1
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 JUVENILE BOARD MEETING
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
7:00 a.m.
Kerr County Commissioners Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
PRESENT: HON. PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge
HON. STEPHEN B. ABLES, 216th District Judge
HON. EMIL KARL PROHL, 198th District Judge

\~
L
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
April 11, 2006
1.2 Consider, review, and take appropriate action on
residential and short-term detention contracts
with Atascosa County and 4M Youth Services
Incorporated
1.1 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action
with regard to personnel in the Kerr County
Juvenile Probation Department and related issues
concerning the operation of the Kerr County
Juvenile Facility by the Department (Executive
Session, as necessary and/or appropriate)
3.1 Action as may be required on matters discussed
in executive session
--- Adjourned
PAGE I
3
4
13
17
e-ii-oe io
3
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
On Tuesday, April 11, 2005, at 7:00 a.m., a meeting of
the Kerr County Juvenile Board was held in the Kerr County
Commissioners Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville,
Texas, and the following proceedings were had:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning. Let me call to order
this meeting of the Kerr County Juvenile Board scheduled for
this time and date, Tuesday, April the 11th, 2006, at 7 a.m.
It appears that it's just right on the mark there now. Let me
go ahead and take Item 2 on the agenda, if we might.
Consider, review and take appropriate action on residential
and short-term detention contracts with Atascosa County and 4M
Youth Services Incorporated. Mr. Stanton --
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
', JUDGE TINLEY: -- asked that this be placed on the
agenda.
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir. The -- basically, it's just
backup contracts for different -- we need different
facilities. Atascosa County is at $85 a day for
preadjudicated kids, and the 3M contract is for boys and
girls, long-term residential contracts, and I believe that is
also at $83 a day.
JUDGE PROHL: Where is 4M?
MR. STANTON: That's the facility in Round Rock.
JUDGE TINLEY: And these are contracts for the
4-11-OE jb
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
placement of -- of Kerr County juveniles in alternative
placement locations other than the Kerr County facility?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Based upon recommendations from the
Juvenile Probation Department?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
JUDGE ABLES: I'd make a motion we approve these
~ contracts.
JUDGE PROHL: I'll second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve
the -- the detention services contracts from 4M Youth Services
Incorporated, sometimes known as Rockdale Regional Juvenile
Justice Center, and Atascosa County Juvenile Justice Center.
Any discussion? Comments? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's now
move to the first item on the agenda, if we might. Consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action with regard to personnel
in the Kerr County Juvenile Probation Department, and related
issues concerning the operation of the Kerr County Juvenile
Facility by the Department. It'd probably be appropriate if
4-11-UF jU
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
we would go into executive session on the personnel aspect of
this. Is that your thinking, gentlemen?
JUDGE ABLES: Probably so. Somebody needs to make a
presentation. I'm not sure what the -- what the proposal is.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, in that -- in that
event, let me call on Commissioner Williams. I -- I sent a
copy upstairs yesterday dealing with the proposal, for lack of
a better term, that the Commissioners Court dealt with
yesterday. Okay.
JUDGE PROHL: This must be new. Oh, it's 2005.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Did I mess up your copy,
Judge? I give you more than one, or the same?
JUDGE PROHL: No, I think it's okay. I just ...
JUDGE ABLES: Yeah, I haven't seen this one before.
I got something that had four bullet points, but this wasn't
it.
JUDGE PROHL: This is not what we got yesterday.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. What you got yesterday was
this, which was essentially the basis of the proposal that was
made.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is the same, Judge.
It's just restyled, because it became the motion, that which
was underlined.
JUDGE TINLEY: Did you want to make any comments to
the Board?
9-11-06 jb
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think the comments that I
would have made, Judge, are contained in that top sheet.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which were the comments I
delivered to my colleagues yesterday with respect to --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- our collective position
on the matter and the reasons why we would seek to make this
change. And to point out that it is not an effort on our part
to shift responsibility; it is an effort to stem financial
problems.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any member of the Board have any
questions for Commissioner Williams with regard to the
materials he presented?
JUDGE ABLES: So, I think what you want us to do is
to add to Kevin's job description that he runs the facility,
but he would answer to the Commissioners Court on how he runs
the facility; the budget, his supervision of the employees,
his handling of complaints, he would answer to Commissioners
Court, but yet he would be our employee?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe that's the notion,
Judge, if that's -- if that's an acceptable alternative. I --
I believe I'm given to understand that that is not an unusual
circumstance in various places -- locations around the state
of Texas, and, in fact, the Juvenile Probation Officer does
9-11-06 jb

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
wear two hats in many counties. So, it's not a new thing.
The question is, is it an acceptable thing?
JUDGE ABLES: Everybody that I could contact about
it, and it was not many, said that there were some situations
where the Juvenile Probation Officer hired the director of the
facility, but the director of the facility did all the work,
did all -- took care of the facility, and all the Juvenile
Probation Officer did was -- was hire that person with the
consent of the Board. But in this case, you'd want Kevin to
run the facility, be -- step in and take Becky's place and do
what she was doing?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That was the proposal, if --
if we get concurrence from the Board. It won't happen if we
don't have concurrence from this Board.
DODGE ABLES: What if he -- what if he was just the
best supervisor in the world of the facility, but he became
derelict in his duties as a probation officer or we didn't
think he was doing a good job, and y'all loved what he was
doing at the facility? How we would we resolve that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Interesting question, Judge.
I don't think we've pondered that possibility. But --
JUDGE ABLES: The -- you know, the facility was
something that -- you know, going back to Judge Stacy and
Judge Henneke and Judge Tinley, that we were comfortable
running it as long as it was no recourse, no -- taxpayers
9 11 06 jh
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
never had to pay a dollar for it. And when the Commissioners
decided to go ahead and buy the facility and make it an asset
of the County and get us out of the situation where it was no
recourse to taxpayers, that was your decision, and that's
fine. But I don't think we were elected -- Karl and I were
elected, and I don't think Judge Tinley, in his role as
juvenile judge, are supposed to do financial matters for the
county. Y'all are elected to do that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE ABLES: And we get back to the facility now
being something that's owned by the County, like the county
jail. I think Rusty's budget's what, a million and a half?
Five? $5 million?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Total, Sheriff's Office and
jail.
JUDGE ABLES: I don't know if people in the county
know that it costs us that much money to run the county jail.
When we're going to start running the county children's jail,
y'all have got to make that decision. That can't be something
I, we can dictate money spent for that. And, you know, from the
~~
first day we talked to Bill Stacy about this years ago, it's
like, "Bill, we'll do it if there's no tax impact, but if
there's going to be a fiscal impact, Commissioners have to do
it." And we finally have gotten to that point, and so I think
y'all have to make a decision. And I don't see how Kevin
4-11-06 jb
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
can -- can make the financial decisions on running your
facility that you bought for a couple million dollars out
there, and be our employee, and us not be involved in that. I
just can't figure out how we could stay away from making those
fiscal impact decisions on that facility if he works for us.
We got -- I got an e-mail from Fred Henneke last
week. He did apologize for sticking his nose in, but he sent
me an e-mail before I left for Chicago saying, "I don't think
you can do this. I don't think Kevin can do both of these
things." I'm just trying to figure out how you -- how you
could do it, if you wanted to, and keep us out of the loop in
making decisions for y'all fiscally. Running a probation
department is supposed to be a full-time job, and yet let him
have as part of his job description to run your facility,
which y'all would control. And I think Becky would tell us
it's more than a full-time job. It's a wear your beeper 24
hours a day kind of job. I -- you know, I don't -- I hate to
be sour grapes, but I don't see how you do it, how you put it
all together. Maybe -- you know, maybe Kevin's got a way, but
I can't -- I don't know how you put it all together.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I couldn't respond to that,
Judge Ables. My discussions have been with Kevin in terms of
whether or not he thought that that was something that could
be integrated under his administration, and I'm given to
believe that that was the case. How he would organize his
a-ii-oh it
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
work day, I really don't know. He did not have a chance to
elucidate on those issues yesterday before the Board of
Trustees and/or Commissioners; the topic was just put aside
pending this morning, because it might end up being academic,
so I don't personally know. I can't answer that. Perhaps
Mr. Kevin -- Mr. Stanton can.
JUDGE ABLES: We did have -- you know, we're
probably going into executive session pretty soon, but we did
have a concern by the school district that there's a fiscal
impact to them by closing down the preadjudication aspect of
the facility. And I don't think Dr. Troxel could be here,
because he had another meeting, but Bill Orr is here. Bill,
what's this -- did y'all want to weigh in or tell us something
about what happens if the --
MR. ORR: Well, it's my understanding that if the
preadjudication facility is kept open, then we would only need
one teacher. I believe that y'all are saying that there was,
at most, 16 students there at that time. Under that
situation, then it's a positive cash flow for us. You know,
if it runs, I think, anywhere around eight students, then we
can run it and not have a negative financial impact. However,
we don't -- you know, we don't look to have a positive
financial impact in everything we do. We do need our classes
to bring in a little bit of money to pay for our overhead,
just like a business.
9 11 06 jb
11
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
JUDGE PROHL: Are you saying between 8 and 16 is --
is feasible for you? Is that --
MR. ORR: Yes. So, we -- I mean, we're actually
It would be better than it has been
uncertainty in the numbers. We talked about providing
breakfast and lunch, and that brings in additional revenues
for us also, so we look forward to doing that also.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's essentially what Dr. Troxel
informed me of; that a preadjudication facility, 12 to 16, in
that range, would be something that would certainly be
workable for them. And he did mention the aspect of he
thought there was a way that they could provide breakfast and
lunch, but not supper, at least on the days that -- that
instruction was taking place.
JUDGE ABLES: And, once again, whether or not it's
going to stay a preadjudication facility, how many kids are
going to be there, who you're going to try to recruit, that's
all Commissioners Court's decision, and it's not our decision.
And somebody asked me the other day, "Wouldn't you like to
have a juvenile facility?" It's like, "Yeah, sure, I would."
But Fredericksburg would like to have a jail and Bandera would
like to have a jail that they could house all their prisoners
25 ~ in. It's really difficult to send them to Comanche, but I
9-11-0 c~ jb
12
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
have to live with it. I don't make those decisions. The
Commissioners in those two counties make those decisions to
ship the prisoners off to out-of-county. That's a
Commissioners' call. Do y'all want to run a preadjudicated
facility, and how many kids do you want to try to recruit to
do it? I take it that y'all have -- you thought Kevin's done
a good job and analysis, and feel like that he's the person to
go out there and run this preadjudicated facility?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Our experience with
Mr. Stanton, Judge, up until now, in analyzing that operation,
has been limited to the budget sessions in which he -- he had
spent the time and made -- he did some pro formas for us to
take a look at different scenarios involving operations. When
requested this time by me, he indicated that he could put this
together and would be willing to take this on. I haven't
examined the staffing with him, or the logistics of the
operation. We haven't gone into that yet. Just to know that
it can be done.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions for Commissioner
Williams on the proposal?
JUDGE PROHL: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is it appropriate that now is the
time we go into executive?
JUDGE ABLES: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: We will close the open session at
9-11-OE jb
13
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
7:15 and go into executive or closed session.
(The open session was closed at 7:15 a.m., and an
executive session was held, the transcript of which
is contained in a separate document.)
JUDGE TINLEY: A few more people woke up this
morning, didn't they? Okay. It is 8:02, and we are back in
open or public session, back on the agenda item of consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action with regard to personnel
in the Kerr County Juvenile Probation Department and related
issues concerning the operation of the Kerr County Juvenile
Facility by the Department. Any member of the Board have
anything to offer with regard to that item?
JUDGE ABLES: We had a long discussion, as y'all
e you were out in the hall. Which, Bill, it appears
that a large amount of work has been done, a lot of analysis,
you know, a review of personnel, looking at salaries, and a
lot of work is being done by Kevin and by the trustees trying
to figure out a way to make this work. And our feeling is, we
don't want to get in the way of it as far as -- as Kevin
fulfilling this, but we don't feel like that we can do it with
us hiring him, him being our officer, and in essence us still
being involved in the loop of managing the facility. And, so,
we're trying to figure out a way to get Kevin freed up, let
him go to work and do what y'all want to do. If y'all want to
keep it as a preadjudicated facility, or if y'all want to go

14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2 1
22
23
24
25
back and do some post work, or if you want to move people out
there as far as their office space, if you want to change
salaries, if you want to have people's job titles changed,
that y'all can go ahead and get right with that and start
doing that. That's kind of where I am.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: May I ask a question, Judge?
I
JUDGE ABLES: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would an interlocal
agreement between the Juvenile Board of Trustees and the
Probation Board for services of, for example, Mr. Stanton,
would that be an appropriate approach?
JUDGE ABLES: Well, I think it kind of goes back to
what we were talking about earlier. If I've got my -- if I
got my probation officer -- Adult Probation officer running
Adult Probation and he's running the jail, and he's doing a
great job as a jailer, but he's doing a bad job as my Adult
Probation officer, how do we resolve that conflict? And I
think we all think there's an inherent conflict in a probation
officer who's working to keep people out of jail and get them
on the right track, and the jailer who is getting some
compensation who'd like to have a body out there. That's a
difficult conflict to handle. We see, in the facilities where
they hire a director, that they kind of try to keep a Chinese
wall up between the director and the probation officer, and
they work them against each other. So, I don't know how you
9-11-06 ib
is
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
do it. You know, we've thought about this in months past, but
we never could figure out how you could do it; how you could
have your probation officer, who's supposed to be out doing
programs, getting grants, taking kids on hikes, checking their
homework, going up to the school and teaching, how those
people then get over into wearing a penal facility hat. We
just never could figure out how they could do that.
JUDGE PROHL: Well, I -- you know, we've covered
this thing from -- at least from the perspective that we
gained in the last few days, and we absolutely don't want to
stand in the way of the trustees operating that facility and
running it the way you want to. And, based on what we
understand has transpired over the -- well, past several
months, probably, to gain all the information necessary to
make that conversion to just a preadjudicated facility, and
the fact that, at least from what we understand, the
confidence that y'all have expressed in Mr. Stanton, that I'm
going to move that we release Mr. Stanton from his obligations
as Chief Juvenile Probation Officer so that he can help the
Commissioners run that facility in a manner in which you feel
is appropriate, and we can do that either by June the lst or
sooner, if Mr. Stanton is employed by the Commissioners Court
to run the facility.
JUDGE ABLES
I second the motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to release
9-ii oc ~n
16
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Mr. Stanton as Chief Juvenile Probation Officer, effective
June 1, 2006 or sooner, if he becomes employed by Kerr County
-- the Kerr County Board of --
JUDGE PROHL: Trustees, whatever.
JUDGE TINLEY: Juvenile Facility Board of Trustees.
JUDGE PROHL: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: In connection with the operation of
the facility, effective that date?
JUDGE PROHL: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
JUDGE PROHL: 'Cause he still can't wear the two
I hats.
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, yeah.
JUDGE PROHL: That's the reason.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any further discussion on
the motion?
JUDGE PROHL: Call for the question.
JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor of the motion, signify
by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry.
JODGE PROHL: I don't -- I read those other things
on that summary sheet. I don't think any of those fall under
9 i~-o; ~h
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
our jurisdiction, the items that are listed on that bullet
sheet.
JUDGE ABLES: How to charge people --
JUDGE PROHL: I think Commissioners control where
they provide space for juvenile probation. The per diem rates
are set by the County, not by us.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's all operational, as I see it.
JUDGE PROHL: Yeah. Well, it was on that item that
you provided us, and I thought that those were not within our
jurisdiction.
JUDGE TINLEY: If I'm hearing you correctly, you
have nothing further to offer on that particular agenda item?
JUDGE PROHL: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And, likewise, you, Judge
Ables?
JUDGE ABLES: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have nothing further, either.
There being no further business, we will stand adjourned at
8:08.
JUDGE PROHL: Thank y'all for coming out.
(Juvenile Board meeting adjourned at 8:08 a.m.)
9-11-06 ib
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
~~
23
24
25
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 Official Reporter, Kerr County, Texas,
at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 12th day of
April, 2006.
~jh'~N!~-''-----
Kathy Ba 'k, Certified Shorthand Reporter
Official Reporter, Kerr County, Texas
4-11-G~ jb