get into a dispute.
MR. ODOM: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I just wanted to
bring it up that that's what the purpose of that line item
is. And I think, you know, even though we didn't use it
this year, I think it's a line item that we need to keep
money in.
MR. ODOM: But floodplain's pretty cut --
either it's going to be in or out. It's -- there's a
question there, but it's all approximation, so to get into
their designs in a no-rise, I don't have my P.E. to -- to do
that. But --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything else on Road
and Bridge? Thank you, Mr. Odom.
MR. ODOM: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate you being here.
MR. ODOM: Thank y'all. I appreciate it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move, if we could, to
Information Technology. That'll bring us to fairly early
in --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Four.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, indeed. Four. How are
8-17-05 bwk
61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
you, Mr. Trolinger?
MR. TROLINGER: Good morning. It's a rough
past few days, but I'm here. Could have rested up a little
bit, but I'll do my best this morning.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, that's a big
increase in budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that's -- well,
that's because of salary. Mr. Trolinger requested a salary
increase, which isn't on the table today.
MR. TROLINGER: I did not. That is for a
second full-time position.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, I'm sorry.
MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That is on the table
today.
MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir. The line item --
earlier this year, we had moved part-time salary to a
contractor. You followed my recommendation, and it looks
like we're going to come in a few thousand dollars below the
budgeted part-time salary that was moved to contracting
services, so now contracting services will have a --
probably a couple thousand dollars at the end of this year,
not expended.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So that program is
working?
8-17-05 bwk
62
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TROLINGER: It's working.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not -- lay the money
aside. Is the program working?
MR. TROLINGER: It's been working very well,
yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good deal. And they
respond within the one-hour or two-hour deal that we had
agreed on?
MR. TROLINGER: Drop of a hat. If I need
them, they're here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Great news.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What's the name of
that outfit?
MR. TROLINGER: Gazelle PC. And they're
growing. They've gotten the contract from Dell Computers to
be the local service provider for the Dell service
contracts, so they are --
JUDGE TINLEY: We had a number of those units
in our inventory, didn't we?
MR. TROLINGER: We do.
JUDGE TINLEY: Tell me about this -- this
request for an additional person. What does your normal day
consist of, time-wise? Duty-wise?
MR. TROLINGER: Monday, I had been up since
Sunday at 5 p.m., and I turned in at about 9 p.m. Monday
8-17-05 bwk
63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
night. That's 30 hours in front of the computer. And then
this morning, I went to bed about 2 a.m.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's your average
workday hours? I know you've been keeping a record of it.
MR. TROLINGER: Per day? Per week?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
MR. TROLINGER: I've got, per week, 78 hours
for the past two months, average.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On average, 78 hours
-- 78 hours a week?
MR. TROLINGER: Per week.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What would this -- how
would you divide responsibilities between you and the second
person?
MR. TROLINGER: Basically, we need someone
that can respond to the individual PCs on the desktops, do
the basic software installs, do a little bit of training for
the users, spend some time when a new computer is installed.
And that's what the second person would do mainly, PC
desktop maintenance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would it be a better use
of dollars to have a full-time person or higher-paid
part-time person? With a higher pay, I mean someone with
more skills.
MR. TROLINGER: The full-time is what I
8-17-05 bwk
64
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
prefer, because with a part-time, you may have three days a
week -- Monday, Wednesday, Friday -- that the part-time
wants to come in and work. Well, if, on Tuesday, the virus
outbreak occurs, I've got to have somebody available on
Tuesday, and I don't see it working out. That's why I
recommended earlier this year that we move from the
part-time to the contracting services, so I'd have somebody
available on-call to back me up.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You couldn't set up -- I
mean, this may not solve it, but you could set you up
part-time where they're working four hours every day.
MR. TROLINGER: Possibly. That's possible.
The couple of individuals that I've spoken with, I haven't
discussed part-time work hours; they're both interested in
full-time. So -- but -- but for the responsiveness that I
need, the full-time help that -- the purpose is -- is that
that person can respond between 8:00 and 5:00 every day of
the week, and make the run out to the user, fix their
computer if it's broken, fix the printer, that type of
thing. Be available during normal business hours.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you had another
full-time employee, would you still have a need for the
contract services?
MR. TROLINGER: Somewhat. And that's why
I've reduced contract services next year, Line Number 553,
8-17-05 bwk
65
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to $2,250. And that will mainly consist of a consultant.
Say I need a network engineer to put a stamp on something
before I sign off and send a network diagram to D.P.S. or
the state. It's going to be more along that lines. Or
for -- where some wire needs to be run where I need a
professional to do the installation.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where's the -- the -- in
what budget is the whole mainframe and the -- what we've
talked about, about a possible upgrade of that whole system?
Is that in Nondepartmental?
MR. TROLINGER: Nondepartmental historically
is where that's always been budgeted from.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you go over kind of
what your thoughts are on that and how that relates to your
additional person?
MR. TROLINGER: I've got a report -- an
efficiency report that I submitted to y'all. It's in a
green folder. It says, "Information Technology Plan for
2006-2007 Budget Year," and I'm going to refer to that. The
-- the cost of county information technology, I looked back
over five years at the budgets and took every piece -- every
purchase that I could find, and averaged out over five years
the cost of desktop computers. The system -- the mainframe
that runs, that makes the user, the court system, the -- the
tax, the financial all operate, is about 500 -- about
8-17-05 bwk
66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
$500,000 per year. About half a million dollars a year. If
you look at the -- all the individual budget amendments that
you get, all the individual line items, the supplies, and
that goes all the way to, you know, how much does it cost to
run the -- the computers? Over the next five years, I see
it being about the same, just a slight decrease a few
thousand dollars, but basically that's the -- that's the
cost that the County spends each year to put these computers
on the desk and to operate the mainframe, the -- the large
server.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What -- what part of that
MR. TROLINGER: Where it says "Servers," I
believe I broke that up as a separate line item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 55,000?
MR. TROLINGER: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or that's to replace the
server?
MR. TROLINGER: That's to replace it. That's
contingency. But, basically, that one server, that one
large box that we have right now, everybody relies on. If
it's offline, then the county government comes to a halt.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How old is that
server?
MR. TROLINGER: It is five years old.
8-17-05 bwk
67
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's the useful
MR. TROLINGER: Five years. The -- the
present status is that the -- I've done the updates to it
that were possible to bring it up to the point where The
Software Group, our vendor, will continue their maintenance
and be able to add the few pieces that we added this year,
but if it fails -- if the server breaks right now, it's
unsupported by the manufacturer, by IBM, because it has not
been upgraded over the five years. The basic operating
system had not been upgraded.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are we talking about
hardware or software or both?
MR. TROLINGER: It's combined. It's really
-- the operating system is -- is considered software, but it
goes hand-in-hand with the -- with the server.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: John, can you go back to
-- and I'm looking at the -- this page.
MR. TROLINGER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which is kind of where
you get to the 500,000. We're going back under that -- come
up where it says 2000-2005 Legacy System.
MR. TROLINGER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Those are per-year costs,
or is that a five-year cost? Is that a -- I mean, where I'm
8-17-05 bwk
68
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
looking at 346,660 for desktop computers, is that what we
spent over a five-year period or each year?
MR. TROLINGER: Per year. This is per year,
and I -- I took five years worth of data to come up with
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I'm -- you know,
if I take -- I look at that and I say, okay, desktop
computer system, $5,000 apiece. That's 70 computers a year.
How does that number -- I just -- I mean, have we been
buying 70 computers a year, or even anywhere close to that
number, or is there something else in there?
MR. TROLINGER: The -- the total cost of the
desktop computers is in there. In other words, the costs
from electricity to -- somebody goes down and buys a mouse,
all the way up to the monitor fails and they've got to
replace the monitor. And that includes the -- the
additional software. That's Microsoft Office; that's all
the other --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All the licenses?
MR. TROLINGER: -- things that need to be
purchased to go along with that. Every single thing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How many desktop
computers do we have in the county?
MR. TROLINGER: That I directly, every day
can get a phone call, responsible for, is about 170. There
8-17-OS bwk
69
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
are other computers that add that up to about 220 computers
that I'm not directly responsible for. In other words,
Adult Probation. They -- they pretty much have their own
maintenance contracts and their own repair in-house, or
their own contracts.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would they -- you said
Adult Probation?
MR. TROLINGER: Adult Probation. But I do
spend some time over there, because they do use the county
system. They use the server for everything they do.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Anybody know how much
they spend for outside contract services?
MR. TROLINGER: I do not.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tommy?
MR. TOMLINSON: No, I don't know. That might
be in here, but I think -- I'l1 look and see.
MR. TROLINGER: I do know when they made a
large initial outlay on computers, that they purchased a --
a very good service plan with Dell, the Platinum service
plan, so that may be --
MR. TOMLINSON: All of their desktops are
Dell.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon?
MR. TOMLINSON: All their desktops are Dell.
MR. TROLINGER: Yes, they are.
8-17-05 bwk
70
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
MR. TOMLINSON: So, they -- I think they
purchased a warranty on those, and service contracts on
those. So, the costs would be in the -- the cost of -- of
the service would be in the cost of the PC. So --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right, okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: -- it would be difficult for
me to tell you if they -- if they have any outside service
other than what they've already purchased. They do -- they
-- you know, they do pay their own maintenance to Software
Group, and that's -- it's probably about -- they budget
35,000 a year for maintenance for computer services.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- if my math is
anywhere close to being correct, that means we're spending
about $2,000 a year per computer. And then over -- and that
includes the purchase of the computer, which is to say a
five-year life, so every, you know, five years, spending
$10,000 per computer. I guess where I'm going is, do we
need as many computers as we have? It seems that that's a
lot higher number per year than I would have thought.
MR. TROLINGER: It's difficult for me to get
my arms around that whole picture. In each individual
department, you know, do they need one more computer? Do
they have one computer too many? And I haven't been able to
go into the departments; I've just looked at what was there
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25 right now.
8-17-05 bwk
71
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, I
ongoing basis.
MR. TROLINGER: They do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's not as much a
one-time expenditure, and then they operate for five years
and you buy them again. That means we're spending a lot
every -- for every computer every year.
MR. TROLINGER: And the State of Texas is
about three years that they -- that they cycle through to
another computer. The T.A.B.C. office, he's going to get a
computer every three years. Any of the state offices, about
every three. We extend that to about five years in the
county, so -- as far as I've seen.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, that
$2,000 a year, that doesn't include personnel costs.
That's --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's just --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- equipment,
software.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- equipment, software.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's a lot.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But you figure, you
know -- I don't know. What's the average computer costing?
8-17-05 bwk
72
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
$3,000? $4,000?
MR. TROLINGER: The average new Dell computer
can be upwards, with software, of $1,700. The low end of
that figure, where they don't purchase as much software,
about $900. I've found another -- I've found another
vendor, C.D.W., where I can purchase a computer that's
basically built from the same components that Dell's built
from, and not pay for the additional warranty and the things
that Dell throws on there, for about $450 to $500 for the
computer itself, so I've found another vendor to reduce that
cost.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What you're saying, if I
understand this right, is that, going on the high side, say
the computer costs $2,000 with the other things that go with
it. Of what we're spending on computers, only 20 percent of
that goes to the cost of the computer, 'cause over five
years, with a five-year life, $2,000 one year goes for that.
Then we have another $8,000 going in for other costs related
to computer, which is a lot.
MR. TROLINGER: Well, if you look at a
printer, a laser jet printer can be -- for a desktop
computer, Linda's probably got $200 printers on the desk, so
we're looking at $200 printers for each one of the
computers. Some of the computers will have very expensive,
large printers attached to them, a lot of peripherals.
8-17-05 bwk
73
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Help me out here.
The 346,660 is an aggregate cost of everything associated
MR. TROLINGER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Now, is that
predicated on 170 computers or 220 computers?
MR. TROLINGER: 220.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That brings the cost
down to $1,575 a computer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, still -- you're
still talking about 20 percent. I was rounding up. You're
still talking about 20 percent of the cost of -- of having
this computer is the computer. We pay another 80 percent
for the other stuff that goes with it that we don't really
ever think about. We just buy the computer and --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- worry about that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think the
Commissioner's question is a good one. Do we have more
computers than we need? I don't need my computer here; I
use mine at home. It might be a little inconvenient for me,
but not -- are there any other -- are there another couple
8-17-05 bwk
74
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
dozen people that would be willing to give up a computer? I
don't know.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's just -- it's a --
that's something that each department needs to kind of look
at with John, I think, to come up with whether the answer --
I don't think we can answer that question today. But I
think in the next year, as part of the ongoing -- really
looking at how we're using technology, that's a real
important question. And if there's ways to -- you know,
it's one of those things that there is a great example of
relatively small expenditures add up to a whole bunch of
money. Is there a way we can share printers in some of the
offices? I don't want to -- you know, Linda's already been
picked on -- not picked on, but talked about. Is there a
way that they can share -- a few people can share a printer
more than they are? Maybe they already are, but anything
like that. Because of the volume we're talking about, it
really does start saving the County a lot of money.
MR. TROLINGER: And Linda's an example of
efficiency. Her county operation, she's got a printer at
each station for the local printing of receipts and other
items, and then she's got a work group printer -- large
printer, so when there's a large volume, a report or
something along that line, she sends it over -- they send it
over to a larger printer, and that way it reduces the
8-17-05 bwk
75
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
up-and-down at the counter. And, actually, I'd like to see
the County Clerk, Jannett, move that way also with a printer
at each station. It's much more efficient than getting up
and running back to the big printer or to the receipt
printer. Makes things move faster.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In your handout,
you've got capital -- anticipated capital expenditures to
desktops at -- for the next five years, it's just 29,640.
That would be 29,640 for each of the five years?
MR. TROLINGER: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. What's in your
Capital Outlay, Line 570 in your budget, of 55,280? What's
that all about?
MR. TROLINGER: Okay. Because, historically,
Information Technology budget had been just for the office,
just for the individual, it did not encompass all the
computer purchases, all that. The capital outlay has been
spent for network equipment, for antivirus software and the
associate components of that. Last year, it was budgeted
$16,000, which I have made purchases of about $13,000 as of
today, probably -- probably just below that. Next year,
to -- in order to maintain the network, the infrastructure,
I see about 5,280 needed for new purchases. That's
additional equipment to -- to keep the backbone, the
network, the servers that run the e-mail on the web site
8-17-05 bwk
76
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We had a meeting -- I
think you engineered a meeting with some of us, if not all
of us, with a representative of The Software Group; is that
MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can you explain how
that fits into all this?
MR. TROLINGER: The big picture is that all
these computers run on one server, one big computer, and we
pay about $106,000 per year in software maintenance --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
MR. TROLINGER: -- for this server and for
those desktops to operate. And I've consolidated that
number. I'm giving you these, breaking these out. But the
-- the existing system that we have now, the technology's 15
years since we purchased it initially, and about 25 years
since the technology was developed. I see right now that,
just to maintain the system as it is, that the server needs
to be replaced. It's at the end of its life, and if it
breaks, we'll have to replace it anyhow. And if we retain
that existing system, that we should then purchase
additional software licenses or packages for departments
that do not use -- do not take advantage of The Software
Group right now.
8-17-05 bwk
77
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
But, ideally, we would take -- and instead of
years, we are at a point here, we have the opportunity to
get in on the ground floor, so to speak, with Software Group
with their new package, which is called Odyssey for the
Courts, the courts system, and that's the majority of the
cost. And that's right at $750,000, is the cost to replace
and install the Odyssey package. And that affects the jail,
the operation of the Sheriff's Office, the -- and all the
courts, including the clerk's office.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm listening.
MR. TROLINGER: The -- the cost next year, if
-- if we decide to wait and purchase the Odyssey package
next year, will be about twice as much.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why is that?
MR. TROLINGER: And that's because right now,
they're -- the first five counties -- the first handful of
counties -- I'm not sure if it's five -- in Texas are just
now coming online with the system, and Software Group would
like to offer us the -- to take advantage of Kerr County,
because of its size, and use us as a testbed on the
development portion for some of the packages; in particular,
the computer-aided dispatch. So, right now they're offering
to install that at no cost to -- to encourage us to -- to go
with the package this year.
8-17-05 bwk
78
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I see good and bad with
this -- with the proposal. One is -- the good is that we
save money. The bad is, we're the guinea pig, and it may
not work very well.
MR. TROLINGER: Well, most of the burden of
the -- of the test phase of the -- of the roll-out is just
particular to Texas. This already exists in Georgia,
Florida, Minnesota. The entire state of Minnesota
operates --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Doesn't make me any more
comfortable.
MR. TROLINGER: What they're doing is, they
have to bring this into Texas, and they have to adopt our
laws and D.P.S. -- the way that D.P.S. does things, the way
that our -- that our state, all the computers interface
together. So, basically, the headache for me every night is
that Software Group would send a new patch or update, and
I'd have to make sure that that was up and running in the
morning.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you see any
interruption of services to the Sheriff or others as a
result of that?
MR. TROLINGER: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, is this one of
those things that we can borrow the money to pay for it and
8-17-05 bwk
79
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
pay that like we do other things? Yes?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does this include the
video conferencing?
MR. TROLINGER: It does not include video
teleconference. I wanted -- I was going after a grant,
Indigent Defense Grant --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. TROLINGER: -- for the video
teleconferencing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But the software or
hardware that's included in the Odyssey program has nothing
to do with the teleconferencing?
MR. TROLINGER: It's complex. A lot of
things tie together here and fit together in a puzzle. The
part where the high-speed Internet connection, the broadband
that we paid for, I put those numbers in -- rolled those
numbers in here, and the video teleconferencing runs off of
that, so --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But we're not talking
about a camera being included in this program at all?
MR. TROLINGER: Correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know what I'm
talking about? A camera here and a camera in Menard.
MR. TROLINGER: Correct. Does not.
8-17-05 bwk
80
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: John, have you or has
Tommy looked at the various technology funds that we have
that are dedicated for certain purposes and to see if any of
those funds can be used for the new system?
MR. TOMLINSON: There -- the technology fund,
relation to -- to the big picture.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Talking about regards
management, I mean, it seems like we have a lot of dedicated
funds that we can pull things for, and I can see that a new
system is going to benefit anyone that uses the computer for
any purpose in the county, and, to me, like -- you know, I
know Linda kind of runs the records management portion. And
we're not talking, I know, big bucks in these funds, but if
we can come up with another 20,000, that's 20,000 that's
dedicated that we can use. I think we shuffle --
MR. TROLINGER: The big picture over the next
five years, what I'd like to develop is, I'd like to bring
all these purchases, all these individual purchases that you
see that costs a half a million dollars a year, as much as
possible into the Information Technology budget wherever
possible, and then this gives the Commissioners an idea of
how much is really being spent and what's really going on.
8-17-05 bwk
81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was thinking of that,
and I was getting ready to ask Tommy if he could do that.
Then I started thinking the down side to that maybe is that
we get them out of the individual department budgets where
they're being -- or are in there now, and I think it would
be -- from a budget standpoint, I kind of like it the way it
is, but I think it needs to be able to be consolidated as
well so we can look at it as a whole. But I'm not sure if
it's good or bad to all of a sudden take the computer
purposes -- or purchases for the District Clerk out of her
budget and put it in another budget and just say her budget
goes down and yours goes up. I don't know what that gains.
MR. TOMLINSON: Just depends on your
philosophy. Do you want to, you know, look at the big
picture, or do you want to look at -- at how much it costs
to run each office? And, so, it's just -- just a matter
of --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is your
preference?
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't really have a
preference. I mean --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, that's too
easy. What is your preference?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I mean, it would
simplify things for us to have it in one, but on the other
8-17-05 bwk
82
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
hand, I think there's some value to knowing what the total
cost of operating an office is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me ask --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But we could always --
one more, Judge, I'm sorry. But we could always ask the
question, break out the District Clerk's numbers, and you
can do that, couldn't you?
MR. TROLINGER: Well, with the new financial
package, it will, that we
MR. TOMLINSON: That's what I was going to
get to, where along with this -- the court package, we're --
I'm looking at a new financial package along with it, and
that -- that particular software is designed to be more
flexible than what we have. So, there's -- there would
be -- I foresee ways to -- to massage the data any way you
want to.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
MR. TOMLINSON: So I think there's -- there
is benefit in that, in new -- you know, in a new accounting
package for that reason.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we not have the accounts --
the numbering system that you currently have in place, we've
got those paralleled in each department where software is
620 or whatever number?
8-17-05 bwk
83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: And you could key your system
even now to provide -- pull up all of your budgets for that
particular item, could you not?
MR. TOMLINSON: I can do a report that keys
off of the last three digits of the account number, and
that's really all you need.
JUDGE TINLEY: And that would print -- give
us a -- an informational printout of all of the software
expenditures from all of the departments.
MR. TOMLINSON: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Listed by department.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
MR. TROLINGER: I looked at that starting in
Budget Year 2000, and -- actually, my wife went through
every single page of the budget and broke out and tried to
determine how those line items were -- where the spending
was, and it was very difficult. It looked like there's --
sometimes there's software in a particular line item, and
it's in a different line item for the jail or for the
Sheriff.
MR. TOMLINSON: There -- over the years,
there's been issues with -- with account numbers, and I
foresee a time when -- when every county has the same chart
25 ~ of accounts. There are -- they're already -- the
8-17-05 bwk
84
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Legislature already issued a directive to a committee to go
out and study that, and that's been in the mill for -- for a
couple years. So, we -- our charter accounts right now are
designed around recommendations out of the Comptroller's
office. And most -- most accounting numbers in most
counties are very similar. And I -- I look for that to
happen within probably the next two years. So, there's
already a manual printed by the Comptroller's office that
breaks down or consolidates, actually expenditures by
function, and they did that because of GASB.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I was going to
ask if that was because of GASB.
MR. TOMLINSON: And so -- and so I foresee a
numbering system coming down the pipe that will lend itself
to reporting for the State.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sounds like one world
government to me.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Have we got any more
questions?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I do.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think I understand
your proposal. Not all the details of it, but I -- it's my
sense that you're probably leading us in the right
direction. And my assessment of it is that our choices are
8-17-05 bwk
85
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to continue to spend a lot of money on the system that's
essentially obsolete or becoming obsolete, or spend more
money and get a -- a leading-edge kind of a system. My
question I've got is, the impact on productivity. I've seen
in the past where -- where computers significantly increase
productivity. 35 years ago, one of the hottest jobs around
was keypunch operator. Well, there aren't any more of them;
technology eliminated that job. Computer-aided drafting
replaced millions of people. Systems can do it better and
faster and all kind of things. But I also don't -- I also
wonder if we've got the will or the discipline to allow
technology to increase productivity and reduce the number of
people it takes to get our work done. What do you -- what
do you see that this spending more money on -- on
leading-edge systems, what impact do you see on
productivity?
MR. TROLINGER: I attempted to do a
return-on-investment analysis. I started small. I looked
at the e-mail efficiency, and that's why I included that in
my efficiency report. I tried to analyze, how much does it
cost if we've got one e-mail system versus the other?
Versus -- and include the people that did not have e-mail in
that return-on-investment number that I've given you the
bottom line. And it's very difficult for me to analyze even
something as small as the e-mail and come up with a solid
8-17-05 bwk
86
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
number. And I wanted to give you that example of e-mail
efficiency. Well, to do the same thing for the courts
package and for the financial and for the Tax Office, I
just -- it's completely beyond my capability. So, I went to
the vendors, and as recently as yesterday at -- after 5:00,
I was still on the phone with one of the -- one of the
software vendors that we're not using right now, and asked
them, "Well, what do you see -- how many people did Potter
County reduce at their county operation?" And the vendors
really -- they don't have that information either. And I
said, "Well, just off the top of your head, what do you
think?" Well, maybe two or -- but these aren't solid
numbers. I can't -- I can't present you -- I'm told they
won't hand me a piece of paper that says, "Here's the
report," so even the vendors that want to sell a product to
us won't give numbers on people. But the return on
investment for the -- for the taxpayer that doesn't have
access to their data right now, that has to come into the
courthouse versus logging in through the Internet, the
amount of traffic of having a time card system versus a
paper time system, an electronic time card system, just --
it's invaluable, the amount of foot traffic, the amount of
driving back and forth. I've just looked at the big
picture, and that's where all this comes together. Just
reduces -- you know, it just reduces the time that people
8-17-05 bwk
87
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
spend every day doing mundane tasks that just don't need to
be done.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, with that thought
in mind of reducing the traffic in the courthouse, then we
can go over here and reduce the security issue problem, huh?
MR. TOMLINSON: There you go.
MR. TROLINGER: Well, that's the courts. I
don't know how many people -- that's the court system,
running through the courtroom. When I talk about traffic,
mainly I'm talking about the counter operation, where the
public comes in and has to see somebody at the counter, and
the foot traffic of the people driving back and forth, you
know, when payday hits. We've got -- probably the majority
of the -- of County employees are going -- making a trip to
the bank, and I think Barbara's going to improve that some
with direct deposit. But --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: John, acquisition of
this new software package would enable the County Clerk, for
example, to offer up through Internet query documents that
someone might come in to the counter and ask for and pay a
fee to receive; is that correct?
MR. TROLINGER: Yes, it is. Right now, she's
made an attempt desperately -- Jannett's made an attempt to
bring in, even for her land records, a third-party company
to do just that, to put the electronic records out there on
8-17-05 bwk
88
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the Internet and to, for a fee, sell those records on --
from a web site.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is this something
that would also apply to the District Clerk?
MR. TROLINGER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How do we collect a
fee?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, the -- the
client puts in a credit card. That's how you do it, right?
MR. TROLINGER: Yes, lots of options.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Debit card.
MR. TROLINGER: For the online payments.
But, basically, it comes down to choosing a payment -- a
provider that will take the transactions, and then -- same
as Brad does over in Collections. He uses that now. He's
got a provider.
MS. UECKER: Be a little bit more difficult
for the courts because of the expunged cases and the sealed
documents. My plan would be to have the -- to start out
with, to have the indexes online so they would -- you know,
they -- 'cause the biggest part of the traffic is, I want to
come in and I want to see if there's a case. There may or
may not be. Online, they could see if there's a case. If
there is, then they would know from that, you know, what the
fee is, where you go to get it. You can call me and, you
8-17-05 bwk
89
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
know, we'll mail it to you, maybe with a credit card or
whatever. But as far as putting the records online, I still
have some real concerns about that because of all the sealed
and expunged cases that are expunged after they go online.
So it's kind of -- going to be kind of hard to pull those
off.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Any applications for
the Tax Assessor?
MS. RECTOR: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would it be
beneficial to you?
MS. RECTOR: Yes, as far as the tax rolls
being online for the taxpayers to view. The main question
would be whether they're understanding what they're looking
at, and that's where the phone calls, I don't think, would
decrease much. Probably the over-the-counter traffic, as
far as information part of it, that would benefit us.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could people pay
their taxes online?
MS. RECTOR: Not at this -- well, if we were
set up to do that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what I'm
asking.
MS. RECTOR: That's another --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: With this new system,
8-17-05 bwk
90
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
it would allow -- is that a possibility?
MS. RECTOR: That's a possibility.
MR. TROLINGER: Yes. In Guadalupe County,
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. That's where
we get into productivity or reduced -- what Dave talks
about. And it also reduces traffic in the courthouse. It
becomes efficient.
MR. TROLINGER: What I see --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know. The
Auditor has a problem with it, though, maybe.
MR. TOMLINSON: No, I was just going to add
something, too, to my desire to have a financial package.
And it's something this County's never done, and -- and --
but it -- what it would do, it would allow the online --
online requisition from different offices, and it would lend
itself to a purchasing officer if, you know, the County ever
decided to do that. And so I think there would -- there
would be some control -- more control over -- over
expenditures for everyday items. And from -- from an
internal control standpoint, you know, I think that --
that	a purchase order system	with	-- with a purchasing	agent
is -	- is something that, you	know,	this County needs to	do
24 sometime.
25
8-17-05 bwk
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
91
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TROLINGER: Going back to Paula's, I
wanted to make sure I made this point, Tommy. On the -- on
the Tax Assessor/Collector side, the -- the things that
Paula does now under a great workload, especially when tax
time comes up -- I understand that there's just a huge
workload that cycles up, that ramps up. Well, I don't think
she's able to -- because -- because of the way that cycle
works, I don't think she's able to provide you all -- or
give you information as quickly as she could online to have
the numbers typed in, to have the -- you know, to be able to
do the things that Paula really should be concentrating on.
Instead, she's actually going and she's sitting down and
serving customers and helping, you know, take some of that
load off. And I think by -- by getting her a modern system,
a modern system that integrates all the pieces that she's,
some of them, doing by hand now, that it just -- it just
makes her life so much better and helps her provide you with
the information on a more timely basis. And that's my -- I
think that's my assessment.
MS. RECTOR: Yeah. One of the pluses in this
is the bookkeeping part of it. I am still manually keeping
books, because the system that we have does not integrate
with QuickBooks. The new system would integrate with
QuickBooks. It would make my life so much easier.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would that be part of
8-17-05 bwk
92
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the package, John?
MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir.
MS. RECTOR: Mm-hmm, that's part of the
package.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Help me understand
this purchase. You've got two different scenarios here on
purchase. You've got a scenario that costs for a payback of
250,640, and another one of 152,640. Is that annualized
cost under each of those scenarios?
MR. TROLINGER: It is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, on a five-year
purchase, we would be committing to an outlay for all of
this software and its use, as well as the server and
whatever desktop computers are necessary to upgrade and so
forth, and our -- our obligation would be 250,000 and some
dollars?
MR. TROLINGER: Correct. And, additionally,
over five years. Each year for five years.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Each year, five
years.
MR. TROLINGER: And it also includes training
every single user.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
MR. TROLINGER: Which, right now, the
majority of the users have never been trained on the system.
8-17-05 bwk
93
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me -- let me -- we've got
some more things to do here. Our reporter needs a break, so
why don't we take a break for about 15 minutes. We'll come
back, and we've got some more work to do.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, could we come
back to this actual issue?
JUDGE TINLEY: Sure.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Again, I want to hear
how it's going to benefit the Sheriff and his office as
well.
JUDGE TINLEY: No, we're just kind of
stopping in mid-stream where we are.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good deal.
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll be in recess for about
15 minutes.
(Recess taken from 10:53 a.m. to 11:15 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's come back to
order, if we might. We were in recess, and we were dealing
with the Information Technology Department budget. I
believe Commissioner Baldwin said he wanted to be sure we
were back on the same page where we left off.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's where we are.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I wanted to hear from
8-17-05 bwk
94
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the Sheriff, of how the Odyssey package would affect his
impact on our department.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A major-plus impact.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Major-plus impact, all
for the good.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The real small things,
it's just what Commissioner Nicholson was saying,
productivity. Number one, the Odyssey package has the
capability of -- all the stuff we send to and fax every day
to the medias, about six or eight different ones that we're
required to; arrest list, offense reports, anything that
happened the night before. It allows all that stuff to be
sent automatically through e-mail at 8 o'clock or whatever
time we set every morning, and we don't have to pull it. We
don't have to make copies; we don't have to stand there at
the fax machine. And yesterday, for an example -- and I'm
sure Gerard got tired of the fax running yesterday, for
example. It was 25 pages that had to be faxed to every
media around. So, that is -- that's just a small part of
it, but that is a major -- 'cause our C.I.D. secretary has
to do all that faxing every day.
It allows -- especially, like, Gillespie
8-17-05 bwk
95
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
County is on it now. Denton County is a fabulous example.
They were the original actual test site for Software Group
to use it all. I can go online right now in Denton County
from any computer, as long as I've got Internet access; I
can see all the public information, every jail arrest, every
docket sheet, every inmate photograph, everything. The
sharing of information between the departments is -- is, you
know, ten times better. So, it gives all that information.
It would solve us a lot of public information requests. The
organizational and the ability to do forms and design the
forms that we need it to do, just like -- one thing Tommy
and I have talked about for years, and we may be able to get
to it with Legacy; I'm just not sure, but our department has
never, ever had a complete, full, itemized, running
inventory of every piece of equipment that the County owns
that's in that department, and being able to separate it out
to -- this is to this car, this is to this car, this is to
these offices. It hasn't happened ever, and probably won't.
It's very hard to do in this, but the Odyssey
program allows you the flexibility to draw up those programs
and do that. With Fredericksburg on it, I can log on with
their passwords they give us -- and this is where law
enforcement across the state is trying to do more
interoperability stuff, is that their Sheriff can give
certain ones of us passwords; I can give them passwords.
8-17-05 bwk
96
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
You can actually get into the entire system, depending on
what password availability you had or chat clearance you
had, and see everything that entire department's doing.
I've talked to the Chief of Police here about it, that I
think the City should seriously look at doing that, and in
going with it or something, or at least going to it, to
where we solve beaucoups of problems on them having to call
all the time and get information from the jail or -- or
trying to do a stand-alone computer and get licenses, so
that they have just a couple people that could pull up stuff
where they could pull it up individually when they need it.
A good example is a couple weeks ago, when we
had the drowning in Ingram, the person that drowned was an
alien -- illegal alien, okay? He had only been arrested in
the county one time, which was four years ago, for no
driver's license. That's the only record the state ever had
on him, so his name was not in the State's database. His
fingerprints were not in the state database for that or the
national database for that, okay, because he was only
arrested on a Class C charge four years ago here. That was
local. There's only a couple people in my office that know
how to search our database on description, and so we had to
wait till we got one of those people in. We searched it,
and within 10 minutes of doing that, we identified this guy
25 ~ that we wouldn't have ever been able to identify before.
8-17-05 bwk
97
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
The Odyssey package enhances all that, makes
it ten times better and ten times easier, and quicker to be
able to -- an officer on the street, if it were -- has the
capability of going into a laptop computer and doing it
right there from his car. And where this comes into play,
say you have a robbery. All you have is a red car; first
letter of the license plate was "F," and it had a white male
in it, maybe 6 foot tall, maybe 30 to 50 years old. You can
plug that information in it, and it will search your entire
database and narrow it down to only what fits that
description. And if you can do that in the field, you can
talk about so much quicker in solving and affecting law
enforcement. So, I can't -- and what I've seen in talking
with him and seeing the program upstairs and seeing -- and
visiting with Software Group, it would be the best thing in
the world.
Now, the training ground, we would be -- we
would have -- and where the real cost saving is is in the
computer-aided dispatch. We don't have computer-aided
dispatch now, okay? We have a call screen that the
dispatcher just puts in the call, but it's not a
computer-aided dispatch; it doesn't help you along. This
system, it's a good system. They've already got it. But
what their test site is, is, "We want you to use it. We
give it to you for nothing. You use it; you tell us, from
8-17-05 bwk
98
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the people that are actually using it, what improvements we
need to make in it, what it's not doing that you really
need." That's the testing part of the deal, is getting it
worked out. It puts a map of the entire county with every
street on it. It can locate every house. You can have
every patrol car pinpointed to where they are with the extra
stuff. I mean, it's just -- the capabilities of the modern
technology, as we all know, are unbelievable, and the
capabilities of what we currently have used up.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty, on that one point,
just -- you know, not that -- not a big point, particularly,
in my mind, but, okay, you have a map of the city. Where
does that come from?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Comes from 9-1-1, and it
would all be into that system.
MR. TROLINGER: It originates from Central
Appraisal District, who I'm also integrating in with the
County.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, your -- my confidence
in the system is going down real rapidly as you're talking
about that, 'cause their maps are not accurate at all. That
was what I'm saying, is -- I mean, it's good stuff, but --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The street index is --
we go back over and the City goes back over and we do a lot
of those, and those help too, but their maps, the ones we
8-17-05 bwk
99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
have, okay, are really not bad. Now, you get out there in
your subdivision off 87, yeah, a lot of that's still
coming -- you know, a lot of it's behind, you might say.
But they are not -- for our use, they are not bad maps at
all, and they do get us to the -- to the area that we need
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How often are they
upgraded, Rusty? How often are they upgraded, the maps?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We upgrade our maps at
the Sheriff's Office about every year, and every time y'all
change a road name or do something like that, between Road
and Bridge and us, we try and integrate that in. What we
did is, we went to a total different self-made-up Microsoft
program that they have to get out of the County computer,
pull up that screen, and try and get into it and find it
out. This type system, it's --
MS. UECKER: If I'm not mistaken, that
Odyssey will also allow you to do aerial photo maps, which
would be accurate.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, the problem is, the
Appraisal District uses the photo, perhaps, and it's
probably accurate for 99 percent of the needs. The
inaccuracy comes when you get out in the rural areas.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it's the source
8-17-05 bwk
100
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in the system now; they're all just in a -- back in
Dispatch, and we have to try and go by those and street
indexes.
MR. TROLINGER: Right now, there is a one-way
flow from Central Appraisal through 9-1-1 to the Sheriff's
Office, and there's no feedback on -- if the dispatcher
knows what the real address is versus the old one, or the
notes on it, that doesn't go back and forth. And this
brings that together so that if -- given permission, the
Sheriff's Office can say, "Okay, here's the real information
on that field," and then Central Appraisal will then be able
to see that also, 9-1-1 will be able to see it. It
integrates everybody.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And patrol-wise,
everyone's using video cameras in the cars. Everybody's
trying to go to digital cameras, which is needed. What this
system also does, where now we have to have evidence areas,
storage areas for all those video tapes -- and I've got
thousands of them out there, 'cause you need to keep them.
What it does is, the officer, from in his car, on a digital
video system will be able to get within range, which is
anywhere around, okay, push one button, download that entire
video from that case that he's been working out in the field
8-17-05 bwk
101
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
directly into the actual case file in the computer system.
It's not a separate file; it goes in with that case; you
know, autopsy reports, mug shots, photographs, hand
photographs. Everything is in that one case file. If the
D.A. wants a copy of that case file, we can -- with the
Odyssey -- you can't do it now -- you can e-mail that entire
case file with every attachment, including the videos, to
that D.A. or anywhere else you need to, even mail it.
MS. UECKER: We could even do -- the Judge
could even pull it up in the courtroom.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Oh, you can pull it --
it's an unbelievable system. You know, I've always liked
Software Group. The problem with Software Group, one was
always the expense, but two was training issues. But this
system is ten times
based off Microsoft
the old Uniplex and
trying to learn how
common folks being
work.
more user-friendly,
Word and the common
the different codes
to use it. This is
able to use it, bein
'cause it's all
way. You don't have
that kills everybody
more the -- the
g able to make it
JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff, you indicated that
Gillespie County has this --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- in place?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. They've got parts
8-17-05 bwk
102
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of it in place, and they're adding more into it each --
MR. TROLINGER: The district -- excuse me.
yet as to their --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only report I have
was when they first started getting some of it up and going,
and I was with Milton Jung, the Sheriff over there, and we
-- we were talking about it, and it was mainly built on the
ease of it, 'cause they had parts of it in and there was --
they were starting to use -- they said it was an
unbelievable advantage, 'cause, you know, he's got something
his officers can actually use. And that was his opinion of
it, because it's easy to use.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: John used the phrase
"test site." I want to see if we can qualify his comment
about it being -- it's not -- it is -- this is not an alpha
site where we're developing something, right?
MR. TROLINGER: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is where we're
shaking out some idiosyncrasies that apply to Texas law. Is
that essentially it?
MR. TROLINGER: Correct. And the Sheriff
8-17-05 bwk
103
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
actually said -- told Software, when I first sat down in
February or March with them, and said he wants -- you know,
Denton County's getting all the stuff, and we want it too.
And this is what it does. It's not -- it's not alpha.
It's --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I have watched Denton
County for the last umpteen years be their test site, and
they get all the stuff just about free. And visiting with
them and everything else -- and I harass Software Group
every time I see them, because we do just as much -- not
quite as big, but we've got such a complex-type deal, is why
can't Kerr County do that same thing? Why can't we be, you
know, one of the test sites and get it at a -- at a much
reduced cost or free cost to let -- and let us work through
the bugs? 'Cause we do the whole thing. And --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can we do EMS billing
through -- I'm just teasing here, to be honest.
MS. PIEPER: Gentlemen, by being the guinea
pig on this, as well, if we have something in the system
that we want tweaked or changed, then we're more than likely
to get that as well. If -- like, if I have a -- a case that
I want flagged and I don't have that capability, then we can
call Software, and they can give us that capability to where
we can flag a case. Now, some other county may not want
that capability, and they may get it, but they won't use it.
8-17-05 bwk
104
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
But it also -- it kind of gives more -- us more access to be
able to do what we -- we can have them program it to the way
we want it and the way we'll use it better.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- speaking for
me, y'all have sold me on the -- the use of it. The desire
for us to have it. The productivity enhancements down the
road, it looks like. Cost --
know how.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER:	Well,	the only	other --
COMMISSIONER LETZ:	-- I'm	talking -	- I don't
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well talk to him, but
one thing I want to mention on cost is, right now we have to
have licenses for so many terminals in so many areas, okay,
which the County has so many; it costs so much. Our problem
is where we run into -- and you don't have this with the --
with the new system. Where we really have a problem is at
shift change, or my dispatchers log off; they're changing
shifts. Once they log off, then they go to log back on, and
we can't even get on our own system because all the licenses
are used up. And then I have to call Tommy and say we
21 need --
22
23
24
25
are using it.
MS. UECKER: And we can't get on 'cause y'all
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: See? It goes somewhere.
But the problem is, regardless of who's at fault, the
8-17-05 bwk
105
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
licenses are being used right then. There's too many people
on the system. And I have to call John and tell him, knock
somebody off. And they go in and make them mad 'cause they
knocked them off, or sometimes we get knocked off because
people can't -- but, like, the dispatch, that's -- that's a
very serious problem when we can't get onto our computer
system and let the guy in the field know, "We've been to
this house five times before. He's been arrested for
assault on a police officer; he's been arrested for this.
Use caution when you go to the house." And we can't pull it
up and let them know that, and it is serious.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This will correct
that?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This system will correct
that.
MR. TROLINGER: One day I had to shut
everybody off the system so that dispatch could get on.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got a couple of
questions about mopping up what we learned in the last hour
or so. I want to talk about online transactions, and how --
what can be done online, and how does it get paid for?
First question is, can we pay fines online?
MS. UECKER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: When I'm in the
J.P.'s office, I notice that a lot of the clerk's time is
8-17-05 bwk
106
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
spent dealing with law breakers and fines and things like
that. Is there some way, using either a local bank or a
facility like Pay-Pal, that we can pull all this together
and collect our money efficiently and easily?
MR. TROLINGER: Yes. That's the -- that's
the choice -- who -- whomever does the credit card
transaction for us, whoever that provider is, is -- is going
to be selected based on if they provide Linda and Jannett
with exactly what services they want. I don't know the
details.
MS. UECKER: Well, my suggestion was, you
know, that maybe the Auditor or the Treasurer would talk to
know, getting a
money. See,
I'm looking at
sive for the user
contract with our
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah.
MS. UECKER: -- I would think that they
21 would --
22
23
24 Odyssey.
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That can be done.
MS. UECKER: And that would work exactly with
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That should be
Security and see about working a -- you
contract price for everybody that takes
Jannett's got her own system right now.
having a separate one. It's very expen
fees. But if we can get some type of a
depository bank --
8-17-05 bwk
107
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
doable.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: In the small
business I owned, I had that facility through one of the
local banks. Could you -- can you buy a -- pay for your
license tags, your license renewal online?
MS. RECTOR: Well, that goes through Texas
Department of Transportation. That would not go through
this system. I'm currently working on doing that for Kerr
County. It's not in --
MS.	UECKER:	Your tax	issue could,	though.
MS.	RECTOR:	Taxes, we	could. But	the
problem being, either with the TexDOT equipment or the Orion
equipment, would be somebody has to be in front of the
computer the next day to download everything that was paid
the previous day or during the night, so you're still not
eliminating a body that processes that. It's just that it's
going to make it quicker for the taxpayer. The money will
go direct deposit to the bank, and then we'll get a report
from the bank on a daily basis as to what our deposits were.
MS. UECKER: And we'd all have to download,
you know, whatever inquiries and orders or whatever took
place.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, all these kinds
of transactions can be done; it's just a matter of working
out the process.
8-17-05 bwk
108
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. UECKER: Right.
MS. RECTOR: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We talked a good bit
about -- have talked a good bit about productivity and/or
reducing labor costs in various departments. There are some
departments where that's absolutely impossible to do,
because they're already winnowed down and it's computerized,
but I think what we sometimes fail to take into
consideration is the fact that, first of all, this is a
growing county. We're at 45,000; we're going to be at
50,000 before you know it. As a result of that, there are
increased demands on services in the courthouse on every one
of these elected officials, tremendous increases in demand.
And I'm -- what I'm hearing, I think, is -- and I want John
to confirm it. What I think I'm hearing is that, with this
type of package, which is -- takes us out into the future
now, we can absorb that increased demand on our services
hopefully without any increases in our personnel cost
itself. Am I hearing that correctly?
MR. TROLINGER: I agree, yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. TROLINGER: And I did look at Guadalupe
County. They're about twice our size, I believe, roughly,
and saw how he were operating and whatnot. I saw that they
8-17-05 bwk
109
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
were -- that there doing everything online.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's good enough
for me. Let's talk about the cost. Tommy? He's got two
scenarios here. 250 each year for five years or 152,6 for a
10-year payout. How do you come down on that? What do you
see as the recommended approach?
MR. TOMLINSON: I would go the shorter term.
But we just gave that to you just to show you the difference
between, you know, one maturity or the other. Personally,
I -- I mean, I -- I think this is largely done that -- that
we might do a tax anticipation note for this purchase. And
the benefit to that is that it qualifies the debt as -- as a
deduction in -- or to increase our rollback. If -- if we
go -- if we go to a finance company like -- well, a bank,
for instance, it qualifies for that, but that debt is not --
is not a qualified debt. So, as large as it is, I -- there
might be some advantage to think about a tax note.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can you work up that
scenario for us so we can take a look at it?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, the -- the numbers will
be essentially the same. If they -- if the tax note is sold
on the open market for -- for a five-year term, it will
probably be -- the rate will probably be less. I used a 4
and a half percent rate for the numbers that you have, and
it could be 50 basis points lower.
8-17-05 bwk
110
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How much?
MR. TOMLINSON: 50 basis points lower if we
go to a tax note. I would have to talk to our -- to Bob
Henderson about -- about that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: John, looking at your
same chart above, in the first -- Lines 1 through 6 --
MR. TROLINGER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- new system, 598,000
per year. Does that include the 250,000?
MR. TROLINGER: I'm sorry, what line number
was that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Line 6. Line 6, new
system. It says 598,698.
MR. TROLINGER: Let me make sure we're on the
same page. I've got a couple versions of this. Okay. That
-- that is the -- that is the total per-year cost that
we're -- that we paid over the past five years for desktop
computers, software licenses, everything county-wide.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that's under the new
-- that's the Legacy. That's the 2000-2005. Historically,
it's 570, but you have a 2005-2010, 598.
MR. TROLINGER: And that's what I'm
projecting first year -- I'm sorry, per year for the next
five years. That number's going to come down significantly.
8-17-05 bwk
111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
One thing that happened this year, the Sheriff seized --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All that stuff.
MR. TROLINGER: -- several computers. We've
received some computers from the Crimestoppers, and there's
a couple other sources where I wanted to, you know, get more
contributions in.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the 250 is not
included in that.
MR. TROLINGER: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What if we were to not
buy the Odyssey system, but do a -- another bandaid on the
Legacy system? What would that cost?
MR. TROLINGER: And that's the Legacy column,
and that's the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the 81,000 a year?
MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir. And that's the
same -- it's spread out over the next five years.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's 81 on top of
598?
MR. TROLINGER: Yes. And that gets -- and
that gets everyone trained, basically.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the new system costs
$170,000 additional a year for the next five years?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct, over
8-17-05 bwk
112
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and above the cost on Lines 1 through 6, I guess.
MR. TROLINGER: For the five-year
lease-purchase, recommended capital outlay is $250,000, 640
per year for five years. Those are the numbers that Tommy
and I worked up.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My other question is,
we're getting a good deal from Software Group because of --
or pilot -- whatever you want to call it. The Software
Group has a -- a history of hitting you pretty hard with, I
guess, their annual licenses and/or annual fees, and --
MR. TROLINGER: The maintenance costs,
software maintenance, yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What kind of guarantee
are they willing to give us on their -- on the escalation
that we've seen on the maintenance cost side?
MR. TROLINGER: No increase for three years,
was the verbal that I received, in software maintenance.
So, the software maintenance that we pay today would not
change over the next three years.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that number is not in
here? Or is it?
MR. TROLINGER: It is. It's part of the
total of the desktops and the servers and the training and
networking.
MS. UECKER: Does that include all the
8-17-05 bwk
113
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
computers?
MR. TROLINGER: It does.
MS. UECKER: It does?
MR. TROLINGER: I'm sorry, does what
include --
MS. UECKER: The computers, the hardware.
MR. TROLINGER: The servers. Yes, it -- the
equipment's included.
MS. UECKER: The monitors, the keyboards,
the --
MR. TROLINGER: Which part are you asking
about?
MS. UECKER: Odyssey.
MR. TROLINGER: Oh. It does for some --
there's some equipment in there that's required, some
upgrades.
MS. UECKER: Not all?
MR. TROLINGER: Not everything. The base --
what we spend right now on computers, networking and all
that, I've got that figured in separately.
MS. UECKER: Okay. As, like, a credit or
something?
MR. TROLINGER: Basically.
MS. UECKER: Okay.
MS. RECTOR: John, does that figure include
8-17-05 bwk
114
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the Orion package also?
MR. TROLINGER: It does.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We just heard that
if we go with the latest technology compared to continuing
to make the old system work, the net cost is 170,000 a year
for five years?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: $850,000.
JUDGE TINLEY: Actually, it's about 197, the
way I compute it, because of the difference between the
annual for the Legacy of 570 and the new one of 598.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: You add that on top of the
difference between 250 and 81, you come up with about
$197,200.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do you agree with
that, John?
MR. TROLINGER: I do. I didn't look at it
that way; I'm not certain about the -- the exact numbers. I
looked at it as either Legacy or new, or, you know, hang on
to what we've got by our fingernails.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. We can accept
that 198,000, whatever. That gets us --
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm just talking about pure
dollar outlay; I'm not talking about relative benefits
8-17-05 bwk
115
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
otherwise.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, you're just over
and above where we are today.
MR. TROLINGER: Correct. And I wanted to add
that I've got -- the 198th District Attorney's on board with
this, the Ingram City Marshal, and to some extent, like the
Sheriff said, the City of Kerrville. And -- and Ingram City
Marshal told me this morning they're willing to participate
financially, to throw some money in the hat. Rowan wasn't
certain how much, but he said they did want to participate
in paying the cost. And 198th District Attorney said they
would pay their way -- their fair share of the system.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What did City of
Kerrville tell you?
MR. TROLINGER: Basically, we're still --
because their budget has already been set and they've got a
new police chief, it looked like they weren't ready to
commit. But they -- they have stated verbally -- the Police
Chief has stated verbally that he wants to participate in
the system, and this coming year, see if we can integrate --
my goal would be to first integrate the PSAP, the 9-1-1
system better, which is underway now. And also for the
bookings and arrests, I want to get City of Kerrville on our
system so that they're not filling out separate paperwork
using separate computers, but instead integrate them into
8-17-05 bwk
116
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the Odyssey package.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not -- you said
something that just -- that caught my ear just then. Are
you telling me that part -- if we do this, part of that will
improve the PSAP?
MR. TROLINGER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which is city dispatch
equipment.
MR. TROLINGER: The computer-aided dispatch
portion that the Sheriff spoke of, that's part of the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: His dispatch? Not the
City of Kerrville dispatch, which is 9-1-1's dispatch?
MR. TROLINGER: City of Kerrville has the
PSAP and provides all the information to the County.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. TROLINGER: The PSAP is a separate 9-1-1
Commission issue.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. TROLINGER: The vendor for that is aware
of our intention -- or possibility of using the new system,
and it will integrate in what the efforts of 9-1-1
Commission, will integrate the PSAP and --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess my bottom line
is -- either one of you can answer -- this is going to go
towards helping the city's dispatch?
8-17-05 bwk
117
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The main thing that will
okay, it will give city dispatch direct access real quick,
real easy, to any information regarding inmates, courts,
anything like that they may want as far as sending their
officer out. They're not going to have the maps. They're
not locked into this system, but the biggest deal is, 9-1-1
and their upgrades is trying to set the Sheriff's Office up
as a complete secondary 9-1-1 office. Because if something
happens to the City's dispatch office, it goes down, okay,
everybody's out on 9-1-1. We don't have the capability
right now of taking over for them, you know, on an instant
notice or anything. We don't have a server out there for
that. We don't have any of that. In their upgrades, what
they're looking at -- and I think you'll probably see it in
this year's budget, that they're doing -- they're going to
set up the Sheriff's Office dispatch as a complete another
9-1-1 deal to where if that one goes down, we are their
backup 9-1-1 dispatch office.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Going back to the
equipment only, I mean, 9-1-1 funds currently $36,000 a
year, and they're getting ready, I think we're all aware, in
the next couple of years to do a major system upgrade of
technology in dispatch.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
8-17-05 bwk
118
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does this system -- if we
do this, that helps that whole process?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It does help that
process. The biggest thing is, it would totally be able to
be integrated into that, to where, say, in the future, us
and the City do come to a deal and work a totally joint
dispatch center, okay? If we could get the City to end up
going to this same type of system, Odyssey -- 'cause they
just went to a law enforcement system that I wouldn't give
you a nickel for, and if their office would --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Did you get that, Gerard?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: He knows it. But if
they were to go city-wide to this system -- 'cause that's
what it's designed for, is cities and counties -- it can all
work together. And if they were to do it all together,
you'd have the best dispatch in the state, because it would
all be under one deal. It -- and it's setting the
groundwork for doing that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I -- thank
you.
(Low-voice discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. I've heard
all I need on this.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have too. I'm in.
25 ~ JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Trolinger.
8-17-05 bwk
119
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TROLINGER: You're welcome.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're in? I'm not.
JUDGE TINLEY: The District Clerk and the Tax
Assessor each have six minutes. (Laughter.) Y'all can
split up the 12 any way you want to.
MS. UECKER: I'll take it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Will y'all take the
whole 12?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Linda's quick.
MS. UECKER: I'm easy.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: She doesn't exist.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Nine.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Number 9. There she
is.
MS. UECKER: I just want to start off by
going down to my Microfilm Records. I would like for you to
increase that to 8,000, and I'll tell you why.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Microfilm. What
number -- oh, yeah, 412.
MS. UECKER: 412.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Increase it?
MS. UECKER: To 8,000.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Eight.
MS. UECKER: I want to get rid of every damn
reader-printer in my office. I don't want to pay
8-17-05 bwk
120
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
maintenance on them any more. Now, records preservation is
a big issue, because we do have to preserve these documents
forever. I know -- and any vendor will tell you that
microfilm is still the only way to do that. So, I still
want to be able to microfilm, but I want to be able to do
that for archival purposes only. Right now, I have a copy
of the film that we use, which has been very useful. It's
been an up -- it's been better than what we've had before.
But at this point, because of technology and -- and all the
computers that we have, I have found someone that can very
inexpensively convert all of the microfilm and still
maintain the original in case we have a fire or whatever,
all of the microfilm, the older ones, everything back to
1856, put them on C.D.'s so that -- and they'll be
searchable by name, by part of a name, by offense, by
anything.
So that when someone comes in and says, you
know, "I want to look up a divorce record from 1950," rather
than pulling Cartridge, you know, 27, they'll pull C.D. 27,
put it in a computer, either one of the staff or the public
computer, which I'm going to get another one donated from
the O.C.A. to put on the counter. They can put it -- look
it up, print it to one of the printers, and that's it.
There's no microfilm; there's no reader-printers to have to
keep up with, and it just makes a lot of sense for the
8-17-05 bwk
121
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
money. Now, this will happen probably over a two-year
period. I don't think that I can get it all done this year.
I'll do as much of it as I can. And still, you know, the
other project that I'm working on is the -- but that's
another line item and we'll talk about that later, but it's
all of the old historic documents, preserving those so that
they don't deteriorate any further. But that's what I need
the 8,000 for.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Pieper?
MS. PIEPER: Yes?
JUDGE TINLEY: You have a need for those
MS. PIEPER: Yes. I'm down to one, the one
JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon?
MS. PIEPER: Yes, I'm down to one, the one we
just purchased a couple of months ago.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do yours work?
MS. UECKER: Depends on how you hold your
mouth. (Laughter.) Right now, there's four. The only one
that's really -- that we can count on is the one that I
bought 20 years ago. It's an old 605-Z, Minolta. But the
MARS controller, which tells you what -- you know, you can
enter a key pad -- it has a key pad that you can take it
directly to a case. It doesn't work any more, because they
8-17-OS bwk
122
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
don't make the parts any more. They don't even make that
machine any more. So, you have to scan it, but it still
makes the best copies. Now, I have two that don't work at
all.
MS. PIEPER: I don't want them.
MS. UECKER: And I have one good one that,
you know, does -- does work good. So, you know, that --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: One and a half.
MS. UECKER: Yeah, probably got one and a
half. But I'm also paying maintenance on that, and I don't
want to have to do that any more, either.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does your maintenance
contract go down slightly if you -- we increase --
MS. UECKER: Yeah. And it depends on -- see,
I'm -- until I get them all on C.D.'s, I'll still have to
use a reader-printer for certain --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. UECKER: -- you know, for the film that's
not on a C.D.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. UECKER: The other things, of course, is
the computer software. We've already talked about Odyssey
software.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let's look at Line
104, Deputy Clerks salary.
8-17-05 bwk
123
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. UECKER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We had a current
budget of 196, estimated actual 153, requested 180. What
are those variations?
MS. UECKER: The 180 was cost-of-living
increases and, I think, a two-step merit increase for one
person.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: How are we down
43,000 from budget -- budget versus estimated actual?
MS. UECKER: Because of the other person that
I gave up, and -- and a part-time person.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: How many deputy
clerks does this budget include?
MS. UECKER: Seven.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And we have seven
now?
MS. UECKER: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Looks good to me.
MS. UECKER: The other thing is, on software,
depending on what the Court does with Odyssey, if we don't
buy Odyssey, then I would request about $1,000 to create --
to hire someone to create a web site to do what Odyssey will
do. So, if we don't buy Odyssey, I would like that plugged
into my budget.
8-17-05 bwk
124
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: $1,000?
MS. UECKER: That's --
MR. TROLINGER: Just to edit a couple of web
pages.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're telling me that for
$1,000, we can do what Odyssey is going to do?
MS. UECKER: No, to create a web page.
MR. TROLINGER: What Linda wants is her nice
picture right there on the web site right in the middle --
MS. UECKER: Not necessarily.
MR. TROLINGER: -- and then the bio on either
side.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Does it get a title
that says "Our Beloved" across the top?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: State champion.
MS. UECKER: State champion.
MR. TROLINGER: Basically, to update her
existing web site.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: One thing that I left
out a while ago that even goes along with this scanning and
documents -- you know, Linda would probably be able to use
part of it. As y'all know, trying to get a scanner in to
scan documents in a case right now, you have to have that
dedicated, and all this --
MS. UECKER: Which we've got.
8-17-05 bwk
125
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- stuff, okay, and we
don't have any -- Buster can tell you what my file room
looks like; he was in there yesterday. With the Odyssey,
any scanner purchased at Office Max, you can use at any
computer terminal, and you can scan those documents all into
a -- into a regular case file that's already there. The
price we got to try and take care of our file cabinets a
couple years ago when Linda and I were working on it trying
to get everything was $1 million just to do the Sheriff's
Office documents that need to be put into the system.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question -- I'm sorry
Judge. You had your hand up?
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Baldwin was there
yesterday?
MS. UECKER: Are we still talking --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm on a work-release
program.
JUDGE TINLEY: I was going to say, were they
working out there?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They let me out this
morning so could I come to Commissioners Court. I do
represent a quarter of the people of this county.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's why I brought my
gun today; I'm pulling guard duty on him. (Laughter.)
MS. UECKER: There's a couple things I need
8-17-05 bwk
126
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
before I move off of computer.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just a second, Linda.
If we go to the Odyssey, does your software maintenance, the
fifteen thousand five, go away?
MS. UECKER: I don't think so.
MR. TROLINGER: No, the software maintenance
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's for the
existing system?
MS. UECKER: Well, plus the fact that they've
agreed not to raise what we're currently paying for three
years.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MS. UECKER: The other thing that I might
just incredible. I mean, we've been doing l~ anct ~u
passports a day. We get 30 bucks a passport. Even having
to reduce the staff, it almost takes, you know, one person
just constantly working on passports, and we're doing okay
with that. Plus civil case filings are up from 1,300 to
about 1,425. Criminal, a third again as much in the same
period of time. The other piece of information that might
increase our workload -- well, it will increase our
workload, and I think I've got it -- and we'll talk about it
again Monday in the Commissioners Court item agenda, is
8-17-05 bwk
127
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Senate Bill 1704 will require that the -- that the District
Clerk keep grant -- let's see -- hear grant postponements,
and keep record of that. Now, I understand that The
Software Group is changing their software a little bit to
accommodate us with that, but we will have to keep some type
of a running tab of who all is postponed, because if they've
been -- had a postponement within the last year, they can't
be postponed again. And their postponement has to be to a
date that's not more than six months away. So, I mean,
that's going to increase our workload a little bit.
I think that's all on that, except that I do
want to make one comment on salaries for employees. When I
hire someone, one of the -- the first thing I tell them is,
anything you do, any of your actions, I don't want to scare
you, but if you make a big mistake, it reflects personally
on me, and could even cause me, in the most serious
incident, to lose my house or property that may not be a
homestead. That's the effect that it has. And when I hire
someone, they have to be intelligent enough to interpret
lengthy court judgments that are composed by attorneys. We
have to issue the right process; for instance, a writ of
execution, garnishment, sequestration, but all of those
judgments -- some of them are that long -- have to be
carefully studied. They have to be savvy enough to survive
intense technical computer training. They have to be
8-17-05 bwk
128
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
tactful enough to deal with very difficult people. And
they're difficult people because they found themselves in
the court system, so we're the only outlet they have, 'cause
they're darned sure not going to tell the Judge what to do.
They have to be confident enough to absorb strong
personalities of attorneys and judges. Sorry, Judge, but
they do. They have to be honest enough to be bonded and
insured to handle very large sums of money and sensitive
information, and they have to be adaptable enough that every
two years, fees change, laws change. Forget what you
learned two years ago; we're going to do it all over.
Having said that -- and I think Jannett will
agree with me, and Paula will too -- these people that come
in entry level at the same pay scale that the light bulb
changer and the trash picker-upper enters at, and can't
speak English, there's something wrong with this picture.
My suggestion would be -- I know that there is, I think, a
Step 14 that's not even being used. I don't want to take
anything away from those people, but my suggestion would be
to move all of the 12-1 office staff up to 13-1's, all the
13-1's to 14-1's. And to make an even more distinct
comparison, there is actually a position in the courthouse
-- I won't say who it is, because it's a good person --
whose job description is a legal secretary, but the
description is exactly -- exactly that of what my staff is,
8-17-05 bwk
129
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
entry level, and that's a 17-1. Now, I know the Nash study
did this, I'm sure. I don't -- I don't know that for sure,
but I think that's something -- you don't have to comment on
it -- I would really, seriously like for you to consider
when you start talking about employee salaries.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're saying, Linda,
that there's an employee that -- that's a legal secretary;
they're at a 17-1?
MS. UECKER: Job description's the same as --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the job
description for your people are exactly the same, and a new
hire for you would be a 12-1?
MS. UECKER: Well, in my office right now,
it's a 13-1, because the Nash study said because of the type
of judgments, as big as they are, and the type of cases,
that -- but before that, it was a 12-1.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
MS. UECKER: I mean, the same applies to
Jannett's folks.
MS. PIEPER: My folks are a 12-1.
MS. UECKER: So, this would apply to her as
well as Paula. I haven't talked to them about it. They
didn't even know I was going to say this.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And we have
8-17-05 bwk
130
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
custodians that start at 14-1? Is that what you said?
MS. UECKER: No, 12-1's. Which is fine;
which that needed to have happened. Because I think
Mr. Nicholson was the one, last budget year or two years
ago, that said no one should start at less than a 12-1, and
I agree. But that makes them the same as someone who's --
who has to be -- has to have all of these qualities, and be
semi-intelligent enough to comply with these.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You make a good
point.
MS. UECKER: Thank you.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Very good point.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, that job
description you gave and the qualities they have, we could
replace this Commissioners Court with your employees and --
MS. UECKER: That's right.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- improve the
average capability. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That was a lame duck
statement.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Heard that quacking, did you?
MS. UECKER: Let's go over to Law Library.
I'm not sure that the books -- I see that the actual was
43,714, and, you know, I'll try to live with the 37,5, but
8-17-05 bwk
131
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
we might need to raise that a little bit. I'm pointing out
that that's still a lot less than what we were spending
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are we still buying
MS. UECKER: Very few. Very few.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But, like, this year she
does buy, because it got changed over, the -- all the new
law books that every patrolman has to have, the Penal Code.
MS. UECKER: Yeah, paying off all those now.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: All of that gets paid
for out of that, so we get over 50 of those, so each officer
13 I has one.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. UECKER: See, I'm also paying out of
this -- and we decided to do this last year to save money
from the other budgets, because we can't use this money for
anything else. Everybody's law books, their bill comes to
me. County Attorney, the Sheriff, whoever needs a law book,
bring the bill to me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that still a good
thing?
MS. UECKER: It's a good thing. I mean,
we're up a little bit. I mean, you know, probably 5,000,
6,000 we need to add so I can keep doing that. But that's
still a lot less than what we've been doing. Let's see,
8-17-05 bwk
132
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Jury. There's going to be a big change in juries -- jury
fees. We need to raise that from 20,000 to 50,000. And
here's --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 50,000?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Need to raise it to
what?
MS. UECKER: 20,000 to 50,000.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Why?
MS. UECKER: The same Senate bill, and I've
got that -- I've got all of these explanations of all of
these on the agenda for Monday, and we'll go into them in
detail more. But it's going to require that the first day
of service for a juror is not less than $6, we're going to
ask for $15 because of the fact that County Court at Law
jurors and -- like, yesterday I had a jury that finished in
one day. Under the new bill, if we set it at $6, they would
only have gotten the same as for the person that came in and
said, "I'm here and I'm going home." So, I talked to both
the District Judges. They would like that one set at $15.
The big one is, any day after that, any -- yeah, it goes up
to $40 a day, not less than. And, you know, we can set it
at higher than that, but the minimum is $40 a day. So that
is where -- and doing some intense mathematics and changing
it a bunch of times, I figured that 50,000 is probably where
we need to set that. However, there's another new fee added
8-17-05 bwk
133
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
to criminal cases -- convictions that we collect and send to
the state -- State Comptroller for a jury reimbursement fee.
You know, God forbid we just keep the money and pay the
jurors; we have to send it to the State. But every quarter,
someone -- and I would assume that to be the Treasurer or
the Auditor; I don't know, or me -- will have to apply for a
reimbursement from the State Comptroller for $34 of every
$40 that we spend. Now, that's going to be tough the first
year, because before all of those funds get to the
Comptroller, we're going to be asking for money that's not
there, and in that case, Senate Bill 1704 says that they
will proportion it, you know, based on what county asks for
what percentage. They'll prorate it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: As I understand it --
MS. UECKER: In other words, you may not get
COMMISSIONER LETZ: As I understand it, the
fees goes in place September 1, but the reimbursement --
MS. UECKER: January 1, right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the $40 doesn't start
till January 1, so that -- and also, this goes on all
traffic cases, every conviction.
MS. UECKER: Everything.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Municipal. So, it's --
25 ~ MS. UECKER: So, you know --
8-17-05 bwk
134
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- it should -- their
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's why they're
taking the money and sending it back, 'cause they're going
to pay the mandate and keep the extra money for themselves.
MS. UECKER: Overall, I don't think it's
going to be that much of a big increase for us, but I don't
know until I see how this first year plays out. The other
increase is the Operating Supplies, to 6,000, because
although I have a lot of jury cards right now, the law also
changed to make some mandatory changes to the jury cards, so
I'll have to have those reprinted. And I'm working on
getting some proofs done on those right now.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What you're saying
is that the net effect of this new law that says you have to
pay 40, you might get 34 back and all that, the net effect
is going to be an additional 32,000 a year cost to us this
first year?
MS. UECKER: Not the net effect, no, but we
have to put it in here to pay it. Now, when we get the
check back from the Comptroller for the reimbursement, I
don't -- I don't know where -- it will probably go back into
the General Fund.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I see.
8-17-05 bwk
135
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. UECKER: To be appropriated here next
year.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Our total budget's
not going up 32,000, but this --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We hope.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's a cash flow
situation.
MS. UECKER: Exactly. Let's see, what else?
JUDGE TINLEY: You've already used all of
Paula's time.
MS. UECKER: I know.
MR. TOMLINSON: What did you say?
MS. UECKER: 6,000. Which, actually,
Operating Supplies, that's mainly all we use, except I think
the jurors' coffee comes out of that. And --
JUDGE TINLEY: Price of coffee went up.
MS. UECKER: -- price of coffee went up along
with gas. The other thing that I would like to ask for
again -- and I hope to have this project completed before I
leave -- there --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you leaving?
MS. UECKER: No. But, you know, someday I'm
going to have to. Remember, I can retire now and come back
to work for the County. I'm eligible to do that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You going to be on
8-17-05 bwk
136
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the Road and Bridge crew, or where would you like to be?
MS. UECKER: No, I want to run for
Commissioner of Precinct -- wherever I live. (Laughter.)
Just kidding. The Records Preservation, that is the
County's -- there's actually three records preservation
funds within the county. There's one that covers everybody
that Jannett and I collect money, and it goes into this
fund. There's one that she collects that goes into just for
her. There's one that has just started for district clerks,
that mine doesn't have that much money it yet. That will,
however, increase by $5 a case for district clerks this
year, and I think also for the County Clerk. $2.50 of that
goes into this -- this fund, and $2.50 goes into mine, the
increase. So, every year I've asked for -- I think it was
5,000 for a while -- for 3,000 out of that -- the County's
general one to continue to try to preserve all of these
pre-1800, early 1900 documents that I have.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, you're going from
three to what?
MS. UECKER: 3,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 3,000?
MS. UECKER: From five to three. And the
only other one I have is the -- see, like, my -- my Records
Preservation right now just shows $1,400, and you can't do a
8-17-05 bwk
137
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
whole lot with that, except maybe put it in on Odyssey,
'cause it would qualify. I don't know how much that would
help. The Alternative Dispute Resolution, that's also on
the agenda for Monday, but to -- and I think the Judge
penciled in 12,5, which may or may not be pretty accurate as
to what the fund will have in it. That fee also will --
goes from $10 to $15 per case, so that fund will increase.
And I will defer, then, until Monday on the other bills --
oh, wait, wait, wait. Let's go back to Jury. I talked to
John, and he got a figure for me for a video projector for
the courtroom. He said we can get one for $875. The --
here's a little something on it.
There is a program -- a free program that the
Supreme Court has come out with to increase jury efficiency
and reporting. The number of people that report right now,
we're at less than half because of the over-65 or
disinterest, apathy. We're going to be putting those in the
courtrooms on the counters. And there is a video -- an
excellent video, and I've got a C.D. of it upstairs if any
of you want to see it, that would play the first 15 minutes
as jurors are filing in, and it's been proven in some areas
to actually greatly reduce the number of excuses that are
requested. And it instills a greater sense of
responsibility, what a juror should do, and has actually
increased attendance, and it's an excellent video. Supreme
8-17-05 bwk
138
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Court Justice Wallace Jefferson is on it, and some of the
other Supreme Court Justices, trial court judges, D.A.'s.
Even, I think, a clerk or two is on there. But it's an
excellent video, and we would like -- and I've talked to
Judge Ables and Judge Prohl about it. It's free; the only
thing we have to do is buy the projector. Now, the
projector would not be just for that purpose, because we
have needed one. We just haven't had one, so the trial
attorneys have had to bring in their own or buy one to hook
up to their computer and to play videos. You know, like a
DWI video or whatever could be played using this equipment
during the trial of a case, so the $875 would not just be to
play this video.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's included in the 6,000,
though?
MS. UECKER: Yes. Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's included in the
6, 000?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. UECKER: What else? That's all. Is that
why I'm hungry? Okay. Paula, you got two minutes.
MS. RECTOR: What's the pleasure of the
Court? Do you y'all want to go to lunch?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. How long will it
8-17-05 bwk
139
1 take you?
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. RECTOR: Not very long. First of all, I
want to say I appreciate Linda's comment about the
employees. I hope you all will take that into consideration
when you start discussing salaries. And I don't have as
many new projects as Linda does, but I do have one that I'm
working on right now, and that is to go online with the
Secretary of State's office for voter registration, meaning
they would maintain the equipment, they would supply the
software. So, the cost for the software maintenance and
scanning would go away to the tune of about $5,400 out of my
Software Maintenance line item. We'll be meeting with the
Secretary of State's office next week to discuss the
possibility of us switching over to their system. We
haven't done it before now because they didn't have scanning
capabilities, and we currently scan all of our voter
registration records, so I hope I can get that accomplished
this budget year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How many employees do you
have in your department, Paula?
MS. RECTOR: I have 12.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 12 total?
MS. RECTOR: I have 11 in the main office
here and one in my Ingram office.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And you're proposing
8-17-05 bwk
140
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
12?
MS. RECTOR: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Your proposal is 12?
MS. RECTOR: Yes. Yes, I have not asked for
any additional staff. I think everything else except for
the Postage and Office Supply line items are increasing
because of this year's mass mail-out of voter registration
cards which takes place every other year, so you'll see a
rise and fall every other year in those two items.
MS. UECKER: I have a question while Paula's
here and Jannett is here. I recently learned that -- and it
will affect all of our budgets -- that our Pitney Bowes
machines will not be -- and I did not include that in my
budget, and I don't if --
MS. RECTOR: Next year -- they're telling us
this year they will all have to be replaced next year
because they will not maintain the machines if something
breaks.
MS. UECKER: The meters, yeah.
MS. RECTOR: Yeah.
MS. UECKER: So I didn't add it. I figured
I'd add it next year.
MS. RECTOR: That's what I'm going to do for
next year, is put in for a new postage machine.
MS. UECKER: Which we'll all have to do.
8-17-05 bwk
141
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS.	PIEPER:	I've	already done mine.
MS.	UECKER:	You'	ve already done yours?
Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions? Thank
you, ma'am.
MS. RECTOR: Is that it? There's a couple of
comments. This year, we hit the 55,000 vehicle registration
mark in Kerr County, meaning that we will be collecting an
additional dollar off of registration. All the counties,
when they hit $55,000, can charge an additional dollar on
the vehicle registration, which stays at the county level.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you automatically
do that? Or --
MS. RECTOR: It'll be programmed into our
collections from TexDOT.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We get the whole
dollar?
MS. RECTOR: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Once you reach that plateau,
you collect it on every one of them, or just those in excess
of 55?
MS. RECTOR: Yes -- no, on every one of them.
Another thing is, I'm currently revising my contract with
8-17-05 bwk
142
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1~
1~
2C
27
2~
2:
2~
2.
the Appraisal District for the 10 percent rendition penalty,
late-filing renditions. They do not have means of
collecting that penalty, and in the past there was no
legislation that allowed any recourse if it wasn't paid by
the taxpayers, so I did not pursue that collection. It was
just too much of a headache. With the new legislative
session, it is becoming part of the tax bill, and penalty
and interest and attorney fees can be attached, and we can
actually file suit on that delinquent rendition penalty if
it's not paid, so we're revamping the contract, which will
mean some additional funds coming into Kerr County off those
rendition penalties. Another thing on the down side, with
this new legislative session, they've created another --
another little monster for me in the form of an escrow for
D.V.A. and other military-related people that I have to
escrow their tax money. They can come in and pay me --
prepay their taxes throughout the year, and I must hold it
in a separate account and keep track of it on a monthly
basis. So, just another little bookkeeping situation. And
that's all I have. Any questions?
JUDGE TINLEY: Any questions for the Tax
Assessor? Thank you, ma'am. We appreciate it. We're
3 scheduled to have a workshop on emergency services districts
} at 1:30, so we'll stand in recess till 1:30.
~ (Budget workshop recessed at 12:17 p.m.)
8-17-05 bwk
143
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1E
1.
1F
1~
2(
2:
2
2
2
2
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF KERR
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as
County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County,
Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 7th day of November,
2005.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
BY: ___ ~-----------------
Kath~ik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
,~
~i
3
4
5
8-17-05 bwk