1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Special Session 10 Tuesday, September 6, 2005 11 1:30 p.m. 12 Commissioners' Courtroom 13 Kerr County Courthouse 14 Kerrville, Texas 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge H. A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 24 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 25 DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4 2 1 I N D E X September 6, 2005 2 PAGE 3 1.1 Consider and discuss and take appropriate action on the Kerr County Juvenile Detention Facility 4 and budget, including staff positions, staffing levels, designation of management personnel, 5 specification of salary grade/step levels. (Executive Session as necessary or appropriate) 3 6 1.2 Consider and discuss and take appropriate action 7 on county personnel issues in various departments, including increase/decrease in staffing levels, 8 salary adjustments, reorganization, reclassification and changes in job description. (Executive Session 9 as necessary or appropriate) 22 10 1.3 Consider and discuss approval by record vote of the proposed FY 2005/2006 Tax Rate and set date, time 11 and place of first and second Public Hearings -- 12 --- Recessed 59 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 1 On Tuesday, September 6, 2005, at 1:30 p.m., a special 2 meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the 3 Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville, 4 Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court: 5 P R O C E E D I N G S 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let me call to order, if 7 I might, the special Commissioners Court meeting scheduled 8 for this date and time, Tuesday, September the 6th, 2005, at 9 1:30 p.m. It is a bit past that time now. The first item 10 on the agenda is to consider and discuss and take 11 appropriate action on the Kerr County Juvenile Detention 12 Facility and budget, including staff positions, staffing 13 levels, designation of management personnel, specification 14 of salary grade-slash-step levels. And there's a notation 15 that executive session as may be necessary or appropriate on 16 one or more of those particular subjects. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I have entirely 18 too many pieces of paper. 19 (Discussion off the record.) 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess, if it's open for 21 discussion, I've got -- to make sure that we're all going 22 off the same options, can someone enlighten me as to what 23 two options we're looking at today? I recall we were down 24 to a 48-bed or a zero-bed. Is that where we were? 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's sort of 9-6-05 4 1 where we were. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's where you were. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's sort of where 4 we were. Then I think at the conclusion of the last 5 meeting, I asked a question -- which I thought was not 6 rhetorical, but might have been -- as to what would happen 7 if we pared down the census from the 31 or 32 that it is now 8 to fit into the 24-bed facility and staff accordingly? 9 Where would that take us? And I'd like to have an answer to 10 that. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we have a 24 -- do we 12 have that option in front of us anywhere? 13 MS. HARRIS: You have a 24-bed pre. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pre? 15 MS. HARRIS: Yes. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not pre and post? 17 MS. HARRIS: Not a 24 pre and post, because 18 you sacrifice 16 beds for pre's alone, and that only leaves 19 you eight beds for post. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Your dorm 21 structure -- is that the proper word? Dorm structure in the 22 new facility is -- is "X" of what? Two or three of what, or 23 four of what? 24 MS. HARRIS: There are three dorms, eight 25 beds each. 9-6-05 5 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Three of eight. 2 MS. HARRIS: Yes. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, if we had 24 4 juveniles in detention, one dorm reserved for pre and three 5 dorms reserved -- or two dorms, whatever, reserved for 6 post -- 7 MS. HARRIS: You'd have -- 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 8, 16, 24. 9 MS. HARRIS: You'd have -- 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would that work? 11 MS. HARRIS: No, sir, 'cause you'll have to 12 reserve two dorms for pre's; one for girls, one for boys. 13 And that only leaves you one dorm for post, and that's only 14 got eight beds on it. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What would be the 16 scenario if we determined that -- that the facility would be 17 pre and post male only? What would that do? 18 MS. HARRIS: You would have 24 beds available 19 that you could mix up any way that you needed to, because 20 you can put pre's and posts on the same dorm of the same 21 gender. You have to have separate staff, however. You 22 would need a staff -- if you had four boys -- pre boys and 23 four post boys on one dorm, you'd have to have two staff on 24 that dorm. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. But you can 9-6-05 6 1 have male and female detainees in the same dorm; is that 2 correct? 3 MS. HARRIS: Not in the same dorm, no, sir. 4 You have to have males and females in separate dorms. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. So, then, the 6 minimum number of female detainees that would be reasonable 7 would be no fewer than eight; otherwise, you're wasting 8 staff; is that correct? 9 MS. HARRIS: That's correct. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'd love to hear -- 12 I left here at the last meeting with the same sort of 13 thinking that Jonathan expressed, that I thought we were 14 either at 48 or none, 48 or shut it down. And if we got 15 there, then the remaining question is how to organize it. 16 I recall that there were significant expense differences in 17 the case presented by Kevin Stanton than there were by -- by 18 the Juvenile Detention Facility, I think $300,000 a year 19 difference in costs. Following that train of thought, then, 20 I wondered if 50 of the 52 facilities in Texas are organized 21 under the Juvenile Probation Department, then doesn't that 22 suggest that that's the best model? How are we -- why are 23 we out of step with -- with 96 percent of the facilities? 24 Why aren't we organized like 50 of 52 other facilities? 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good question. 9-6-05 7 1 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Particularly if it 2 costs a lot less money? 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That question, I 4 think, goes to the heart of the dilemma, and it goes to what 5 two separate individuals believe is an operational 6 possibility, and I thought that's what we wanted to try to 7 get to the bottom of today. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's -- and that's 9 why I think I brought up at the last meeting an executive 10 session, because I think when we start going too far down 11 that road, we get into personnel questions that -- you know, 12 that I believe qualify for executive session, because it 13 comes down to asking both the Juvenile Probation Officer and 14 Ms. Harris, the Facility Administrator, about specific 15 personnel, and I just -- I think it's awkward to put that -- 16 ask, you know, those questions in open session. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I agree. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: For either one of them. 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If we build that 20 organizational model, then it appears to me that there's 21 five jobs in jeopardy, and that's an executive session 22 discussion. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think so. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I see a slight nod that 25 we're on the right wavelength from the County Attorney. 9-6-05 8 1 Judge, I -- 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: His head's going in 3 the right direction; it's going up and down. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not often -- it's not 5 always going that direction, I might add. Judge, I request 6 we go into executive session to talk about personnel in the 7 juvenile facility. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got a couple 9 questions I want to ask before we go in there, though. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We may want to take 12 this information in. And one has to do with -- one of the 13 proposals is that we can take in $115 a day and $85 a day, 14 and if my memory serves me well, we just recently signed 15 some contracts at $83 a day. Now, how is that going to 16 work? Can we change those contracts, or do we just rock 17 along at $83 a day for a year now before we can kick in the 18 $85? Or -- you know, it's just -- how is that going to 19 happen? How does that work? 20 MR. EMERSON: Do you want an answer from me? 21 I think there's -- 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. 23 MR. EMERSON: -- two options there. The 24 first is you propose an addendum to the counties that you're 25 already dealing with and see if they'll approve it without 9-6-05 9 1 essentially affecting the contract that you have one way or 2 another. The other way is that you go out and you try to 3 materially change the contract by changing the rate, in 4 which case the county will have an option to either accept 5 it or to either drop dead and pull their kids if they 6 haven't. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rex, on that -- the -- I 8 mean, the proposal I'm looking at shows $83 and $115. I 9 don't see $85 anywhere on the two that I'm locking at. 10 That's not to say that they're not, because we certainly 11 have enough proposals. But for us to get to the $115 for 12 the sexual offender-type kids, that we have to amend the 13 contract with those counties? 14 MR. EMERSON: I think to get to the $115, 15 most of your contracts do not allow for the specialized 16 treatment, okay? Our standard contract did not, 'cause I 17 didn't even know that existed when we drew it up. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 19 MR. EMERSON: And I think, realistically, if 20 my understanding is correct, because the counties are 21 theoretically -- if a child meets the criteria, is 22 reimbursed by the State for the $115, I don't think you're 23 going to find a county under those terms that would balk at 24 an addendum going on the contract saying that if the child 25 needs specialized treatment, then they'll be -- the payment 9-6-05 10 1 will be at the higher State-reimbursed rate. Now, I don't 2 think you could go in and just send them a whole new 3 contract with different amounts on it. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. The other, I 5 guess, thing on the expenditure side that we touched on at 6 the last meeting was transportation costs. And, as I 7 recall, we are currently going and picking up the kids and 8 bringing them back at no cost to the county. 9 MS. HARRIS: Not all of the kids. It's just 10 if a probation officer is in a bind for whatever reason and 11 cannot transport the juvenile the entire way, we would go 12 get the kid. But then, when it came time for discharge, 13 they would come pick the kid up; kind of a trade-off. 14 Sometimes we meet probation officers halfway, or sometimes 15 we don't have to go get the kid for intake or during 16 discharge. It's just that it's available if the probation 17 officer needs us to do that. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It would seem -- and 19 we're not talking about big bucks, I don't think, here. It 20 does affect personnel. It seems that -- do our contracts 21 allow us to recoup that if we choose to? 22 MR. EMERSON: I don't think that issue's 23 addressed at all in the contracts, as far as transportation 24 of the juveniles. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because I don't -- I 9-6-05 11 1 mean, it just seems -- I don't know how much we're 2 transporting, but if we're up to -- if we go with a 48-bed 3 facility, there's potentially a fair amount of 4 transportation around, and I think that the County -- I 5 wouldn't know why we would absorb that cost. I mean, I 6 think we -- we may provide a service for the cost of just 7 whatever the mileage reimbursement rate is at, the state 8 level, which is 40.5 now, I think. But I wouldn't know why 9 we would not get that reimbursement. You know, but I think 10 that if the contracts don't allow for that, that should also 11 be -- either add it to the contract or -- and I wouldn't -- 12 maybe that's even a separate agreement. I mean, it wouldn't 13 be that hard. If they're doing some of the transport 14 themselves, we clearly -- when we send our kids, I'm under 15 the impression that we transport them to and from the 16 facilities that we use. Therefore, I would think that other 17 counties should transport to and from where they use, or pay 18 to have that done. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that all we have for the 21 open session portion? 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, my contract 25 question, the answer is that it's very unlikely that we 9-6-05 12 1 would be able to charge the new numbers until the 2 following -- for another year? 3 MR. EMERSON: The answer to that is yes. 4 Keeping in mind that, at least since I've been here in the 5 last eight months, there's -- just about every month, 6 there's been one or two contracts rolling around for 7 renewal, so it would be kind of an ongoing transition 8 process. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 10 MR. EMERSON: You couldn't draw a line in the 11 sand and say October 1st, this is what we're going to 12 charge. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. And I think 14 that's kind of what we're basing some of our -- these 15 numbers are kind of based on these new numbers, in my mind, 16 cranking up October 1. And we -- so you're answering my 17 question; we can't do it. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But you said that we 19 could amend the contracts. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, but they won't 21 take it. 22 MR. EMERSON: I think you can send out 23 addendums, and I don't think -- and Becky could probably 24 answer this better than I can since she's dealt with the 25 other facilities, but I -- I don't understand why a county 9-6-05 13 1 would balk at the $115 rate for a sexual -- a child 2 undergoing special treatment for sex offender conditions if 3 that's the rate they're reimbursed at from the State, 'cause 4 the county's not going to lose anything. It's no additional 5 cost to the county. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 7 MR. EMERSON: Now, having said that, I think 8 you might run into something if, all of a sudden, you decide 9 you're going to go from $83 to $87 a day and you want to 10 increase the rate, that is affecting the county's 11 pocketbook. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And under your -- 13 this is both -- probably both to Kevin and Becky. Under the 14 scenarios, there are how many -- well, how many beds are 15 allocated for that sexual abuse? 16 MS. HARRIS: The -- the one budget that I did 17 for you had 10, and that was the 48-bed budget, and I put 10 18 sex offender beds in there at $115. And then the one that I 19 gave you last week was another 48-bed, and I had increased 20 that sex offender to a possible 18. I agree with -- with 21 Rex that an addendum to the contract by which you outline 22 that, come October 1, we would charge the maximum amount for 23 the sex offender kids that are sent there that are 24 court-ordered there for sex offender treatment, as long as 25 they meet one of those three criteria for registration. 9-6-05 14 1 That's what allows the county to be reimbursed that $115 a 2 day. And I don't think that we would have a problem with 3 the counties, especially the counties that are sending us 4 sex offenders right now, such as Guadalupe County. We're 5 number one on their list for sex offender. El Paso and 6 Amarillo are sending us a lot of sex offenders, and I don't 7 believe that they would have a problem with that addendum. 8 I do agree with Rex that if you were to change the other per 9 diem rate from $83 to $85 or $87, then I think that's where 10 you -- we would run into problems. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How many counties in your 12 discussions are going to be using the sexual offender beds? 13 You mentioned three just now. I mean, any of them could. 14 MS. HARRIS: Any of them could. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But how many are we in 16 discussions with right now, having those kids in our 17 facility? 18 MS. HARRIS: Well, the three that I 19 mentioned, and I know that Bexar County has indicated some 20 interest. Those four have been in direct dialogue on sex 21 offender kids. Some of the smaller west Texas counties may 22 jump on board on that, because I know that they get one 23 periodically. Lubbock may be another avenue. We get a lot 24 of Lubbock's substance abuse kids. We may get some of their 25 sex offender kids. I did get a phone call from Wise and 9-6-05 15 1 Jack County; that's under the same Probation Department. 2 That has a couple of sex offender kids that they're looking 3 at to send us, so -- 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And you anticipate it 5 being at $115, that we could probably fill those beds up? 6 You're relatively confident of that? I mean, it seems to me 7 that if there's a demand for that service, and the State's 8 picking up the difference, I would think it's a pretty high 9 likelihood that they would amend the contracts at the $115 10 rate like Rex said. 11 MS. HARRIS: Right. Now, Bexar County had 12 indicated, back when we were negotiating the contract with 13 Bexar County -- that was back in February, I believe, is 14 when that was. That was when the -- the chairman of the 15 Juvenile Board, who was also the juvenile judge, had 16 indicated that he was seeing more juveniles coming across 17 his docket that were committing sexual offenses at the 18 junior high age level. We have not gotten any kids from 19 Bexar County for sex offender treatment at this point in 20 time, but that's not to say that we wouldn't. But he did 21 indicate that they were seeing more of those kids. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The -- 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Your turn. 9-6-05 16 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Harris -- let me follow up 2 on it. In your discussion with these jurisdictions that are 3 talking to you about sending sex offender treatment 4 residents, have you indicated to them that the new state 5 reimbursement rates, as long as they meet that 6 qualification, that it is your intention or the intention of 7 Kerr County to charge that reimbursement rate for those -- 8 for those residents? 9 MS. HARRIS: No, sir, I haven't said anything 10 to anybody, 'cause I didn't want to get the cart before the 11 horse. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 13 MS. HARRIS: So I -- no, sir, I have not said 14 anything to any of those counties. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, what does our 16 contract say? What is the amount in our contract? 17 MS. HARRIS: $83 a day. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: But the contract does not 19 provide for any specialized treatment at that level, and 20 what I heard the County Attorney saying was that the 21 addendum would provide for specialized treatment services. 22 MS. HARRIS: Right. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: And that's what would trigger 24 the higher rate. Is that what I heard, Mr. Emerson? 25 MR. EMERSON: Yes. 9-6-05 17 1 MS. HARRIS: We didn't know about this sex 2 offender reimbursement rate at $115 a day. We didn't know 3 about that until July, that that was going to be a change 4 that T.J.P.C. had made, and that that money was going to be 5 available. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, are these sex 7 offenders? Are they registered sex offenders? 8 MS. HARRIS: There's three -- one of three 9 ways that the juvenile has to qualify for that 115. They 10 could be registered only with law enforcement; in other 11 words, the general public would not know that that juvenile 12 was a registered sex offender, or be registered for the 13 general public purposes, or be on deferred registration, 14 which would mean it would be up to the presiding judge to, 15 in essence, tell that kid, "I'm going to send you to a sex 16 offender treatment program. You have to successfully 17 complete that program, and if you don't, when you come back 18 to court I'm going to register you as a sex offender." 19 Which that's called deferred registration. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. 21 MS. HARRIS: So, to get the $115 22 reimbursement, the kid has to be one of those three. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And you had 24 said previously in here that it is very unlikely we'll ever 25 get one registered sex offender. 9-6-05 18 1 MS. HARRIS: Registered. That's registered 2 with the Department of Public Safety or any other law 3 enforcement -- or registered to the general public. Now, 4 deferred registration, that's a very good possibility, 5 'cause judges can do that to hold something over that kid's 6 head to participate -- 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 8 MS. HARRIS: -- in treatment. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Of the number of sex 10 offenders currently in detention, how many fall in the 11 categories one, two or three? 12 MS. HARRIS: That we presently have right 13 now? 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am. 15 MS. HARRIS: Three. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Out of how many? 17 MS. HARRIS: Five -- I'm sorry, excuse me. 18 Seven. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Three out of seven. 20 And where are the others? Where are they? 21 MS. HARRIS: The other four would possibly 22 fall under that deferred registration. Now, the judge -- 23 the presiding judges of those kids did not do that, but 24 that's not to say that -- that they might not be willing to 25 do that. But three of the kids are registered. 9-6-05 19 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you know, Becky, 2 how many contracts -- how many contracts do we have in total 3 with counties? 4 MS. HARRIS: I would say right at 50, total. 5 And you've got -- 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's staggered 7 throughout the year in terms of -- 8 MS. HARRIS: Yes, sir. And you've also got 9 to remember that not all of those are our contract that the 10 County Attorney wrote, because some of the counties use 11 their own contracts. Bexar County, El Paso County, Tarrant 12 County, Tom Green County. Some counties use their own 13 contracts. Now, I know in Tom Green County's, there is a 14 specification in there for specialized treatment rates, so 15 we wouldn't have to redo the Tom Green County contract. 16 It's already in their contract. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How much is it? 18 MS. HARRIS: It goes to the 115. They had 19 plugged in the new reimbursement on theirs. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the only other 21 question I have is this letter to Becky from Rex in regards 22 to the A.D.A. problems out there. Still don't know? 23 MS. HARRIS: Perry from DRG came out to the 24 facility -- it was Wednesday or Thursday; I can't remember. 25 He looked at the parking lot and looked at our drainage 9-6-05 20 1 system, and he was given a copy of that letter that Judge 2 Tinley faxed over to the facility. Gave him a copy of that 3 and indicated to Perry we need somebody to come out and 4 inspect for A.D.A. compliance, and Perry's response was not 5 forthcoming, so we're still at an impasse on -- 'cause it's 6 Perry -- it's DRG's responsibility to send an inspector out 7 there to inspect it. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, is the facility 9 certified or blessed or whatever you want to call it by the 10 State? 11 MS. HARRIS: As far as A.D.A. is concerned, 12 no, sir, because DRG needs to get an inspector out there. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does that hold us up 14 in any way? 15 MS. HARRIS: No, sir. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The function? Okay, 17 fine. Thank you. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That has only to do 19 with the that front parking area? 20 MS. HARRIS: Yes. But the inspector would 21 also need to verify that the A.D.A. fixtures that were out 22 of compliance inside have been rectified, which they have, 23 but you just need an inspector to say that it has. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, just this one 25 sentence in here from the A.D.A. Support Group says, "If we 9-6-05 21 1 do not receive a response to this notice, we will be 2 required to refer this matter to T.D.L.R. Enforcement." And 3 that looked like a pretty serious sentence to me. The word 4 "enforcement" makes me think that there is some kind of 5 state law that we're not complying with. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We probably had that same 7 thing on the bathroom when we remodeled the courthouse. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, it's juvenile 9 facilities and bathrooms -- nevermind. All-righty. What 10 are we doing? 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else to be handled in 12 open session with regard to this issue? If not, we will go 13 out of open or public session at 1:59, and we will go into 14 closed or executive session with regard to personnel matters 15 at the facility. Obviously, we'll need the reporter. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we need -- 17 JUDGE TINLEY: We need Ms. Harris and -- and 18 Mr. Stanton, I presume. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd rather have them one 20 at a time. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One at a time. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: One at a time? Who do you 23 want first? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Makes no difference. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ms. Harris; she's 9-6-05 22 1 sitting there, and the County Attorney. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: County Attorney. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: And -- okay. 4 (The open session was closed at 1:59 a.m., and an executive session was held, the 5 transcript of which is contained in a separate document.) 6 - - - - - - - - - - 7 JUDGE TINLEY: We will resume in public or 8 open session. It is 4:47. Ms. Rector, with regard to Item 9 3 on today's agenda, we've still got quite a bit of work to 10 do on 1 and 2, and in connection with the timetable that you 11 gave me for Item 3, is it going to present a problem if -- 12 if we take that up tomorrow by virtue of a recess today, and 13 then pick back up where we left off tomorrow? 14 MS. RECTOR: I think if you just recess and 15 take it back up tomorrow, we'll be okay. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. Thank you. 17 Item 2 on our agenda is to consider and discuss and take 18 appropriate action on county personnel issues in various 19 departments, including increase-slash-decrease in staffing 20 level, salary adjustments, reorganization, reclassification, 21 and changes in job description, with executive session as 22 may be necessary or appropriate. 23 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, in our 24 earlier discussions, there were -- as we went through each 25 department, there were a number of proposals on changes in 9-6-05 23 1 staffing level or changes in classifications or salaries or 2 whatever. I'd like to start off with an overview of 3 staffing levels that includes a proposal to -- to change the 4 budget. It would have a net effect of reducing the 5 employment level by 14 and a half people. I want to make it 6 clear that what I'm proposing is that we will reduce the 7 salary line item on several budgets of either departments of 8 people that report to the Commissioners Court or elected 9 officials. It doesn't deal with identifying what specific 10 individuals would be surplus; it deals simply with the line 11 item on the budget that deals with salaries. And I'm just 12 going to go over this first, and then I think that we'll 13 invite some discussion. 14 First department I've got on here is 15 Information Technology, and that department asked for an 16 additional full-time staff, and I'm proposing that we leave 17 that item in the budget. For Road and Bridge Department, 18 I'm not proposing any reductions, and I've noted that over 19 the past few years, they've made significant reductions in 20 their employment levels. I'll deal with Facilities and 21 Maintenance and Animal Control in one -- one statement. I'm 22 proposing that we merge Animal Control with Facilities and 23 Maintenance, and we reduce the total staffing there by a 24 total of two employees. Juvenile Detention, I'd propose 25 that we reduce staff by five, but that's going to be dealt 9-6-05 24 1 with in another budget scheme, so I won't deal with that 2 here today. Collections Department, no change. County 3 Extension Office, I recommend that we abolish the fourth 4 agent position. That's the job that's been vacant for some 5 time. Environmental Health, I note -- 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Going back to the 7 Extension -- and I'm guessing with that, we don't add the 8 new position that was requested? 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No -- yes, and 10 reduce the staffing there by one. Environmental Health, I 11 note that that department's grown by one and a half since we 12 established it, and I'm recommending that we cut that staff 13 by one. Sheriff's Department, I note that the Sheriff has 14 abolished two jobs from the last budget period, and has 15 requested an addition of two different positions for no net 16 change, and I'm suggesting that there should be a net effect 17 of minus one there. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that above and beyond 19 what the Sheriff's done, or -- 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No, that includes 21 what he's done. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. So, no change from 23 what his proposed -- 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: He's proposing to 25 add two; I'm asking, can you get by with adding one. 9-6-05 25 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Instead of two. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 4 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: District Clerk, I 5 don't propose any changes. Tax Assessor/Collector, I 6 recommend we budget for two fewer positions. County Clerk, 7 I recommend that we budget for two fewer positions. The 8 Treasurer, I recommend that we eliminate the part-time job, 9 the halftime job, and that we move the employment function 10 to Commissioners Court and add a part-time job there. 11 County Attorney is -- by his proposal, is down one; he 12 previously abolished a job. Justice of the Peace, I'm 13 proposing that we relocate J.P. 1 and 2 to a close proximity 14 here in the courthouse, and that they share a clerk, 15 reducing staff by one. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 1 and 2, or 1 and 3? 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 1 and 3. I always 18 get that wrong, Commissioner. Thank you. Constables, no 19 change. And the Auditor, I propose that we agree to leave 20 one-half part-time -- agree to the one-half part-time. I 21 think it's converting a part-time to full-time or whatever; 22 he asked for one-half person additional in his salary item, 23 and that we add JDF billing to that function. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, okay. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That reduction's 9-6-05 26 1 going to be 14 and a half, and the estimated savings will be 2 about $500,000 a year. These changes are consistent with 3 the fact that we have -- that show that we're an expensive 4 county and that we have more employees than any other county 5 our size. It's not a solution to that overstaffing, but 6 it's a step in the right direction. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm sure -- I mean, I'm 8 not going to touch on the other elected officials; I figure 9 that they can speak for themselves on that. The questions 10 I'm going to have are on Facilities and Maintenance and 11 Animal Control. Can you walk me through how you combine 12 those two? I mean, just to -- as to -- they seem like very 13 different functions to me. I mean, I could see Animal 14 Control and Environmental Health closer together than I can 15 Maintenance and Animal Control. 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They are different. 17 It's a stretch. And it's -- what I do see is that both of 18 them deal with maintaining facilities and with custodial job 19 functions, and -- and I think there's some synergy to be 20 gained by having the two of them managed by a single 21 individual. It's kind of a stretch, I admit. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It was that way years 23 ago. 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Was it? 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, it was. I 9-6-05 27 1 believe. Wasn't it? Wasn't it, Mr. Holekamp? 2 MR. HOLEKAMP: Say that -- I didn't hear you. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Did you not used to 4 have a combination of Animal Control and Maintenance? 5 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what I 7 thought. I don't know how effective it was, but it was that 8 way. 9 MR. HOLEKAMP: In fact, at that time -- 10 excuse me -- Environmental Health, which was Solid Waste, 11 Animal Control, and Maintenance at that time. It wasn't 12 called Facilities Use; it was just called Maintenance, but 13 that is correct. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, basically what you're 15 doing is you're combining the supervisory position, and the 16 actual -- you're not changing the -- 17 MR. HOLEKAMP: It's a reduction. 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm not -- I'm 19 looking at a different organization chart that's got no 20 names in it, that's blank. I'm not proposing who would head 21 this -- this newly created department, but it would reduce 22 the supervisory position. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Reduce a supervisor. 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah, and it would 25 reduce another position. 9-6-05 28 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, how do you want 3 to proceed? Do you want these various departments -- I see 4 10 of the 18 that you list for all practical purposes report 5 to Commissioners Court through their department heads. Do 6 you want some assessment from them back as to the 7 practicality? How do you want to approach it? 8 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, as we 9 went through each individual department, we talked about 10 their justification for needing the budget levels that they 11 proposed, and I don't see any -- any reason to go back 12 through that now. It's obviously a -- a difference of 13 opinion on it. It -- the combined total of all of our 14 functions are -- in the opinion of those that head the 15 functions, they're justified in having an extraordinarily 16 high level of employment compared to other counties our 17 size. I don't think I'm going to see any minds changed on 18 that. I'm just suggesting that this Commissioners Court, if 19 there's ever going to be any reconciliation of our 20 employment levels, has to -- has to take a position that 21 we're not going to budget for and pay for employment levels 22 that we deem to be too high. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I want to ask 24 the Auditor a question as soon as he gets through visiting 25 back there. And he is not one of our employees, either. 9-6-05 29 1 But you're talking about adding, I think, this Juvenile 2 Detention Facility billing. Is that your JDF -- 3 Commissioner? 4 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Juvenile. Weren't you 6 talking about taking on possibly some indigent health care 7 billing as well? Or -- 8 MR. TOMLINSON: That was my proposal, was to 9 take on the indigent health care payments. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm sorry, Tommy, I 11 can't hear. 12 MR. TOMLINSON: Right now we're contracting 13 with a firm -- a Houston firm to -- to make our indigent 14 health care payments to our local vendors. And the Social 15 Services Department at Sid Peterson Hospital essentially 16 have a manual system that they use to -- to approve people 17 for indigent health care, and I'm proposing to -- to take on 18 the payments in lieu of contracting with -- with this 19 Houston firm. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think I got that 21 wrong, Commissioner. Your proposal was to convert a 22 part-time job to full-time? 23 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And the rationale 25 was what? 9-6-05 30 1 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, right now we pay that 2 Houston firm 4 and a half percent -- 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I see. 4 MR. TOMLINSON: -- of our indigent health 5 care bills, which is around $32,000. So, my request was to 6 change my part-time person into a full-time. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: My note was wrong, 8 Commissioner. That's what I'm thinking about. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, I see. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What I'm saying here 11 is that -- and other thing Tommy didn't say is that the cost 12 of the auditing department has dropped over the last year or 13 two because of him cutting back his hours. What I'm saying 14 is, I'm supporting it. I think we should support that. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, adding a half a 16 person onto the half that's already there -- 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- would make the one 19 full-time. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's taking back 21 the billing, which helps pay for that. Which -- which does 22 pay for that. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's almost -- 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What do we pay that firm 25 in Houston now? 9-6-05 31 1 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, so far this year, we've 2 paid them $32,000. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, that's half a spot. 4 We're coming out ahead, okay. 5 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, it helps -- it helps 6 Sid Peterson, too. I mean, it streamlines their -- their 7 process of qualifying people for indigent health care. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I look at -- I'll just 9 start with some of the ones that are -- Justice of the 10 Peace; I think that's worth exploring. I think that's an 11 interesting idea. I know there was opposition to doing 12 that. I don't know that we can do it. I mean, it's -- it 13 seems like a difficult thing to do right now, I mean, 'cause 14 we'd have to change offices and -- you know, someplace in 15 that area, but I think that's a very good thing to look at 16 really seriously, because I think there should be a way to 17 combine those. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You notice Precinct 4 19 is not in this thing. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner? Could 21 you enlighten us on your -- your comment with respect to 22 Commissioners Court? Assume employment function -- 23 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm looking for some 24 synergy there. I think we've observed that we have -- 25 currently have a difficult issue in that communications and 9-6-05 32 1 answering the telephone and all that is sometimes 2 overwhelming, so I'm trying to find a way to -- to get some 3 relief there, but by not adding to our total employment 4 costs in general. The -- the processes of enrolling new 5 employees and doing the personnel action forms and handling 6 benefits and that sort of thing I think could be added to a 7 job that provides some -- some -- allows Kathy Mitchell to 8 stretch her work more without adding to the total staff, and 9 that's why I'm proposing to transfer that from the 10 Treasurer's department and allow that part-time person to 11 handle some of the overload in Kathy Mitchell's job. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, I 13 somewhat agree with that, but I would also like to add to 14 that. I think the booking of the -- of the Youth Exhibit 15 Center should also come to Commissioners Court. And I don't 16 know if it -- one-half person is enough, but I think there's 17 a -- it frees up a slot in Maintenance by moving that up 18 into this office, and then, likewise, moving some of the 19 answering phones, other clerical responsibilities away from 20 Ms. Mitchell and bringing that up. And I think that, 21 actually, you could, you know, add a half up here and get 22 rid of one half elsewhere, or maybe one elsewhere. I don't 23 know if it totally gets rid of -- I don't know how much of 24 that time the Maintenance Department has devoted to that, 25 but there certainly is at least half a position, so you 9-6-05 33 1 could get rid of two halves and add a whole, and we're a net 2 decrease. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But as far as booking 4 the Ag Barn facility, you know, if you get -- we get a half 5 a person up here, or a halftime person, how is that person 6 going to be able to go and show the Ag Barn? I mean, by 7 scheduling tours? Or -- 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Scheduling. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just can't see all 10 that working, in my mind, but I'm certainly not saying that 11 it won't. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think scheduling. I 13 mean, I think that's something we'll have to look at. You 14 know, you may have to rely on -- I mean, we have a 15 maintenance person out there almost all the time. That 16 person can still show the facility; they just won't enter 17 into contract discussions. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's how 19 its accomplished, that way. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think that's how 21 other facilities -- I mean, there's no reason to have, you 22 know, the contract person out there discussing -- I mean, 23 giving -- we should have a contract that is pretty clear. 24 We have a fee schedule; hand that to people. They go out, 25 they show them the facility, come back and ask questions of 9-6-05 34 1 the person in here. On the Extension Office, I would 2 probably rather bring in the new spot, which is not -- isn't 3 that funded by a different department? 4 JUDGE TINLEY: It's funded, about probably 60 5 percent or better, by the State. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But isn't, I mean, the 7 new one that I believe Kevin was going to put under his 8 department coming out of his department? That new -- 9 JUDGE TINLEY: That part-time, yes. That 10 would be -- that would be out of state IV-E money, and 11 that's limited purpose money. That can only be used -- 12 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The job I'm thinking 13 about -- maybe I'm confused. Something in here is the one 14 that's been vacant for some time. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the one, that 16 family -- 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Family and 18 Consumer -- 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Consumer science, yeah. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And they've had -- 21 they've had that position open, and it's been a stretch for 22 them to get by without it, but the stretch is okay. They 23 seem to be doing pretty well. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I kind of agree with 25 you; I think that can continue. 9-6-05 35 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the only -- just 2 remember that those are primarily state money. Doesn't mean 3 we shouldn't spend it, but that doesn't impact our -- we 4 don't get an employee off of that. It's a quarter of an 5 employee, or a third. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Probably about a third. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: A third. But, anyway. I 8 don't have a real problem with leaving that spot vacant 9 for -- I mean, certainly for a while. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: It's going to be an 11 interesting conversation with the district supervisor when I 12 talk to her tomorrow, isn't it? 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Give her Number 4's 14 number. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Got it handy. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Going back to the -- what 17 are the -- the possibility of combining Environmental Health 18 and Animal Control and/or Maintenance with it, as it was at 19 one point? Is that something we should even entertain? 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think my question to 21 that would be, why did we break it out in the first place? 22 If those things were together at one time, what was the 23 reason that we separated them out? Mr. Holekamp? 24 Commissioner Holekamp? 25 MR. HOLEKAMP: The reason it was -- it was 9-6-05 36 1 taken apart was because U.G.R.A. contracted to do the -- 2 were doing the environmental and the septics. Then it came 3 back here, and Miguel and them went ahead and started to do 4 solid waste. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Under the old 6 scenario, you only had -- you only had solid waste? 7 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir. I just had a 8 part-time person. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the County 10 contracted out for O.S.S.F. 11 MR. HOLEKAMP: Doing inspections; that is 12 correct. We didn't do any septics when -- 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 14 MR. HOLEKAMP: -- I was there. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- since I don't see 16 anyone jumping up to talk, does either the ones that are 17 affected -- Treasurer, County Clerk, Tax Assessor, or 18 Sheriff -- want to comment on the proposal? 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The Sheriff one, only 20 thing I can comment, he's still adding one instead of the 21 two security, and to me, I've told y'all all along the 22 security is an issue that I think this Court and everybody 23 has to make. If we do not get the panic system through the 24 grant deal that we're doing and that's not figured in, and 25 if we can get through Judge Tinley and what we've been 9-6-05 37 1 talking about with the District Judges and having more court 2 out there in that J.P. courtroom instead of a lot of those 3 mundane ones here -- just like, you know, pretrials and 4 that; not the hearing, even that one extra one that you're 5 still adding, that's courthouse security. Okay. If we got 6 the panic system, it probably should be there. If we can 7 get some of this other stuff, then that one may not even -- 8 I hate to say it may not be needed. We need more courthouse 9 security. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that paid for out 11 of a separate courthouse security fund? 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Part of that does come 13 out of fees, but it's only paying, I think, like right 14 now -- Tommy may correct me if I'm wrong -- with the 15 salaries and all the equipment we have now, it's about a 16 $44,000 budget, and I think it's paying about 38,000 or 17 39,000 of that. So, the County's budget is paying about 18 5,000 for courthouse -- or -- 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As it exists today? 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: As it exists today. 21 Now, I don't think the courthouse fees -- the security fees 22 are going up in any of the new stuff on court costs and 23 that, so that's going to stay about the same. You'll get 24 about 38,000, 39,000 in revenue, but any of this additional 25 would cost the County. I'll leave it kind of at that. 9-6-05 38 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How about 2 Environmental Health? Mr. Arreola? 3 MR. ARREOLA: Well, it's like we discussed it 4 in the prior meeting; it's the service we provide to the 5 community. So, it's -- we have it right, the staffing level 6 we have. On solid waste, we do need more. On O.S.S.F., the 7 way we have it is -- it's just right. Cutting one person 8 will affect the service. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Anyone else over here? 10 MS. NEMEC: Cutting a part-time employee in 11 my office and hiring a part-time employee in the County 12 Commissioners office and letting them do enrollment, and I'm 13 not sure what else y'all had in mind, but there's no way our 14 office is going to be able to function that way. If we take 15 the duties of the insurance enrollment and whatever else you 16 had in mind and put them in the County Commissioners Court, 17 all that's going to do is alleviate my chief deputy from 18 working overtime, which this week she's off every day this 19 week trying to take off some comp time. My part-time 20 person, what she does is she does revenues and she pays 21 bills. And the Auditor's office works very closely with us, 22 and if -- if y'all are going to want to cut, I suggest that 23 y'all go and spend a week in my office, and I think y'all 24 will know that that's not possible. Or talk to the 25 Auditor's office, because I think that they know that 9-6-05 39 1 there's no way our office could function that way. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have any comments you'd 3 like to make, Ms. Pieper? 4 MS. PIEPER: I'm kind of scared to, 'cause 5 it's very upsetting. Because Mr. Nicholson's not really 6 been in our office to see what we do. I have 15-plus 7 departments in there, and we're already doing multiple 8 duties, so I don't know how I'm supposed to cut. And I've 9 justified my employees when I presented my budget. We have 10 no room for play. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Rector? 12 MS. RECTOR: I want to comment on the other 13 counties that we are being compared to, and the duties in 14 those other offices are not the same. And I gave some 15 statistics last year on some of those counties. Some of 16 them contract away their collections. They contract away 17 their voter registration and do nothing but vehicle 18 registration, and have almost the same amount of staff that 19 I have. Texas Department of Transportation is also saying 20 that I am under-computerized, understaffed in my Vehicle 21 Registration Department; that they gauge it on 50,000 22 transactions per clerk per month. We are doing way more 23 than that. We've already hit the 50,000 registration mark, 24 which I explained to the Court would be an additional dollar 25 that we will be collecting on those registrations. If 9-6-05 40 1 anyone would like to come and stand in line in my office, 2 like I have especially today, my clerks are overworked. I 3 don't see how in the world that Commissioner Nicholson can 4 think that I can do with two less people in my office. 5 Absolutely no way. When we get into tax time, I invite 6 Commissioner Nicholson to come and work in my office in tax 7 time. Come in and work in my office in Vehicle 8 Registration, and see if he thinks that there's room for me 9 to cut my staff. I have one more person in my office than 10 was in there 25 years ago, and this county has grown 11 tremendously in 25 years. So, just the idea of even 12 thinking about my staff being reduced is -- it's out of the 13 question. I am already overworked. My books are so far 14 behind because I stay covered up with everything else I'm 15 trying to do. My staff stays behind. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Here's the bottom 17 line. We have each year attempted to, and have done -- 18 found a way to provide a cost-of-living adjustment for all 19 of Kerr County's employees. It is my personal goal to do 20 that again this year, and I think there's -- there's others 21 on this Court who share that position with me. But you're 22 going to have to help us find those dollars. They're not 23 here. You're going to have to help us find those dollars. 24 They are not here, period. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other elected official or 9-6-05 41 1 department head have any comment they wish to make? 2 MS. UECKER: Well, I just want to comment on 3 something that the Sheriff said about the security out at -- 4 holding pretrials out there. You know, we've tried to do 5 this before, but what you don't understand is when pretrials 6 go out there, so does the clerk, without a computer, and so 7 do all of those files. And we've tried this before, and 8 we've had to have people just load all of this up and take 9 it out there. The way it is now, when I -- when I have -- 10 with 198th -- no, 216th pretrials, I have to have two clerks 11 in there anyway. Now, I don't know how they intend to work 12 that, but the way -- the way it is, at least they can come 13 back and forth when they're doing discovery motions that 14 might take more than 30 minutes or so, and continue to 15 perform their duties. But if they're out there, they can't 16 go back and forth. So, you know, I don't know how that's 17 going to work. 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, we've got just 19 about all the department heads and elected officials here 20 now that -- that supervise a number of people. We don't 21 have the J.P.'s or the constables, but we've got most of the 22 people who can control the employment levels for the county, 23 and we hear the same thing time and time again. We've got 24 more people and more expense than any other county of the 14 25 that are our size, and it didn't happen on anybody's shift. 9-6-05 42 1 There's one or two of you that have made an effort to cut 2 back on staffing. The Sheriff has and Rex has and some 3 others, but the rest of you are saying there's good and 4 sufficient reason that we need more people than those other 5 13 counties in our functions, and I don't believe that. I 6 think we need to find out how those other counties operate 7 with fewer people, and then take on those best practices and 8 cut our staffing levels to be -- I don't want to -- I don't 9 want to be the best. I don't expect that. I'd just like to 10 not be in dead-last place. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I will make a comment, 12 that -- I don't want Rusty to get mad at me, but we have 13 increased his staff substantially since I've been a 14 Commissioner. So, I mean, I don't know where he ranks on 15 the numbers, but, you know, I don't want Rusty to be 16 standing out there as a -- as a big staff cutter. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I take that back. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because he's -- 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only thing I'll say, 20 if you remember, we gave back already -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- four jailers before 23 this year when they increased it. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, you have. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And what I'm saying, 9-6-05 43 1 even on this one security personnel issue, I think we have 2 survived, you know, with where we're at now with security 3 officers. We've been very fortunate there hasn't been 4 anything major happen. As far as having, you know, one 5 person here, there's going to be. Now, that one extra 6 position, you know, I don't mind cutting back too, 'cause 7 the camera system's not going to be -- be a deal, so you're 8 cutting one of those. And the one extra position -- I'm 9 saying that I would recommend we increase security at this 10 courthouse, but what I'm also saying is that if the clerks 11 and -- and the Court feel comfortable with it, I think y'all 12 know what the security issues are around here too; that we 13 don't add even that second position here, okay? Being the 14 current one we have and one more. Then don't add that one 15 more, you know. I mean, we'll -- we'll survive as we have 16 been. I just think there are some security issues. But in 17 Linda's deal in pretrials and court out there, I think this 18 is a viable deal. We haven't come to Linda with it yet, but 19 it would be -- I think a lot of her concerns would be worked 20 out in that, but the timing just hasn't been right to come 21 talk to Linda. 22 MS. UECKER: But we've done that before, and 23 it's a huge problem. 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We're going to do it a 25 little bit different to where it doesn't create the huge 9-6-05 44 1 problem it did for you before. But a lot of that is very 2 feasible, because it is a big security issue bringing 50 and 3 60 inmates over here instead of bringing one employee out 4 there. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just wanted to make 6 sure that -- I mean -- 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So, no, I don't have a 8 problem, okay? I haven't asked for more officers lately, 9 except for courthouse security, and that's a -- that's a 10 call of this Court. And officials here need to make -- 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Holekamp? 12 MR. HOLEKAMP: I just have a comment. And I 13 commend Commissioner Nicholson for taking his stand on 14 cutting back, and I -- and as a department head, I work at 15 the pleasure of the Court. I'm going to do whatever y'all 16 ask me to do. But one thing I need to remind you is that 17 when you -- when you cut people, whether it be in my 18 department or anybody else, there's a certain level of -- of 19 service that may slow down. I know in my department it'll 20 slow down somewhat. We won't do the construction -- a lot 21 of the construction stuff that we currently do; it would be 22 jobbed out or whatever. I'm not -- this is not a threat. 23 This is just saying is -- is that when you -- we get in a 24 comfort zone of people doing certain tasks, and we all -- as 25 I said, I work at the pleasure of y'all, so I'll do whatever 9-6-05 45 1 you ask. And the Animal Control thing, if you wish to do 2 that and save some coins, I'm willing to do whatever you ask 3 me to. Whatever the Court asks me to. It's -- and, of 4 course, the juvenile detention thing, that's still -- as far 5 as I know, there's no definitive answer on it, and there's 6 another two buildings that we're going to be dealing with or 7 whatever, so I wanted y'all to keep that in mind. So, I 8 well understand what you're up against, and I would really 9 appreciate if we could do a cost-of-living for the 10 employees, because it's really, really important if we can 11 do it. 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'll second the 13 cost-of-living. I think it's more important this year than 14 any other with -- as we all are dealing with the gas prices 15 and everything else. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't disagree with 17 you, Sheriff. 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I agree. I'm just 19 reiterating that. 20 MS. UECKER: I have a comment on the 21 cost-of-living, which I agree it should be done. And as 22 I've talked about every year -- and it seems like, on a 23 one-on-one basis, you know, you agree with me, but if you're 24 going to call it a cost-of-living, it should not be by 25 percentage, because a percentage of a 12-1 is much less than 9-6-05 46 1 a percentage of, say, Leonard Odom's salary. And the 2 gasoline costs exactly the same for this 12-1 as it does for 3 Leonard Odom or me or anybody else. So, if you're going to 4 call it a cost-of-living, then it should maybe be averaged 5 to the percentage and add a flat amount to everybody. A 6 loaf of bread is the same; doesn't matter who buys it. And 7 I -- you know, I feel like this is where the cliche, "the 8 rich get richer and the poor get poorer" -- because if, you 9 know -- 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not at 3 percent a 11 year, they don't. 12 MS. UECKER: Exactly. But that 3 percent may 13 still put that person that's a 12-1 in the hole when it 14 comes to, you know, the increase in gas and bread and 15 whatever. Which is -- it's still going to have to come out 16 of their pocket, you know, minus what the cost-of-living is. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I disagree. 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Ms. Uecker, you've 19 heard me say -- and other Commissioners, and I know you've 20 heard the Judge say that we'd like to pay people more, and 21 particularly our lowest paid people; I'd like to increase 22 their pay. I'd like to lower our payroll and pay people 23 more, and it can be done. 24 MS. UECKER: Well, and I understand that, but 25 that's -- I'm talking about the cost-of-living being 9-6-05 47 1 percentage-wise versus -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it's called a 3 cost-of-living because you -- take the Sheriff. I'd rather 4 not, but, you know, his salary's higher than a 12-1. Well, 5 he has a cost-of-living that's higher than a 12-1. 6 Probably, too, he has a certain lifestyle that he leads 7 versus somebody else. Based on what you're saying, we 8 should pay everyone the same. 9 MS. UECKER: No, that's not exactly -- that's 10 not at all what I'm saying. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, it is. You're 12 saying the same thing. You're saying we should give flat 13 increases regardless. 14 MS. UECKER: No, for cost of living. You've 15 already set his salary at much higher than everybody else's, 16 so... (Laughter.) But -- so the cost-of-living should be 17 the same, because a gallon of gas is $3; I don't care who's 18 paying it. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand your 20 point, and I'm not arguing your point, but a 21 cost-of-living -- an allowance adjustment is predicated on 22 the Consumer Price Index, and it is an indexing of 23 everybody's salary based on the inflation factors in the 24 country. That's what it is. It is indexing everybody 25 upward because of inflation. 9-6-05 48 1 MS. UECKER: Sure it is. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So part of what 3 you're -- part of your argument, Linda, is embodied in the 4 cost-of-living indexing. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's -- I mean, yes. I 6 mean, you're saying that Rusty should take a pay cut versus 7 a -- 8 MS. UECKER: No, I'm not. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, because -- 10 MS. UECKER: No. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- if you don't give, you 12 know, every -- Rusty or any employee -- me, whatever -- the 13 same percentage, and the cost of living has gone up 14 3.5 percent this year, anyone that gets less than 15 3.5 percent salary increase is taking a cut in pay. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's right. 17 MS. UECKER: Well, at 3.5, probably the 18 12-1's are taking a cut in pay. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can be. But at 20 nothing, it's a bigger cut in pay. 21 MS. UECKER: Well -- 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You're not going to 23 win this argument. 24 MS. UECKER: No, I understand that. Well, 25 you have to figure who's making the decisions, I guess. 9-6-05 49 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We could start with 2 reducing the Sheriff's pay. 3 MS. UECKER: Well -- 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Y'all finally got it 5 above the chief deputy's pay last year. Wait a minute. 6 MS. UECKER: Well, I was just using him as an 7 example. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Of course. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He'd much rather you 10 use a captain on the local police force. 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Now, that would be an 12 interesting comparison. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, gentlemen. Anything 14 else? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We've solved all 16 these problems, right, Judge? 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, we did. 18 MS. UECKER: I have one more question about 19 my request during another budget workshop to move 12-1's to 20 13's and 13's to 14's within the office staff. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What was the 22 question? 23 MS. UECKER: To move the office staff in the 24 courthouse and Sheriff's Office, those that are 12-1's to 25 13's, and those that are 13's to 14's. Because 14 seems to 9-6-05 50 1 be kind of a blank level. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're asking have we 3 done that yet? 4 MS. UECKER: Would you consider that? 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's part of -- all 6 these are part of the considerations. We have not made a 7 decision yet. 8 MS. UECKER: I was reiterating my request, 9 then, to do that. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The number of 11 proposals on reclassifications or salary adjustments, I 12 think we just have to go back through here and say yes or no 13 on each one. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But -- 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Go ahead. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Another part of your 18 request was to -- there were certain -- certain employees to 19 leave at the -- new hires coming in, leave at the 12-1? 20 MS. UECKER: Well, yeah. And, you know, I'm, 21 of course, talking about people maybe in Maintenance -- and 22 that's nothing against anybody in Maintenance, 'cause he has 23 an excellent staff. But someone may start at a 12-1 there 24 that may not even speak English, or -- you know, and then 25 you have to have -- 9-6-05 51 1 MR. HOLEKAMP: You don't have to speak 2 English to clean a commode. 3 MS. UECKER: Exactly. But they may not. 4 MR. HOLEKAMP: I wish you wouldn't use that 5 analogy. 6 MS. UECKER: Okay. 7 MR. HOLEKAMP: Linda, I'm sorry. I feel real 8 sensitive about that. 9 MS. UECKER: Well, and I know -- 10 MR. HOLEKAMP: It's very important to me. 11 MS. UECKER: Okay, that's fine, and I 12 apologize for that. 13 MR. HOLEKAMP: All right. 14 MS. UECKER: But what I'm saying is -- 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's the Sheriff's 16 fault. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All the Sheriff's 18 fault. 19 MS. UECKER: What I'm saying is, there is a 20 certain amount of ability and skills that go into -- and, I 21 mean, you have some that are the same way. 22 MR. HOLEKAMP: I understand. 23 MS. UECKER: You should understand. 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You made the 25 argument very eloquently when you were here before. 9-6-05 52 1 MS. UECKER: Okay. 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And I've got notes 3 on it that says -- 4 MS. UECKER: Well, he asked me, you know, 5 what the -- 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- move the 12-1's 7 to 13-1's, and 13-1's to 14-1's. Isn't that what you said? 8 MS. UECKER: Yeah. 'Cause you've got 9 something that would be affected by that as well. 10 MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, yeah. But I'm -- well, 11 I got you. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question I have is -- 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Gentleman has his 14 hand up, Judge. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, let me go on to 16 this. Can Tommy go over this newest handout he gave us, 17 just as to exactly what's in here? I know the two pages, 18 the COLA amounts are on there. And, Tommy, just looking at 19 the numbers, I had -- 20 (Low-voice discussion off the record.) 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is today's. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, okay. In the one 23 that we've got today, or late last week, is the COLA in 24 there? 25 MR. TOMLINSON: No. 9-6-05 53 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This most recent one, 2 it's not in there, but you gave us a second sheet with the 3 costs. 4 MR. TOMLINSON: Hmm? 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But you gave us a 6 second sheet that told us what it cost. 7 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, that's correct. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And a COLA for all 9 employees is 235,000. 10 MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 12 MR. TOMLINSON: That's -- that's the -- 13 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's at 3.2. 14 MR. TOMLINSON: That's the salary plus 15 benefits -- 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 17 MR. TOMLINSON: -- associated with that. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, on this sheet 20 here, the very bottom one, 1 percent of tax levy. 21 MR. TOMLINSON: Mm-hmm. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is it 1 percent or one 23 cent? 24 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, it's one cent. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One cent. 9-6-05 54 1 MR. TOMLINSON: That was a subtle little 2 hint. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I picked it up. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the -- if we were to 5 give a -- a 3.2 percent COLA, that's going to reduce our 6 general fund down to basically $3 million -- 7 MR. TOMLINSON: Right. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- in reserves. 9 MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And we are -- our policy 11 is 25 percent? 12 (Mr. Tomlinson nodded.) 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's 25 percent of 14 15 million? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's not there. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, the number you 17 have right there now is 21.33 percent without the COLA. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Without the COLA, so 19 we're going down well below reserves if we give a COLA in 20 the current budget. And that does not include the juvenile 21 detention facility. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: No. 23 MR. TOMLINSON: That's right. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think, you 25 know, the options are to raise taxes, which I don't see this 9-6-05 55 1 Court really inclined to do, or cut personnel. 2 MR. TOMLINSON: There -- there is -- there's 3 one, I think, major pitfall in -- in reducing staff below a 4 certain level, and I think the more -- the more stress you 5 put on employees, the higher the risk of loss. That -- 6 that's just my opinion. But I think when -- at a certain 7 level, I think mistakes start to creep in, you know, the 8 work, and -- or the quality of work. I know that for -- you 9 know, as far as the Treasurer's office is concerned, there 10 is -- there is a statute on the books that says that 11 every -- every deposit shall be made within seven days of 12 receipt. So, I mean, that -- that puts some pressure on any 13 fee collection office to have -- you know, to have their 14 money available, and for the Treasurer to be able to receipt 15 that money and have it in the bank in seven working days. 16 You know, and as far as -- I mean, from an 17 internal control standpoint, I think -- I think it's -- it's 18 best for -- to have someone receipt funds other than the 19 person that audits the funds, and that's the reason that we 20 don't receive funds in our office, because we -- it's kind 21 of like the fox guarding the henhouse, and because, I mean, 22 we'd be auditing ourselves. And so, from a control 23 standpoint, I think it's important that -- that you keep 24 this in mind, that when -- you know, when you think about, 25 you know, reducing staff, I just -- as we are right now, I 9-6-05 56 1 have a -- I have a high confidence level in fee collection 2 offices, because they have -- they have the ability to 3 segregate their duties and, you know, hand over their 4 collections to the Treasurer in somewhat of a timely manner. 5 And I -- you know, I don't -- I don't want to lose -- I 6 don't want to lose that confidence, because if I -- if I 7 didn't have the confidence, I'd have to ask for two or three 8 more people to really do my job. So, I think -- I think 9 there's a down side at certain levels in staff reduction. I 10 just wanted to point that out. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll just make just a 12 general point, just a general comment. I hope all the -- 13 everyone in this room watches real closely the next time the 14 governor tries to put a cap on spending, because a lot of 15 this is -- what we're going through right now, or part of 16 it, is because we -- the over-65 freeze went in. That's a 17 hundred-some thousand that went in there, or 150,000, 18 whatever that number was. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 140. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Any cap that comes down 21 from Austin is going to make this year look like a good 22 year. If we can't raise the -- I mean, we just don't have a 23 choice. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to point out 25 that Commissioner Letz voted against that, and I voted for 9-6-05 57 1 it, and I confess that it is a sin, and he's absolutely 2 right. But, as well, the Juvenile Detention Facility has 3 cost us right at a million dollars out of our reserves, so 4 you couple those two items together, and that's kind of 5 where we are in our reduction. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: May I ask the Court to 7 look back at your courthouse security budget and see what 8 y'all actually penciled in? Make sure we're on the same 9 page with that amount and what Tommy had figured in. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Tab 16. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Speak up, Sheriff. I 12 can't hear you. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And what Tommy had 14 figured in. 15 MR. TOMLINSON: There's two people. 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What about the alarm 17 system? Did you figure that in there? 'Cause they were 18 going to pencil it in. 19 MR. TOMLINSON: I don't think it is. 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Actually, without 21 anything, I don't know what your bottom line would be on 22 that, but if you take out all of that and just figure in 23 regular salary increase -- 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: My notes say that on 25 security improvements, you were asking for $30,000 to 9-6-05 58 1 $90,000. 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right, depending on the 3 system, okay, and on the employees. But if we cut that -- 4 everything back out of there, you're -- except for whatever 5 the regular employee costs are that's going in, it should go 6 back really close to what it was this year, which would be 7 the -- about the 46,000, 47,000 total budget. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, basically, try to get 9 the -- the less expensive of the -- 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well -- 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- grants. If we can get 12 it through a grant, great. If not, we'll hold a year and 13 hold the line. 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Y'all gave me permission 15 for some reserves, if you will recall, and if I can find 16 some good qualified reserves, I can use them in courthouse 17 security, which was the original intention anyhow. But if 18 you take out the system -- if we can get it in a grant, 19 we'll get it in a grant, but it will still hold that overall 20 budget down to exactly what it is this year. Unless -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Depending on the salary 23 increase. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we pencil off one. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It may cut out quite a 9-6-05 59 1 bit of what y'all have, 'cause two employees and that 2 system, if y'all had that system penciled in, there will be 3 well over 100,000. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Cut out one employee. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Quick calculation, that will 8 cut about 40,000. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, it's about time I 10 quit thinking. Some people might say that happened long 11 ago, but... 12 JUDGE TINLEY: I wouldn't touch it. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would recommend that we 14 recess until tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody else have anything 17 else to offer this evening? We will be in recess until 18 9 a.m. Wednesday, September the 7th, 2005. 19 (Commissioners Court recessed at 5:37 p.m.) 20 - - - - - - - - - - 21 22 23 24 25 9-6-05 60 1 STATE OF TEXAS | 2 COUNTY OF KERR | 3 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 4 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as 5 County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, 6 Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. 7 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 9th day of September, 8 2005. 9 10 11 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 12 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 13 Certified Shorthand Reporter 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 9-6-05