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 6, 2008
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
BRUCE OEHLER, Commissioner Pct. 4

~o
4
~9
~O
Q
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 6, 2008
PAGE
Review and discuss FY 2008-09 Budgets and fiscal,	
capital expenditure and personnel matters related	
thereto, for various County Departments, including,	
but not limited to the following departments:	
County Clerk	3
Sheriff's Office	14
Jail	34
Courthouse Security	54
DPS	60
Crime Victims	66
Road & Bridge	73
Animal Control	102
City/County	105
Environmental Health	121
Juvenile Probation Department	142
Court Compliance	151
County Auditor	164
Extension Service	---
County Sponsored	181
Adjourned 209
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 6, 2008, 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: Okay. Let's come to order this
morning for our workshop budget meeting of Kerr County
Commissioners Court scheduled and posted for this date and
time, Wednesday, August 6th, 2008, at 9 a.m. It is a bit
past that time now. The agenda item for this morning is to
review and discuss fiscal year 2008-09 budgets and fiscal,
capital expenditure, and personnel matters related thereto
for various county departments, including, but not limited
to, the following departments: County Clerk, Sheriff's
Office, Jail, Courthouse Security, Crime Victims, D.P.S.,
Road and Bridge, Juvenile Probation Department, Environmental
Health, Animal Control, Extension Service, County-Sponsored,
Court Compliance, and County Auditor. Looks like the County
Clerk is first up.
MS. PIEPER: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Good morning.
MS. PIEPER: Okay. I'm going to start at the top,
gentlemen -- well, second to the top. On the employee
training, I know I had requested $1,500, but our travel
8-6-08 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
allowance for the mileage comes out of our conference line
items, so in either my employee training or my conference
line item, I'd like to request additional money just for the
added expense in gas.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Line 216, Employee
~ Training?
MS. PIEPER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What are you asking for?
MS. PIEPER: I would like to have around $300 to
$500 more just in the added expense for gas. I would like my
chief deputy to attend two conferences for the new budget
year, our annual conference and vital statistics conference.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, if that's the case, you're
talking about increased mileage expense?
MS. PIEPER: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Under conferences, let's see what
we've got there.
MS. PIEPER: Under conferences, that's normally
what I use, but there are times, depending on the
registration and the miles that we have to travel -- excuse
me -- we pool our money together to meet those needs. Now,
this year, I did not use all of my conference money because I
have not been able to attend the schools to get all my hours
I need, so I'm trying to work on that, to get the remaining
hours, 'cause I had too many elections at the beginning of
8-6-08 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
the year.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think you'll be disappointed to
know, if you haven't checked up there on the screen, that
your 9,500 that you requested had been reduced to 2,000.
MS. PIEPER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Primarily based upon the historical
expenditures in your office.
MS. PIEPER: Well, that money that I had requested
in that was for the Odyssey training.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. But we had a discussion
about that.
MS. PIEPER: Correct, we did.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. What you're saying is you
want the 2,000 increased to 2,500 to --
MS. PIEPER: To offset the mileage.
JUDGE TINLEY: Going from whatever it was last
year, down at 40 or 44-something up now to 58.5, I believe.
MS. PIEPER: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: May go higher. I understand it's
destined to go to 60.5 or something; they're talking about
it. As the mileage is a component of conference
expenditures, travel in connection with conferences, I don't
see that that's out of line. Anybody have any different
feeling from that? You've already changed that, Ken?
MR. RUARK: I will in a second.
8-6-08 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
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, that must have come out
of detail. Did it?
MR. RUARK: Possibly.
MS. HARGIS: It did.
I JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're changing which line?
JUDGE TINLEY: Conferences from 2,000 to 2,500.
Original request was 9,500.
MS. PIEPER: Thank you.
MR. RUARK: Okay, I've got it.
MS. PIEPER: Going down to Line Item 461, Lease
Copier, my lease copier charges is going to go up slightly.
This was a renewal on the contract that we did, I believe,
like, a month ago, and so I need to increase that $705 more.
JUDGE TINLEY: If we put in 16,000 even, that ought
to be about right.
MS. PIEPER: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: You got that also in detail, I
presume, Ken? 'Cause it won't register on mine.
MR. RUARK: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. RUARK: I add $705 to --
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, just round it off to --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sixteen.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- 16,000 even.
8-6-08 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
25
MR. RUARK: Under Lease Copier, correct?
MS. HARGIS: It's 24,000.
~' MR. RUARK: Yeah, it's 24,000 total. The detail
is -- $16,000 -- I mean --
JUDGE TINLEY: On 461.
MR. RUARK: 461, Icon copier is $12,000.
Icon-ready printer is 4,872; Xerox copier is 5,591, and plat
scanner supplies is 1,800, for a total of 24,263. Which is
right here.
JUDGE TINLEY: Whatever it takes to make that line
item total out 16,000, that's what you want.
MR. RUARK: Right here? Okay. Let's do it this
way. Okay, now you've got copier, 16,000.
JUDGE TINLEY: Zero out everything else.
MR. RUARK: Zero out everything else?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. We appreciate the detail, but
it makes it more difficult to change it.
MS. PIEPER: I understand that, yes.
MR. RUARK: There you go.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Where else are we?
MS. PIEPER: Okay, gentlemen. Yesterday I had a --
one of my scanners bit the dust. Drew said that it's not --
that it's out of warranty, and it's not going to be sent off
to get repaired. So, either in operating equipment or
capital outlay, I would like to get money to replace that
8-6-08 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
scanner, and I'm told it costs $950. And then on that same
note, either operating equipment or capital outlay, I'd like
to have money to purchase a laptop to keep here in the
courtroom for probate court, commissioners court, juvenile
court, for the deputies.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there not a laptop that's
', utilized now?
MS. PIEPER: There is one in County Court at Law,
but I think it would be easier if we could have one just to
keep in here.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Can you use one of these?
'Cause I don't take mine home.
MS. PIEPER: Oh, you don't? Yes, we could.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Doesn't do much good with a
~ dial-up.
MS. PIEPER: Okay, yeah. Then I'll mark laptop
off. That will be great.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We still have smoke signals
out west.
MS. PIEPER: Okay. So, if I could just have the
950 for the scanner, then we can put this one to bed.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, change capital outlay to 950 --
MS. PIEPER: Yes, please.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- for a scanner? Bingo. Okay, is
that it?
8-6-08 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
MS. PIEPER: That's it, unless y'all have any
questions on it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sounds like the final there. Okay.
Any questions of Ms. Pieper? Let's move to the Sheriff's
Office.
MS. PIEPER: Sir, I have my records management and
my records archival. Do you want to do that as well?
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh. Which one do you want to go to
first? 404?
MS. PIEPER: We can go to 404. And I'm not
requesting anything different than what I have requested in
the initial budget.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me make sure I haven't hammered
it.
MS. PIEPER: On that budget, I have $1,000 for
office supplies, and then I have $1,932 for my microfilm
storage, and $750 for my continuing education on that, and
that's it.
MR. RUARK: That was eliminated, looks like, Judge.
MS. PIEPER: I had -- I had some help on my
education, but the Judge put it in, so thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: You have something with continuing
ed?
MS. PIEPER: $750 is what I always put in that for
my continuing education.
8-6-08 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
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I don't show it as requested.
MS. PIEPER: No, I had failed to do that. But I
had noticed yesterday that it had showed in the
administrative recommended, so I do want to keep that 750.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does it show 750 up there?
MS. HARGIS: No.
MR. RUARK: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Doesn't here, either.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It does on the -- no, it
doesn't on the requested. She didn't request it.
JUDGE TINLEY: It does now.
MR. RUARK: Okay.
MS. PIEPER: I'm requesting it now, yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That may be a little bit too
much power.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's what I'm reading.
MR. RUARK: That's what we have.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. You've got some other
dedicated funds. Where are they?
MS. PIEPER: I have my 41, the records archival.
JUDGE TINLEY: 634?
MS. PIEPER: Yes, sir. In this, I had requested
13,650. However, I'd like to go ahead and utilize the
remaining money that we have in this 41 budget, plus utilize
the 28 funds.
8-6-08 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
25
'I JUDGE TINLEY: And you're requesting what, now,
Ms. Pieper?
MS. PIEPER: Well --
JUDGE TINLEY: Your old records -- you had
requested 13,650.
MS. PIEPER: Yes. And that is a bill -- an
outstanding bill, basically, that I have. When eDoc came in
and scanned a bunch of our documents, we had a bunch of them
that were very distorted, and so, out of the kindness of his
heart, he went ahead and had his people scan those, because
we -- we had several index books that were just really bad.
So, I told him that in the next budget, that I would put this
in for that. 'Cause his -- his comment was basically, "Pay
me when you can." So -- 'cause he knew I was out of money.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. PIEPER: But we -- I still have money left.
JUDGE TINLEY: But this is something he's going to,
quote, finalize in this coming budget year, correct?
MS. PIEPER: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you.
MS. PIEPER: In following the statute, I have to do
-- to utilize this, I have to do -- I have to renew my
written plan, and we have to have a public hearing. In doing
so, I would like to utilize the money that's in our 28
account -- 28 fund, I believe -- what do you call it? Fund
8-6-08 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
account, records management money. And the money that I
still have in this fund, which is 28,884, utilize both of
those under my records archival plan for the coming budget.
Does that make sense?
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm not sure. But what numbers do
I you want to change here? This is the dedicated fund, is it
not?
MS. PIEPER: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
	COMMISSIONER	LETZ: So, you want to use Fund 28 and
41 for	the same purpose?
	MS. PIEPER:	Combine them, yes, to bring --
~i	JUDGE TINLEY:	Are those strictly County Clerk
!, funds,	or is either one	of those the one that's shared by --
	MS. PIEPER:	The 28 fund is shared.
	COMMISSIONER	WILLIAMS: With the District Clerk?
	MS. PIEPER:	Yes. And I -- I don't remember how --
	MS. HARGIS:	She got 19,000.
	JUDGE TINLEY:	I think there's adequate funds
there.	I don't see a problem with that. But --
	COMMISSIONER	LETZ: Fund 41, though, stays the way
we hav	e it, and it's Fund 28 that we look to change, 'cause I
don't	think -- Fund 28,	right now that has 19,000.
	MS. HARGIS:	If I'm hearing her right, she wants to
use wh	at's left in her	cash account, which is about 28,000,
8-6-08 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
and in Fund 41 --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MS. HARGIS: And then I have to look at -- at Fund
28, because we gave Ms. Uecker 19,000, and the cash balance
-- I don't have it off the top of my head.
MS. UECKER: I've got it somewhere right here.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, what you're proposing to do is
use the remaining -- the remaining balance in 41, that's
strictly your records archival for the County Clerk's office,
and whatever that balance is, enter that on Line 411; is that
correct?
MS. PIEPER: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. PIEPER: If we combine the two, I think there's
going to be, like, 77,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How much do you have on -- she
I has 13?
JUDGE TINLEY: 13,650.
MS. HARGIS: In this 28, there's only 39 in it, and
then your new money -- all together, the new money that you
would get for the current year?
JUDGE TINLEY: Is this a number that we're going to
have to extrapolate and just plug in later?
MS. HARGIS: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's move on, then. We
8-6-08 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
can't solve this problem here. You have one other --
MS. PIEPER: No, sir, that's it. I used to have
the elections, but now the voter registrar has it, so as far
as my budget, that completes it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Thank you, ma'am. Any
questions for Ms. Pieper on any of these? Okay. Let's go to
Sheriff. Hold on, let's don't go to the Sheriff, then.
We'll go to --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Go straight to jail.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I can arrange that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll bet.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff's Department.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page is the Sheriff
on?
JUDGE TINLEY: Four million, plus.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's the biggest page in
I the book.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yep -- pope -- yep, it did.
We break 4 million this year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Page 53.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right there. Holy
mackerel, look at that number.
JUDGE TINLEY: What do you want to reduce 101 to?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 101? Nope, sorry.
8-6-08 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
15
JUDGE TINLEY: You don't want to talk about that?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Don't want to reduce that at
all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't believe you changed
anything on --
JUDGE TINLEY: Surely I did.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: For once, for the first year,
I don't believe you did, that I can see as of yesterday.
JUDGE TINLEY: You've reviewed them very carefully?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Unless you snuck it in this
morning when I wasn't looking.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff, I assure you, I didn't. If
I -- if I didn't change any of your figures, I apologize.
There must have been an oversight on my part.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's in the deputy
salaries? What's it up, 300,000 over current?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's 10 percent.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Huh?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's the 10 percent.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the 10 percent.
JUDGE TINLEY: I -- here, again, I did -- when it
came to the personnel items, I didn't work that portion of
it. That's a whole separate --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: All of this between the
8-6-08 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
Sheriff's Office and the jail, it's a total of right at a
400,000 increase.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. There are no new
deputies in that number?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No new deputies in that
number, okay? And that does -- the 400,000, I've got, what,
100 employees -- over 100, so over a third of the county.
So, the 10 percent is in that $400,000 increase.
JUDGE TINLEY: I was thinking there was one new
deputy.
MS. HARGIS: We didn't put it in.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We did not add the new --
JUDGE TINLEY: At one time there was, though?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: At one time --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- there was, yes, but we took
that all back out.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I wasn't dreaming, then.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Now, the restructuring, I got
a new patrol position, but if you remember, I killed a
sergeant position and created a patrol position.
JUDGE TINLEY: I understand.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So there is a new patrol
position.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
8-6-08 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
17
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But that --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Radio equipment, that's --
we're rolling that into another -- another budget somewhere?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, we're not. In doing some
research over that, that's 181,000 that I cut out on the
radios.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Before you get started, are
you going to slam D.P.S. on this thing, or should I go sit in
my truck or what?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'm not going to slam D.P.S.;
I don't have any problem with D.P.S.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It may be a good time for us
to do that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, I -- no. I found out one
thing, is that there is no law that says we have to go
digital, period. It's not in existence.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You just can't communicate
with anybody.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's going to be -- that may
be true. Now, we do have to be narrow band capable by 2013,
all right? That will cost us, at today's price, about 50,000
on upgrading the -- the infrastructure, radio towers. All
our current radios that are manufactured are narrow band
capable, so the ones in the cars don't have to be replaced to
be in compliance. So, the only thing we have to do by 2015
8-6-08 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
18
-- '13 and '15 is we're going to have to upgrade $50,000
worth of stuff. Now, the other deal is, I do wish to start
gradually replacing my car radios with digital radios so that
we can communicate with the City. But at this point, if the
City flips that switch and they go digital, yes, it's going
to hurt us, okay? It's going to hurt them more. We back
them up a lot more than they back us up. I don't like it.
They can do both; they can monitor it. But I don't -- also
don't want to be forced into buying a more expensive radio
than I think the County needs to purchase, or going to a
system that we don't have to go to right now. And some of
the other research and some of the manufacturers and that
have even said at this point, if anybody goes totally
digital, they're really cutting off their nose to spite their
face. They're hurting themselves, because most systems are
staying VHF.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: For a while.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Staying VHF.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: For a while.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: For the foreseeable future,
period. There's no requirement to go digital.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the stuff that we had
talked -- or been hearing about that we had to do?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Because, number one, I was
under the impression that we had to go digital too. We have
8-6-08 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
to go narrow band; we do not have to go digital.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But you can't go narrow
band on analog.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, you can.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can you?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yep. Relicensing -- you're
redoing your license to get them narrow band, which I'm
already in the process of doing, okay, all our radio
licenses. Advantage is doing that. And the rest of it,
we're -- you know, besides the 50,000 to reconfigure the
tower situation and the microwaves and that and address that,
we're going to be in compliance with state law and with
federal law. But our problem is, we will need to change our
radios to digital so that we can stay in communication with
K.P.D., but I don't think we should be forced into it
immediately at $181,000. As I buy new cars, as we purchase
new cars, we'll make sure that those cars have the digital
radios in them.
We are applying for a Homeland Security grant to
help do that. The one thing, if we want to do it to where at
least I've got one in each car, it's about $3,600 to put a
radio and a portable, okay? For one car radio and one
portable, that's what each one's going to have to take. And
I have 50 of them. That's where we came up with the 181,000.
But what I would recommend -- and next year I'll ask for it,
8-6-08 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
and some in the cars -- is that if I had 36,000, that's ten
of them, okay? Ten of them would give me some on every
single shift and with my investigators, so that somebody on
the shift could always hear the City. They can hear us; we
won't be able to hear them, is what the difference is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is the grant cycle
through AACOG for Homeland Security?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The end of this month, and my
chief deputy's working on it right now.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What are you asking for?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: To get it turned in, we're
asking for -- to do it in three years, which is 60,000 a
year, is what they want. Okay? They want it staggered, so
we're asking for 60,000 each year through that Homeland
Security. I don't know whether we'll get it or not. You
know, the State got something like -- or this AACOG got
something like 22 million.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sergeant Cummins?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So we'll see.
JUDGE TINLEY: What is your primary communication
now, digital or analog?
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Well, we have the ability to
hear both. We can communicate digital with our
communications in San Antonio, but we can also hear K.P.D.
and the Sheriff's Office.
8-6-08 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
JUDGE TINLEY: You can hear them. Can you --
SERGEANT CUMMINS: And we can speak with them also.
'~ JUDGE TINLEY: So, if you need backup from our
5.0., you have the capability of calling for it?
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Yes, sir.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
SERGEANT CUMMINS: And I will tell you that a lot
of the troops are using that channel, and that -- for that
reason, because they would prefer that the Sheriff's Office
know where we're at. Because if we operate on our digital
channel, then they don't have any idea where we're at. So,
it's actually worked out really well.
JUDGE TINLEY: You can hear them, but they can't
hear you?
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: That was the reason I asked you the
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Right. If we're operating on
our digital, they can't hear us, as far as I know.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's exactly right.
JUDGE TINLEY: So your guys have the capability,
and will have the capability for some time to come, to have
free communication with the 5.O.?
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Yes, as far as I'm concerned.
~I JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, good enough.
8-6-OS 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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I like what I'm hearing from
spend a bunch of money. And if AACOG gets the grant through
Homeland Security, we can do it over the next couple years,
and, you know, that's -- and it's a City decision to do what
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Now, I have a couple of -- you
know, like our nares, narcotics units that both work real
well together, and they go digital. Those -- I've got three
of them that I have digital radios in their cars, and that's
narcotics, so they have communication -- will have, digital,
with the city narcotics guys. They're the ones that have to
work closest together. But otherwise, the City can --
JUDGE TINLEY: The whole thing that initially drove
this train was the understanding that there was a legal
mandate that you be digital by a given deadline, and it
turned out the only mandate was the -- was the narrow band.
But there is no legal mandate for -- for digital, and may
never be one; I don't know.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The process was, the City
also got a grant, so they just moved forward.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Only thing I see on here
really is the gas and oil budget. I don't believe that the
actual expenditure, based on historic, and also -- you know,
the price has gone up, but it's also starting to come down
8-6-08 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
some, and I believe you can cut 50,000 out of that one and
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, the only thing I did
there -- and Bruce and I talked about this just a little bit.
If we average right at 4,000 gallons a month, in May we were
paying $3.63 a gallon. If we stay at the same number of
gallons per month -- and what I have figured as a cost for us
was $4.10 a gallon. That's what I estimated it for next
year, at $4.10 a gallon, 4,000 gallons a month. That's where
I'm coming up with the budgeted amount. Now, if we don't
think it -- you know, it's been going down like we've seen
lately. If we don't think it will hit 4.10, if we want to
figure it at -- at 4, or 3.90 --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You're paying -- if you're
going to pay 4.10 a gallon, that means the rest of us are
going to pay about 4.50, 4.40, and that has not reached that
point, anywhere close to that. 'Cause you're not paying the
tax. So, I really think that's a little inflated over what
it could be, based on last year's expenditures, 'cause we
went from basically paying three and a quarter up to paying
$4.05 or something, 4.15. That doesn't count Jonathan's
diesel pickup. You know, it --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't have any diesel.
JUDGE TINLEY: At 3.50, it comes out 168,000. You
8-6-08 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
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 3.50?
JUDGE TINLEY: You might want to possibly drop that
to 175.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: At 3.50? See, we paid 3.63; I
don't see it going down to 3.50.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't either.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I would say 3.90 or so, maybe.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But you don't got to --
remember, you're not paying the tax, so whatever the price
is, your price is 38 cents less.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But I paid 3.63 in May.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: In May, but --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It was --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's -- it's coming down. I
don't think -- I tend to agree with Bruce; it's not going to
average that high, I don't think. I think 175 should be
plenty. And if it -- you know, make an adjustment.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If I get half what I asked
for, I feel like I've done pretty well.
MR. RUARK: What price per gallon? That's the way
we've got this set up, so he's got it at 4.10. That's the
~ way --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Put it at 3.78.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And see what happens.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And see what happens.
8-6-08 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
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: See what it comes in at.
MR. RUARK: 181.
JUDGE TINLEY: Just kill the detail.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's 177 on gas. 4,000 is
on -- 3.65.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Delete the detail and just put
in 175.
MR. RUARK: Well, I can fix it here in a minute.
Six of one, half a dozen of another.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You have to remember, that's
also oil -- that's gas and oil. That's all our oil changes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Should we not -- should
there not be an adjustment on all others that have a gasoline
increase if we're using that rationale for the Sheriff?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Depends on -- I don't know that
everyone -- everyone used probably a little bit different
number.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If you add 38 cents to that,
that would be up to what we'd be paying. He's not paying
tax.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The only other part -- I think
we really need to look at Road and Bridge to see what they
used.
8-6-08 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
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Road and Bridge, Animal
Control, and --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Constables.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Constables too.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We don't want --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Environmental Health.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We don't want to terribly
overbudget funds for --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, we want to cover them.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We want to cover them, but we
don't want to inflate that to the point to where it wouldn't
be realistic.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: What did we do, Ken?
MR. RUARK: I reduced it to 3.65 a gallon, which
makes the gasoline $175,200.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Just change the detail?
MR. RUARK: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. You use a fine pencil. I
like working round figures close enough.
MR. RUARK: There's what it is right up there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Close enough for government
I work?
8-6-08 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
27
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ready for the jail?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Before we go to the jail,
Judge --
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mark Del Toro is here from
911, and we were talking about the Reverse 911, and I asked
them to visit with us this morning when the Sheriff has his
budget up in front of us.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, great.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Bruce and I have been
working on that. Mark's going to tell us a little bit about
the proposals and the amount, give us an estimate of what the
amount would be --
MR. DEL TORO: Good morning, gentlemen.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- if the County did it on
its own.
MR. DEL TORO: Well, back in -- back in May,
Mr. Amerine and myself put together this emergency
notification systems proposal package. I'm sure each one of
you received one.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know Commissioner Oehler
and I have both seen it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes.
MR. DEL TORO: And it outlined the three companies
that provide the service. The first one that we have
8-6-08 bwk
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
I3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
28
outlined is 3n Communications, and they came out $44,000 per
year, unlimited use. Second was WARN out of Austin, $33,000
a year with 12 and a half cents per call cost. And then
Connect-CTY, they had broken out the price two ways,
city-only or county-only. County-only was 23,400 with
unlimited use. City-only was 10,000 with unlimited use.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: County-only would only be the
individuals living in the county?
MR. DEL TORO: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Those not living in the city.
MR. DEL TORO: Not living within the city limits of
Kerrville.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, if you add those two, it's
30 --
MR. DEL TORO: It's 33,800.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There wouldn't be any
economy of scale by combining the two?
MR. DEL TORO: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's unlimited use?
MR. DEL TORO: Unlimited use.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the 44,000, the 33, this
one, or the --
MR. DEL TORO: Unlimited use. With your WARN
system at 12 and a half cents a call, it's going to cost.
8-6-08 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
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Cost.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is there a per-call cost on
this last one?
MR. DEL TORO: No, sir. All calls are -- they're
all -- it's all-inclusive, all unlimited calls. Now, you're
going to have to look at each one of them, look at the
features that they offer and base your decision upon your
needs.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We'd have actually gone out
for a bid, but for budgeting purposes, this would give you
the best --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: County Attorney says we can
I do an RFP.
MR. DEL TORO: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: RFP or RFQ.
II MR. DEL TORO: That was one of our concerns there.
II' COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Request for proposal.
MR. DEL TORO: If you look back in the proposal,
one of the problems that we foresaw with one of the vendors
is they were going to get their GIS data from a commercial
source.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
MR. DEL TORO: And that's typically invalid data
for our area, because it's based off specific distances --
house distances within the city limits, or even out in the
8-6-08 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
30
county, and when they go to map those addresses to make those
phone calls, they're going to miss some citizens. So, our
role in this is that we will support whatever company that
you go with, and we will give them -- provide them our data.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Give more accurate data?
MR. DEL TORO: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Including this third
one you're talking about?
MR. DEL TORO: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. DEL TORO: We will push for them -- if that's
who you choose, we will push -- push our data upon them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are these single-year
contracts?
MR. DEL TORO: They are single-year contracts.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Could we get a grant for this
for one year to try and it see how it works out if we need
to?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What did you have in mind?
From whom?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: AACOG.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We're trying to get that grant
already through the radio stuff.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know. I can make
8-6-08 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
an inquiry. The question is, do we want to plug it in?
the county-wide City/County Emergency Management Plan, the
Sheriff's Department duty, the Sheriff's duty is warning for
everybody. That does fall solely under the Sheriff's
Department. Whether it happens in the city or not, the
management plan is the Sheriff's Department duty.
JUDGE TINLEY: May be something we want to bring to
somebody's attention this afternoon.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe an option this afternoon
is to split it fifty-fifty this year, first year trial, and
then if it -- if it's worthwhile and being used, the County
pick it up in the future. It's not a huge dollar figure; I
don't see anyone trying to go back and forth. I don't think
it's a big deal, but I would like to -- if they don't have
interest in even checking it out, that says something.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: In the meetings that we've had
and everything with them, the City has been very willing, and
wants -- at least from the Chief of Police and their captain
and them, they want to -- to do this with one of these
8-6-08 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
32
vendors, whoever it is, and go half-and-half with the County
on getting this type of system. Because we all know what the
-- what the need is for it during emergency situations. So,
I think talking to them this afternoon, you know, each
department, each agency budgeting half of it may be a doable
deal.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think -- I believe it's an
important thing, especially whenever you do have emergency
situations, and here, it's floods and fires, basically. And
if you can --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So many --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- block off an area, they
can be notified within a very, very short time.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And there are so many other
uses that are vital or could be important to the community at
II large that that could be used for. So, total number would be
~' what, Mark? 44?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 33.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 33,000, 35,000.
MR. DEL TORO: Yeah. Well, 3n was 44,000. WARN
was 33,150, and then Connect-CTY total combined was 33,800.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thirty-three?
MR. DEL TORO: 33.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, that's 16 and a half a
piece.
8-6-OB bwk
33
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 OEHLER: Yeah. It's --
MR. DEL TORO: Now, these are web-based services,
so there's no proprietary software that you have to purchase
and download and worry about upgrades. It's all kept over
the Internet. And with, I believe, two of the three, you
have scalability as far as the users go. You can actually
set up different user groups and authorizations to do the
activations depending on what, say, departments within the
city or departments within the county.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Whose budget would these go
under? Where would it go? Yours?
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I would assume.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Notification.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I would assume it would have
to go in mine somewhere.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, that was our thought.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we ought to plug it in
at this point. We can bring it up this afternoon.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Plug 33 in here. If we get
16 and a half back, that's great.
MS. HARGIS: I think we'll create a new line item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, 'cause this is a
different --
JUDGE TINLEY: Emergency Notification?
8-6-08 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
34
MS. HARGIS: Yes. Emergency Notification Contract,
probably.
JUDGE TINLEY: We're plugging in 33 there.
MR. RUARK: She'll have to add that.
JUDGE TINLEY: I understand.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mark, thank you for coming
over. We appreciate it.
MR. DEL TORO: Very well.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Now, are we ready to go to
jail? Over two and a half mil.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page is jail on?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Biggest increases in jail are
to -- and, Judge, again, I think we finally agreed on here.
I don't see that you changed anything that I hadn't already
changed also.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page is jail, Ken?
MR. RUARK: I'm getting there; hang on for just a
second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can't find the jail. We
lost the jail.
JUDGE TINLEY: 42.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 42. I'm going the wrong
direction.
MR. RUARK: 42. Page 42.
8-6-08 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
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Two of the biggest increases
are prisoner meal and prisoner medical. Now, the way it
shows on the budget is prisoner medical is -- should be
showing cut down. Let me see here.
MS. HARGIS: It's the contract.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You added that. It's got a
zero right now in it, okay. But under prisoner medical, are
we still showing the --
MS. HARGIS: 30,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't see your new
contract number in there.
MS. HARGIS: Yeah, it is.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's 340 -- Line Item 340.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, I see.
JUDGE TINLEY: Medical, from about close to 200
down to 30, and then -- are you going to need that 30?
MS. HARGIS: Mm-hmm.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think we will, because in
the contract, in reviewing, we're still negotiating the
bottom line of it, but there are some things that are out of
contract expenses.
JUDGE TINLEY: Stop loss.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We'll have to have stop loss,
you know, a certain amount that they will pay for hospital --
ones that are in the hospital, or specialists, or the
8-6-08 bwk
36
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
psychotropic drugs that M.H.M.R. has and all that kind of
stuff are not going to be in that contract.
JUDGE TINLEY: But the savings occurs up in the
personnel.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The savings occurs 'cause we
are cutting five people out of personnel.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tell me again -- remind me
of what we're putting in the contract line, though.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 298,000.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can read the number. Tell
me what kind of people.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It is 82 hours a week that the
company, okay, CH -- I can't think of it right now. They do
Smith County and another county, and I've talked to both of
them; they wouldn't trade them for anything in the world.
They do all your medical stuff in your jail. They supply a
nurse on duty, they supply a doctor. They're all their
employees; they are contracted.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is the doctor on call, or is
he at your place?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: On call. Their medical
director's on call. They're stationed out of Denver, mainly,
but they have -- have a lot of different -- I could have
brought that. I have it out in the car, Buster. I didn't
bring it in, but I'll let you see their deal. They have
8-6-08 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
$5 million liability insurance, which also as Rex will tell
you, and Frigerio will tell you, that is one of the biggest
benefits the County has, because our biggest lawsuit stuff is
inmate medical. And our current doctor doesn't have a
~I contract with us, so the County's totally liable for
~, everything, where this company is a buffer between us and --
I~I
and inmates.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do they contract locally
I~ with the doctor?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what they do?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. They contract locally;
they hire all their people locally, and then it's their
employees. In fact, they're probably going to hire my -- if
you'll look at personnel expenses right now, I have not
replaced or hired any so that we wouldn't be laying off a
bunch of people, since it's cutting five positions. I only
have one current position, my EMT, right now, and he's
working about 70 hours a week, and getting a lot in overtime.
But I would rather do that than hire someone and then go with
this company and have to lay them off in October. But, yes,
they contract with everybody and guarantee 82 hours a week in
the jail.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sounds good to me.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Looks to me like we're going
8-6-08 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
to be able to pull a bunch of money out of your jailer's
salary line item to fund more legal toward the end of the
year, because it has quite a balance in it, and it's even
been requested more, and the Judge has approved a whole lot
more than what was requested. What's the story on that
general line item?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: General line item, I just now
filled four positions. That's one reason, okay? On jailers.
This also has the 10 percent in it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me address that, Commissioner.
As I've indicated, I don't -- I don't tinker around with the
salary items. The clear understanding is, if this contract
for medical services, all this medical thing is approved,
then he pulls these people out of the personnel item.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They're already pulled out.
~, MS. HYDE: They're already pulled.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think the people you pull out more
than offset the amount of contract when you figure all the
rollups.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right. I'm talking about --
JUDGE TINLEY: Without regard to the supplies and
the liability issues and a bunch of other things.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm not on the jailer line
item.
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, okay. I'm sorry.
8-6-08 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
39
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm just strictly on the
jailer -- jailer salaries, and it shows here that -- that the
current budget is 802,000. Year-to-date, 604; projected
year-end, 752; budget request, 857; administrative
recommendation, 982,000.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What that is --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So that is way up from what
the actual projected -- actual year-end is going to be by,
you know, $220,000.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What that is, Bruce -- and
y'all can put whatever figure. That is if I have every
position that I have filled, --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- 365 days, and the
10 percent salary increase for all the employees.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand that, but it
just seems like that that's a -- that's a lot of increase
right there over past history. I mean, we've had enough --
there's been enough staff approved and paid to run that jail.
It has been done. We haven't been out of compliance,
correct?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If you look at my overtime,
you look at my turnover, you look at -- no, we're not out of
compliance; I always try and make sure we aren't. But what
I'm talking about is burnout, turnover. I'm not asking for a
8-6-08 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
new position.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand. I'm just
talking about this -- that's a lot of money. That's a lot of
increase in this over last year.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Take a look at the current
752, and you said you -- you just added four positions -- or
filled four positions that had not been filled this far into
the budget year.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I still have --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, four times what, 40?
160,000?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I still have two
positions. We've been hurting in the jail. I have totally
worn out people.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I guess my point is that
those four would put you over your current budget right now.
i
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, it's -- the salary's
29, 000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon me?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Salary's 28,000, 29,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, with the rollups --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, but they're in different
line items.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Hargis Or Ms. Hyde, whoever has
8-6-08 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
41
the answer to this question, how did 982,000 end up in the
104 account?
MS. HARGIS: That has the proposed increase in it,
and it is fully staffed. And he has not been fully staffed
this year; he's been running at least four, and even --
what's that statistic?
MS. HYDE: Two to three. It's, like, 2.6.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So --
MS. HYDE: And when I say 2.6 --
JUDGE TINLEY: 802 -- 803, essentially, this
current year's budget, was based upon fully staffed.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Should have been.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It is every year.
JUDGE TINLEY: And so the 802 went to 982 on the
same number of jailers staffing; is that correct?
MS. HYDE: I just want to put a little push in
there just to make sure. When we gave that -- and let's
clarify the thing. When we gave it, we had the five people
that were approved by the Court in the hospital.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's the nurses. That's cut
I out .
MS. HYDE: The nurses.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a different line.
MS. HYDE: And so that's the only thing, as far as
8-6-08 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
the jailer line item. He did not increase; it's exactly what
it was. It's how many he's supposed to have.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. Well, the 804 -- the
current budget, 802, and you take 10 percent of that for
salary increase, that makes that 880, somewhere in the
neighborhood.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Then you also have --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is my math screwed up or
what? That's 880, approximately. Well, that still -- what
is the in the recommended is $100,000 more than that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't know where they got
the recommended, but the other increases you will have in
that is longevity and education.
MS. HYDE: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, there are a few there, but I
don't see 100 grand worth.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This is a big year for that.
I don't know how many I have in the jail. I know it is a big
year on the -- on the longevity and education.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Two and a half percent onto
the individual's salary. Right, that's not 100 grand.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: No. I acknowledge that, you know,
we're in -- we're in the third year.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
8-6-08 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
JUDGE TINLEY: Which means a lot of longevity
increases for longtime employees.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: We started in '99. We had the
one-year, and then you had 2003, 2006, 2009, so this is going
to be a big year for that for long-term employees.
Traditionally, you won't have long-term employees as jailers.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Now, 850 -- we requested 857,
okay?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's more like it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, that is with the
longevity -- with the longevity and educational, and with
fully staffed. Now, you would have to add 10 percent to it,
10 percent on the 857. Now, if you add 10 percent to the
857, I don't know what you get.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, that's still -- that's
85,000, so you're up to -- you're up to 923 -- 925. But
we're still at 982 over there. You're still --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'm just saying, Bruce, what I
would -- what I requested was 857. Add 10 percent to that,
and you should be able to come up with what the salary line
item should be.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That recommended needs to be
busted down to whatever that number is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's get back to the
8-6-08 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
Judge's question. Where did the 982 come from?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Obviously, --
JUDGE TINLEY: I didn't put it in there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- it did not come from him.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Obviously, it did not.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So where did it come from?
Nobody's going to cough it up, so let's put it back to 857.
MS. HYDE: We're adding numbers to give you a
better number.
JUDGE TINLEY: Y'all work on that, because I don't
know where that number came from. I didn't put it in there,
and I don't --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, best Kerr County figure
ciphering.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ciphering.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is that what it is?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's some pretty good
ciphering.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Maybe we just added about ten
defense attorneys in there too, 'cause that's going to be
where it goes at the end of the year.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That number -- that's okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's an honest budget.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's probably where it is.
8-6-08 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
I don't know.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Lawyers get it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you saying it's -- the
requested number of 857 did not include 10 percent?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The requested number, the 857,
does not include the 10 percent.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It includes the longevity and
education.
JUDGE TINLEY: Education.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay? So, if you add
10 percent to the 857, you would get what it should be fully
staffed.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You're going to get up there
real close to what I was talking about.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's what I would say.
MR. RUARK: Apparently, they're checking the
numbers.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They're huddling in there,
so --
JUDGE TINLEY: And that, of course, will affect all
the rollups and whatnot. But --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, it could.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's deal with whatever else
you've got here, Sheriff.
8-6-08 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
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: All right. The other things
that the -- one of the big deals that you will see, and gas
prices has a whole lot to do with this, is my increase in
prisoner meals. This current budget, we had asked for
190,000. There was an expected -- wrong line. They're
expecting projected end of year is 174,000, but I had
budgeted in 252,000. Now, the reason I did that, last
month -- when we first started this year, our meal cost was
-- let me just read you under my notes here; you can read the
notes that I put in there, if you have them, on how we came
to that cost.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Peanut butter went up?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Everything went up.
JUDGE TINLEY: We're figuring 2.80 a day.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Here comes the conference
I back.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay.
MS. HYDE: This is -- this is -- right there is
what we did. And we checked it and double-checked it and
triple-checked it, and this is correct. And from this,
Ms. Hargis took --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It doesn't look right to me.
MS. HYDE: I know. I know, but he has got -- in
this year, we have got over half the staff that's going to
have longevity, and they're getting their education.
8-6-08 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
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That was supposed to be
included in the 857.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Then you add 10 percent to
that, and that does not come up to 982.
MS. HARGIS: The -- not all the education things
were in the 857, because he didn't have them at that point.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
MS. HARGIS: I didn't have them. I mean, Rusty --
MS. HYDE: They're in here.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They are -- they should be in
the 857, gentlemen, and have 10 percent added on that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You believe you put it in
the 857?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir.
MS. HYDE: 'Cause we base it off of this, and
that's the position schedule. And this is with -- just what
he has, their education and their longevities, and so then we
had to turn around and we did the steps.
JUDGE TINLEY: Added 10 on top?
MS. HYDE: Right. So, really, they're getting
double-banged, so it's going to be more than 10 percent.
JUDGE TINLEY: Would you -- would y'all put
together a composite calculation and furnish that to us so
that we can analyze it? I'd sure appreciate it.
8-6-08 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
MS. HYDE: On just the jail?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, jailer salaries. That's
what... Okay, Sheriff, you're looking at 2.80 a day on your
meals?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. As of June, our average
meal cost was $1.40, okay? Wait a minute, let me get this
increase -- average of a hundred -- I left the average number
of inmates at 163. And we -- of course, we do fix some meals
for JDC, not all of them.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's why you've got an income item
that's going to partially offset some of this.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The JDC meals.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, it goes into the general
fund; it's not going to come to me.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, what I'm saying is, your cost
of preparing those meals is included in your 252?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: JDC budgets a certain amount for
their residents' meals.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: And --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Which isn't much.
JUDGE TINLEY: And that goes into the general fund,
which has an offset effect, so that's not your total cost
8-6-08 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
49
that we're talking about.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Now, what it was is right now,
we're averaging $1.37 a meal. What I figured this cost at --
and this was in June, we were averaging $1.57, 'cause
everything had gone up. What I figured it at for the year
was $1.40 -- at $1.40, with an average number of inmates 163,
and you start adding three meals a day and then a few more
for JDC and a few for the employees that have to eat there,
it ended up being the 252,000. And I don't know where that
-- I mean, you can budget --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if we, you know, happen to
get lucky and get our costs less, we're doing great. But if
not, that's where -- in this calculation and this detail,
that's where it comes out at.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's the same charge you --
the same charge that we apply to the Juvenile Detention
Facility for meals? Actual?
', SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Actually, I did it at 2.80.
All their costs are in there.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Your cost per meal?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Meal cost.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Same meals; we don't fix them
any different.
8-6-08 bwk
50
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 OEHLER: Your cost per meal went up
from what to what?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Let's see. And I looked. It
looks like --
MR. RUARK: We used 2.80.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Oh, the reason you're
~' seeing -- it shows 2.80 up there. My cost now is $1.37; I
figured it at $1.40. The reason you show 2.80 up there, if
you get into the number of meals that we serve total for the
year, it's 180,000, but up there where it says "Quantity,
90,000," the computer program won't allow me to put in
180,000, 'cause it has too many zeros in it, so I had to cut
I
it in half and double the cost on the detail to show where
I
that is.
MR. RUARK: It won't do it; he's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: So you come up to the -- to the
initial raw number for your inmates of 216. That was the
initial request.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: And then you add to that JDC.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: And your staff that's on duty during
mealtime, and that's how you get the 252, the additional
meals.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
8-6-08 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
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At a unit cost of 1.40 per
meal?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Which I honestly think is a
very good per-meal cost that my staff does.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I just have a hard time
believing that 3 cents more a meal, basically 9 cents a day,
is going to equal out to a $70,000 increase in meals, 35
percent increase for one year.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, there's a big difference
there. Last year we figured it at 149 inmates, and we were
paying, at the beginning of last year, $1.20 a meal, all
II right? So, your average daily population has gone up over
20, and your meal cost has gone up over 20 cents. That is --
and that's where you get the large increase from.
JUDGE TINLEY: If he's got some fluff in there,
it's -- it's in the excess for the JDC, and the --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I just see the big increase.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And there could be a little
bit of fluff. Could be a little excess in there for JDC,
because, you know, they -- number one, I didn't -- I figured
this in round numbers. Two is that once school starts back
up, they get the breakfast, and lunch -- and I don't know if
8-6-08 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
he's in here -- lunch is served by the school, 'cause they're
on the school program, so I cut those out. It's summertime
that we serve them all. Plus, I think their inspector came
in last month or something, and because of the way we -- we
fix meals, they come over and get them, and they were serving
them inside their cells. I think the State told them now
they can't serve their meals inside their cells to their
kiddies; they have to have them all together or something, so
now they're having to -- to furnish breakfast for them
themselves. So, that cut our breakfast meal out, so there --
there could be some give in there for the JDC amount.
JUDGE TINLEY: But you just look at the number and
it kind of gives you a jolt, doesn't it?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what I'm doing.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It gave me a jolt too, Bruce,
believe me, when I plugged it in.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I figure everybody else got
the jolt.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Unfortunately, you know, our
department, when you talk gas and food, it really hit us
hard.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Maybe you need to carpool.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Carpool the -- get smart cars?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hire some drones and drive them
I around.
8-6-08 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
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Peanut butter and jelly
sandwiches.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'd love to. Unfortunately,
meals have to be dietitian-approved, and the number of
calories and nutrients. I don't have a choice.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Volkswagens may on be on
their way as Sheriff's cars.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That is one thing we -- just
talking real quick, 'cause that reminded me, I have in this
budget, in the Sheriff's Department, two cars, okay? I cut
it from a request of five down to two, because I can do it.
Cutting it down to two -- and if it helps get the 10 percent
increase, I would even cut those out if it had to be. The
only problem that will do is, if I cut even the last two out,
even -- even only asking for two, next year I will be having
to ask for between five and six at least, 'cause I will have
them with over 200,000 miles.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd keep the two in. We don't
I need to --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I didn't want to get too
drastic in there.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Just not two Tahoes.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, these are L.T.D.'s.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Of course, they're cheap
8-6-08 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
right now.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, they are.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They're actually just about as
cheap as the L.T.D.'s are, and they actually get a little bit
better gas mileage than the L.T.D.'s.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else, Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Not unless y'all have any
other questions.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any more questions for the Sheriff
from anybody on the Court?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, not me.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Why don't -- you have
courthouse security also, don't you, Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I did not change that at
all.
JUDGE TINLEY: I didn't think it did.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There's some salary -- I
didn't bring that one with me.
JUDGE TINLEY: The only change here, other than the
10 percent salary increase or any longevity, is
cost-of-living. That's it. What's the account on the
courthouse security?
MR. RUARK: 29-636.
JUDGE TINLEY: 29?
MR. RUARK: 29-636, and then I'll get to the --
8-6-08 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
55
MS. HARGIS: It's Fund 29.
MR. RUARK: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. RUARK: 115.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 116, Expenses. Why does your
computer cut off so often?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's just a habit I got
into. I'm saving --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Saving energy.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Saving energy for Rusty.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Nothing there?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. Now, with all the
addition of the camera system and that, I think we've done
excellent this year. That grant was --
JUDGE TINLEY: When is the courthouse security
system due to be totally up and functional? I know we got
some sort of tests and shakedown occurring here pretty quick.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We have been having several
tests and shakedowns, and half the time we can't even get in
our own door out at the Sheriff's Office, because it
basically locks at night and won't let us in. I have
ordered -- they may have come in yesterday -- more of the
automatic passes to get in the doors. Once we get those,
then I will start getting with all the department heads, see
8-6-08 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
who actually has to have access to this courthouse. I have a
problem right now with the way the security is. I think just
about every employee -- just real close to every single
employee of this courthouse has a key to the courthouse, and
I don't think that's necessary. I don't think there's any
reason for it.
JUDGE TINLEY: I would agree with you.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So, we're going to do away
with a lot of that. I'm hoping for the department heads'
cooperation in that. We'll get with them, issue the
identification badges that we're going to do that has
everybody's picture on it and that they're an employee of
whatever department, and then we will also be programming the
electronic entry passes or little keyring, whichever one.
And once I get all that up and going, then we will have kind
of an open house so that we can show everybody how the system
works.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there a -- a plan to require
employees to wear those ID cards?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I haven't decided whether I'm
going to require them to wear them, or at least to have them
available. 'Cause our biggest deal is, I need to know at
weekends, things like that, whenever somebody is up here, and
our officers do a security check and they come, I want them
to be able to prove that these people are employees.
8-6-08 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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm just thinking, it may not
be a bad idea -- I mean, people around in the -- especially
more in the upstairs, in the courts, if someone doesn't have
a badge on, they probably shouldn't be back in that area, and
it would be a good check for people up there to know that,
you know, hey -- at least any courthouse security.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: With having two people here
all the time, Charlie and Chuck pretty well know all the
employees, but there are a lot of changes, just like in mine.
So, it may be we're going to work on a whole lot of the
different security issues around the courthouse. I think
things have to be changed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: While I personally wouldn't
like it, I think it would be a good idea for everyone to wear
it in the courthouse.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I will keep that in mind when
we're developing the policy. But hopefully within the next
few weeks, we can have -- next couple of weeks, I think.
Just takes a while to get the cards programmed. Each one has
a serial number and is programmed, and it goes to a certain
person, and if that person leaves employment or quits or
whatever, they're going to be -- the department head's going
to be required to collect that card back so we can reuse it,
or I'm going to have to start charging some dollars for those
things.
8-6-08 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
JUDGE TINLEY: When that individual enters or
leaves the courthouse, that information is recorded as to
who -- who it was. And, of course, the camera's going to
record it anyway, so you got two different sources of
information.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The thing is, not every door
will have it, as you know. The front doors, these glass
doors on the side here do not have that keyless entry, okay?
Only the one push-open door, emergency door on the other side
of the elevator is the first door that has it. Because --
and the reason is, after 8:00 in the morning, the courthouse
should be unlocked and opened all the time anyhow. It's the
other times when people are coming and going.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What about -- so all the locks
will be removed from the other doors?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: From the other doors? They
will either be removed or, like, in a push-bar door, what you
do is you -- there's an alien wrench that locks that lock
open, so you don't have to have a lock on it. And, no, they
will -- the locks will be not functional, because it will all
be done by that electronic deal. Now, the other issue we've
got to do -- and I got to looking at this, and I thought
~', about it, and I need to get with the fire department. The
fire department has a key box out here, okay? And I don't
know when or how long or if -- because the courthouse keys,
8-6-08 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
you know, different maintenance people have changed keys,
changed locks, and I'm not sure if the fire department can
get into this thing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They could if they needed to.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But what -- well, yeah. I
mean, we can get them in, but I don't think that is probably
accurate. But what I will probably do is issue one of those
cards for them, because we can set up those cards to open
only a certain door, every door that's, you know, set that
way, or -- or however I want to do it. And so we will set
that one up for the fire department that it will open all the
doors that they can possibly get into at one time.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Question. Is there a
longevity increase in salary?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There probably is. I'd have
to go back and look at that. You're talking two employees.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Otherwise, their numbers
don't add up once again.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There very well could be a
longevity increase.
MS. HYDE: Which one?
I
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: On the courthouse security.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: On either Chuck or Charlie.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If there's a longevity in
there, that would add up, but otherwise --
8-6-08 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
MS. HYDE: Yes, sir, we have a longevity.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. That was my question,
thank you.
MS. HYDE: You're welcome.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I know it sounds like I'm
picking on you, but I'm really not. I'm just looking at the
number.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't have a problem at all.
Like I said, all that does is end up going to the defense
attorneys at the end of the year anyhow, which I'm not that
much for, so the more you can cut out of that, keep more of
that, Bruce --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Is that it for the Sheriff?
Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: All right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Where's D.P.S. on all of this?
(Low-voice discussion off the record.)
MR. RUARK: 580.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page, Jon?
JUDGE TINLEY: 580.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, it's Fund 580.
JUDGE TINLEY: Fund 580, yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page is that, Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: 62.
8-6-08 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
61
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: His pages are different.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I got a -- of course, I go to
the beat of a different drummer anyways.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're probably three pages
behind.
JUDGE TINLEY: The question you're asking?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm always a little bit
unclear.
MR. RUARK: You want to reload that report? We can
do that; you can be on the same page. Well, it's really on
62.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 62?
MR. RUARK: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I've got Emergency Health
Services.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's Fund 580.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what I was doing a
', while ago. I got to 580, it had something else.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sergeant Cummins, come on up here.
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll put you on the whipping post
for a while. How's that?
SERGEANT CUMMINS: That's great. Should be real
quick.
8-6-08 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
JUDGE TINLEY: Did you see that I reduced your
operating equipment request?
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Yes, I did.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you understand why I did that?
SERGEANT CUMMINS: No, sir, but that's fine.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me explain it to you.
SERGEANT CUMMINS: I think that's great.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm looking that you were budgeted
$1,500 for this year.
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: And to-date, I don't show any
expenditures.
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is -- is there some reason you
haven't -- have you got a bunch of stuff pending that you're
fixing to make happen? Or --
SERGEANT CUMMINS: A few things I've got some ideas
for, yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
SERGEANT CUMMINS: But I would say that you're
probably right; there's going to be some money left in that
fund.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, now that will
disappear.
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Sure.
8-6-08 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
JUDGE TINLEY: And we'll start again with the
1,500, the way I propose it.
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Yes, sir, and that's fine.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is that something that's workable
for you?
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Yes, sir, that's fine.
JUDGE TINLEY: Then it looks like we got no issue,
right?
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Not at all. It looks good.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That was quick and easy.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any questions for the good sergeant?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I guess a question for
you all. The -- the secretary salary.
JUDGE TINLEY: Now, that was for Commissioner
Oehler to bring up, remember?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, it's his turn.
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sorry, Bruce, I didn't mean
to step in there.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, it's tag team. Go at it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right. Well, why in the
hell did this thing drop from 29 to 27? Who did it? Up
against the wall.
SERGEANT CUMMINS: I thought it increased.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It increased from 27 to 29.
8-6-08 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
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Administration recommended
is 27.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's not what's on mine.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mine's --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Projected year-end is 27,6.
', COMMISSIONER LETZ: The recommended is 30,563.
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Which is more than I
recommended.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We sure don't want to do
anything that you --
SERGEANT CUMMINS: But I appreciate that. That's
great.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You requested 29,816, and
Administration Recommended is 27,688.
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Recommended is 30 --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why am I sitting here with
this thing?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know. You're on
the wrong page. 30,563 is Administration Recommended.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 30,563.
MS. HYDE: That's what he said.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The wrong year, maybe.
MS. HARGIS: You have the wrong one up. Department
of Public Safety?
8-6-08 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
JUDGE TINLEY: You have plugged in 30,563, or
you -- you or the Auditor, or the combination of the two of
you. Okay.
MS. HYDE: That includes the increase -- the
proposed increase.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. HYDE: That's why it would go up. But, of
course, if he doesn't want to give her the proposed increase,
then we can take it down.
JUDGE TINLEY: I didn't hear the sergeant --
SERGEANT CUMMINS: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- raising an issue about it.
SERGEANT CUMMINS: I'd be run out of town if I did
that, so --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's kind of like messing
with the cook.
SERGEANT CUMMINS: That's something you don't want
to do.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Is yours just a computer issue,
Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, I'm in the wrong --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Thank you, sergeant.
Appreciate it.
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Yes, sir. Thank y'all.
8-6-08 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
(Low-voice discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: I didn't skip them on purpose. I
apologize to Ms. Lavender. Doggone it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Did you jump over her?
JUDGE TINLEY: I jumped over Ms. Lavender. Get me
in trouble.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Let's try and see if we can
find this one in record time.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you know what --
MR. RUARK: It's Page 22, if you're on the -- we're
all on the same --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If we're all on the same --
MR. RUARK: Report, yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll be doggone.
MR. RUARK: It's 10-438 is the account number.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Got it.
MS. LAVENDER: Everybody find it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Looks pretty -- pretty plain
I vanilla.
MS. LAVENDER: Plain vanilla. I would say to you
that this will be -- or is at the beginning of the fourth
year of this federal Victims of Crime Act grant that funds
80 percent of this program. The only hangup this year is the
8-6-08 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
Congress has not appropriated the funding for the Victims of
Crime Act money for 2008-2009, and the last communique I had
proposal for funding, so once that's approved, the funding is
approved, it comes back to the governor's office. The
governor's office then has to dole all the money out to all
So, gentlemen, I have no idea what the status of
since the program began. Judge Tinley and I talked about it.
We are going to assume that the funding is going to be
granted. We were in the top six in the COG ranking this
year. Kids Advocacy Place and Hill Country Crisis Council or
Hill Country CARES are in exactly the same position we are
right now; their funding stream is considerably larger than
ours. That's VOCA money, and they are going to be in a world
of hurt much quicker than -- than we would be if they don't
get the funds released for their programs. But right now,
what -- what the County is funding out of my budget is travel
and health insurance, and we put more in the health insurance
in the grant application than what it's actually going to
cost, so we're cool with that. I asked for $600 for local
8-6-08 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
68
travel, because last year I made a lot of trips to AACOG back
and forth. This year, AACOG has awakened to the gas crisis,
and have -- they've canceled the meetings, and so I'm
willing, if you'd like for me to, to return to you some of
that $600. If you'd like to reduce that line item down to
$250, I think three trips to AACOG is about what $250 will
pay for. And I know that's not much, but maybe you can find
something to do with that other $350.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I can assure you. Thank you.
MS. LAVENDER: Maybe somebody else can use it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the -- this is more for the
Auditor. We probably should change that to not say "local
mileage," 'cause it isn't local mileage. It's going to San
Antonio.
MS. LAVENDER: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Out-of-county mileage. It says
local.
MS. LAVENDER: The problem is, you can't use grant
money to get more grant money, and so that's the reason we
separated that out. I would tell you also that we have our
first community planning meeting Friday morning at 9:30 to
begin the cycle for doing the community plan again for the
grant applications for this year through AACOG. And they
have taken homeland security out of the community plan now,
and it's being done separately. So, our community plan will
8-6-08 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
69
be a little bit different this year than it has been in years
past .
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, it's my opinion that
we need to go ahead and approve -- include this whole budget
in, and if we don't get -- if the federal folks don't send us
~, our own money, then we need to -- the County needs to fund it
for at least a year to complete what we have started.
MS. LAVENDER: Since we're already three months
into the --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, we've committed to.
MS. LAVENDER: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, I think there's no
question but that Ms. Lavender is more than earning her keep.
Was it last month or month before last? We had a tragic
situation out in Ingram that we would have been faced with a
lot of transportation and autopsy expense, possibly pauper
remains disposition. All of that, she managed to get funded
through the Crime Victims from the state, which saved us from
having to. That's one example. Then there are a number of
other instances where there have been medical costs in
connection with -- with crime victims that we would have
otherwise had to roll into our indigent health care and
absorb that she's managed to get. So, grant funding is -- is
just an additional plus, but I think what we're saving by her
actions here in crime victims is more than what's in this
8-6-08 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
70
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I agree.
MS. LAVENDER: Yeah. Year before last, we got
$270,000 from crime victims to pay local vendors and San
know -- I didn't look up the numbers for the last grant year,
but it was somewhere in there. I would say there's -- you
each quarter, that you turn in a financial report, and that's
how you get the money reimbursed to you. And this year, the
first three-quarters of the four quarters of the grant -- not
this year, but last year's grant that ended the end of June,
the first three times, we had a problem with the reports.
And the reports have to come from the County Auditor's
office; it's by law that the financial officer does it. And
we had a little hangup in getting the reports done on time,
and there were some other problems, and so I'm not sure
whether they're going to red-flag this grant for an audit, or
perhaps the governor's office may look at it and say, "Look,
these people can't do the reporting on time" or whatever, and
we may have a problem there, but we don't know that for sure.
8-6-08 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
71
But you just need to be aware that that did happen this year,
so that if it comes up, at least we'll know; you'll have the
background to it. And there wasn't any malicious intent to
it. It was just the transition, I think, from one office to
the other, and from doing the reports differently in the
system.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think the reports were submitted,
but there were some -- there was some computer software --
MS. LAVENDER: Yeah, issues.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- problems that they weren't being
accepted over in the Criminal Justice Division.
MS. LAVENDER: Right. So -- and I don't know if
that's going to have any impact on it or not, but you just
need to be aware of it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Rosa, what contributes to
the in-state travel training increase for 258 projected,
year-end 1, 100?
MS. LAVENDER: There wasn't any increase. Last
year was 1,100 and this year is 1,100, and those are two
workshops. Last year I didn't go to any of them, because
they canceled one of them, and the other one was at a time
that I had a trial that I needed to be here with the victim,
and so I didn't go last year at all. That's all grant
funding. We would just simply not request that money.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
8-6-08 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
MS. LAVENDER: And --
JUDGE TINLEY: One of the workshops --
MS. LAVENDER: -- until I find out I have the grant
this year, I'm not going to register for the one in
September, because I'm not going to use somebody else's money
to go to something -- you know, those are sort of redundant;
after you've been to them for four years, it's about the same
topics. So, I'm just not even going to register for it until
we have a grasp on whether we're getting the governor's
grant, because I don't want to use county money for it. And
the other one was in May, and as I said, it was canceled for
some reason, and so I may not have any travel and training
related to it again this year. If we don't -- you know, we
don't need it, if we don't need to go and don't need to spend
the money, then I'm not going to do it, because I don't want
to spend county tax dollars to do that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Is that it?
MS. LAVENDER: That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: She's smart and she's
pretty, and she lives in Precinct?
MS. LAVENDER: One.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Attagirl.
MS. LAVENDER: The number one precinct.
(Laughter.)
8-6-08 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
73
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, boy.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thanks for the commercial.
JUDGE TINLEY: Can we do Road and Bridge right
quick?
MR. ODOM: Number one on her scorecard, right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Jody?
(Low-voice discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 611.
MR. ODOM: Yes. What I have is -- is from
July 15th, and I don't know what they have.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Jody?
(Low-voice discussion off the record.)
MR. ODOM: Well, it looks like this is more like
July 15th. That's the closest one I have, and I don't -- it
looks like that sort of reflects what I've got here.
JUDGE TINLEY: Jody, pastrami and swiss on rye with
stoneground mustard, if you don't mind.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Cut the pickles.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Partridge in a pear tree.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page?
JUDGE TINLEY: 83?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Leonard's on Page 83?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Must be some longevity built
into the three salaries as well.
8-6-08 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
MR. ODOM: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Some longevity increases on
top of the 10 percent, increased salaries.
MR. ODOM: In crew salaries? I tried to add one
man. But may I go through 600 first, then?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes, sir.
MR. ODOM: And, see, what I -- I've gone to the
Auditor. I thought this had been corrected, if Eva had done
this, but the assistant's salary was to be at 25 -- 25-1,
which this does not reflect that change, Kelly going up to
Truby's position. And then I asked for an open -- you have
the one position, which is Barbara, but I also asked to fill
a position to have three in the office there for 14-1, so
should have been around 50,000.
MS. HARGIS: I didn't put the new positions in.
MR. ODOM: Okay.
MS. HARGIS: Until the Court approves it.
MR. ODOM: And then I'm asking for one position in
secretary salary to be Barbara and another lady, and then
Kelly.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's the other lady going
to do?
MR. ODOM: Other lady is going to answer the phone
too and do computer work and download a lot of information
that Kelly's doing right now. I got three there, and they're
8-6-08 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
busy.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You lose something, Judge?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Trying to see how the computer
I works .
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, trying to figure it out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, Leonard, I'm not going
to, you know, disagree; you may need personnel, but with this
year, trying to do some -- budget overall salary increases, I
think it's not a good year to ask for it. I think most
departments, we've really cut back on the personnel
increases. We're trying to give an across-the-board
10 percent increase to all employees.
MR. ODOM: I understand. And we -- we balanced
where we could do all this. I mean, I worked with the
Auditor to do that. I'm not saying that I'm better than
anybody else. I'm just telling you, I think that I need that
one position there in that office, so --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. ODOM: -- other than that, there may be some
changes in retirement and all that, adjustments there, but if
that's not --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Without the position right
now, how does it impact your operation?
!, MR. ODOM: Well, Kelly would be able to -- well --
~, MS. HOFER: I would basically have to be taking
8-6-08 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
over all the questions that Truby's answering right now, and
along with doing what I'm doing right now, and I keep myself
pretty busy all day long. So, I would be taking on all the
things that Truby's doing and all the questions that she's
answering to the public and things that I'm still trying to
learn. So, I mean, --
MR. ODOM: This is in addition --
MS. HOFER: -- it would overwhelm me quite a bit.
MR. TROLINGER: And y'all recently automated, you
got a new software program where you've automated your office
a little bit.
MS. HOFER: Yes, but we have not been -- we're
using it on a couple of things, but part of what Leonard has
in the budget for the software is an extra $1,000 this year
for training for Barbara and I to understand how to use that
I' software fully. We're using it on some of the equipment and
using on it complaints. But the annual -- the annual charge
for that software, I believe, is 1,750, and then we added
$1,000 for training.
MR. TROLINGER: Good.
(Low-voice discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: This only shows -- what I'm looking
at here, Leonard, is one secretary, isn't it?
MS. HARGIS: Yes, that's all it shows, Judge.
MR. ODOM: That's all it shows.
8-6-08 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
MS. HARGIS: I would not -- I did not add any new
employees until the Court agreed to add them, 'cause --
MR. ODOM: I went to try to correct it, but it's
just not showing up.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would a --
MS. HYDE: Can I just -- they're not really adding
one. They've had the position for two budget cycles; this
would be the third budget cycle.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it hasn't been filled.
MR. ODOM: We11, we had a part-time.
MS. HYDE: They had the part-time/full-time person
that was in there, and what we did is we just moved them and
changed the names.
MR. ODOM: There's no longer part-time.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me -- let me see if I've kind of
got this figured out. In previous budgets, you had -- in the
administrative budget, you had the assistant administrator,
and you had a secretary.
MR. ODOM: That's correct. Then we had a
part-time.
I JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. ODOM: That was a young lady that was going to
college. Didn't work out, so we eliminated that part-time,
put that money back in. Kelly came in, and I didn't have
anybody to replace Kelly out in the field, so basically what
8-6-08 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
we did was scratch the part-time and ask for another position
for the three people in there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Have we -- over on the crew side,
when Kelly came in, have you filled that position on your
crew?
MR. ODOM: Not yet.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is it in your budget to fill that --
MR. ODOM: It's in the budget for her position.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, we've got -- we got the
crew portion of it taken care of.
MR. ODOM: That's correct.
'I JUDGE TINLEY: In addition to Kelly, you're asking
I
for one more?
MR. ODOM: We11, I'm asking.
MS. HYDE: Yeah.
MR. ODOM: You're talking about in 611?
JUDGE TINLEY: No, on the administration side.
MR. ODOM: Administration side, what I'm asking is
for a -- one position, but I'm taking that part-time and
eliminating the part-time, okay? We didn't have a full
position; we had a part-time position.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Where's the
part-time?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, where was she?
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me see if I can get into this
8-6-08 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
differently. On the administration side, --
MR. ODOM: On the administration side.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- you have been budgeted three
full-time positions; yourself, the assistant administrator,
and a secretary, correct? Traditionally.
MR. ODOM: Traditionally.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And no part-time.
JUDGE TINLEY: Kelly --
MR. ODOM: We had a part-time.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're -- that's what the
problem is. I don't see the part-time here.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me see if I can get through with
i
~I this. Kelly is moving into the Assistant Administrator
position, by virtue of the retirement of Truby at the
beginning of this budget year.
MR. ODOM: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, what you want is someone
to replace the position that Kelly was in.
MR. ODOM: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: And no more.
MR. ODOM: And no more.
JUDGE TINLEY: It ought to be in there.
MR. ODOM: Well, it's -- it's --
MS. HYDE: It's not.
8-6-08 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
MR. ODOM: It's not.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is not.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They want another -- they had a
part-time --
MR. ODOM: We had a part-time.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- position that is no -- that
is not reflected in the historical budget that I see.
MS. HARGIS: No, it is -- if you look under the
current budget under assistants salaries, see 64? Let's see,
there's part-time --
MR. ODOM: 24,000-something.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the part-time person that
was in the office was carried under the --
MS. HARGIS: Assistants salary.
MR. ODOM: We tried to bring it into the
assistants --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It was in your --
MR. ODOM: 600.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 600 -- no, the 611.
MR. ODOM: Was it 611?
MS. HYDE: I can't see.
MS. HARGIS: In 600.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't see --
MS. HYDE: Yeah, it's in 600.
MS. HOFER: 600-103.
8-6-08 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
MS. HARGIS: If you look in the fourth column --
one, two, three -- fourth column, the second heading, 103,
c
see where it says 64?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 64,376.
MS. HARGIS: And then look at year-to-date actual.
The projected year-end is wrong, but see, the year-to-date
actual is 49,000.
', MR. ODOM: 49,174.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Part-time was being paid out
of that same line item.
MS. HARGIS: Part-time was paid out of the same
line item. That's how it had been budgeted in the past.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, in addition to the full-time
secretary slot that you've got that Kelly is -- is going to
be moving out of come October 1 and moving to the Assistant
Administrator slot, you want to be able to fill the one she's
leaving, plus you want one more. Is that what I'm hearing?
MS. HYDE: No.
MR. ODOM: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Tell me what I need to hear.
MR. ODOM: Let me tell you what I need.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. ODOM: I need three people in the office, which
I'm what asking for.
8-6-08 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
82
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Plus you.
MR. ODOM: Plus me.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. ODOM: And, basically, it comes close, within
$4,000 of what I've actually had. Adrienne was the one that
was part-time, going to school. And I'm taking that
part-time money and trying to get two assistant secretaries.
I think that's what we call them, secretaries. Kelly was
already paid for out of 611. She moved up to train. So, I
', need Kelly, I need Barbara, and I need one more position,
which is about $4,000 more, probably. Plus --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Than what you've already got
budgeted?
MR. ODOM: Basically, that's what I'm seeing on
mine, 4,100, 4,200.
JUDGE TINLEY: That excludes, of course, the --
MR. ODOM: Yeah, FICA and retirement.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, and it excludes the 10 percent
and excludes the -- the longevities and that sort of stuff.
MR. ODOM: Yeah, I never figure any of that.
Y'all -- whatever. It is what it is. Whatever y'all tell us
it is.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's for the bean-counters.
MR. ODOM: That's right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question of the
8-6-08 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
25
bean-counters. Under 600-103, Assistants Salary, we're at
YTD 49,174, projecting a year-end of 41. If they're already
I
~,I, at 49, how do we project 41 at year-end?
(Low-voice discussion off the record.)
MS. HARGIS: This program projects based on what
was in there, and we did this a month ago.
MR. ODOM: Projection.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The projection is wrong.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, that's fine.
Something had to be wrong.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sergeant Cummins has remained here;
he obviously finds it to be quite entertaining.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's better than chasing
bad guys, isn't it?
SERGEANT CUMMINS: Yes, sir. I don't know.
MR. RUARK: When you look at -- just to clarify the
projected budget, when you look at it, it's a point-in-time
calculation, so if that was done a month ago or two months
ago, --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. RUARK: -- it may not be accurate. That has to
I! be updated. Somebody has to --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're right, it may not be
I accurate.
8-6-08 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
MR. RUARK: Yeah. But that's the reason for it.
JUDGE TINLEY: What's the feeling of the Court on
Mr. Odom's request for additional administrative help?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would -- my preference would
be to put money in there; call it part-time, then you have a
part-time person, let Kelly get in there for a year, and then
look at it next year.
MR. ODOM: Then look at it next year. But we're
pushing the envelope with her to learn everything and be
responsible. That's really tough.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And after -- a year from now,
let's retook at it, 'cause, you know, I hope with the
technology and Kelly's experience increasing, you won't need
a full-time spot there. But I do think you do need a
part-time, at least for part of the year. You need to use
it, you know, however you want to get some assistance. I
', have high hopes for Kelly.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have the greatest confidence in
Kelly, that Kelly is going to --
MR. ODOM: Kelly is doing a wonderful -- I will
tell the Court, Kelly's doing a wonderful job.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Add part-time.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Do you feel the pressure
building?
25 ~ COMMISSIONER LETZ: Half of a 14-1 is the part-time
8-6-08 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
person.
MS. HYDE: That would be based on 24 hours a week.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, we've got
administration?
MR. ODOM: Do what? I'm sorry, what?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, it is. We added a -- a
14-1 -- a dollar amount of 14-1 divided by two.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On 108 -- Line 108.
I MS. HYDE: Instead of 2,080 hours, you get 1,040
i
hours for them to work. Nod your head yes.
MS. HARGIS: Can't even take that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Kind of like dealing with the
Legislature, Len; you get half a loaf. And that's about all
you can ever expect anyway.
MR. ODOM: Okay. 611.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought we did good.
MR. ODOM: Not good enough.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 611. Okay, Bruce. You got
a big number there.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's Buster's turn.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let's be quiet now.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He can't find it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sorry, can't do it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Can't find it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can't get there.
8-6-08 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
JUDGE TINLEY: Leonard, is there anything in the
administrative recommended that you've got any --
MR. ODOM: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- serious issues with?
MR. ODOM: The only thing was trying to get that
one position in there, to -- to help in the -- in the office.
But we'll find out after a year; we'll find out how it rolls.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Looks like you were over --
Judge, you were overly generous in the administrative
recommended on that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a $200,000 spread.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
MR. ODOM: What are we talking about?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 300.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 611.
MR. ODOM: All right. Well, the only thing that I
have in crew salaries -- well, there's several things here
that were left off, too, and I don't know -- I was told that
the bottom line was -- they were added in, but I'll go
through them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. ODOM: Crew salaries, I was trying to add one
position to the crew salaries, which was about $24,000,
$25,000 more than what was proposed a year ago. And then
fuel oils, I had increased fuel to 148,000, hoping I could
8-6-08 bwk
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
87
get into September. We were out of fuel first of July.
Kelly?
MS. HOFER: Yep, end of June.
MR. ODOM: Equipment repairs, I increased a little
bit, 3,000 for equipment repairs, trying to hope that I could
get close into September. Tires and tire repair, I did the
same thing, added about 3,000. Rubber wheels -- tires have
gone through the roof. Hopefully I don't have that much, but
there are years I get killed, but I really think I need that
increase just to cover us to maintain where we're at. I
believe cold mix was -- paving, I increased that. We were
out of cold mix. We've been out of cold mix since -- first
of July? June, maybe.
MS. HOFER: Yeah, end of June, I think we ran out.
MR. ODOM: And I think that our bids show --
reflected something like $5, wasn't it, Kelly? 3.50 to 5.60,
something like that, increase per ton.
MS. HOFER: From last year.
MR. ODOM: From last year. Paving aggregate, I
kept the same. I increased the emulsions due to the cost
reflected from a buck -- $1.50 to $1.63, I think. I believe
my -- my guess apparently wasn't too good this year, but I
thought $100 a barrel. I'm thinking $110 a barrel average,
which would sort of keep us sort of in there into September.
If I can get into September, we will see what's left and how
8-6-08 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
88
we can make it -- or into the new budget.
JUDGE TINLEY: When was it that you bid your --
your aggregates and emulsions and so forth?
MR. ODOM: January, February, I think, somewhere
around then, I think it was.
MS. HOFER: What? When we actually received the
bids, the material bids?
MR. ODOM: Right, mm-hmm.
MS. HOFER: I want to say it was March or May.
MR. ODOM: It went out in February, and I think we
opened them in March.
MS. HOFER: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that was when it started
approaching the high, then, on a lot of that. May, I think,
is when it generally peaked out pretty good. May, June.
MS. HOFER: It was March, yeah. So, it was March,
like March 24th, 2008.
MR. ODOM: Yeah, I think we went out, opened
sometime in March.
MS. HOFER: That's what I had on the bid sheet.
MR. ODOM: They may reflect back down, but I -- I
don't know if they'll take the gamble to do that, Judge. I
-- talking to them in the past, I was really shocked that I
got that type of increase over -- in one year, and it had to
do with surcharges for delivery and things like that.
8-6-08 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
your --
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, yeah.
MR. ODOM: And that's what's eating us up.
JUDGE TINLEY: Everything's related to your -- to
MR. ODOM: Related to fuel.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- to your petrochemicals, whether
it be fuel or whether it be in your emulsions or asphalt or
any of that business.
MR. ODOM: Right. Well, this is what -- 20 -- no,
16,000 -- no, I'm sorry, I'm looking at asphalt and oil.
25,000, I think I had. And we feel like we -- we will need
that. I might be pushing the end of September. That will be
-- we're running around 8,200 -- 7,000 to 8,200. The last
bill I saw -- one bill every two weeks -- is running about
8,200.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I don't have -- I don't have
any dispute with your figures, Leonard.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think everything you asked
for, you got.
MR. ODOM: Sir?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A11 those were approved.
Everything you mentioned so far has been approved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Only I have a question,
Len. You have $10,000 in for cattle guards. Is that enough?
(Laughter.)
8-6-08 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
24
25
MR. ODOM: I have got a policy -- as a matter of
fact, they're rewriting part of it. I submitted it and
wanted to reinforce that, and going into the minutes and all,
I think I will be fine. I will be looking at the program,
and we will analyze the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm just kidding you.
MR. ODOM: I know you are. But road count, ADT is
going to be a factor in that, too. When we -- we'll be
looking at it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can we go for a part-time
cattle guard?
MR. ODOM: Part-time cattle guards?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Leonard, the area that I would
question is contract fees.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Contract fees, you dropped down
from --
MR. ODOM: I went up.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, you actually -- current
budget was 70,000.
JUDGE TINLEY: 74,5.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You went to 74,5, okay. I
thought you dropped. I got to the projected --
MR. ODOM: No, I went up. I had installation of a
guardrail on upper Mason Road. Kerr County Drive, Scenic
8-6-08 bwk
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
Hills, there's an area left open there. Lower Reservation
Road, and I may -- that will probably be Weatherby to finish
it. I'm going to be able to do four-tenths. I've got to run
water from the sewer plant, so -- and I'm going to try to
finish what I said I'd do on Weatherby next year, instead of
Reservation. And Kensing is left, so that was in that area
that I was going to look at Reservation.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We need to talk about that,
too. But we're going to have some -- I think we're going to
have some surplus cattle guards in that area, one of which
needs to be moved to another area.
MR. ODOM: That's fine. I have an area --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But we're going to be able to
take out some of those cattle guards in that area.
MR. ODOM: Super. We'll be talking about I-10
right there, too. I got one up front --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
MR. ODOM: -- on Reservation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Leonard, I do want to
review with you just a second so I can clearly understand it.
611, crew salaries. Current budget's 700,000, and your
projected year-end is 630. That suggests that you've got a
position open that you didn't fill; is that correct?
MR. ODOM: I have two positions.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Two positions open you did
8-6-08 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
not fill, okay. And you're -- and you're wanting to go up --
or being recommended to go 836. What does that tell us?
MR. ODOM: Well, mine shows 725. Well,
administration recommended is 836; that's 116,000 more.
JUDGE TINLEY: That includes full staffing, plus
the longevities and education, plus the 10 percent.
MS. HOFER: We have 17 longevities, I think.
MS. HYDE: Right.
MS. HOFER: In 2009.
MR. ODOM: A lot of people coming due with
longevities.
JUDGE TINLEY: Majority of yours, probably, because
your -- your employees, there's not a lot of turnover in
them.
MR. ODOM: No, but I -- it's hard. I'm sort of
like Rusty was talking about. I hire somebody; you know,
they're on workmen's comp. I hire somebody, and they have a
background problem. And, you know, it's -- it's hard to find
people to fill. I may keep them for a while, and -- six
months, and then, well, they'll find another job and they're
gone.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can we go back to contract
fees?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This year, we -- you and I,
8-6-08 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
early in the year, talked quite a bit about right-of-way and
some issues on Lane Valley, South Fork, and then a lot of
stuff was put on hold in my mind because we didn't know what
was going on with subdivision. That's now become clear;
looks like it's going to happen, based on settling of
lawsuits, and there have been additional properties developed
on South Fork. I think we need to really look back, and I'm
going to -- you know, I want to get that moving again. I
don't see what you -- you're talking about under contract
fees there, or enough money in right-of-way surveying.
MR. ODOM: Well, I had --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just want to make sure it's
in here somewhere.
MR. ODOM: Well, I had 30,000 in here, but that was
the lease on 5 acres up there on Hermann Sons. We had talked
about -- and I didn't know where we were going up front on
Hermann Sons.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's still working.
MR. ODOM: Right. And I didn't know what we were
going to do. Last time I talked to you, you said the doctor
and a11, we were sort of on hold, so I have -- I didn't put
anything.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we ought to put -- at
least on the surveying side, I think we need to put something
in there for that on both of those, because we still have all
8-6-08 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
those -- all parties are still willing to work with us on all
those right-of-way issues and acquisition issue.
MR. ODOM: I think it's time to do it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we need to do it while
they're still willing to do it. And I think on South Fork, I
don't know if you're aware, part of the Flach Ranch sold to
III the Bohnert -- I mean, the -- Morris Bohnert's portion.
That's another subdivision as well, and that road has
right-of-way problems worse than any part of Lane Valley.
JUDGE TINLEY: Are we concerned more about
surveying expense?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Surveying, and there will be
some --
JUDGE TINLEY: Acquisition.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- acquisition, and some
I dollars in there for fencing and redoing some of that, how it
all goes together. The total amount, I think we put 20,000
somewhere to cover that.
MR. ODOM: I think we talked to --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 20 or 30, you know, needs to be
in here. And I think we'll probably get it -- I don't know
if you want to put it under contract fees or -- there it
gives you the most flexibility, it seems to me. Or 25,000,
some figure so we can get moving on it. Then try to defer,
do some of it the following year.
8-6-08 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
JUDGE TINLEY: You say 20,000 or 30,000?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Would it be appropriate just to
raise the contract fees from 74,5 to 100 even?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, probably the easiest way.
MR. ODOM: Probably easier way to do it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
MR. ODOM: And I also had a hydraulic study in
there on Fall Creek.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was just going to ask you
about Fall Creek. Where's the hydraulic? I got another
question also. Where's the hydraulic?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's in the budget.
MR. ODOM: In the budget, 17,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. ODOM: I don't know what y'all have there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I see it. I see it. You
and I talked about the rehabilitation of the first section of
Fall Creek up to the first cattle guard. Is that just
routine, or is that -- it's not special projects, is it?
MR. ODOM: Well, this would be -- that hydraulic
study, is that for that crossing right there?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know we talked about the
rehabilitation of the first section.
MR. ODOM: No, that --
8-6-08 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
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Up to -- up to the first
cattle guard, which has been -- hasn't been rehabbed in a
long time.
MR. ODOM: Hasn't been rehabbed, right. It's been
sealcoated.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that something that
needs to be in special?
MR. ODOM: I would say special.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, what are we talking
about, possibly?
MR. ODOM: Possibly half a mile. Maybe 9,000,
10,000 for material. Sealcoat could be in there on the
program for Precinct 2; be covered into the program.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. ODOM: So I don't need to do that, but I'm
going to guess you're going to need nine -- 9,000. But I
hate to -- I hate to rehab anything prior to -- if we can get
the money to do the construction, we're jeopardizing what's
up front with all the heavy equipment and everything else
going down there working, so I prefer to wait.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If you get construction done
before you do the front, you're going to lose it?
MR. ODOM: You'll lose it. We'll mess up what
we've already done in front if we do that part in Lower
Turtle Creek to the bridge right there.
8-6-08 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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. ODOM: See what I'm saying? It's not that you
can't do it, but you're going to be running all the
equipment, turning around on it, everything right in there.
So --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. ODOM: So, I think I'll wait until I know what
we've got and do the study, and then if we can get the funds,
we can build it, and then tie it all in as one project right
there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where are we proposing to
get the funds? Through that Washington group that we were
talking about?
MR. ODOM: Sir?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're proposing to get the
funds through that Washington group?
MR. ODOM: Well, I'm hoping that might be an answer
to it. That's what I'm hoping right now.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. ODOM: The other way --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is this an appropriate time
to talk about that? We'll talk about it now. For that
group, their original proposal was $120,000 a year to get us
moving in terms of all the work that needs to be done to
obtain an earmark through Congress and so forth and so on.
8-6-08 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
That's a lot of money. So, I talked to him again about the
possibility of another option, and another option for that is
50 percent of that number, which gets -- in fact, gives them
the ability to do all of the paperwork for us, and it's just
a lesser option, 5,000 a month instead of 10,000 a month.
It's not a full-service option. So, I think that's where you
-- we had talked about plugging in money for the
rehabilitation of that crossing and some other things; is
that correct?
MR. ODOM: We11, we discussed it, but the problem
with me, I don't have a firm number on that. I'm sure it's
going to be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to do
what we -- what I had talked to the engineer about. I don't
think it is as -- it is a modified deal, but I bet you we're
at 300,000 to do the project.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that was the amount
-- the exact amount comes when we refine the priority list
for these people to go to work for us.
MR. ODOM: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's where the exact
amount comes.
MR. ODOM: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The question before the
Court today is, are we going to put into your budget
sufficient funds for this Russ Reid group out of Washington
8-6-08 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
to work with us to try to gain those dollars we're looking
for, which is a couple million bucks or more?
MR. ODOM: You bet.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to say no.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Because I don't have a clue
what you're talking about.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We need to have an answer.
If we're not going to allow them to work with us, then it's
academic.
MR. ODOM: I would say it's worth trying. I don't
know what -- listening to that right there, it sounds like I
need $60,000. But --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I --
JUDGE TINLEY: That's what it sounds like to me.
MR. ODOM: That's what it sounded like to me. I
don't have 60,000 that I --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the whole question.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess my -- I'd have to be
convinced with a lot more information than I'm seeing that
that group can -- can come through with two or three million,
or whatever the -- or one or two million.
MR. ODOM: Talking about seven or eight million to
do the project.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or seven or eight million. If
8-6-08 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
we spend 60 that they're going to come through, I just find
that hard to believe.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, another issue on that
point is, with all of the politics going on in Washington
about the reduction of earmarks, that -- that puts a negative
connotation on the whole thing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we're going to hire a firm
for earmarks, I'd hire them for the U.S.D.A. lab, not for
this. I mean, I just think that's more a thing for the
community. If we think they can come through, I think that
something like that, which is an earmark, or has been --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that would be -- that
would be for KEDF to decide.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But I think -- I mean,
I just --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm not pushing. I'm just
saying if we're going to do it, this is the place to talk
about it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A full-service contract is
120; half-service contract is 60.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I need more information.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I have a small question about
a small amount of money to rent equipment for the possibility
of -- of getting the mud off the ball at the Ingram Dam so we
8-6-08 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
can tie the new cable on. We're going to need to rent a
pump. I have some guys lined up that are -- that have the
other equipment, but if we rent a 6-inch pump, say, for two
days, can you do that with what you got budgeted?
MR. ODOM: I sort of think I can in some project.
I may call it the west-end projects.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
MR. ODOM: You know.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I wanted to be sure that I
got that in, because that time's approaching.
MR. ODOM: I can't remember what they told me, but
it wasn't cheap, but it wasn't astronomical to rent something
from the Odessa Pump down there in Boerne.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: All we really need is a pump.
The other -- I think I have the other part of it possibly
worked out. I'm not for sure.
MR. ODOM: I think I can find the money. Now, if
it's tremendously high, then I won't have any hair left. I
don't have any now.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, not that much, so be
good, I guess.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Bruce, where are we going
I
to talk about the dam repairs?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's another issue, because
I do believe there's going to be some. I know Ingram has
8-6-08 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
some voids in it. You can see them. Get it drained, and it
will -- you'll see even more.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Is that it for Road and
Bridge? Thank you, sir. We're going to take about a 10-,
15-minute recess.
(Recess taken from 11:01 a.m. to 11:20 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order for
', our budget workshop. We want to move quickly to Animal
Control, 'cause we may have some issues to discuss with the
City relative to this, because it is a -- it's a service that
we do provide to the City, and they have traditionally
provided a portion of funding.
MS. ROMAN: I believe my -- the largest increase
for me would be my part-time salary. I did request 10,500,
and administration recommended 11,550. That would be for 12
weeks of summer help to relieve employees taking their
vacations, and part-time weekend -- part-time weekend kennel
worker for weekends and holidays. And right below that, on
my overtime, I've always had 4,000 in there. What I'm doing
is I'm having my employees take off rather than pay overtime.
JUDGE TINLEY: Can we reduce that?
MS. ROMAN: So we can definitely reduce that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Cut it in half?
MS. ROMAN: Cut it in half. I'd say 2,000.
8-6-08 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
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. ROMAN: If we go down to my radio repairs, I
had requested 8,900 for -- or 8,985 for the new radios.
Being that we're not going to need those any more -- well, I
need 200 in there, what I've always asked for for radio
repairs.
JUDGE TINLEY: We can do that.
MS. ROMAN: My lease copier, I requested 700.
However, it is going up to about 1,200, and that's because
I'm -- I'm currently paying approximately $53 per month, and
then I'm being billed quarterly for the -- the metering,
which is running about $120, and that's because we're having
to make -- because of all of the registrations, plus we're
making all the copies for the vets for the registration.
JUDGE TINLEY: 120 a month?
MS. ROMAN: No, a quarter. A quarter.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Another $500 -- $480.
MS. ROMAN: Right.
MS. HARGIS: Needs to go up to 1,200.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. ROMAN: Needs to go up to approximately 1,200.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. ROMAN: And my capital outlay, I requested
3,825, and that's for nine cat banks. The cat cages that we
currently have for our wild cat room, they're probably -- I
8-6-08 bwk
104
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 know -- well, they've been there since I've been with
the County, which has been almost 13 years, and they -- they
have holes in them. I've had to put sheet metal, and screw
sheet metal in there. And I have to have those. That also
includes the new cages for one of the new trucks.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think I -- I didn't modify
that at all.
MS. ROMAN: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other issues?
MS. ROMAN: No, sir, that's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any questions for Ms. Roman
from any member of the Court?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you got any issues, Ms. Hargis?
MS. HARGIS: Well, a thought just crossed my mind,
'cause I didn't realize that she needed a cage for the truck.
They still have money left in their line item from purchasing
Environmental Health and Animal Control --
JUDGE TINLEY: Take that out of the capital?
MS. HARGIS: Yeah, the money -- go ahead and buy
that cage now.
MS. ROMAN: What do we have?
MS. HARGIS: We have $26,000 in there.
MS. ROMAN: Oh, great.
JUDGE TINLEY: So we can zero that one out?
8-6-08 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
MS. HARGIS: No, she -- well, yeah. If you want to
just take all the cages --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Take it all out of it.
MS. ROMAN: Okay.
MS. HARGIS: Okay. Just buy all the cages and do
it now.
MS. ROMAN: Perfect.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. HARGIS: They did an excellent job on
purchasing those vehicles and getting the prices down.
MR. RUARK: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. RUARK: Which line item is that? Capital?
MS. ROMAN: Is that it?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Thank you, Janie.
JUDGE TINLEY: I tried to change it, but it's in
detail, so I can't do it.
MR. RUARK: Yeah, I got it. Here we go.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay. Now, gentlemen, we've
got some issues that involve fiscal capital expenditure
implications in our dealings with the City. We have a
meeting with them scheduled for noon today, and we need to
kind of reorient ourselves. I suppose -- why don't we take a
look right now at City/County. For those of you that are
waiting here from Juvenile Probation, Environmental Health,
8-6-08 bwk
106
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
Extension, County-Sponsored, Court Compliance, and County
Auditor, we're going to have to reschedule you. Not sure
whether it'll be this afternoon or a week from today.
Probably more likely a week from today.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just do it a week from today.
That way they can go about their business.
JUDGE TINLEY: Again, at 9 o'clock in the morning.
I apologize. Next Wednesday seem okay for the rest of you
guys?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll miss that, Judge. I'm
out of town from the 18th to the 20th.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's go to County -- I mean
City/County very quickly. Those are located in various
places, I think.
MS. HARGIS: Yeah, they are.
JUDGE TINLEY: You've got some in Health and
Emergency Services. Let's take a quick look at that one.
That is 10-630, which is going to be --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 10-630, got it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Page 62.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 65, I got.
JUDGE TINLEY: You got 65, you got 62.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm three pages off. That's
8-6-08 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
not unusual.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How'd you do that?
JUDGE TINLEY: The major portion of that is EMS
contract. Buster, have we gotten -- have we gotten current
numbers from them, or is that the current number?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, you have -- somebody
in this system has the -- their request, yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's not the current number.
MS. HARGIS: I don't have the City's request. I
put what we agreed to in our letter.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What I -- what Bill and I have
been told by -- through Scott Gross and Mack Hamilton at our
various meetings -- they keep on bringing all that stuff back
up, that they have implemented all of the county
recommendations over the past few years about pay -- or
collecting money and billing and all that stuff, and
they've -- they are making a bunch of money. Bottom line is
that they're coming up with -- I think they -- this year's
projected budget total is down 100,000 or something, you
know, a lot of money.
JUDGE TINLEY: A deficit, you're talking about?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The deficit's down -- been
reduced substantially. But their recommendation is that we
pick up a greater share of that. They want us to pick up
75 percent of their budget of that deficit, 'cause that's
8-6-08 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
108
kind of -- that's where it is. And --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you want to know how I'm
going to vote on that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I bet you I can predict.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You sure can.
JUDGE TINLEY: We don't need to ask you now. We'll
hear about that later, I'm sure.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I hope y'all do a kumbayah
before we get in there with them today.
MS. HARGIS: Okay, 215 is what they had originally
given us.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I checked with Jody, and
Jody assured me that the EMS budget arrived here and she did
whatever she's supposed to do with it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The City's been changing their
numbers at a very rapid pace, what I've been getting from
them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is the current City
position? I know the percentage, but what's the dollar
amount?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let me hand this out. I think
it's going to be -- this replaces this one, because I had
some bad numbers in there.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The red and black one is
I trash?
8-6-08 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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, throw that in the trash,
the red and black one. And we went to this because it's a --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Here's an extra copy if
somebody needs it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I need to explain. The second
page shows -- the top group of numbers of June 16th County
proposal shows that's what the County sent over to the City
in June. Below that is the City proposal that came back from
the City. I think we've all seen those. What I did, I took
those numbers, put them in a spreadsheet format, and totaled
them up so we can kind of see what we're doing. Fire doesn't
seem to be -- it's just a flat service that we're paying for,
and so I really didn't include it in the sum totals, because
it doesn't -- the City wouldn't have a number there. And if
you look down under the City's newest proposal, they want the
County to pay 75 percent of the EMS, among other things.
'~, COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would put us at 255 as
opposed to --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 138. Those are their most
recent numbers.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 258. There's the 181 we're
now paying.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MS. HARGIS: I must not have the same ones y'a11
I have .
8-6-08 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 OEHLER: There's one right there.
JUDGE TINLEY: You may need this one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you see a 181 on here, or
you just know that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, it's up here on top,
I where EMS is.
MS. HARGIS: So, they -- okay. They want us to go
to 181 on the EMS?
JUDGE TINLEY: No, they want us to go to 258.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 258.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 258 is where they want us
to go.
MS. HARGIS: Where's that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're looking at -- the top
proposal is what we proposed. The second one down is what
the City proposed back to us.
MS. HARGIS: The second one? Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A point that I'm sure that
we all understand and know about, this 4 percent annual
increase, I don't know that we can do that to future budgets.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't do any of this with
future budgets. This is all -- this is kind of a plan.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The language, then, of
"4 percent annual increase" needs to drop out of the
conversation. We've told them we're not going to agree to
8-6-08 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
4 percent.
JUDGE TINLEY: They can't either.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is just a plan based on
the numbers. Wherever we go into the future, we can't commit
any of these numbers beyond one year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But those are the two
proposals. If you look at it, the County's first proposal
back to them was very much in favor of us, bottom line.
Their proposal back to us was in favor of them, 100 percent,
bottom line. The second page -- or the top page only, this
page is some numbers that I came up with that are kind of
keeping in line with what I think we've been talking about,
the direction we're trying to go, and keeping them much more
in balance. That's kind of a recommended starting point for
today.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner? On EMS, for
example, on the top page --
(Low-voice discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm sorry?
MS. HARGIS: Nothing.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: She was irritating me.
~I JUDGE TINLEY: Is there anything new about that?
MS. HARGIS: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bill, you had a question?
8-6-08 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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought -- EMS on the
'07-'08 budget, we were only -- their number is 227, and
we're at 220. We were only 7,000 away from 50 percent. That
was based on some of that stuff he gave us.
~ COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. There's -- these numbers
vary a lot. You know, I just don't -- we don't need to get
into too much of the details of some of those numbers. It's
more of, bottom line, how close we are. We're talking about
probably within 50,000, because Animal Control, I didn't take
Ingram out. I mean, it gets so complicated when you start
looking at this. I didn't deduct Ingram out in the future
year, because I wasn't sure what we were going -- we haven't
discussed what we're going to do with Ingram in future years.
You know, it's basically referred -- it has budgets remaining
constant, which isn't going to happen, but it's just kind of
a -- directionally, where things are going if we kind of
adopt what we've been talking about adopting.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you going to share this
with the City guys today, or are we going to work from this
or what?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If you all like the -- this
page better than anything else that we've seen, I'd say we
start working off that. I mean, working with the City, in my
experience, has been -- we're better off working off our
worksheet than their worksheet.
8-6-08 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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, I mean --
MS. HARGIS: I agree.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think -- and this, you
know, is keeping it relatively budget-neutral, total
expenditure-wise, in the city and the county, where we are
right now, for the next three years. Fourth and fifth year,
the County starts picking up a bigger part of the burden.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which -- which we need to
let everybody know is -- was the City's original position,
revenue-neutral.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. This plan, you know, is
I
splitting up, giving them the library, basically, long-term.
We're taking the airport and animal control long-term, and
trying to keep the dollars -- and getting there over a number
of years to keep the dollars from hitting either party
significantly in any one budget year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask a dumb question.
Do you anticipate airport going up at all?
MS. HARGIS: I didn't increase a lot of them.
Library stayed constant. I just put last year's numbers in,
'cause I've never -- I don't think I've seen any budget
number for the airport.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We haven't.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: See, the City's got so many
8-6-08 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
numbers we don't have copies of, I don't know what's -- so I
just -- it's kind of a mixture of our accurate numbers and
their numbers, which we just don't know, so I just used last
year's numbers if I didn't know.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, in terms of the
airport, we really need to know what that number is projected
to be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we're still -- oh, yeah.
And this is more just a philosophy. If this is where we're
tying to go, I think this makes sense. If this isn't where
we're trying to go long-term --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you a question.
And I grew up in west Kerr County too, so Bruce and I think
alike in some ways. Which is scary. But you're talking
about through the -- in the near future, you decrease our
contribution to the library, and slowly let them have it, and
then we start taking over more of the airport and animal
shelter, et cetera. What happened to the common sense way to
look at this thing, is we own half of the airport, they own
half of the airport, and we own the animal shelter, and they
own the library. They own the library; they need to pay for
their library. Why do we -- why do we pay one nickel to the
library?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's fine. I --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Airport, we own half, they
8-6-08 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
own half. We need to do the half.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, part of the answer to
your question is that --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And animal shelter, we own
it; we need to pick up the animals in the county.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Kerr County residents who
live outside the city limits use the library, but not to the
extent those within the city use it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What they need to do is
charge those people that walk in there that are county --
county residents, charge them a different fee or something.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't disagree with that
philosophy. I really don't.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then the animal thing,
we need to pick our animals up outside the city limits; it's
simple as that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What about inside the city
limits? They're county residents.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, well, we can argue that
all day long.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know, but they -- I mean --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, that doesn't fly. It's
just like the taxing thing; it just flat doesn't fly.
Doesn't work.
JUDGE TINLEY: Need to pair him up with Councilman
8-6-08 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
Hamilton.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That might happen here
shortly.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You need to sit right next
to him today.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It might happen today.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, Councilman Hamilton has
very little -- what he told Bill and I late yesterday, very
little optimism we're going to have any kind of agreement
today, so we'll probably need to meet --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He may be smarter than we
think.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We'll be meeting with them very
soon again.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which is one reason why, if
you look at the draft of the airport governance agreement, I
believe it reflects that we pull the finances out of it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So we can get to a basic
agreement.
JUDGE TINLEY: Does it provide that the parties
shall -- shall provide for funding of airport --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, as --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- operations and capital
requirements generally?
8-6-08 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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As on Exhibit A or
whatever, yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: As we agree to.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As agreed or whatever, yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's -- I mean, I don't
have a problem going down that approach. I just didn't -- I
was --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that approach hasn't
worked.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It doesn't work.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It doesn't work, but I have no
problem with it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the way you look at
it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I just think that we --
it would be helpful if we could have a more than one-year
plan. You can't budget for it, but we can at least have a
plan. This accomplishes some of the things we had talked
about and some of the things they wanted, and for the first
three to four years, stays relatively budget-neutral within
the parties.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll see where it goes.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, just, for instance,
8-6-08 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
25
this year, the proposed budget for animal control that we
just did is going to be somewhere around 300 and --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 40,000.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: $335,000, $338,00.0.
~ COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. Less than I have here.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And so -- and so, you know,
if we were sharing it 50/50, you know, that's $169,000
apiece.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And on this sheet it shows
that, you know, it's 120,095.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, last year.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If we want to talk about
actual numbers of what's being -- our budget's proposed for
this year for these things, we can go with their actual
budget and revenues and all that stuff, so that we get an
accurate feeling, or as close to accurate as we can get.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that -- the spreadsheet
format is very helpful to me, but we've got to get the right
numbers from the City to make it work.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I like this. I had to
figure it out, but now that I've got it figured out, it looks
good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
8-6-08 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
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think it's beneficial for
them to know what our actual costs are going to be in the
animal control.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Because that's one that we --
you know, we're proposing to totally fund.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably be really helpful on
this to have a total cost column, and then the City and the
County.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mm-hmm. Well --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, do we want to talk off of
this in 20 minutes?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All right with me.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm sure we're going to be talking
off of a whole lot of things.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay by me.
JUDGE TINLEY: This certainly is probably one of
the several.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you going to introduce
this, Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: Huh? I'm going to let you introduce
it, probably.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't you introduce me to
introduce it?
8-6-08 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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who's chairing this, you or
~ the mayor?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He is, 'cause it's our host.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: I see. Me first, huh?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: I see.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You're the leader.
JUDGE TINLEY: I see.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You're the lead dog in the
~ pack.
JUDGE TINLEY: I see, said the blind man.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The rat pack.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I'm sure, Buster, we'll
have plenty of opportunity for you to make comments, which I
tried to get across to Councilman Hamilton the first four,
five minutes. He still brings up too many -- he went back to
day one, brings up all the City/County stuff.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Buster, I agree with your way
of thinking totally on that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hear, hear.
MS. HYDE: Go, one. Go, one.
JUDGE TINLEY: You might ask the Sheriff to loan
you a gun before you go to this meeting.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would you like to go with
8-6-08 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
me?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'm going. I want to hear you
say it.
JUDGE TINLEY: At this point, we may want to come
back later on this afternoon. So, at this point, I'm going
to recess this workshop so that we can attend this
City/County joint meeting, and we'll go from there.
~~, (Recess taken from 11:42 a.m. to 3:40 p.m.)
(Commissioner Oehler was not present.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's -- let's reconvene the
budget workshop that we recessed at approximately 11:40 this
morning. We'll take up Environmental Health.
MR. GARCIA: All right. I have my postage that I
wanted to show the trend of about $1,300. I believe it's set
at 14 -- or it was at 14.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's at 1,000, I believe, isn't
it?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, I cut it by 400.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Because?
JUDGE TINLEY: Because of historical use.
MS. HARGIS: Which one?
MR. GARCIA: The postage. I have a -- 2005-2006
shows 1,376. And then 2006-2007 shows 1,296. And then the
current is 633 right now.
8-6-08 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
122
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you think you're still
going to get to that, even though --
MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 1,200? 1,300?
JUDGE TINLEY: I --
MR. GARCIA: $1,300. That was -- I was requesting
to go back or just leave it.
JUDGE TINLEY: 1,300?
MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're there.
MR. GARCIA: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: What else you got?
MR. GARCIA: Also, I have -- I wanted to show, too,
that we -- I spoke to Jeannie, and we removed another $1,200
off the -- the vehicle gas and oil, maintenance. That should
show there also.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's up on that, Jeannie?
JUDGE TINLEY: You requested 28,311.
MR. GARCIA: And then it was -- it was less than
28. 20,948.
MS. HARGIS: He was at 22; we took him down again.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: To 20,948, is where he is currently?
MS. HARGIS: Mm-hmm.
8-6-08 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
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, that's where we are.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything else, Ray?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask a question. The
oil and gas issue, is that because of new vehicles?
MR. GARCIA: That was based on the -- the prior was
based on the two jeeps and one truck; the two jeeps
full-time, and the one pickup truck that was used two days a
week. Now we have four vehicles; the three new ones, and
then the old white pickup, that are all full-time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just checking to see if you
knew.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That still seems high to me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It does, doesn't it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If you go back to -- you
shouldn't have any repairs, 'cause they're all under
guarantee -- no, under warranty.
MR. GARCIA: We didn't. It was refigured. It
I was --
MS. HARGIS: He's got P.M.I. with it.
MR. GARCIA: Right, we have P.M.I. on it. It was
refigured at --
MS. HARGIS: 640.
MR. GARCIA: -- 4.18.
MS. HYDE: Originally, it was at 5 bucks a gallon.
8-6-08 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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's this?
MS. HARGIS: Then we changed it to 4.18. We can go
back and change --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You need to change it to, like,
3.60, 3.65.
MS. HYDE: Same as the Sheriff.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 3.65.
MS. HYDE: If you go to Animal Control's, everybody
was at 5, and then 4.18.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You don't pay tax.
MR. GARCIA: We can bring that down.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You operate off the same
gas card the Sheriff's Department does?
MR. GARCIA: No. As a matter of fact, I spoke to
the Sheriff, and -- again, starting off new in the
department, I was asking why I was using something -- I
thought we all had to use what the Sheriff was using, but I'm
going to establish an account with where the Sheriff uses.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, you're just buying it
random at the pump now?
MR. GARCIA: We're buying it from Valero.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So you're paying tax, and
you should not be paying tax.
MR. GARCIA: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're paying road tax, state tax.
8-6-08 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
MR. GARCIA: State tax.
JUDGE TINLEY: Twelve cents, yeah.
MR. GARCIA: Yes.
MS. HARGIS: I figured only a 23-cent difference.
I don't know where -- who's got the 38 cents, because --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think he's just saying
that's about what it is between --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He has the federal tax.
MS. HARGIS: We looked; he had his filled for
about, what, four or five months. He brought it in my office
'cause he had another problem, so he had asked for all these
bills, and in the comparison with the market, it was kind of
an average of 23 cents lower at Maxey.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're figuring -- how many miles a
week are you driving total on all vehicles? Is that the
2205?
MS. HYDE: It's in the notes.
MS. HARGIS: It's in the notes.
MR. GARCIA: If you look at it, I got it all
scheduled out there for 2,400 per truck. That's --
JUDGE TINLEY: That's a month?
MR. GARCIA: 2,400.
JUDGE TINLEY: Per month?
MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir. Eighteen -- 18 and 15. The
21's are the D.R.'s. The 24 is the Code Enforcement, mine.
8-6-08 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
And then the 15 --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, you got 7,500 miles a
month, right?
MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: And you divide that by 17 miles per
gallon, that's 441 gallons a month. Why are you multiplying
that by five days?
MR. GARCIA: I'm sorry?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, you got 7,500 miles total per
month, correct?
MR. GARCIA: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: And times 12 months, divided by 17.
That's going to give you 5,294 gallons per year, times 3.65.
That comes out to 19,325, roughly.
MR. GARCIA: Right.
MS. HARGIS: That's what I have.
MR. GARCIA: 19,323.
MS. HARGIS: Right at 20,000, and he's got his
P.M.I.'s in there, so that's about right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. If that's the mileage you're
driving, then that's roughly the fuel mileage you're going to
get. Yeah, you're on target.
MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, Commissioner Oehler's
coming in.
8-6-08 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
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, he is? Good.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He just called from El Paso.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He's on his way back?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: On his way back, yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He flew to El Paso; he's
driving back.
MR. GARCIA: All right.
JUDGE TINLEY: I thought you were listening for
I him.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can't hear you.
MR. GARCIA: Okay. And also, I handed you a short
stat sheet here. I heard Commissioner Letz mention the red.
Nobody likes the red, but this is what I have here. This is
for the extra body that was the part-time, and I'm requesting
in that part-time a full-time officer, okay? Now, if you
follow along with me here, I'm showing the trend here --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, well --
MR. GARCIA: -- of 2005, 2006, 2007, and then
to-date, 2008. Now, the resolved cases of solid waste and
O.S.S.F. together in 2005 was 180, okay? Excuse me, 141,
okay? Which left unresolved 39. Now we move to 2006. 198
cases; 93 resolved, 105 unresolved. We're moving along to
2007. 163 cases; 10 resolved, 153 unresolved. To-date,
2008, 162; 125 resolved and 38 unresolved. And those are all
pending or in court currently with the County Attorney or the
8-6-08 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
J.P.'s awaiting jury trial.
', JUDGE TINLEY: You're catching up big-time, then,
aren't you?
MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're catching up so fast you need
one less person.
MR. GARCIA: No, sir. Now, I'm going to show
I You --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's where I thought he was
going.
MR. GARCIA: Let's go to the red there, 335, along
with the O.S.S.F. unresolved cases of 230, for a total of
unresolved year-to-date of 565. Now, what caused this, okay,
a part-time enforcement officer, again, there's no way he
could keep up with the caseload. Now, in the past, the
31-day notice, by law, had to go out. It still does. It was
followed up with another notice of 31 days again, which
didn't have -- wasn't necessary, and then another notice, and
then it stopped. The enforcement was never followed up,
okay? Now, if you flip to the next page, it shows 2007 and
2008. Okay, my total cases showing on 2007 -- now, this is
coming back when I started back in June through December of
2007, okay. Again, the total cases for O.S.S.F. were 104,
and the total citations were 3. The solid waste was 163, and
the total citations was 8. Okay. They were all Class C, one
8-6-08 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
Class A misdemeanor. And then the four arrests that were
subsequent to ID'ing some of these violators led to their
arrest because they were wanted by the County.
Still on 2007, you move down to traffic stops. One
traffic stop in 2007 was one of the pumper trucks -- in solid
waste, a sewage pumper truck was leaking sewage on the road.
Effected a stop on him, okay. Then we see all zeros for the
rest of that year. Now we move to 2008. The O.S.S.F. cases,
50; the solid waste is 162. Total citations for O.S.S.F. is
21, and total citations for solid waste is 23. Now, what's
causing those cases to drastically lower is the enforcement
part of it. Now we're actually holding these people
accountable of the 31-day notice, or when we see a violation
out there, we act on it there. We send the 31-day notice
out. If they don't comply -- what we try to do, ultimate
goal is to get compliance and abatement, but if they don't
comply and if they do not wish to comply, then we go into the
citation mode. We start issuing citations every day, because
each day is a new violation for solid waste in the Health and
Safety Code.
Now, the numbers move down for the traffic stops.
They also have risen up also 11 for the traffic stops, and
then 7 arrests, 2 of those felonies, and all taken to the
county jail. Again, 134 abated for solid waste, and 42
abated for O.S.S.F. The follow-up cases, 88 for O.S.S.F.,
8-6-08 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
and solid waste is 263. Repeat cases or repeat violators,
2 for O.S.S.F. and 46 for solid waste. Then your notice of
public nuisance violations, for O.S.S.F., 14 and 99.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tell me what a repeat case
is.
MR. GARCIA: It's just repeat violators. We --
after we've effected the law, which is what's required by our
nuisance abatement program, we go in, we send a 31-day
notice. They either abate or they don't abate. Then we
effect citations until the Judge -- or they settle out, and
then we start all over again once that case is closed. So,
once they pay their fine and that, I have to start all over
~ again.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, they're on the same --
it's the -- it's a --
MR. GARCIA: The whole thing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Repeat is on the same
system?
MR. GARCIA: Yes, on the same system.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not another piece of
property?
MR. GARCIA: Same system again, or same violation
of solid waste. Now, the last page, I break it down for the
problem, the current procedure, and the solution to the
problem, okay? Now, keep in mind, as the -- also, as the
8-6-08 bwk
131
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
enforcement for follow-up for solid waste, public nuisance,
and illegal dumping, both random and chronic sites. Now, you
all remember some of the notable cases that we had. One, for
instance, is the Roy Street case, Ms. Lara. Okay? That was
due to failure to follow up. It was two years in the making.
It came in as a complaint, and then the letters again went
out. We sent -- the department had sent out letters of
violation again and again and again, and never followed up on
those violations, but we're not doing that any more.
Required by law, the 31-day notice, or whatever the D.R. sets
for that type of violation. We act on it there, then, and
now, okay? Thirty-one days -- or 10 days after that notice
is gone, boom, you get your citation, or you either come into
compliance, okay?
Again, a lot of these cases -- and, again, the
notable one, the Roy Street, was lack of follow-up. Another
one, Dave's Place in Center Point, same issue. It was a 2005
case; now it's back in enforcement again. It has always been
in violation, but we failed to follow up. And, again,
there's notice after notice after notice, but no enforcement
8-6-08 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
Department is that the County's not going to do anything.
And, again, time and time again, when I show up and cite
these people after their violation, the first thing I hear is
was coming back," and the wife will say -- or the husband
will say, "No, I told you that they wouldn't come back." So
they start arguing because they're so used to us not
enforcing the law. Well, now we are, and this is showing a
progression out there, and we're setting a trend of enforcing
these laws.
Another case in point is Castlecombs. Started out
in 2004, and it's still a major issue, and the County
Attorney has that, along with T.C.E.Q. now, and we're heading
to -- for that to be resolved. Hill Country Camp is another
notable one. That was a public hearing -- started out as a
complaint years ago, and now it's finally coming into some
resolution. Blue Ridge -- I can go on and on. Hunt School,
West Creek. Again, Cade Loop, Hill River Country Estates,
Saddlewood, and then we come down to Ellerbracht, Crosscut,
the Taylor case, Scenic Hills, and Madrona. All these solid
waste cases have been out there for years, okay? They're
finally abated. We've taken care of them, with a rough
estimate of almost 100,000 tons of solid waste.
8-6-08 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
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What, now? Say that again?
MR. GARCIA: A rough estimate, because we're still
getting numbers in from the Ellerbracht place, of tonnage of
solid waste, we have about 100,000 tons of solid waste that's
been abated since starting back. Now, moving back to my
little point here, the current procedure that I'm doing now
is enforcing all the state standards and laws in the Kerr
County O.S.S.F. program and solid waste, public nuisance,
illegal dumping laws. The notice of violations are sent out
one time and one time only. There's no more three and four
notices. You either abate by law or you get a citation. The
follow-up after the 31-day notice, all -- they're all
inspected for compliance or noncompliance. And my solution
to the problem is -- is that we need that full-time peace
officer to effect that law.
I -- again, I'm running most of my time now out in
the field trying to set a precedent out there so we don't
have these repeat problems, and we do have a good hold on it
now. But this entails a lot of follow-up enforcement,
because the repeat violations are there and will continue to
happen until we have set a standard. The O.S.S.F. program
has been streamlined now, so that, in itself, with a little
kicking and screaming now, is set up to -- all I'm doing
there is enforcing the minimum state standards laws, so --
with a full-time officer instead of a part-time, 'cause the
8-6-08 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
134
part-time would never be able to enforce these laws.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Garcia, looking at the numbers
that you've presented to us, it -- it appears that you're
making a significant impact, and there's a lot of catch-up
that's been going on here. Wouldn't you agree?
MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Granted, even the 2008 cases, you
got some that are unresolved, but the percentage -- number
one, the percentage of resolved and unresolved are
significantly -- the resolved are significantly increased.
(Commissioner Oehler entered the courtroom.)
JUDGE TINLEY: But probably as telling as anything
is looking at the complaint cases also. The follow-up that
has been done in the solid waste and -- and O.S.S.F. are up
significantly. It strikes me that -- that you're making some
significant headway with what you got right now.
MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir, I am.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But what he's got right
now, Judge, he's losing two days a week of what he had.
Right?
', MR. GARCIA: Yes. It's -- my problem is, you know,
i
trying to maintain and sustain what I'm doing now, versus in
the past, which I don't have any numbers but goose eggs to
show you, because I don't have any stats from then until now
as far as the type of enforcement that we're doing. What
8-6-08 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
135
going by the law, and which is bringing everybody into
compliance. So, I haven't created anything new; I'm just
enforcing it. Now, the problem comes in -- the problem lies
in how do I sustain and maintain that? I am going out a lot
more in the field, and my duties in the office now are
lacking, because I have to put this enforcement in to try to
I don't correct the enforcement out with the professionals in
the O.S.S.F. industry and on the solid waste and illegal
dumping side, it's -- it's always going to be -- I'm always
going to be playing catch-up. Again, I'll never be able to
get a handle on crime totally, but our precedent's out there,
and with the standard that we're setting now, everybody will
be aware of that if I can sustain and maintain enforcement.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there any way you can switch
the part-time slot that you have open to an office slot, and
convert one of your office slots to an enforcement slot?
MR. GARCIA: We did that, sir, for Jesse's
position. He works O.S.S.F. and solid waste. It was a clerk
position, and we changed it into that, and he's a significant
part of this. But he does a lot of administrative up until
that point of sending out violations, inspecting for the
8-6-08 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
D.R.'s to keep them on the O.S.S.F. professional cases, and
the planning materials that we have going on. Jesse will do
the investigation, but up until that point. After that, if
you don't get compliance, which nine times out of ten we're
not getting compliance, then we go into the citation. But
that's what we did for that -- that one. We had two clerks;
now I only have one, because we changed that position.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, there's one clerk and three
full-timers, right?
MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Jesse --
MR. GARCIA: Right, Jesse, Tish, and Roy. Tish and
Roy are the D.R.'s.
I
~'~ COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, D.R.'s.
MR. GARCIA: But that's the number one problem in
that department, is trying to maintain and sustain the actual
enforcement. And, again, it's nothing new to what we're
doing here. It's the law that these professionals in the
O.S.S.F. industry are bound by, because they're licensed
~, through the state. Every action they take, every step in the
O.S.S.F. program is a misdemeanor if they don't comply.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, going back to the
same thing, if we added a -- a part-time office person, would
that help allow Jesse to have more time to do the
enforcement?
8-6-08 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
137
MR. GARCIA: It would. Again, but
administratively, again, what I need is that officer to go
out there, in effect, after Jesse had reached that point with
to sustain this, he follows up, but only up until
administration.
MS. HYDE: He can't write citations.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Say that again?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He cannot write citations.
MR. GARCIA: As Code Enforcement officer, he can't
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I see. I mean, you clearly
have made huge inroads in your department. My personal
preference is to leave it the way it is, not add any other
personnel until next budget year, and look at it after you --
'cause, I mean, working through the backlog, you're doing a
great job getting rid of those. Your enforcements,
everything you said, I totally agree with. I'd just rather
let it go a year before we add another full-time person.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, the part-time --
part-time option, it would seem to me, would be a pretty good
option in that he's already giving up two days a week. He
had a part-time person in there; am I correct? And so he's
8-6-08 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
going to be short going forward two days a week in that
connection. So, if we can allow him a part-time for at least
three days a week, he can perhaps keep up and work on the
abatement and some of the backlog.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you're right, if you
can find the right part-time. But I think the odds of
finding a part-time that can do that, the possibilities I'm
hearing are pretty slim. He needs a full-time person,
training-wise, you know, to do that. I mean, you can't find
that qualification, somebody who can write citations, with a
part-time person.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, that's probably true.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ray, you said -- there was a
comment, "cannot write citations," and then you started to
say "unless." Unless what?
MR. GARCIA: We had a peace officer.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. GARCIA: As a Code Enforcement officer. Rex
and Ilse had already established that, that --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. GARCIA: -- our county doesn't fit that statute
for that. He can still be a Code Enforcement officer and
work -- do what he's doing now. Now, here's another point to
that also. Rex had sent out a memo when we first enacted, in
2005, the Kerr County Nuisance Abatement Program, which said
8-6-08 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
139
-- it also states on the court order that you have to be a
full-time employee of the county to effect that program, and
which I designated Jesse as my representative for that
abatement program. Again, for that part-time person, they --
in 2005, myself or Eddie, at that time, was not allowed to
effect that program, and that was a memo that was sent out
through Rex's office.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Since you were -- since you're
going down a part-time person from this budget to last year's
budget, what if we put in the dollars for a part-time person,
-- put the dollars in for a part-time employee; January or
February, whatever, midyear, whenever midyear is, come back
to us. We can see how the department is going. There could
then be enough funding for a half a year for a full-time
employee, and we can address it at that time and move funds
into that. That way you have funds in the budget to look at
it midyear, and that's keeping your person -- your account --
your budget basically neutral from last year.
MR. GARCIA: I would definitely agree with that. I
would take you up on that offer.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's just fine. I think
that'll work.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That way we're kind of seeing
if it will work. We're keeping the personnel count neutral.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, you're going to fund a half of
8-6-08 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
an employee, in essence?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, in part-time.
JUDGE TINLEY: In a part-time. He's going to sit
tight for the first half of the year to see how his numbers
work out, and --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Come to us.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- if he's in worse shape, if he's
'~ going downhill between now and then, then you'll have enough
to bring somebody on full-time for half a year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: I thought I understood that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it's basically
budget-neutral from an employee standpoint this year. It
will have an impact next year or two years from now's budget.
JUDGE TINLEY: Some would call that smoke and
mirrors, but I think that's creative thinking.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, you know, the thing is,
he can justify what he's doing because they're working.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, exactly.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And they're making headway,
and they, you know, have shown us what they can do with
working cases and -- and writing citations and doing things.
And it's going to eventually clean up this county that has
gotten pretty dirty over the years.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's been a big help, you know.
8-6-08 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
141
And I think you're -- you're being honest and truthful with
us when you say you can't find a part-time person with the
qualifications you need. I would agree with that. That's
~!, pretty -- it's either all or nothing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I tell you, the guy that he
has down there is a quality -- quality employee. He gets his
job done and dots all the I's and crosses the T's, and he's
courteous.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes, the whole office is.
'I COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, they really are.
i
~, Don't get the big head, cowboy. We can cut this thing too.
MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: What else we got, Ray?
MR. GARCIA: That was --
JUDGE TINLEY: I didn't beat up on you anywhere
I else?
MR. GARCIA: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: I must have -- I must have been lax.
MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm sorry I was late, but I
wasn't told we'd be reconvening.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did you really jump out of
helicopters into the ocean in the nighttime?
MR. GARCIA: Most of the time. That's the only
good time to do it.
8-6-08 bwk
142
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: We've got a weird one here
on our hands, boys. I can tell you that.
MR. GARCIA: That doesn't happen any more. Not
unless Rusty gets some kind of new program going.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, no.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: People that jump out of
perfectly good planes and helicopters are nuts; they ain't
working for me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In the middle of the night
into the ocean.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, on top of it.
MR. GARCIA: Is that it? Any more questions?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sounds good.
I', COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Thank you, Ray. Appreciate
your work.
MR. GARCIA: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Juvenile Probation.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, the Judge said --
I said, "Judge, what about Bruce?" And he said, "Oh, hell,
he doesn't need to be here." Like that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That sounds about right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Buster insisted that we
call you.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I was glad somebody did.
8-6-08 bwk
143
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: I did, didn't I?
MS. HYDE: He did.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 57.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What number?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How about Page 57? For
~, everybody except Bruce.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, mine's 54.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, what part of this do we
have any authority over? All of it?
JUDGE TINLEY: Actually, it doesn't make any
difference right now, because the Juvenile Board is not --
has not considered it.
MR. DAVIS: It's not gone to Juvenile --
JUDGE TINLEY: So, it -- good point.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there any big changes from
last year?
MR. DAVIS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you go over the big
changes?
MR. DAVIS: Yes, sir. Line Item 10-570-482,
Alternative Housing, is the significant -- that's going to be
the big thing. The salaries we put in, because we have to
have our salaries approved beforehand. I couldn't tell you
that we put in the 10 percent increase, as those funds are
8-6-08 bwk
144
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
allocated; however, we will actually only pay what the County
matches. If the County receives a COLA, if the County sees
an increase, we will do the same. If not, then we'll use
those funds for some other thing, probably alternative
housing, because if we're going to have a deficit, that's
where it's going to be. With that being said, I'll tell you
the increase is based on -- we're detaining more children,
short version.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You -- say that again?
MR. DAVIS: We are detaining more children, is the
short version.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, it's not a per diem
increase as much as it is a volume increase?
MR. DAVIS: Right now, it's not a per diem
increase, that's correct. Kevin's kept his rate. The
majority of the facilities that we contract with, we are not
seeing -- in fact, I can't think of any of the facilities we
contract with that we've seen a rate increase. We have all
the new contracts, and no one at this point is raising their
rates. Now, whether that changes next year, I don't know,
but right now, no. The increase is coming from more children
being detained, number one. Number two, more children in
facilities, and then number three, the children that are
being detained -- well, I don't know that it would be fair to
say they're being detained longer, but we are having more
8-6-08 bwk
145
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
children -- we have more bed days. That's basically the
short version.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask a question about
it, Jason, please.
MR. DAVIS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The alternate housing, do
you consider our facility -- our juvenile facility as
alternate housing?
JUDGE TINLEY: Absolutely.
MR. DAVIS: Yes, sir. That is the primary.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, our facility is the
primary on this money here?
MR. DAVIS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: They get the vast majority of those
funds.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do -- are we still
looking -- I remember a few years ago, maybe under another
judge, but sometimes this character here, but that we send
kids to other facilities outside of Kerrville because of
different treatment facility issues. Are we still doing
that?
MR. DAVIS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that's this money here,
isn't it?
MR. DAVIS: That is correct, yes, sir. Yes, sir.
8-6-08 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
146
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. DAVIS: We have preadjudication,
postadjudication. Basically, before conviction, or before
the child is found guilty or adjudicated, and then after.
Once the child has been adjudicated or found guilty -- our
facility is a preadjudication-only facility; therefore, we
can hold them, but we can't provide services. Whether it be
substance abuse, --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
MR. DAVIS: -- intensive counseling, sex offender
treatment, any of the services, boot camp facility, we don't
have that ability to provide those services. Therefore, we
must contract with private facilities in order to provide
those services to juveniles. Some of these funds go to that
purpose and go to that end, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does there -- is there --
can you see a trend -- a new trend of any sort of -- I mean,
you know, narcotics, of course, is always a part of the game,
and I understand sexual stuff is part of it. Is there
anything new? Is there a new kind of treatment that is on
the rise of some sort?
MR. DAVIS: Not significantly enough that I would
say that this is a pattern. You know, we might have
anomalies from time to time. We might go along and see a --
a little blip in sexual offenses, meaning that we might,
8-6-08 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
147
MR. DAVIS: -- that we're seeing any kind of
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was just curious about
MR. DAVIS: I don't see -- again, actually, our
referrals of cases we're getting are fewer. We're actually
seeing a slight drop in the number of cases, as we are
statewide in juvenile referrals. Unfortunately, the kids
that we're seeing, we're seeing either a higher degree of
offenses or children with more, quote-unquote, specialized
needs, meaning that they're -- they've got a lot harder
background, meaning with their family most often. Another
big, big, significant problem that's going to affect, in my
best guess and overall opinion, every county in the state of
Texas, is one of the reasons that we're seeing this increase
is because the Legislature did away with the Court's ability
to sentence juveniles to T.Y.C. for misdemeanor offenses. If
we have a child, he can go out and commit 25 misdemeanor
offenses, and the only thing we can do is ask that we put him
in a placement, a private placement. T.Y.C. won't touch them
8-6-08 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
148
unless they were to commit a felony.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's typical state. Do
you see -- do you see a rise in -- I don't know what I'm
trying to say.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Magnitude.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The level of offenses? I
are we still just out smoking pot behind the barn?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, the -- as Mr. Davis said, we
-- the severity of the offense, the number of referrals -- of
actual referrals is down slightly. The number of cases
actually filed, petitions filed, is up, and the severity of
the offenses is up, which means there's fewer administrative
and deferred prosecutions that they're handling. And,
unfortunately, it seems like the conduct is more severe.
MR. DAVIS: I will tell you -- and I don't have the
stats on this, but that the number of petitions on juveniles
being filed have significantly increased. And, again, I
don't know if that is 5 percent or 35 percent; I'm not sure
of a percentage. But Mr. Emerson has told me on more than
one occasion that the potential -- that the number -- the
percentage of petitions filed have greatly increased, which
would -- that would be agreeing with what the Judge said,
indicative of either, one, a higher level of offense, or two,
repeated violations of lower level offenses.
8-6-08 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
149
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there state reimbursement
for part of this? Or_ --
MR. DAVIS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What percent?
MR. DAVIS: Based on -- well, state -- our state
budget is about $247,000, total funds that they give the
department. Now, they have funding schemes, and they have
incentives, is what they're going to call them, "incentives."
They're funding schemes. If you can, you know, match this
program, then we will give you "X" amount more money. Jesse
Herrera is our placement officer, the assistant chief; he's
very good at that, and there's different ones. And it
varies, because it's literally a rat race. They'll say,
okay, as of this date -- for instance, small county
diversionary funding is one of the funding streams.
Beginning the first day of the fiscal year, we will spend --
we will divvy out the money until it's gone. Well, within 45
days of the fiscal year, that money's gone to whoever can get
the most cases in requesting that money. There are also some
-- there's one funding stream that came in strictly for
misdemeanor offenders with a prior supervision or a current
probation violation. They say, "We're going to give your
county $20,000 for services." Wonderful. We cannot use a
single dollar of that to place a child in a facility. So, we
can pay for $20,000 of counseling. They're so restrictive on
8-6-08 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
150
the pots of money that they like to say they're giving out
that they're -- they're almost ineffective. Some counties
won't take them. If you're in a larger county, $20,000 of
counseling is pretty good for you; they spend $100,000. I've
tried like the dickens to spend the $20,000 on counseling,
and can't do it. We're going to probably spend, when it's
said and done, maybe 12,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. And the other item I
see -- line item that went up quite a bit is Attorney Ad
Litem, and that's related because of the increased volume?
MR. DAVIS: Direct relation. More court hearings,
more petitions being filed, and -- and basically more time in
this room, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. Hope you don't
spend your budget.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I learned a long time ago --
I used to try to get into this thing, and I learned that,
"Mind your own business." See you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You were very informative.
Thank you.
MR. DAVIS: Thank you, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Jason.
MR. DAVIS: Anything else? Thank y'all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We'll go now to Court
Compliance.
8-6-08 bwk
151
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: Look at that.
MR. RUARK: 429 is the number.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 429?
MS. LYLE: 429, yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What number?
MS. LYLE: 429.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 429.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Uh-huh. I just passed it --
there it is.
MR. RUARK: Page 17.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's Page 17 on mine this
time.
MR. RUARK: How about that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's amazing.
JUDGE TINLEY: How'd you finally end up on the same
page? How'd that happen?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You lost three pages
someplace, huh?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Somewhere down the list, the
number changed.
MS. LYLE: Okay. There's only one line item that I
would ask for an adjustment on, 10-429-309, Postage. When I
first took over this game, I anticipated sending out
additional mailings to people that are delinquent on their
8-6-08 bwk
152
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 costs to get them to come in to pay. I didn't realize
there's going to be as many as there are. Part of that has
to do with County Court at Law has now requested that I mail
out the show cause hearings, which is additional postage for
me, whereas before the clerk's office was doing that for me.
~I So, now that's an additional expense for myself, setting show
cause hearings for County Court at Law, mailing them out.
And also, in the last two weeks, I have mailed out 237
mailings, which is more than I anticipated; that's 474 a
month. If you calculate that times a whole year, $2,619.36.
I don't foresee it staying that rate the whole year, because
we're at the beginning, trying to get people jump-started.
The show cause hearings are going to be greater than what
they are, hopefully, in the future, so I don't think it'll be
riding the same way all year.
JUDGE TINLEY: But it looks like you're going to
end up burning up most of that 950 that's in your current
budget, though, huh?
MS. LYLE: Yes. Yes. I have spent 190 -- probably
$300 of that since I have been there. At least $300 of it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, pretty short period of time.
MS. LYLE: For a short period.
JUDGE TINLEY: And because the show causes are
MS. LYLE: Yes.
8-6-08 bwk
153
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: -- you're handling that function?
MS. LYLE: I am for County Court at Law. Not for
felony, because --
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I understand.
MS. LYLE: -- the end result for the show causes
are different between misdemeanors and felonies.
Misdemeanors, there's a capias filed if they do not appear,
and for felonies there's a motion to revoke if they do not
appear. So, the motions need to be different.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's pretty interesting.
JUDGE TINLEY: The alternative, even in County
Court at Law, would be a motion to revoke and they end up in
jail, and we don't want them in jail.
MS. LYLE: I don't want them in jail. They've
called me several times, and I have scared the life out of
them, for lack of a better word, and the end result is I get
money instead of them sitting in jail.
JUDGE TINLEY: Best result both ways.
MS. LYLE: Best result. I told them, no joke, "I
want your cash; I don't want you sitting in jail." And I
hold people accountable for their money that they owe us.
I'm not joking; the day after their payment is missed, the
notice goes out. The day after they do not become current,
the show cause gets set. The day after they miss court, the
warrant gets issued.
8-6-08 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
154
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I'd like to say at this
point that Judge Brown is a huge part of that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
MS. LYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He is really participating
in this thing.
MS. LYLE: Yes, he is, as all three judges are.
They are very active in it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll bet in the County Court at
Law, postage is level with last year and the postage
increase, so actually, that makes sense.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, what kind of an adjustment are
you thinking you're going to need in your Postage line?
MS. LYLE: I'm asking for about $800 more.
JUDGE TINLEY: Running to 2,000?
MS. LYLE: Run it to about 2,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Money well spent if we collect
~ any .
MS. LYLE: And, honestly, when I do a mass mailing,
I get a lot of phone calls, so they do work. So, I guess
it's my fault. I send out the notices; I tell them to call
me, and they do. There's days when I can send out 30
different mailings at one time.
JUDGE TINLEY: Long as it works.
MS. LYLE: It's working.
8-6-08 bwk
155
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: Money well spent.
MS. LYLE: Yes. The other one is 10-429-420,
Telephone expenses. I see you've dropped it down to $800. I
think that'll be a comfortable figure. I just wanted to let
you know that I have a fax machine in the office that is very
seldom used, if ever. It's going to be disconnected. It has
a dedicated line to it; probably $30 to $35 a month, I would
guess, is what they spend on it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that dedicated line
outside the county system or part of the county system?
MS. LYLE: Outside -- I believe it's outside the
system, isn't it?
MS. HARGIS: I don't know.
MS. HYDE: What's the number?
MS. LYLE: 895-1861.
MS. HYDE: It's not in; it's out.
MS. LYLE: It's an outside line that I know is at
least $30 or $35. I have an agreement with the County Clerk
that she says I can use her fax machine, burn it up for faxes
I want to receive or send, because her cost is minimal.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. LYLE: The only other thing that may outweigh
that expense is that I'm making a lot of long distance phone
calls, because, as I said, I generate a lot of calls. People
call me back, leave messages. Most of those are long
8-6-08 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
156
distance, because they no longer reside in Kerrville.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the 800 is a good number?
MS. LYLE: That should be a good number. By the
time -- by the time we take the fax machine expense off and
add on the phone calls that we're making, I think it's going
to weigh out on there.
JUDGE TINLEY: And if there's any fluff in there
and you need some additional postage, that's where you can go
to get it.
MS. LYLE: Exactly. Exactly. 'Cause I --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. LYLE: -- may have more coming from there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask something here.
Personnel, that's you. Her salary is 40,374, only we are
paying her 29,090, correct? 'Cause we're just paying her
part of it?
MS. HYDE: That was the agreement. That was the
court order, where she was going to start.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, "yes" is the answer?
MS. HYDE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. The next -- next
agenda -- next Commissioners Court meeting, I'm going to have
an agenda item to bring your salary up to where it should be,
because of what you've done to that thing. And that's a
machine; y'all need to go down and see it.
8-6-08 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
157
MS. LYLE: Y'all are welcome to come down any time
to see it, any time to see how it operates.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we need to talk about the
assistant's salary or anything like that, or anything new?
MS. LYLE: I have a current part-time person that
is slow to learn the job. I'm not sure that he will be able
to completely perform the job. Right now, he's probably
performing 5 percent of the job, as in -- there's 100 percent
of the office to do. To give you numbers, he has about 60
entries on his 198th spreadsheet. I have combined County
Court at Law and 216th, about 750. So, he is maintaining a
minimal part as to what I am, and barely keeping up with it,
and I would propose getting someone in there full-time who
can help me out, because this is becoming a full-time
operation. There were two people in there before. There's
only one in there right now. Minimal, another one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is this salary, the
assistant salary, is that a full-time?
JUDGE TINLEY: No.
MS. LYLE: No, the $8,000 is part-time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, the 29.
MS. LYLE: The 29?
MS. HYDE: The 29 was where -- right at where that
other person was.
MS. LYLE: Yes.
8-6-08 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
158
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We all agreed if we could
hold hands and become one with nature, and she wanted to have
a full-time employee in there, she would offer that person
29, 091.
MS. HYDE: No, that person got that through some
court orders, so the starting amount, that person would
probably come in at a 16.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How much?
MS. HYDE: 16. And a 16 -- which the next question
will be, "How much?" -- is 25,711 currently.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I'm kind of out of
line asking these questions. I just wanted to encourage you
to think about --
JUDGE TINLEY: If you're out of line, don't ask.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I'm through. But I've
done everything I needed to do. Just --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, you have.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- encourage you to start
looking in that direction. That's all I'm saying. You're
doing a super job. I went to her show cause hearings with
Judge Brown and Judge Prohl both, and this is a neat thing
I'm seeing. It is a neat, neat thing going on.
MS. LYLE: Do you know what makes it successful?
Cooperation from everyone.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
8-6-08 bwk
159
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. LYLE: The District Court Judges, the County
I
Court at Law Judge. Parole will be starting Friday in the
office; every Friday they'll be meeting. Probation sets up
every week.
JUDGE TINLEY: Parole is coming to your office now?
MS. LYLE: Yes, every Friday.
JUDGE TINLEY: So you'll get a crack at them?
MS. LYLE: Yes, every Friday. I met with the
Director of the Parole Division for San Antonio two weeks
ago.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Two weeks ago.
MS. LYLE: Then I met with another officer two days
ago, and he told me he would be here 7:30 in the morning
Friday, ready to roll.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They're going to have --
they're going to have an officer sit down at her front desk
when there's no one there. It'll be a probation -- no, what
do you call them?
MS. LYLE: Parole officer.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Parole officer is going to
sit down there and meet with his client, and during that time
he says, "Go right there and talk to that lady right there."
MS. LYLE: It's one-stop shopping.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We have them captured. It's
fantastic.
8-6-08 bwk
160
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. LYLE: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: We haven't been getting any of the
parole money that they're obligated to pay when they're
released on parole.
MS. LYLE: That's going to be changing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well --
MS. LYLE: Well.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well.
', MS. LYLE: That will be changing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If I'm hearing Commissioner
Baldwin correctly, I agree that we should crank in a
full-time assistant at 25, whatever, whatever.
JUDGE TINLEY: If you're going to work parole
'I cases, that -- I don't know what the parolee numbers are, but
parole cases have never been worked before.
MS. LYLE: I will have to get them from Parole when
they meet with me Friday to find out how many active parolees
that they have. Then we begin the process with them. Blue
warrant notice; ten days later, show cause. After show
cause, I'm not sure how far we can go with a show cause.
JUDGE TINLEY: Are you talking about parolees?
MS. LYLE: Mm-hmm. I'm not sure, yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: That may be questionable.
MS. LYLE: As long as we have to --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nobody's sure.
8-6-08 bwk
161
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. LYLE: -- start getting into -- but I think
between us and the parole officers, we can come up with
something.
JUDGE TINLEY: If y'all keep talking blue warrants,
maybe you'll get some.
MS. LYLE: That's what I'm hoping is going to
~ happen.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Don't. Don't.
JUDGE TINLEY: It loads his jail.
MS. LYLE: I don't want anybody in jail. I tell
the defendants that honestly. "I don't want you in jail; I
want your money."
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The problem with the
parolees -- and I've been trying to listen, 'cause that's
going to be an issue, 'cause the only choice they have is
blue warrant, and blue warrant is an automatic at least 90
days in our jail.
MS. LYLE: It's amazing, though, with these people
that don't have money, as soon as you mention warrant and
jail, they say, "Oh, I'll come with something," and they do.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's a miracle.
MS. LYLE: Mm-hmm, it's a miracle.
JUDGE TINLEY: Kind of like the child support
issue. "Well, Judge, if you put me in jail, that's not going
to get you your money."
8-6-08 bwk
162
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. LYLE: No.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's exactly right.
JUDGE TINLEY: If you put them in jail, they find
~ money.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: About the best example I ever
had is a county court case where there was -- the gal owed
over $5,000 in restitution and fines. That was before we had
to do an actual show cause, and there was capias profiling
warrants issued for her. And she showed up at the County
Clerk's office, said she didn't have the money, she wasn't
going to pay it, wasn't going to do nothing. I was a warrant
officer. They called me; I came down, grabbed her, arrested
her. As soon as that metal door shut up the stairs in the
jail, she says, "Oh, I have the money in my purse," and she
paid the full $5,000-something in cash. Once she really
realized that that steel door shut behind her, she paid it.
MS. LYLE: And that's what I'm hoping is going to
happen with most people, that they're going to get to the
point where they're not playing, and then they'll come up
with the money. I just had a gentleman in my office two days
ago, same situation. Didn't realize he had a warrant, and I
said, "Do you think I sent you a notice for just the heck of
~ it? You ignored them?" He said, "No, really." I no more
than said that and Chuck came in one door, Charlie came in
', the other door; he realized after that that I meant business.
8-6-08 bwk
163
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 said, "You know, they're fixing to take you away." He
says, "What can I do?" "Show me the money." He paid.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: God, she's good. Getting
~ mean .
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's a good attitude
adjustment.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mean.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Best not have to go to her
office unless you want to just go --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Just go peek in
there.
MS. LYLE: I let Buster listen in on phone calls
once in a while when he's in there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Buster -- oh, he likes those racy
phone calls.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Buster's just thankful there
wasn't something like that a number of years ago.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: God, can you imagine?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: He'd have stayed out there at
the jail.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Especially the time I broke
out of jail, when the old jail was up here, and jumped off
the side of the building. That's part of the rumor mill, but
it's true. Every bit of it's true.
MS. LYLE: Okay.
8-6-08 bwk
164
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
I9
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Right after that's when you had
trouble with your ankle.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Then my knees started
bowing in a little bit.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How many pats of butter did
it take you to slip through the bars? Part of the legend.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's part of the legend,
that's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
MS. LYLE: Did you get the $2,000 worth of postage?
MR. RUARK: I certainly did, young lady.
MS. LYLE: Thank you. That's all I have.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, County Auditor. Where is that
one?
MR. RUARK: It's 495. We'l1 get you the page
number here.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Page 34 on mine.
ICI MR. RUARK: Page 34 on mine too.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got Page 34.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's Page 34 on mine.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's not where you're missing the
pages, then.
8-6-08 bwk
165
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 OEHLER: Haven't gotten that far yet.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What's this salary increase
thing? I'm kidding.
JUDGE TINLEY: You said you were going to uphold
Bruce's end of the deal while he wasn't here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm waiting for you to get
started.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that 10 percent?
MS. HARGIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's do the math.
MS. HARGIS: Okay. Before I get started, I would
like to pay a compliment to Diane Bolin for her very
professional process this year in getting the tax rate done
and processing it and getting it to the paper. She's been a
great help and has been working with me very closely this
year, and I really appreciate what she's done, so I did want
to say that before I get started. We had a little problem
yesterday, and she was on her cell phone, and we got it
resolved and it worked out really well. Also, when I was
here last, my employee had just quit, and so we needed to go
back and revamp our office, and with Eva's help -- and I do
appreciate her, as well -- we have got an ad in the paper as
of today -- I believe it's today or tomorrow.
8-6-08 bwk
166
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. HYDE: Weekend.
MS. HARGIS: And we're going to hire a person in
that position with perhaps a little stronger skills, and
going to keep the lady that I already have. And with your
approval, I'd like to keep Ken, and he is willing as well to
take work a little less if he has to so I can have two people
in the part-time situation, if needed. And then I have
contacted Schreiner University, and I am going to try to get
an intern for every semester, and they are free, to help us
so that we can work it out, you know, for this year.
JUDGE TINLEY: What -- what was the reception at
Schreiner when you contacted them? Did you go straight to
the -- the business department, or how did you do that?
MS. HARGIS: Well, I contacted -- I haven't heard
back from him yet, the gentleman that I dealt with at -- the
last intern that I had at the City. And I had to write a
letter to him; I contacted him by e-mail. I have not heard
from him. When Josh and I were in the car this afternoon, he
called their H.R. person, and she's e-mailing me the lady's
name, but they do have accounting students, and they're
cross-trained. They're pretty sharp. They're accounting
I.T. majors, and a lot of times what we could do there is, if
we get them for 180 hours, is what their program is, and then
once their 180 hours is over, then perhaps we can retain them
part-time, you know, to the end of the semester, and then get
8-6-08 bwk
167
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 one. But they're real sharp, and they're -- you know,
especially with their computer skills and in knowing Excel
~ and those type programs. So, I think we can work it out this
year. I do think that, like a lot of the departments,
', towards the end of this year that may or may not work out,
I
but I'm going to try to make it this year so that I can help
everybody else. But I will be coming back next year, because
I will need another person at some point in time, a full-time
~ person.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What -- what is a part-time
~ employee?
MS. HARGIS: Apart-time employee comes	in -- Ken's
coming in four hours a day. Sometimes --	
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is he a part-time	employee?
MS. HARGIS: Mm-hmm.	
MR. RUARK: I'm a part-time employee.	
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How many hours?	
MS. HARGIS: He's been working 20 hours	a week
since May. Before then, he was only working as we	had an
'~ audit or -- or, you know, as a project, working on	a
particular project. And so right now, I really --	you know,
sometimes I -- he's there in the mornings, and --	and we may
have a crisis in the afternoon, and I'm it. So, i	t's just --
for the next 30 days, we're probably -- you know,	we're going
to have a few hiccups. It's going to take us 30 d	ays to get
8-6-08 bwk
168
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
someone in there. And my employee at first had told Eva and
I both that she'd be there till the end of the month. Her
last day is next Tuesday.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh.
MS. HARGIS: So there's no way I'm going to get
anybody in there. So --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The -- a part-time employee
is under 19 hours? Is that --
MS. HARGIS: Oh, you mean -- a part-time employee
is 30 hours, I believe, isn't it, that we consider it?
MS. HYDE: In the policy book right now, we've got
it in that a part-time person has to work less than 1,200
hours a year. So that --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought there was a
federal law or something.
MS. HYDE: Well --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nineteen hours or less is a
part-time person.
MS. HYDE: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And my -- really, my
question is -- is providing insurance or other benefits for
part-time employees.
~'I MS. HYDE: Not at this point. The only thing we do
is retirement.
25 ~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It says here insurance for
8-6-08 bwk
169
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
four people.
MS. HARGIS: Well, that was when I wanted -- there
was three of us in my office, and a fourth person would have
been my other full-time person, which I am not asking for
i now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see, okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So that note goes away?
MS. HARGIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you've given me some bad
information again. This is two days in a row here.
JUDGE TINLEY: Outdated information.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- I mean, I would
have probably recommended you go with the part-time approach
rather than full-time approach, even if you had needed to do
it this way. My reason is, it seems to me that you've been
on a sharp learning curve -- the whole county's been on a
sharp learning curve because of the new communication -- or
new accounting system and all that. I think that staffing
may be adequate once everyone is familiar with everything and
you're familiar with county business. You know, but I
understand a part-time's a good way to bridge that gap. I
have no problem with putting it in here, but it's going to be
a pretty hard sell -- just to warn you, a pretty hard sell to
get a full-time person, but maybe -- maybe you can justify
it.
8-6-08 bwk
170
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. HARGIS: Well, I'm not -- at this time, I'm
not. But next year, after I've been here the second year and
I have the -- you know, we'll keep the statistics, and I'm
hoping that, again, that the -- the new person coming in with
-- Eva's written the description to be a pretty strong Excel
software person, and to be honest with you right now, I have
no one in my office that can do anything like that but me.
And Ken, when Ken came in. So, that was leaving any kind of
spreadsheet, whether it be simple or whatever, to me, and
that's -- that's a lot of time-consuming. But I --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's fine for this year. I
mean, I'm fine with it.
MS. HARGIS: I think we'll be -- but I do -- you
know, I hope you will --
MS. HYDE: We're adding a part-timer?
MS. HARGIS: No, we have Ken. That's it.
MS. HYDE: Okay. Then we're just going to do the
intern?
MS. HARGIS: Yes, that's it. That's all we're
~ doing.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What I want to know is how
you -- where you got the money to pay this -- this contract
worker that you had the contract labor for the summer. Where
did you have that in your budget?
MS. HARGIS: I didn't do my budget last year.
8-6-08 bwk
171
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 did the budget.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Where'd the money come from?
MS. HARGIS: He had --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I want to know where the
money came from.
MS. HARGIS: From the full-time -- actual full-time
line item. There was a full-time person budgeted in there as
well as Tommy. He budgeted himself, he budgeted me, and he
budgeted for three people in that office, okay? I did not
make that budget; he did that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, how do you hire a
contract worker and how do you justify it?
MS. HARGIS: Well, I justify --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: A contract part-time worker
or a summer worker. How do you do that? How do you -- how
do you get to pay contract labor on an employee that you've
hired for the summer, and she's directly supervised and
probably can't qualify for the three questions you ask that
would justify a contract labor person.
MS. HARGIS: I thought you were talking about Ken.
Oh, the young girl that I have in my office right now will be
there approximately three more days, four more days.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: She's been there all summer.
I guess, you know, three more days --
MS. HARGIS: She hasn't been there all summer,
8-6-08 bwk
172
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 --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: However long it was.
MS. HARGIS: Six weeks. And she was there to do
the filing system, which had gotten very, very far behind
because of the two girls not being able to do it. And for
the indigent health care, we changed the filing system up in
my office, because it was very difficult to find the
invoices. And, you know, also cleaned up our storage room,
which we may lose, I understand, because we may need that for
someone. But I've used -- I've used her to get my filing and
things of that -- the paperwork.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. I guess my other
question is, how do you do that without getting approval from
the Court to have another person working in your office?
MS. HARGIS: I --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't remember you coming
to court.
MS. HARGIS: No, sir, I did not.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: For not one red cent to pay
anybody else in your office, but you just did it. Is that
not true?
MS. HARGIS: Yes, sir, it is.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I rest my case.
MS. HARGIS: I had it in my budget. I did not know
that I was supposed to come to the Court.
8-6-08 bwk
173
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 OEHLER: Well, okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else you want to --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm going to get back to
where we were in that office when Tommy let it go. I want to
get back to an auditor and two people, and if she wants to
get a third person on a program from Schreiner that's not
', going to cost any money, so be it. Workload hasn't gotten
any bigger in there than it always has been. If anything,
there was a short time this year when the problem with the
Treasurer -- when you took over some of those duties, but
that doesn't exist any more.
MS. HARGIS: Again, I will -- it's difficult for
me. I have only been here a year, to know exactly what the
workload had been in the past. I do know that none of the
audits had been performed in this building since 2000, and
none of them had been done. No department had been visited.
And that is a requirement of my job, and none of those had
been done. There is a lot of -- I've uncovered a lot of
things that have been done, but for me to stand up here and
to -- you know, to compare one person to another person is
not -- you know, it's -- I don't believe that's my job to do.
I do want to, when we're talking about auditing, explain one
situation one more time. I am working with ESD Number 2.
Ben Alves and I have been in conversation, and I located
someone for him that is willing to write the report and bless
8-6-08 bwk
174
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
He is -- I talked to Mr. Alves about him. He is
looking at their work papers as we speak. And in the
legislation, it allows me to choose the type of audit that we
do, and so in order to reduce the cost and to reduce the type
of audit that we do, the gentleman that I've sent the
information to is going to decide between what we call a
compilation, which would be normally called a write-up, work
which you would get for your own self, or a review. And we
had originally talked about a review, but I had -- I had sent
him documentation and said that I really feel like we need to
bring it down to a compilation, which will bring his fee
down. They will get financial statements from him. They
will get a report from him that they can take to the bank,
and they can get loans off of that. We will do all of the
background work. We will prepare all the paperwork for him,
but then he will take that risk assessment saying that their
internal control is good and so forth, and be able to sign
off on it. Mr. Alves and I are both in agreement, and he and
I have been working on it now for about two weeks, so
hopefully Mr. Siebert will get back with me. I told him I
called around to try to find the best price and someone that
8-6-08 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
175
was knowledgeable in that arena, and he was suggested, and
the City of Ingram speaks very highly of him. And -- and he
seems like he's willing to do the job. So, if there's not a
problem, Mr. Alves seems to be okay with him.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Judge, are you okay with
that?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we're going to have a C.P.A.
writing the opinion?
MS. HARGIS: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: And it'll qualify as an audit under
the statute?
MS. HARGIS: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: But the -- the attractive portion of
this is, rather than him gathering all of the data, you're --
you're gathering the data and providing it to him, which
reduces his time involved, and therefore reduces the cost to
ESD Number 2.
MS. HARGIS: That's correct. We will do all the
field work, and field work is where most of the fee is.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Probably about two pages.
It's a lot of field work involved in that for anybody's audit
for 12 checks a year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, back to internal
audits --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It seems like it -- this
8-6-08 bwk
176
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 thing has just been completely blown out of proportion,
~' you know, to get a little simple audit. And you -- you knew
you couldn't do it. That's fine; just tell me you can't do
it. You don't want to be a part of it, we don't designate
you. You know, it's just -- it's all ridiculous. That's why
you haven't heard from ESD Number 1. They're not going to
contact you, and they don't have to. They can get an audit
without coming through the County.
MS. HARGIS: I have the -- ESD Number 2 sent me
another resolution. I did not contact them, nor did I tell
them they had to choose anyone. When I talked to Mr. Alves,
he asked me if there was someone, and I tried calling around
to get an auditor that would do it for a good price. I found
this gentleman. I suggested him to Mr. Alves. I did not
Iii, tell him he had to use him. That is not my job. Nor did I
ever say that it was my --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's not --
MS. HARGIS: The resolution that they sent me just
said that they would appoint me again, so when I called him,
I said, you know, this is my suggestion; we reduce the type
of an audit that it is so we can reduce the fee.
Unfortunately, the auditors -- because of all the things that
', happened with Enron, whenever they write a report and put
their name on it, it's not the work that they do, per se.
It's the risk they take after they sign their name, and none
8-6-08 bwk
177
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 them are willing to take that risk. And that's the
problem I ran into, is nobody would do it. Most people
wanted to charge me an arm and a leg, and I said that's
ridiculous. And this gentleman was suggested to me. He is
local, and I think that -- I think it will work out well for
them, and he seems to be excited about it. And if there's a
problem, he and I will work it out, but right now, both of us
are working on it and we're trying to get the fee down to a
very minimal amount. But that will allow them to have
documentation to go get any type of loan that they need to
get.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One quickie. Go back to
internal audits -- internal departmental audits. How many
did your office do this year, and how many do you plan to do
next year?
MS. HARGIS: We did every single department, I
think, didn't we?
II MR. RUARK: Yeah, I think -- well, yeah. Anybody
that handled cash, we did it, okay. And if that was eight,
ten, you know, I'd have to go look. But -- and, again,
whatever Jeannie decides that we can do through next year,
you're going to see a little different type, because we have
some more experience with it, a little more familiar with it.
First year of any audit is kind of, "Let's find out where
8-6-08 bwk
178
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're at," and the second year you get a little more
sophisticated. Although I don't expect the results to be
significantly different, but I think you'll see a -- at least
from the standpoint of, you know, the experience of going
through all the departments.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MS. HARGIS: More internal control this year.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Thanks for a simple
explanation.
MR. RUARK: Well, you're welcome.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- general comment on
the audits. I mean, I think that -- be sure you have the
numbers to present, but I think that the office -- or the
Auditor's office is doing a lot different work than the
previous Auditor did, and I don't think you can just say
because there was three people there before, there should be
three people there in the future. I think this office has
done a lot more -- we found, as a county, we had huge
problems on internal controls out there, especially in
discussion of money, and I think we've had three
departments -- Auditor, H.R., and Treasurer -- working on
that, trying to solve it, a huge amount of problems that we
had. So, I think that, you know, you can't just say we did
it this way in the past; we're going to do it this way in the
future.
8-6-08 bwk
179
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: No, we need a lot --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We've changed a great deal of
how we do the audit function in the county.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And we made a lot of
progress in that regard.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The one thing I'd like to
comment on for the -- kind of on Jeannie's part, in the eight
years I've been Sheriff out there, I'll be very honest; this
is the first year that my commissary account even gave me a
headache because of how she was auditing. You know, Tommy
was -- we'd send him a statement -- and I'm not saying Tommy
didn't do it, but we sent a statement and the audit was over;
he accepted our statement. The Auditor really put us through
the ringer. We're fine, and we have -- you know, I have
excellent control. And I think a lot of it also, if you saw
what Pressler Thompson used -- and that was something Bruce
wanted to do, you know, change outside auditors. But that
created a whole lot -- Bruce said there hasn't been that much
more work. Well, I know out at my office, there's been a ton
more work from the Auditor's office, because every penny
we've had and dealt with that we've never been asked about,
we've been asked about in the last year.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's good.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Which is good. It really put
me back on my toes.
8-6-08 bwk
180
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. HARGIS: Well, and let me say one other thing I
do appreciate. The one thing that has really helped is the
teamwork that Eva and the Treasurer have provided, I think,
as well as -- and Eva has done this, and I think this is a
compliment to her; that all the elected officials are working
as a team now, and when we met over there to talk about the
raises, that was a landmark situation, and I think she needs
to be complimented for that. And I think because of that,
all of us are working better together and as a team, and
that's really moving everything forward. It's just -- it's a
joy to work with everybody right now in the courthouse
because of that.
JUDGE TINLEY: You got anything else on your
budget?
MS. HARGIS: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good.
JUDGE TINLEY: How about County -- now, what did
you immediately spring your hand into the air for?
MS. HYDE: I had a stitch.
JUDGE TINLEY: I see.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Take care of it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Probably almost had a heart
attack.
MS. HARGIS: We could not get ahold of Roy Walston.
8-6-08 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
181
I don't know if you want to put him on the next workshop, or
go through here and then -- I think --
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll figure out something to do
I with him.
MS. HARGIS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: County Sponsored is 660 --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Page?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Page 67.
MS. HARGIS: I basically plugged in the same as you
did last year, so if you want to change these, I need for you
to tell me. Page 67, Bruce?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 70.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: There we are; we found the
three-page difference.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There. You can --
JUDGE TINLEY: Somewhere between the last one and
this one, Bruce.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Between 34 and 70.
MS. HARGIS: We did get the new contract on the
Trapper, and that did go up.
JUDGE TINLEY: Went up to what?
MS. HARGIS: 31,4.
JUDGE TINLEY: 31,4, okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I noticed we had an e-mail from
8-6-08 bwk
182
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 Historical Commission; they wanted to be on our next
Commissioners Court agenda.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I saw that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not sure; I didn't look.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I believe they're asking for
about double increase.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There was eight supporting
pages to a one-page budget.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why don't they turn it in
'~ like everybody else?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I found out this morning.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We know the answer to that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, we do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Economic development?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, there's an increase in that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the reason?
JUDGE TINLEY: The reason is there's a lot more
emphasis, City and County, on economic development with the
-- the CVB plan incentives, and I think it's in our best
interest to support that, because we need to enhance the
commercial industrial business tax base.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: To the extent that you
know, Judge, is the City going to match that also?
JUDGE TINLEY: I know that same amount has been
8-6-08 bwk
183
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
requested of them. Insofar as exactly what they'll do, I
don't know. I do know the mayor, as you know, is very, very
strong on economic development. Chuck Coleman is very, very
strong on economic development. I think -- I think Scott
Gross is too. The other two, the newer ones, I don't have
that good of a read on.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Other than the experience we've had
-- or that you've had, much more than I.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I'm asking 'cause I'm
hopeful that they will.
JUDGE TINLEY: I am too. I am too. I would report
to you on the KCAD, of course, contract was off of their --
off of their budget.
MS. HARGIS: Yeah. That went down because they
picked up the school, so therefore our portion of their fees
went down.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm not aware of any increase
requested by the Historical Commission. If -- why did they
want on the agenda?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know why he wants
on the agenda. Maybe --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He wants an increase, I think.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, he wants a minor
increase.
8-6-08 bwk
184
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 OEHLER: That was reflected in this --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He wants $6,250.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: There you go. That's the
number I remember.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He wants his name in the
~ paper.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me mention the Dietert Claim.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We like them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We do indeed.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I would mention that I got an
e-mail last week from Tina Woods, the Executive Director, --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was looking for it right
now.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- and they applied for a state
grant on their Meals on Wheels program, and Tina said they
were expecting somewhere in the neighborhood of maybe 13,000.
They received over 75,000. The reason they were able to
receive that large of an amount is because out of the pool of
funds, there weren't that many programs that had county
support, and therefore the number of recipients was pared
down considerably, and the amount they got went way up. And
she said because they got county support, they were able to
8-6-08 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
185
get this inordinate amount of grant money.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Kind of leverage.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: She was able to leverage
our money.
JUDGE TINLEY: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They served last year
52,660 Meals on Wheels, which is a Herculean task, really.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well-run operation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Unfortunately, they're
closing the restaurant.
MS. HARGIS: Yeah, they did. They did close it
last Friday.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, no.
MR. RUARK: Yeah, the Thursday through Sunday is no
longer --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just not paying off for
them.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is that the one --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thursday through Saturday is
closing?
MR. RUARK: That's the only time they served meals.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He's doing a good job.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, he does do a good job.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Judge, what's the Emergency
~ Management?
8-6-08 bwk
186
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: It's not yours, believe me.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I know. We don't see it.
What does that pay for?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not much more than books or
something.
MS. HARGIS: It's books and supplies that they need
for --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Fire Chief?
MS. HARGIS: -- Eric.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, Maloney.
MS. HARGIS: Isn't that --
JUDGE TINLEY: That's not --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Is that First Responders?
MS. HARGIS: That's the First Responders.
JUDGE TINLEY: We pay for First Responders
supplies, and that's a -- that's in the health and --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. That's not emergency
management. That's what I was wondering.
MS. HARGIS: I can't answer that right now. I
don't know.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Because I know we even asked
them the other day, because the last couple of emergencies
were -- part of that was done, and as the emergency
management coordinator, the fire department, we asked them
why they wouldn't come out in the county. They said that's
8-6-08 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
187
not part of their deal; they're city. And so I'm just -- I'm
just curious, why do we spend $4,500 on emergency management?
~'i COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. It'd be good to find
that out.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good question.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm curious as to the
'~
public transportation. Not the account, but the fact that
they had only vouchered us for $3,100 so far. Is that -- I
guess that's credit, right, Ms Hargis?
MS. HARGIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Interesting.
JUDGE TINLEY: I guess the -- probably the first
step would be to find out what that almost $3,000 has been
spent on so far this year.
MS. HARGIS: Well, we're going to look -- first
let's look at the Emergency Management. Go to detail, Ken.
JUDGE TINLEY: We can come back to that if need be.
MS. HARGIS: Okay. The Emergency Management looks
like we're making payments on -- let me see who the vendor
is.
JUDGE TINLEY: The Public Transportation --
MS. HARGIS: To the City of Kerrville.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- is an AACOG formula type thing,
and it was 8,000 here, and then last year we were pleasantly
surprised when they reallocated that formula down to 3,000.
8-6-08 bwk
188
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've not had any further --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll find that out, though.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- communication.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll check it out this
I month.
MS. HARGIS: Judge. This is all going to the City
of Kerrville.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Do you know what? I bet that
is a supplement to the Fire Chief's salary for being the
Emergency Management Coordinator.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It could be. It could be.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I just had that idea. I don't
know.
MS. HARGIS: Okay. Let's go to the other one, the
Public Transportation one now, Ken.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, whatever it is, I'll
find out where they're going with it.
MS. HARGIS: That's the one that's denoted, I
think, as the main -- are you the main one or is he the main
one?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Fire Chief -- former Fire
Chief was the main one. Now the new Fire Chief, I
understand, and he's sitting back kind of watching. But he's
got fabulous, from what I've been told, experience and
credentials in emergency management, so we may see a lot of
8-6-08 bwk
189
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
changes coming about in that program, which I'm going to be
in favor of.
MS. HARGIS: That's AACOG. Did we -- do we pay for
buses or something?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What are you talking about?
MS. HARGIS: The public transportation.
JUDGE TINLEY: That was to the Alamo Rural
Transportation system.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, A.R.T.
JUDGE TINLEY: And it's a formula thing that comes
to us from AACOG.
MS. HARGIS: Okay. So you know what that is.
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, yeah. Yeah. And it was 7998 or
something --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- a couple of years ago, and that's
why we budgeted 8,000.
MS. HARGIS: But it's gone down now; you've got it
down to four. Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: We don't know what the formula says
for this year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll find out this month.
I'm going to be up there for a board meeting end of the
month.
JUDGE TINLEY: Both of those figures are what we
8-6-08 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
190
call default figures.
MS. HARGIS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: I've not messed with them.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The new Fire Chief has
actually dealt with emergency management?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The old Fire Chief really
never did. He just kind of tinkered with it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's part of my
understanding.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the real thing.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: He has lots and lots of
experience.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And economic development,
you know, they've been talking about, and I agree, that the
residential and the businesses are out of kilter and business
needs to be propped up, but I've been hearing that for 20
years. We've pumped money in there, and I haven't seen
', anything done.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I think --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And now it's going up. I
know you weren't interested in that, but I thought I'd let
you know anyway.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's been suggested I meet
8-6-08 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
191
with the new Fire Chief over the emergency management.
That's why I was also curious.
MS. HARGIS: Judge, we do have one thing we forgot.
As you recall, we -- we do an ad in the -- not an ad, but an
article in the newspaper now -- every other week?
MS. LAVENDER: Every other week.
MS. HARGIS: And Ms. Lavender has been kind enough
to write that for us, and we pay her $125 a month, and we do
need to put that in. And we don't have --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's way too much.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, did you look at
Nondepartmental?
MS. HARGIS: Don't have it in there, Judge, but I
can certainly put it in there. Would you like me to put it
in there under advertising? 409 is Nondepartmental.
(Low-voice discussion off the record.)
MS. HARGIS: I don't think we have advertising.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Letz, where did you put your
personal press release person?
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm showing under Account Number
486, that that $40,000 includes 125 per month, Rosa Lavender,
public info duties.
MS. HARGIS: Okay, I put it in and forgot about it.
Well, good for me. I just wanted to be sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's part of the notes, so I think
8-6-08 bwk
192
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 put it in.
MR. RUARK: Yes, you did.
MS. LAVENDER: Whether we wanted to do it before
the budget year, that was my question. Do we want to
continue to do it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's good. It gets
good information out, if you write less about the Sheriff and
more about us.
MS. LAVENDER: I haven't written anything about the
Sheriff. I try to keep him out of it as much as possible.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You want us to come back
here in the morning to get pictures of us or anything?
MS. LAVENDER: Not till you get something else
I donated.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You and Todd hugging out there
at that meeting.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That did it.
JUDGE TINLEY: She didn't get it, though.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Monumental occasion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can't wait to see the
paper on that.
MS. HARGIS: We still have a few things that we
haven't talked about that I'd like for y'all to kind of think
about. The parks is one, and what we're going to do about --
8-6-08 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
193
about the Ingram Dam, as well as Flat Rock, and how much you
want me to put in there for that. I currently have 25,000 in
there for the parks. That may or may not be enough. I do
know you need to do quite a few things at the Ingram Dam, and
I guess I'm partial to that one since I go by it every day.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We do need to talk about
~ parks.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Didn't we receive the
Freese-Nichols report on how to fix the dam?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, we received a report
that said we need to fix the dam.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not how to fix the dam.
MS. HARGIS: That's all you got for 19,000?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We have to do two things like
the City does. We got to study them to death, then pay a
fortune to get them done.
JUDGE TINLEY: Was not that report supposed to tell
us --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Exactly where and what.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- what we needed to do to fix them?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it told us that we
had a need, and that the solution was pumping some slurry
into the thing, both dams, and -- but it also suggested we go
8-6-08 bwk
194
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
out for contracts, estimates of cost. Am I correct, Bruce?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because the issue was that if
we pumped too much, we'll lift the whole dam apart.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If you just go out there to
Halliburton and just say, "Just poke it full," they may raise
the whole cap off the dam.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which would be
counterproductive.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You don't want to go with the
company that --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, we let somebody else.
Need to have a controlled repair.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Needs to be a controlled
repair.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, absolutely, very much
so.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We need to address it. Now
would be a pretty good time.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. Well --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, in order to address
it now, we'd have to get an engineer in here to take that
report, go out there and make some assessment of what the
cost is going to be.
8-6-08 bwk
195
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 OEHLER: Well, we can't do that. I'm
thinking that for my end of it in Precinct 4, we need to get
the thing drained down where we can drive the spillway up
where we can get an accurate assessment done of what may or
may not be void in that area where the spillway is right in
the middle of the dam.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They didn't do that?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It was wet; they couldn't do
it. They couldn't make any assessment when it was wet.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Water flowing pretty good?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's still there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can do that. We can
contact an engineer, hope to get some sort of an assessment
of costs.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm thinking that we have our
canoe loaded this year --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- with expenses. Our canoe
has a big hole in it this year with expenses coming in faster
than the boat is going down the river. Might be --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think the report
indicated that, you know, we need to do the repairs, but
we're not in imminent danger.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So if the Court wants us to
8-6-08 bwk
196
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
get an engineer in here to assess costs, we can do that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we ought to plan on
assessing the costs during the budget year.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think you're right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, that's fine.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Let's do the assessment, but
let's not plan on any repairs until the following year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: At least get a budget number
for the following year.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This is --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It could be a bunch or it could
be not a bunch.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's going be a bunch,
~ probably.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What we have before us is
astronomical.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. We'll do that.
MS. HARGIS: Okay. Then I --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But back to parks, I'd like
to see some basic improvements in Flat Rock Lake Park. I had
-- as a matter of fact, I've got an agenda item coming up for
Monday to talk a little bit about the dogs and the people and
the park and so forth, but not that -- not that -- not that
I'm raising hell with them. I'm not. I'm really doing a 180
8-6-08 bwk
197
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 taking them off.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, no.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thinking about it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Worse than cattle guards.
', COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm thinking about fencing
off a small area for them and getting them out of the main
section.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know he doesn't like that
idea. Anyhow, I think there's some improvements --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're giving in to them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There are some improvements
that are necessary.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- well, are we talking
the verbiage "money"?
MS. HARGIS: I want a bird place. I want a place
to put my birds.
JUDGE TINLEY: We're not talking about any money,
no. I --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We're going to let them build
it for their dogs?
MS. HARGIS: That's a good idea.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: On county land?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, are we going to have --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I can see that this agenda
8-6-08 bwk
198
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
item is going down south.
', JUDGE TINLEY: I recommend, Bill, before we ever
get there on Monday --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Want to save yourself a
little embarrassment?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't need to have a
workshop next week. Maybe the following week?
MS. HARGIS: That would be great. If we could have
one the following week, give us a little time to get all this
lined up.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And at that point we'll know
how bad we've done, or what the damage is, whatever you want
to call it, how big the hole is.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't even want to look.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Talking about a workshop on
the dams?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, talking about a workshop to
find out what our budget is and how we're going to pay for
it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I can tell you -- I
tell you, I have a thought. And this is the second one
today.
JUDGE TINLEY: Second good one or bad one?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It doesn't matter. Just --
I'm excited that I have one, period. 10 percent salary
8-6-08 bwk
199
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
increases, you can take them off all elected officials, far
'~
as I'm concerned, and definitely take mine off. So, there's
a little mathematics you can play with over the weekend.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think I agree with that
partially. I think the elected officials all got bigger than
everybody else increase last year. That needs to be factored
in, but I also think that you need to look at what we're
doing to employees making more than their bosses.
MS. HARGIS: Don't let the clerks catch up with
some of them.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's true. You got to
watch for those.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Got to look at those two
things.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All I know right now is that
I want the thousand dollars -- I'm sorry, the 10 percent
pulled off the elected officials. And -- but I do -- I do
want a COLA, because I do go to H.E.B. just like the Shaw of
Ingram does.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What if the COLA's more than
3 percent?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll take it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm with you on the COLA.
I think the COLA's top to bottom, but I don't -- I'm not
there for 10 percent across-the-board. Just not there.
8-6-08 bwk
200
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: What does that mean exactly?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That means COLA.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Explain to me what you --
are you mad about the dogs?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not yet.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or what are you saying?
I' COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you saying only a
cost-of-living, and no 10 percent across the board?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm saying 10 percent, in
my book, is out of the equation, but a COLA across the board
is not out of the equation. Now, if it ends up being
10 percent, that's something we ought to talk about. I don't
know that it's going to get there.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Are you talking about just
elected officials?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're talking everybody.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Talking everybody.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see what you're saying.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think I'm not there after
all. I think we need to look at -- we need to decide what
the COLA's going to be; I think that's one number. And I
think that all department heads and elected officials have
pared their budgets down so we can allow for a 10 percent
increase, and I think it's -- you know, you have to look at
ability to fund it. I'd like to see that number in there and
8-6-08 bwk
201
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
see how you pay for it, which is probably going to be a tax
increase, whatever that is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If that tax increase is
5 percent, well, then no, I can't go along with it. But if
it's 2 percent, I'm not going to like it, but I probably --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Two cents?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, 2 cents. I'm not going
to like it, but I can probably go along with it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd like to see what it's
going to cost us.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all I'm saying.
That's all I'm saying, when you start working up those
numbers, 'cause I'll bet you $3.27 we're heading somewhere in
that direction. And I will be willing to bet you that a COLA
is going to be 5 and a half, 5.5 or something like that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It could go as high as 6,
perhaps.
MS. HARGIS: I think it's going higher, to 7 and a
half or 8 and a half.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You stay out of this.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's going to be whatever
it is.
MS. HARGIS: It is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's going to be whatever it
8-6-08 bwk
202
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
is; that's exactly right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I may say the COLA's going to
be that, but we're --
MS. HYDE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But, you know, I just don't
think we need to -- you need to start thinking in that way,
because I really think that we will go in that direction.
And those numbers --
MS. HARGIS: Well, what I would rather do is leave
what I have in there now, let y'all make a decision. I can
run it on spreadsheet separately, but to go in and hit each
budget every time is a little difficult. Why don't we kind
of do it in a spreadsheet, kind of a running total? Let us
do that, and then we can -- then you can kind of look at the
difference.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just take a gross payroll
and do 10 points, 9, 8, 7, or whatever. Is that what you're
talking about?
MS. HARGIS: The 10 points -- the 10 percent is in
there now, and if you look at the sheet of elected officials
that I gave y'all, there's not much difference between the
5 percent and the 10 percent. If you'll look at it, the
10 percent for all the elected officials that are on that
publication, it was 73,000, as I recall. And then if you
went to 5 percent, or 5.2, it only went down to 49,000. So,
8-6-08 bwk
203
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
basically, giving you the COLA or the 10 percent is -- is,
you know, about $23,000. $23,000 is a lot of money, but I'm
thinking --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because everybody -- I've got
to stand up here for them all, because they worked so hard at
cutting their budgets and doing such a good job this year.
And --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, they're employees, so
the employees, the worker bees can have a 10 percent salary
increase.
MS. HARGIS: Yes. Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what that's about,
and I'm there 100 percent. But I'm not there -- I don't
think we can afford all that other stuff. And all I'm trying
to do is give you a heads-up.
MS. HARGIS: No, I will do whatever you want me to
do, but I would prefer doing it on spreadsheets. I would
prefer doing it on spreadsheets rather than on the budget.
Let's leave it, because that summarizes it real quick. We
know what it is. To give you an idea, when we started out,
when the Judge and I first looked at it, it was a million,
six, and I zeroed that out. And that took a lot of Rusty's
help, and we looked at a lot of revenue, and everybody else
gave in and then the Judge cut. So, we cut a million, six
off of the original budget that you never saw. So, really,
8-6-08 bwk
204
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 you're seeing now is -- is a pretty pared-down budget,
mostly just for some of the additional things that we've done
now. Fortunately for us today -- and I haven't had a chance
to go and add them all, but as I was telling y'all earlier,
it looks like we came out to the good on the City situation.
You know --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tell me how.
MS. HARGIS: Well, for one thing, we had already
budgeted the 62,5, because we had sent that over to the City;
that's what we were going to accept. Now we're getting 93,
so our revenue just went up 30-something thousand right
there. In addition to that, we put 215 for EMS, and it's
only 181, so we had picked up about $64,000. So, that --
that ended up being a plus for us, because we already had all
that plugged into our budget. We already had everything they
told me, and Josh had already given me the figure of 215, so
that was actually a plus to us. So, you know -- you know,
that helped us to the tune of about $65,000. But --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The spreadsheet's fine. COLA
is more serious.
MS. HYDE: I understood, but I'm just -- in the
past, y'all have asked me what the COLA's are, and if I give
them to you, then you determine what you're going to give as
a COLA.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But when we get back together,
8-6-08 bwk
205
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 need to have ---
(Commissioner Baldwin left the courtroom.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's so many different
things you can look at. We need to look at several of them,
as we have in the past, to see what the COLA component is,
however you look at it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what I want to see.
I want to see what it looks like in terms of total dollars
against the payroll.
MS. HARGIS: We can do that.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think what those cost-of-living
figures that I've seen are doing in the last just two to
three months, they're starting to power curve up.
MS. HYDE: About two and a half.
JUDGE TINLEY: At the end -- including June, the
wholesale index was 9.2, prior 12 months. And, of course, a
lot of that started in late on them, which means your -- your
consumer index is going to follow that. And -- and the
numbers I've seen, looking at percentage increases for
month-to-month, it's power curving. So, if you interpolate
that -- if you interpolate that up to -- to the end of
September, you know, I don't know.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What do you got now?
JUDGE TINLEY: The August -- the July numbers
should be out pretty quick, shouldn't they?
8-6-08 bwk
206
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. HYDE: Yeah. I thought they'd be out by now.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
MS. HYDE: That's what the Judge is talking about.
if you extrapolate	that	out,	that's how	-- we're	waiting to
see what this one	does.	If	it continues	on the	trend, then
we've got a good -- good indicator. If it starts to come
down, it also is going to tell us a little bit of something,
but it could be as high as what we're already proposing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It could be as high as
what?
MS. HYDE: We're already proposing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, if it is, it is.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The one comment I'd like to
of being involved in the budgeting process, it's the first
time that I've ever seen every department head come together
and be willing to give up stuff that they really needed so
their employees could get a good, decent raise across the
board. And they did this not just because we finally came to
our senses or whatever and decided we're all going to get
together. We're seeing what our employees are going through
8-6-08 bwk
207
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 the county salaries, and what it is costing our employees
and what it's doing. And I'm -- I'm still amazed, after all
these years, that all the department heads and elected
officials came together and said, "This is what we want to
do," and then you saw them actually cut over a million
dollars out of their budgets so that we could do it. And so
that, I do think, needs to seriously try and stay in there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand that and I
appreciate that, and I'm not against taking care of our
employees, not at all. I want to see what the cost is going
to be. I want to know how it translates to the tax rate.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I agree there. You know, I
understand, and all of us knew that. But as far as priority
funding for the entire year, I think everybody agreed with
that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And it could end up being
10 percent; I don't know.
MS. HARGIS: Thank you very much.
MS. HYDE: Whatever y'all determine it will be.
i
MS. HARGIS: We know that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We've got nothing further to
do here this afternoon, I gather.
MS. HARGIS: That's it.
MS. HYDE: So it's in two weeks, the Wednesday, at
9:00? Is that how we're going to do it?
8-6-08 bwk
208
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: Judge, I'm out of town for
the 12th through 20th.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We'll decide -- on Monday we'll
decide what we're going to do.
(Commissioner Baldwin returned to the courtroom.)
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We already adopted the budget,
I went home.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Y'all through?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We gave 20 percent.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, okay. Good. Good.
JUDGE TINLEY: And we cut you out completely as you
requested. And all the elected officials are going to get
10.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The cost-of-living --
JUDGE TINLEY: Other elected officials.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Cost-of-living is
20 percent?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Not for you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, it's 12.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How much are them taters and
milk out there at Mountain Home? Ms. Ellerbracht still got
them eggs?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think they're all rotten.
I don't think they're edible any more.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. Thank you very
8-6-08 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
209
much.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're welcome. Are we
adjourned, Judge?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Did you adjourn this thing,
Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: No. I'm fixing to, now that
Buster's back.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll adjourn.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? We'll be adjourned.
(Budget workshop was adjourned at 5:30 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 5th day of September,
2008.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
B Y : _ _ ~~_~~~ __ _
Kathy Ban' , Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
8-6-08 bwk