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
and
KERR COUNTY JUVENILE BOARD
Joint Meeting
Thursday, August 18, 2005
4:00 p.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
Operational, Personnel, and Budgetary issues
relating to Kerr County Juvenile Detention Facility
P R E S E N T
Kerr County Commissioners Court:
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
Kerr County Juvenile Board:
PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge
EMIL KARL PROHL, 198th District Judge
9~
v
L7
Oo
Oo
d
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
On Thursday, August 18, 2005, at 4:00 p.m., a joint
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court and the Kerr
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 first call to order the
joint meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court and the
Kerr County Juvenile Board scheduled for this date and time,
Thursday, August 18th, 2005, at 4 p.m. It's past that time
now. The item on the agenda is to consider and discuss
operational, personnel, and budgetary issues relating to the
continued operation of the Kerr County Juvenile Detention
Facility, with an executive session addenda for personnel
matters. That particular item is now on the table.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I -- I don't know
how we got these styled way they were, really, but my intent
was -- I saw the Juvenile Board meeting, and the only way
that the Commissioners could come and just listen, 'cause it
had an effect on us, was for us to call a meeting at the
same time or have a joint meeting. So, really, I'm here
more to listen to the Juvenile Board's --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think there's
some things that we probably need to try to work our way
through at the beginning. And after you and I had had some
B 18-u5 jcc
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
discussions about this issue and all of its ramifications, I
to determine the operational and the personnel and budget --
budgetary aspects of -- of this operation. There's been a
lot of -- there have been a lot of documents flying back and
forth in terms of authority, who has the authority to do
what and who should do what and who should not do what and
who reports to whom and who doesn't report to whom, and I
think it's important that we try to work our way through
those issues so that we all know. We clearly recognize that
there are statutory requirements of Juvenile Probation
Board, and we also understand there are -- there are fiscal
responsibilities of Commissioners Court now that we have
taken ownership of the -- of the facility.
I refer to -- if everybody has it, there's a
memorandum dated August 15th, and it's from the T.J.P.C.,
and it's addressed to Kevin Stanton, copy to Rex Emerson,
and it's from Nydia Thomas, who is a senior staff attorney
with Texas J.P.C. I'm not going to bore you with all of --
all of that which is in that memorandum, but suffice it to
say the conclusion is -- is what really, I think, gets us to
the nub of matters. And I'll also refer you to a subsequent
memorandum which arrived today from the County Attorney, and
it has to do with Human Resources Code. In the conclusion
8-15-OS cc
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
of the memorandum from the T.S.P.C., it says there does not
appear to be a statute that prohibits a commissioners court
from delegating to the Juvenile Probation Department the
responsibility for operating the facility or reserving --
reserving its fiscal oversight for the facility. In the
alternative, the Commissioners Court may also elect to
operate the facility as authorized under Human Resources
Code 63.002. And then it goes on and talks about other
things, about owning and establishing and staffing and
whatever, whatever.
So, today we have a copy of the pertinent
sections of law entitled "Human Resources Code," and I refer
-- direct your attention to 63.002, which talks about
authorization to operate the facility. A county or a
combination of counties may, and they are hereby authorized
to, elect to own, establish, operate, and staff a long-term
residential facility for the detention of juvenile
offenders. It goes on to say that the facility is an agency
of the state, a governmental unit, and unit of local
government, as specified in certain chapters of the Civil
Practice and Remedies Code. Section 63.004 says that the
Board of Trustees -- it's titled "Board of Trustees; Single
County Facility." The facility shall be governed by a board
of trustees under this code. The board of trustees for a
facility created by a single county may be the commissioners
8 18-OS jcc
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
"° 2 9
25
court of the forming county, or the commissioners court may
five, nor more than nine people.
It talks about the board of trustees shall
facility under 63.008; board of trustees is responsible for
the administration of the facility. Under 63.009, it talks
about the board of trustees shall develop policies
consistent with the rules, regulations, and standards of the
Texas Juvenile Probation Commission. Under 63.012, the
board of trustees shall appoint an executive director for
the facility. Under 63.013, it talks about the executive
director; the powers delegated by and subject to the policy
direction by the board of trustees. Under 63.014, it talks
about the board of trustees; the director may employ and
train personnel for the administration of various programs
and services of the facility. 63 -- almost the end,
gentlemen. 53.015 talks about contribution of property and
funds by counties.
The important part, I think, is 63.017, under
the title "Single County Facility." And Subparagraph (b)
talks about the board of trustees for facility created by a
single county shall establish rules and regulations for
admission of juveniles into the facility from other than the
a-ia os icy
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
6
forming county. Such rules may allow that forming county
shall have priority in placement, so forth and so on.
63.019, board of trustees may make rules consistent with
those promulgated by the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission
and the policies, principles, and standards provided by in
the act to regulate the administration and services of the
facility. And 63.020, the board of trustees will provide
the following services, which we know to be education and
counseling.
So, with those thoughts in mind, I wanted to
-- I'm glad we're having this meeting today, because I
really think it's necessary for us to -- to clearly
understand, or hopefully that we can come away from this
meeting clearly understanding that since the County took
over the operation -- ownership and operation of the
facility, we believe the Commissioners Court has the ability
and the right under this section of the law to -- to do the
things necessary for the operation side, and we clearly
recognize that the Juvenile Probation Board has the
authority and oversight for the programming, to make certain
that the programming that's administered clearly falls
within the codes and follows the state law. So, that's how
I wanted to set the stage, Judge.
JUDGE PROHL: My response is, that's exactly
what we thought. And when y'a11 took it over, that`s the
8-18-OS jcc
1
"~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
L2
23
°"` 2 4
25

reason we said you should be; we shouldn't be. And so our
position is that we have -- we have performed and continued
to perform our statutory requirements, and everything that
has been required by us under statute has been done and is
current through January of 2006. And I understand that
there are policies and procedures that we have to approve,
but that has to do with plans and things. So, we certify
that the facility is appropriate for children, and we -- we
basically sign off on the policies and procedures to be sure
that they're in keeping with T.J.P.C. Basically, that's
sort of it, I think. Unless -- we stand to be corrected,
but that's been our -- our feeling, was that it was your
facility and we didn't want to infringe on that. We didn't
want to come in and try to do a budget, because we thought
that -- we thought -- and this pretty well substantiates --
this is the first time I've seen this -- substantiates that
position. I say "we." I think that's Judge Ables' -- and I
don't know if -- Judge Tinley has been more involved with
y'all, and I don't know exactly, you know, what's going on
in that realm. But I think -- I don't disagree with that.
And we couldn't understand how we could have all these
alleged authorities when it's a county facility. When it
was not a county facility, that was different. So I think
we're on the same page, actually.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think it sounds
8-18-05 jcc
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
8
that way, Judge, and I appreciate your comments. And I
think, you know, for the record and moving forward, I think
that we need to adopt a motion or a court order that -- that
states that we will be operating the facility under section
-- under Title 3, Facilities and Services for Children,
Chapter 63 of the Health and Human Services Code -- Health
Resources Code, and that sets it out. And I think if we do
that, we know who -- who's playing and where they are, who's
on first, whose responsibilities are what, and we know what
the probation board's responsibilities are, and we should be
able to live happily ever after.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, I guess --
I think it is very important that we determine -- you know,
get kind of on the record officially who has what
responsibilities out there, and what was just said is what I
thought we were operating towards. I guess what confused me
was the agenda that was posted for the Juvenile Board, which
included things like consider and discuss adoption of salary
scale for juvenile detention officer positions, including
facility administrator; consider and discuss approving
alternating numbers of pre- versus postadjudication bed
space. Those things on that agenda it appeared to me to be
things that were -- we were supposed to be doing, and that's
where -- I think where I was confused.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's kind of what
a-ie-os hoc
1
+' 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
"` 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~' 2 4
25
9
my notation was when I saw this agenda.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think I can -- I think I can
explain how that came about. I was provided with a copy of
"Standards for Secure Juvenile Preadjudication Detention and
Postadjudication Correctional Facilities" promulgated by the
Texas Juvenile Probation Commission. And in addition to the
matters that Judge Prohl has mentioned that the Juvenile
Board statutorily is required to do, and that is to certify
the facility as being a proper facility for the detention of
children and approval of the policies and procedures, there
are other standards in here that require the -- the Juvenile
Board or the chief administrative officer of the Probation
Department to appoint a facility administrator. Now, the
only -- the only oversight that -- that existed heretofore
is either the County or the Board -- the Juvenile Board.
Secondly, the -- the other standards provide that the
facility administrator shall assure the implementation of
salary scale for juvenile detention officer positions
adopted by the Juvenile Board. So, that's where those
things came from on the agenda. Whether or not the board
takes any action on them, of course, may be another issue,
but because those were potential issues at the time this
agenda was prepared, those things are on there, and that's
why they're there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But is it -- and you
8-lfl-OS jcc
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
obviously have read that and this; I've only read part of
this. Is there a conflict between those two items?
JUDGE PROHL: I -- it seems like there is, to
me. I mean, a little bit, when you read -- the only -- the
only thing I think that the difference would be is when you
read that, it's like it's a -- not -- before it was a county
facility. That's sort of the way I was looking at what --
what Judge Tinley was reading, because you can't --
obviously can't have both parties doing the same job.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct. Hopefully.
JUDGE PROHL: Yeah. Well, they're not. I
mean, I can tell you, there will be one. Probably won't be
us. So, I think one of the things I thought in the -- in
the memo we got from the -- whoever ordered this from the
State, it was talking -- you know, they go along with a lot
of pages talking about all the things we should do,
shouldn't do, but then it talks about the provision, and
that's the 63.002, which authorized the County to elect to
own, establish, operate, and staff a long-term facility.
And as -- as a remaining option, it's within the authority
and discretion of the Commissioners Court to utilize or
repurpose the facility as it sees fit. I don't know if
that's what they're talking about that they have to -- you
have to make some kind of a designation that's different
than what it is.
ft-18-OS jcc
11
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
"" 2 4
25
And I -- I hope, you know, the County
Attorney can give us some guidance as to -- as to what we --
but our statutory -- my understanding, our statutory
authority is very limited, and -- very limited, and it's
sort of an oversight thing to be sure that -- that,
particularly, that where we house out-of-county kids, we
certify on behalf of the county to other counties that sign
contracts with us -- with the County -- that, yes, the
facility is adequate, and that's our main obligation. But,
you know, the contracts are your contracts and between
y'all, and obligations between y'all, and the budget's
between y'all. And so I -- and I think that that's sort of
what I see. When I -- when I looked at what Pat was looking
at and looked at this, I said, you know, there's -- there's
some wavering as to -- as to authority. I don't think
that -- if that's not a statutory requirement that we have,
then I think we can -- we can say we're just going to do A,
B, C, D, and it's yours, and then you're still within the
statute.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rex?
MR. EMERSON: I can shed -- I can probably
shed some light on that. On July 28th, Kevin Stanton and I
had a two-plus-hour conversation with T.J.P.C. with their
staff attorneys, and I think it was their administrator,
wasn't it? And what they said was that, because the
a-ia-os jcc
12
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
majority of the facilities -- as a matter of fact, I think,
like, 99 percent of the facilities in the state are run
required are written around that effect. The actual -- the
actual text of the statute says that there shall be a single
facility administrator on-site that's designated to oversee
operations, and then the commentary's where it goes into the
Juvenile Board and the Juvenile Probation Department being
able to set that. What was -- what was imputed to us was
that if the County is going to run the facility under the
code that y'all just discussed, that T.J.P.C. was going to
have to rewrite some of their protocols; that there's
nothing wrong with it, but their protocols did not reflect
that type of operation, because nobody else in the state was
doing it right now.
JUDGE TINLEY: One of the -- one of the
conflicts may result -- and I think Judge Prohl referred to
our statutory obligation, and then you have the custom and
usage that County Attorney referred to. These standards
that are written by T.J.P.C. may have the effect of law
inside the four walls of their organization and those that
they have oversight authority over, but from the standpoint
of statewide, obviously, they don't. We have the
Constitution and then the statutes and then any regulations
A-1A-05 1cc
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
'"` 2 4
25
that are promulgated pursuant to statutory authority, but if
there's a conflict between the statutes that describe what
we are obligated to do or are prohibited from doing, those
obviously are going to control over these in-house
regulations, I'm going to call them for lack of a better
term. They're standards that those people have prescribed
for operational purposes for exercising their oversight
authority over detention facilities. I think, as Judge
Prohl said, the -- I think the statutory mandates are pretty
clear. We must certify the facility, and -- and we adopt
the policies -- or approve the policies and procedures that
are put in place for that facility as part of that process,
and I believe that's an annual requirement that we do. We
are current on that. We last did it in January, and I'm
sure we'll do it next January if we have the facility. But
beyond that, I'm not sure what, if anything, on a mandatory
statutory basis, we really have the obligation to do as a
Juvenile Board.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think if we
sorted out -- I believe we're well on the way to sorting it
out today, and I appreciate the opportunity to meet with the
Juvenile Board to do that. I'd like to offer a motion,
Judge, that -- that the Kerr County Juvenile Detention
Facility, which is currently owned and -- owned by Kerr
County, be operated under Human Resources Code Chapter 63.
8-18-OS ice
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second
on behalf of the Commissioners Court. Any discussion or
question with regard to the motion on the table?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've just got one
procedural question, Judge. Did you call to order a County
Commissioners meeting or --
JUDGE TINLEY: Sure did.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- Juvenile Board?
JUDGE TINLEY: Both.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Both.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or
comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Comment. I -- I don't
think it's necessary for us to pass an order. I mean, the
law's the law. But I'm real excited about voting.
(Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's don't tarry, then.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I really think it
is probably necessary for us to establish it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
8 1F-US jcc
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
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Any
other business to be had with regard to that particular
agenda item by the Commissioners Court?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nothing that I have
to offer, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody else? By anybody on
the Juvenile Board?
JUDGE PROHL: I think that takes care of your
agenda.
JUDGE TINLEY: I believe it does. Okay, the
Juvenile Board has other matters to possibly consider.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I do have one
comment, though, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think there are a
lot of folks here concerned about the budget and under what
scenario we're going to operate this facility. We have had
a lot of yeoman work put in by both Ms. Harris in developing
many scenarios and Mr. Stanton developing several scenarios,
and I think it's for the Court to sort through that, but I
don't think we need to do it today. I would -- I would like
for you to put that on our next budget meeting agenda, and
a-ie-os ~cc
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
we'll work our way through to a conclusion.
JUDGE TINLEY: If I'm not mistaken, those
things that I had on the budget workshop for next Wednesday,
that will be posted tomorrow, and I've already modified it
to include Juvenile Detention so that -- it was not on there
previously because it had been on previous ones, but I --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: But it will be there, I assure
you. Any -- any further business before the Court? There
being no further business before the Commissioners Court,
that meeting will be adjourned.
(Joint meeting adjourned at 4:26 p.m.)
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 19th day of August,
2005.
JANNETT PIE PER, Kerr County Clerk
BY: ___ __ ~~ `_
Kathy Ba k, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
e-ia-os ~~~
ORDER NO. 29320
JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY
Came to be heard this the 18`" day of August, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 4-0-0 to continue operation of the Ken County Juvenile Facility
under Human Resources Code Chapter 63.