1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Special Session 10 Monday, July 29, 2013 11 10:00 a.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 TOM MOSER, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 25 BRUCE OEHLER, Commissioner Pct. 4 2 1 I N D E X July 29, 2013 2 PAGE 3 1.1 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to accept resignation of Katherine Antes and hire 4 new employee to fill vacant position 3 5 1.2 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to approve MetLife proposal for County-funded 6 life coverage for employees under employee benefits program; approve payroll deduction 7 for voluntary supplemental coverages desired by employees 6 8 1.3 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 9 approve the purchase of a vehicle for Juvenile Probation, Environmental Health, and Extension 10 Office from reallocated funds from the 2012 Certificate of Obligation funding 20 11 --- Adjourned 64 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 1 On Monday, July 29, 2013, at 10:00 a.m., a special 2 meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in 3 the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, 4 Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in 5 open court: 6 P R O C E E D I N G S 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let me call to order this 8 special Commissioners Court meeting of the Kerr County 9 Commissioners Court posted and scheduled for this date, 10 Monday, July 29, 2013, at 10 a.m. It's a bit past that time 11 now. The first item on the agenda is to consider, discuss, 12 and take appropriate action to accept the resignation of the 13 Katherine Antes and hire a new employee to fill the vacant 14 position, with starting salary to be based upon 15 qualifications and experience, with no change in the new 16 budget. Ms. Bolin? 17 MS. BOLIN: Yes, sir. My new accountant had 18 applied at Leakey ISD at the same time she applied here, and 19 finally got a call from them, and she's going to be making 20 substantially more and not having to driving 45 miles one 21 direction, so she took the job. And I don't blame her one 22 bit. I would like to rehire immediately for that. I do have 23 someone in mind, and if the Court approves the rehire, then I 24 would like to go ahead and hire them effective immediately. 25 And I do have money in my budget, since I didn't hire the 7-29-13 4 1 accountant that I have now until March. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is the person you have in mind 3 an accountant? 4 MS. BOLIN: Yes, 15 years experience. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: We're talking about a degreed 6 accountant? 7 MS. BOLIN: Yes -- I'm not sure if she's degreed. 8 I don't remember from her application, but I know she's had 9 15 years of accounting experience. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we're in the process of going 11 through this MGT thing, and that's -- 12 MS. BOLIN: Right. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: -- kind of evolving into all this, 14 and my understanding is that like so many of these positions 15 that we have, there may be a requirement that they be a 16 degreed accountant. 17 MS. BOLIN: Okay. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: And we have -- just like Kevin's got 19 a requirement for a degreed -- there are others, and I'm not 20 sure where we're going to be there. 21 MS. BOLIN: Okay. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: That's the only concern I have. 23 If the report -- the overall report indicates that that's 24 what we need, and the Court accepts that at -- at that face 25 value, why, then we're going to have that as one of the 7-29-13 5 1 qualifications, of course, for the position. 2 MS. BOLIN: Okay. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Jon, when are they going to make 4 their presentation to us? Do you know? Or maybe Dawn knows. 5 MS. LANTZ: They're finishing up their preliminary 6 report, so they're just double-checking everything, so 7 hopefully within the week we'll have the final job 8 descriptions for department heads and elected officials to 9 review what they've come up with as far as recommendations to 10 the Court. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My preference would be to 12 really not hire anyone in the county until -- for two weeks, 13 basically, something like that. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Until we have an opportunity to 15 review the -- 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, 'cause it could affect 17 what people are paid. 18 MS. BOLIN: Okay. Well, she had originally applied 19 for the motor vehicle part, because she has 10 years 20 experience in that as well as the experience in the 21 accounting, and so I can hire her for that. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 23 MS. BOLIN: And then once we decide on that, then I 24 can shift her if I need to, and go from there. But -- if 25 that's okay. 7-29-13 6 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 2 MS. BOLIN: Okay. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't see a problem in motor 4 vehicle. You've got an opening there? 5 MS. BOLIN: I do, and it was approved already. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, okay. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 8 MS. BOLIN: Thank you. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 2 on our special 11 agenda; to consider, discuss, take appropriate action to 12 approve MetLife proposal for County-funded life coverage for 13 employees under the employee benefits program, and approve 14 payroll deduction for voluntary supplemental coverages as 15 desired by employees. Ms. Lantz? 16 MS. LANTZ: Morning. Basically, our current basic 17 life insurance, we received another quote from MetLife that 18 is lower than our current quote we've gotten from ING, and 19 along with other supplementals such as short-term disability 20 and long-term disability connected into it. I believe 21 everybody should have a booklet that Alamo Insurance 22 provided, and I do have Terri Perez here with Alamo Insurance 23 to explain the differences there. If you go to Section -- I 24 believe it's 3, that is where the changes are occurring with 25 those particular plans. 7-29-13 7 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's -- let's first look at the 2 County-funded portion. That's the 20,000 that applies as 3 part of our employee benefits. And as the agenda item 4 indicates, the proposal is to go from -- our current 5 provider, I believe, is ING under our current plan. 6 MS. PEREZ: Yes, sir. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: And the proposal that -- that we 8 have before us is to switch that coverage over to MetLife. 9 Number one, the rate is a little bit cheaper? 10 MS. PEREZ: Correct, the rate. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: So the cost to the County is less 12 for the same amount of coverage. 13 MS. PEREZ: Than the renewal price for ING; that is 14 correct. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: And we've got a rate guarantee for 16 two years, it looks like. 17 MS. PEREZ: Yes, sir. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me ask you about -- under 19 conversion and portability, it says "included." Explain to 20 me what that means. 21 MS. PEREZ: Depending on the person's situation, if 22 they leave the county, the normal policy is to have the 23 option to either, one, convert, or two, to port. So if the 24 employee is disabled and leaves, or is a certain age bracket 25 and leaves, those also go into consideration when they're 7-29-13 8 1 either porting or converting. To convert a policy means that 2 once you break relationship with the county as an employee, 3 you're gone. You can contact the carrier, whichever one it 4 is, and ask to convert the policy, and normally what they'll 5 do is they'll send you out some documentation information and 6 the rates of what the conversion policy's going to be. It's 7 usually a whole life type policy. The rate goes up. But 8 what it allows the person to do is to obtain a policy without 9 having to show evidence of insurability. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: That's the point I wanted to make. 11 MS. PEREZ: Yeah. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: They can carry that over, and with 13 no evidence of insurability, whatever the current -- 14 MS. PEREZ: Whatever. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: -- standard rates are, smoker or 16 non-smoker as the case may be on, say, a whole life policy, 17 that's what you're going to face? 18 MS. PEREZ: Correct. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: But you got guaranteed insurability 20 as to that amount? 21 MS. PEREZ: Right. And so folks that do leave that 22 are sick, ill, uninsurable, if you will, outside, you know, 23 the job environment, they wouldn't be able to get insurance 24 any other way most likely. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: And we don't have that under our 7-29-13 9 1 current policy, according to what I'm looking at here. 2 MS. PEREZ: Under the basic plan, that is correct. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 4 MS. PEREZ: And that's the employer-sponsored 5 program. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Portability under MetLife is 7 EE to age 100. What is "EE"? 8 MS. PEREZ: Employee. 9 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Oh. 10 MS. PEREZ: Sorry. There's only so much room on 11 the little -- 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. Right. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Looking at the 14 supplementals -- 15 MS. PEREZ: Tab 3. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon? Tab 3? 17 MS. PEREZ: Yes, sir. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: That was the -- what Commissioner 19 Moser was looking at, employee to age 100. Of course, you've 20 got conversion also there. The -- I notice it says none 21 under age reduction. 22 MS. PEREZ: Correct. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: I know heretofore on the voluntary, 24 depending upon the age of the employee, the older employees 25 may not have been able to carry as much as they would have 7-29-13 10 1 desired because of -- of -- 2 MS. PEREZ: The age reduction. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: -- the fact that they were in that 4 age group; there was a percentage required reduction. 5 MS. PEREZ: Correct. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: That doesn't exist with going over 7 to MetLife? 8 MS. PEREZ: That's correct. Right now, ING has 9 five reduction stages, and it starts at age 70, so 70, 75, 10 80, 85, and 90, so depending on how old the employee is. 11 With MetLife, they don't do it. Whatever the face amount is, 12 there is no reduction to that amount, unless the employee 13 chooses to do so during open enrollment. So, if they 14 currently carry 100, they bring 100 with them at open 15 enrollment. If they only want 50, that's okay; they can 16 reduce it if they choose. Met will not impose a reduction on 17 that face value based on their age. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: What if, instead, they want five 19 times, up to a cap of 500,000? And they're only carrying 20 100 -- say 150 now? 21 MS. PEREZ: Currently, for going into open 22 enrollment, if you go with MetLife, the people that have the 23 life insurance currently, they're going to grandfather them 24 in. They will allow additional increments of $10,000 without 25 open -- without evidence of insurability during open 7-29-13 11 1 enrollment periods. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Up to five times of salary, or 3 500,000, whichever is -- is less? 4 MS. PEREZ: It's up to $150,000, which is the 5 normal guarantee issue amount. Anything beyond that requires 6 evidence of insurability. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 8 MS. PEREZ: Hang on for one second. Is that right? 9 MR. DAVIDSON: That's correct. 10 (Discussion off the record.) 11 MR. DAVIDSON: That's correct. You have 12 incremental -- I'm sorry about that -- incremental increases 13 of $10,000 for the employee, but once they're at 150, 14 anything above that, if they want to -- like, five times 15 their salary, let's say they're making, oh, 40,000 a year, so 16 they can go to 200,000. It would require evidence of 17 insurability at that time. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's suppose they currently have in 19 force 200,000. 20 MR. DAVIDSON: We're taking over all of those 21 existing coverages to where employees would not be reduced. 22 No one will lose benefits by moving to MetLife. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, if they've currently got 24 200, they can maintain 200 without evidence of insurability? 25 MS. PEREZ: Absolutely. They will be grandfathered 7-29-13 12 1 in at whatever the current face value is that they have for 2 the life. So, for folks that are in an age reduction 3 situation currently, and you have a few -- a few people, what 4 we'll do is we'll go backwards in time to see where they 5 started at before they started having that amount reduced, 6 and MetLife will go ahead and make them whole, if you will, 7 and give them back that original amount before those 8 reductions went into place. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Without -- they can -- they can -- 10 MS. PEREZ: Without having to answer -- 11 JUDGE TINLEY: The highest amount we've shown -- 12 they've shown over the history of their supplemental benefits 13 history, life history, without evidence of insurability. 14 Anything above that, if it exceeds 150,000, then it would 15 require evidence? 16 MS. PEREZ: Whatever the amount was before the 17 reductions went into place, we would go back in time to find 18 that number, and that's the magic number that MetLife would 19 go ahead and grandfather in and grant them to make them whole 20 again, as if they had no reductions in place. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: And then the good news is, the rate 22 is going down from -- 23 MS. PEREZ: There's always that. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: -- renewal from ING. 25 MS. PEREZ: Yes. 7-29-13 13 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Looks likes it's several win-wins 3 there. 4 MS. PEREZ: Absolutely. I think the reduction 5 portion is -- you know, that's a real big key right there. 6 Most companies have reduction rules in place, and so MetLife 7 is very generous with their life insurance, and it's not a 8 part of that contract. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Any more questions on the voluntary 10 shown? And you've got the short-term and long-term 11 disability? 12 MS. PEREZ: Yes, sir. With the short-term and 13 long-term disabilities, your incumbent carrier right now is 14 Cigna. And for open enrollment, if Cigna is able to obtain 15 the life insurance, they will provide the renewal at no 16 increase. They do require evidence of insurability for open 17 enrollment, because they're already there, so that means you 18 do have to answer the questions. MetLife, however, they've 19 got a better rate on the -- on the sheet here for both the 20 STD and the LTD, and for open enrollment this year, if you 21 decide to go with them, there is no evidence of insurability 22 required. So, anybody that wants to come in, they can do so 23 at this time if they were denied in the past with Cigna, and 24 the rate actually is lower. So, that's a good thing. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Part of this is packaging all this 7-29-13 14 1 up with MetLife, is it not? 2 MS. PEREZ: Yes, sir. And if you -- if you 3 actually bundle it, then that's how you can gain on the rate 4 as well. Plus they are able to provide what's called a list 5 bill to the ladies down in the H.R. office, where they 6 actually take the eligibility information; they know exactly 7 who's on what. They have what they bought, what they're 8 paying, and they're able to provide the ladies with an actual 9 bill based on everybody's name, and here's what they are, and 10 here's what they're supposed to be paying. So, I know for 11 auditing purposes, that's something that -- you know, that 12 we're looking for as well, so they can provide that at no 13 additional cost; it comes in with the rate. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that something that makes it 15 easier for you to keep up with all that, Dawn? 16 MS. LANTZ: Yes, because the other companies are 17 self-billed. We -- we took care of all the bills, gave it to 18 them. They checked it. So, we actually produced our own 19 bills, which this way, there are checks and balances. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay. Under Tab -- looks 21 like 6, we have vision. 22 COMMISSIONER MOSER: How about long-term? 23 JUDGE TINLEY: You got any questions on long-term? 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, on long-term, just some 25 abbreviations. Accident, sickness, maximum benefit RBD with 7-29-13 15 1 SSNRA. I don't know what that means. 2 MS. PEREZ: Okay. 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: At Tab 5. 4 MS. PEREZ: Yes, sir. Monthly maximum. Monthly 5 maximum is 5,000. Monthly minimum -- okay, the accident -- 6 maximum benefit duration RBD with Social Security. So it's 7 basically they will cover a person if they continue to be 8 considered disabled up till Social Security age, which is 9 normally 65. 10 MR. DAVIDSON: That's correct. The older contracts 11 in place used to have employees working to age 65 12 traditionally. Since then, employees are working longer. 13 So, inside of our actual benefit duration, it would carry to 14 the greater of SSNRA, which I believe right now is about 67. 15 However, there is a benefit as well called reducing benefit 16 duration; that's what the RBD is, and if you had an older 17 employee that was, let's say, age 70 or greater, there's 18 still a 12-month benefit that Met would pay on that disabled 19 employee. 20 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 21 MR. DAVIDSON: So it just allows the coverage to 22 extend, you know, longer for the longer-working employee. 23 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 24 MS. PEREZ: Right. Instead of reducing the amount 25 of -- of benefit the person would get monthly, they just have 7-29-13 16 1 a snippet of time. 2 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Of time. 3 MS. PEREZ: The younger you go out, you can 4 basically get it to 65, 67. If you're older, you go out, you 5 know that you at least have a year on the books to be able to 6 obtain the benefit. 7 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: And by bundling, the rates are 9 cheaper. 10 MS. PEREZ: Yes, sir. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Any more on long-term? 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: No. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's go to vision. 14 MS. PEREZ: On the vision plan, it would stay with 15 the same company. There was no increase. You're actually in 16 a rate guarantee through October 1 of 2015. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good. 18 MS. PEREZ: That's nice when they do that. The 19 Allstate products; the accident, the cancer, behind the next 20 tab, 7, same thing. The rates did not go up. Same rate for 21 open enrollment, though they would require evidence of 22 insurability for these particular products. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: For new folks coming on? 24 MS. PEREZ: For open enrollment, yes, sir, for new 25 folks coming in. But anybody that has it today is safe; they 7-29-13 17 1 just keep on going if they choose. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: No evidence of insurability? 3 MS. PEREZ: Correct. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 5 MS. PEREZ: And then, of course, behind Number 8, 6 we've got our disclosure forms we have to provide you with 7 all of the technical fine print, so you will find that there. 8 And then behind the last tab is our business associate 9 agreement that allows us to discuss your business. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Basically that's HIPAA -- 11 MS. PEREZ: Yes, sir. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: -- compliance? 13 MS. PEREZ: Yes, sir. So, we just provide a copy 14 for you. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, from an action -- Court action 16 standpoint, the agenda item talks about approving MetLife as 17 the new carrier for the employee-funded life coverage, the 18 coverage that the County is providing and paying for, and 19 then the other section of it is to authorize payroll 20 deductions for whatever voluntary coverages each individual 21 employee may desire. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- but -- and I guess in 23 that second part, though, we would want to base it on MetLife 24 and Allstate, or whatever the other recommended -- we don't 25 want them to be able to choose -- don't we need to designate 7-29-13 18 1 that we're going to go with MetLife on all those products? 2 JUDGE TINLEY: If all we're doing -- those are all 3 voluntary supplements for the employees, and I suppose if an 4 employee wanted ING, if it were offered -- they may not be 5 able to offer it if they put together a plan. 6 MS. PEREZ: By doing -- by going with Met, it would 7 require you to basically terminate the contract with ING. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I mean, certainly, 9 they're -- employees are free to go out on the market and do 10 whatever they want, but if it's going to be through Kerr 11 County's payroll, it's MetLife or the other policies that 12 we're approving here. 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 'Cause it will -- 14 MS. PEREZ: Now, depending on the age of the person 15 and the medical stance of the person, they may not be able to 16 get insurance through the outside. And so that's why it's -- 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Right. 18 MS. PEREZ: -- a benefit, obviously. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that's one of the -- one of 20 the primary components of open enrollment, is no evidence of 21 insurability. 22 MS. PEREZ: Yes, sir. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: That's what makes it extremely 24 attractive. 25 MS. PEREZ: And then we would also come out during 7-29-13 19 1 open enrollment and we would explain all of this to the 2 employees as well, give them an opportunity, you know, to be 3 able to take advantage of that. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I'll make a motion that 5 we approve MetLife for the County-funded life coverage for 6 employees under the employee benefit program, and then on the 7 voluntary supplemental coverages, approve MetLife, -- 8 JUDGE TINLEY: And you've got some -- 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- Avesis for vision, and 10 Allstate for accident and cancer policies. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Does that cover all of them? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: MetLife covers the -- 13 MS. PEREZ: And then Met would do the STD and LTD. 14 as well. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- covers the balance; 16 short-term disability, long-term disability, for accident -- 17 MS. LANTZ: Accident is Allstate. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- and voluntary life. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as 21 indicated. Any further question or discussion? 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is this a recommendation, 23 Ms. Lantz? 24 MS. LANTZ: Yes, sir. The premiums went down, so 25 that will help the employees. Little bit of cost savings for 7-29-13 20 1 them as well for the voluntary products. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We get to keep the good 3 stuff. 4 MS. LANTZ: Yes, sir. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Got it? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any further question or 8 discussion on the motion? All in favor, signify by raising 9 your right hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. 14 MS. LANTZ: Thank you. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. Appreciate you 16 being here and bringing us those new reduced rates. 17 MS. PEREZ: All right. You're welcome, sir. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 3 on our agenda; 19 consider, discuss, take appropriate action to approve 20 purchase of a vehicle for Juvenile Probation, Juvenile 21 Detention, Environmental Health, and Extension Office from 22 reallocated funds from the 2012 Certificate of Obligation 23 funding. 24 (Low-voice discussion off the record.) 25 MS. HARGIS: I'm going to hand out several 7-29-13 21 1 attachments here. Let me -- I'm not sure I have enough. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Jeannie, how much is in 3 there? I need a new car right now. 4 MS. HARGIS: I'm going to show you. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 6 MS. HARGIS: Take those and pass them out. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 8 MS. HARGIS: And one of those. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Oh boy. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Uh-oh. Getting to be a 11 little bit too much here. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: See, you asked down there. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I know. Thank you, I 14 guess. 15 MS. HARGIS: We have one more which John will 16 present. Let's go over, if we will, the one that is entitled 17 the 2012 Certificate of Obligation that looks like this. 18 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I have an extra one here. 19 MS. HARGIS: You should have two letters, one from 20 the -- one from Rusty and one from Leonard. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. Would you like 22 some more? 23 MR. HENNEKE: Thank you, Buster. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. I think there's 25 more, so don't go too far. All right. Which one are we 7-29-13 22 1 looking at? 2 MS. HARGIS: The first one I'd like you to look at 3 is the -- the Certificate of Obligation itself. 4 COMMISSIONER MOSER: This page right here? 5 MS. HARGIS: This page right here. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 7 MS. HARGIS: It's two pages, all right? The -- and 8 let's just go line item by line item so you get an idea. The 9 Cade Loop has already been paid out, Bruce, so there's no 10 money left there. The Kerr County Exhibit Center shows 11 28,000. We still have paving there. We're going to be lucky 12 if we end up at zero there. The exhibit hall, the 500,000 is 13 for that. The Kerrville South grant match is still 14 outstanding, because we haven't had to use it yet. The Road 15 and Bridge -- you have a letter for 157,610.68. The one 16 vehicle that's -- that's 7,419 is on my sheet that I'll show 17 you. That is -- that is an unallocated amount. Animal 18 Control -- 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Wait a minute. You say 20 "unallocated"? 21 MS. HARGIS: Unallocated. The intended purpose in 22 the issue has been completed, and now there are funds 23 remaining in that line item to be spent by the Court. 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: And that's in what line item? 25 MS. HARGIS: Where it says Constable, Precinct 4. 7-29-13 23 1 Everybody with me? 2 JUDGE TINLEY: So that wasn't in the original 3 capital package? 4 MS. HARGIS: I didn't hear your question, I'm 5 sorry. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It was, but that -- 7 MS. HARGIS: It was in the original capital, but he 8 purchased a vehicle for less than what we had. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I'm with you. 10 MS. HARGIS: If there are funds remaining, it's 11 because there were -- it was an estimate on our part. The 12 second thing happened in the Animal Control and in 13 Environmental. There are funds remaining there of 30,357.58. 14 Juvenile Detention actually spent more than they originally 15 had, so we used some of our cost of issuance for that line 16 item, but they are at zero. The radio digital conversion you 17 have, that was actually a combination of the jail -- 18 remember, the showers, there's 60,000 for the showers, and 19 the rest of it was to go to radios; however, the original 20 request was a million, five, so the 379,000 is a drop in the 21 bucket and will not buy the radios. The first round of 22 vehicles has been purchased, so the total there is 365,631. 23 The amount here that's in question as to what the Court wants 24 to do about it is the 379,193.60. That's up to the Court to 25 reallocate. The next one is the Maintenance Department. 7-29-13 24 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Wait. Let me see -- you said 2 on the radio digital conversion, it was a million, five or 3 something like -- what did you say a while ago? 4 MS. HARGIS: The original request made by the 5 Sheriff's Office was a million, five. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 7 MS. HARGIS: And when we did the Certificates of 8 Obligation in 2012, we had to make a reduction, and so he was 9 not -- we were not able to give him the total amount. 10 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 11 MS. HARGIS: And he cannot purchase the radio 12 conversion for less than a million, five, okay, so these 13 funds have to be used for that purpose or reallocated by the 14 Court. 15 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay, got you. 16 MS. HARGIS: Keep in mind that we signed an 17 agreement with the people who buy this paper at S.E.C. that 18 we will first purchase what we had down as an intended item, 19 and after that, then the Court is able to reallocate those 20 funds. The next one is the Maintenance Department. The 21 sweeping machine cost a little more, but the vehicles did 22 not, so we have 9,796.13 for the Court to allocate. The next 23 line is the technology equipment. I'm -- John has the backup 24 for that, so when we go through letters, we'll go through 25 that. I'm sure he'll need every penny, but he does have the 7-29-13 25 1 backup. The debt service, as you recall, we actually 2 purchased the first payment on this issue. That's been made. 3 And we used that 214 in lieu of raising -- having to raise 4 our taxes because of other issues that were falling off. The 5 issuance cost, we have $910 left. So -- 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So that 910 is not allocated? 7 MS. HARGIS: It's ours to use. So, you have a 8 letter from Leonard that is a backup to the 157,000. That's 9 one vehicle. He has the specs and everything for you there. 10 I want to -- let's address the technology equipment now 11 versus the Sheriff, and then we'll go back to that. 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: We're going to go back to 13 Leonard? Is that what you're saying? 14 MS. HARGIS: No. No. Leonard, I think, has his. 15 He has a letter there for the 157. 16 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah, I understand. So, we're 17 going to talk about it? 18 MS. HARGIS: No. He has not -- as long as he 19 purchases the intended things, you cannot use that money. Go 20 ahead, John. 21 MR. TROLINGER: Thanks, Jeannie. I e-mailed out a 22 copy to each of you the summary of this year's I.T. capital 23 expenditures. It's from line item 16-680-450; that's where 24 I.T. capital resides. And currently, we're in a four-year 25 allocation. It started out at $713,000, and started in the 7-29-13 26 1 2012 budget, and it's going through 2015. I've got it laid 2 out so that the first year was the -- the large -- the big 3 year for projects at about $267,000, and that's been 4 expended, or has been -- purchase orders have been written 5 for that. The -- this year's allocation is about $127,000, 6 and then the next two years, about $120,000. I've got a 10 7 percent additional -- I'll call it a reserve, but the prices 8 are going up 10 percent a year in some cases, and I'm doing 9 the best I can to keep that down. For instance, Jannett here 10 recently contacted her primary software vendor and said, 11 "Hey, 10 percent" -- you know, "10 percent? Why do you want 12 to increase that?" And they came back, and now we're going 13 to pay less this year than we did last year. So, we're 14 trying to control the costs where we can. 15 But as far as the capital goes this year, the 16 largest expenditure is going to be for voter registration. 17 It's a new system, and it's for absentee voting. It's to 18 automate the process where absentee ballots go out, and it's 19 for Diane Bolin. We've had the software vendor come in; 20 we've reviewed the product. It's a good product. It's 21 $20,000. It's a lot, but I think for the elections, we need 22 to -- this is -- we need to spend money on elections to do it 23 right. So, if you're a uniformed military voter overseas, 24 one of the purposes of this system is to make sure if you're 25 in Italy and then you go to Germany, you know, that we can 7-29-13 27 1 keep track of that person, make sure that they can get that 2 -- they can get that ballot sent out to them when it's time 3 to get them sent out during each election. And it does 4 streamline the process they're doing on paper now manually. 5 They're doing a lot of things by hand, and interfacing with 6 the system. I won't go into it unless you have a lot of 7 questions on that. 8 The next large major projects are the server and 9 desktop computer replacements. Servers this coming year are 10 about $27,000. We refresh the old hardware, we buy new and 11 replace it with the newest technology. Newer, better, 12 faster. Our vendors -- our software vendors require us to 13 keep up with the newest, best technology. For example, the 14 Sheriff's office, we're mandated to keep current software -- 15 software and hardware, the desktop computers. 16 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So, how often do you update 17 those servers? 18 MR. TROLINGER: Every year I try and take a little 19 piece of it. It's not quite 20 percent of the equipment. It 20 actually ends up averaging more like 10 percent each year, 21 and I try to look at five years and decide, versus Microsoft, 22 when are they going to obsolete things? And -- 23 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 24 MR. TROLINGER: -- based on that -- 25 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So, it's sort of a five-year 7-29-13 28 1 cycle you look at doing? 2 MR. TROLINGER: It's a sliding five-year -- 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah, got you. 4 MR. TROLINGER: -- thing. And -- 5 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 6 MR. TROLINGER: -- the best I can, I want to keep 7 the old hardware for as long as possible. 8 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 9 MR. TROLINGER: But sometimes it just gets too old 10 and slow. 11 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay, I got you. So, 12 basically, the answer is five years, but you don't do it -- 13 every five years, you don't start with a clean piece of paper 14 or new equipment. You incrementally -- 15 MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir. And same thing on the 16 next item, the desktops. That's about $33,000 this year. 17 And, for instance, the Commissioners Court laptops are circa 18 2007. They're at the end of their functional life, but we're 19 not going to replace them. We're going to put new hard 20 drives in them, and maybe -- maybe you'll see new hardware. 21 But the old laptops will get a secondary purpose; they'll go 22 somewhere else. So, the desktop replacement, that's about 15 23 to 20 percent per year, depending on how -- how busy things 24 are. This year is an average year, 33,000 to replace the 25 computers. The -- you know, Jody's got a five-year-old, 7-29-13 29 1 six-year-old computer. The Microsoft operating system is 2 about to be obsoleted in April, and we need to replace the 3 thing. That's what desktop replacements are about. There's 4 a little bit of money on desktop replacements for -- for more 5 scanners, things like that, so people can automate and scan 6 paper. We've got a -- and those are the largest items. The 7 Juvenile Detention, we're going to put some more cameras in 8 and -- and add to their existing digital video recorder 9 system; that's 18,000. And the other items are all less than 10 10,000. Do you want me to review each one of those, Judge? 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody got any question about them? 12 MR. TROLINGER: Really, the big part of it -- the 13 big cost, really, year after year is the software 14 maintenance. And, you know, capital aside, the best we can 15 do to keep those guys from hitting us with 10 percent every 16 year is what I'm -- what I'm going for. The hardware 17 manufacturers have been pretty steady, but the software, 18 we've been really seeing some increases in that, and staying 19 on top of that is probably the biggest thing to do. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that -- is that what the trend is 21 showing, John? That they're increasing approximately 10 22 percent per year? 23 MR. TROLINGER: They are. And they'll just come 24 and say, "Here, it's 10 percent more, John." And, you know, 25 "All these other counties have to pay it. You too." And -- 7-29-13 30 1 and I ask them why, and, you know, just the example I gave 2 you with Jannett's. They come back and say, "Oh, sorry. 3 Instead of 21,000, now it's 19,000." So, we ask those 4 questions, and usually we get a good answer. For example, on 5 our largest vendor, Tyler Technologies, boy, that -- that's 6 our number one cost. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: What's the annual cost of that, 8 approximately, John, for all departments? 9 MR. TROLINGER: Well, for everybody across the 10 board for software maintenance, it's about $193,000 this year 11 for software maintenance. And everyone says, "Hey, I want 10 12 percent more." Well, hey, guess what? In 2006, we were 13 paying a hundred -- well, we were paying much less than this. 14 In 2005 to 2011, we paid about 145,000 a year. And Tyler 15 technology says, "Well, hey, we want to sell you this new 16 system and it's great, and it's Odyssey; and you guys are one 17 of the first ones." I said, "Well, here, how about a deal?" 18 We locked in the price for that software for five years, and 19 we've saved about -- over other counties, what they've been 20 spending, about $200,000, just by simple negotiation of 21 saying, "Hey, how about a deal?" So, that's what I've been 22 trying to do, is -- 23 JUDGE TINLEY: You're not going to get it if you 24 don't ask, will you? 25 MR. TROLINGER: That's right. But it is going up, 7-29-13 31 1 and I think that's what you're seeing is our number one -- 2 that's -- software means people. They've got their 3 increases, so they -- they want more money for that. Thanks. 4 Thanks for letting me explain that to you. I really wanted 5 to. 6 MS. HARGIS: I didn't want to do that. Okay. Now 7 that you've heard from John, before you hear from Rusty, I 8 want to go over what I would like, which is on this page, the 9 single sheet. The first column is just -- 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Jeannie, can you go back to 11 John's for a second? On his -- it was -- whatever, a 12 hundred-something, whatever the amount was for this year's. 13 MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And -- but your -- how many 15 more years are under this? 16 MR. TROLINGER: It runs till 2016, is the last 17 fiscal year, so two more years. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two more years? 19 MR. TROLINGER: After this year. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: After. 21 MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: After -- 2016. 23 MR. TROLINGER: 127 this year, and then I've got 24 120 and 120 just broken out from that. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And you feel comfortable that's 7-29-13 32 1 going to be -- you're in good shape? 2 MR. TROLINGER: Yes, and I'll make it work. I'll 3 keep the number underneath that, as low as I can go. If we 4 don't need to buy the stuff, I won't buy it. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Kathy, you got that? 6 MS. HARGIS: Okay. Again, this is the sheet I want 7 to refer to. The first column, I've just listed there the 8 items that I spelled out to you that were items that were 9 complete. The funds were remaining, and the original intent 10 is not there any more. I've also then on the next -- if you 11 go to the right, this is the insurance claim, and I've added 12 it in as well, so the total amount is 427,677.41. And then 13 down under capital requests, I have listed for you the 14 requests that I have this year from the different 15 departments, two of which we've already approved, but the 16 others you have not. One is an Environmental Health vehicle, 17 along with the equipment for that vehicle. Juvenile 18 Probation has a vehicle they can't use any more, and they 19 need another vehicle to transport the kids. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that -- is that amount shown for 21 Juvenile Probation -- 22 MS. HARGIS: That is a Charger. At cost, just 23 about. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: But is that a net figure? Does that 25 allow for a trade-in, or do we put the existing thing on 7-29-13 33 1 GovDeals? How are we going to do that? 2 MS. HARGIS: That allows for $1,000 on the trade-in 3 that we have, which is barely running. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 5 MS. HARGIS: The Juvenile Detention vehicle -- I 6 mean, actually the Probation vehicle is two. It's $2,000. 7 He has two to trade in, one that doesn't run at all and one 8 that's at 230,000 miles. And they can't allow that officer 9 to put any of the children in there, because it breaks down, 10 and they can't afford that. The courthouse vehicle we've 11 already approved. I have not purchased any of these yet. 12 The Juvenile Detention vehicle, we have one vehicle there. 13 Again, that's a vehicle that is not running, and so we're 14 kind of one short for the assistant out there to be able to 15 transport those -- those children to the courthouse. Then 16 I've added an amount that I'm not sure about, and that's 17 graphics and radios for those two vehicles. They are exactly 18 the same for Juvenile Detention and Juvenile Probation. It 19 had to be a vehicle that a cage would go in it, so we found 20 the cheapest vehicle that we could have a cage fit into. 21 They have to have a cage, and they didn't want a big vehicle, 22 but they need something that they can put a cage in the back. 23 The Ag Extension vehicle, he is trading in his current 24 vehicle, and I think he's getting $13,339, and this is the 25 net difference for that vehicle. That was a request I took 7-29-13 34 1 out of the budget, but I put on it here for the Court since 2 we're looking at all these other vehicles. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: What kind of vehicle is the 4 Extension vehicle? 5 MS. HARGIS: It's a Ford truck, I believe, that -- 6 when we bought all the Ford trucks. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Crew cab truck? 8 COMMISSIONER MOSER: It's Roy's. I was talking to 9 Roy Friday. I think Roy said that he had 54,000 miles on his 10 current one. He's putting about 20,000 miles a year, so he's 11 got two and a half years, essentially, on this. So, sounds 12 like it's really early to be trading in a vehicle for 54,000. 13 Yeah, I know you can get a better trade-in. You can do a 14 better trade-in the day you drive off the lot, but 54,000 15 miles is not a lot on a vehicle. 16 MS. HARGIS: This is a request. That's why I 17 brought it. 18 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah, right. 19 MS. HARGIS: Okay. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On that list, what are all of 21 those -- or what on that list is not -- or was not in the 22 original plan? 23 MS. HARGIS: None of these vehicles are in the 24 original plan. When you reallocate the money, you could 25 purchase these if you like. 7-29-13 35 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Environmental 2 Department, I thought they had one that had not been 3 purchased. 4 MS. HARGIS: No, they originally requested two, and 5 you turned them down and only gave them one. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: He needs another one for the 8 person -- 9 MS. HARGIS: But he needed another one. He has 10 another officer. He put off hiring that officer for a year 11 and a half, and so now he has one, and they don't have a 12 vehicle, so that's the request that I have received that I 13 can't fund out of the normal budget. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me ask, on the -- the equipment 15 for the Environmental Health, that seems like a pretty large 16 amount there, over $9,000. What kind of equipment are we 17 talking about? 18 MS. HARGIS: Radio and the light bar. And it -- 19 the radios are $6,000. And the -- 20 MR. GARCIA: Cameras. 21 MS. HARGIS: -- the cameras. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's going to be pretty 23 accurate, if not low. 24 MR. BARTON: We spend about -- not counting the 25 radio, we spend close to 14,000 outfitting police equipment 7-29-13 36 1 on the Tahoes. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Each vehicle? 3 MS. HARGIS: Yeah. 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's not laptop computers or 5 anything. 6 MR. BARTON: That's lights, cameras, radar, stuff 7 like that, for us. 8 MS. HARGIS: And the same holds true for the 9 constables. The constables spent about 14,000 on the three 10 that they had. We have to pay to take the cameras out; we 11 have to pay to put them back in. $930 out, $930 in, and you 12 add the graphics, the light bars. At least we have -- but he 13 doesn't have a camera or the equipment, whereas in some of 14 these vehicles, we can just take it off and put it back in, 15 so it's a lesser cost. But we still have to do the graphics. 16 Graphics are about 1,300. But I also put an additional 10 in 17 there, because I didn't know what exactly -- I know that the 18 Probation Department needs a camera in that one so that 19 there's no problems when they're transporting those kids to 20 -- and some graphics for both. I don't think they need a 21 camera at Detention. I think they actually may have one, or 22 have something -- do you have one in your other car? 23 MR. STANTON: No. We always -- we always have at 24 least two people transport our kids, so we don't have 25 cameras. 7-29-13 37 1 MS. HARGIS: So they don't have to have the 2 cameras, where the probation officers, it's just one in the 3 car, so that's to keep the liability down. So, that's my 4 suggestion. I'm going to let the Sheriff present his, in 5 fairness. So -- 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Fairness. 7 MS. HARGIS: Yeah. Go. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We submitted the letter. I 9 don't see any -- unless you have questions over it. The 10 biggest thing is in the original request -- 11 COMMISSIONER MOSER: You said you submitted the 12 letter. We just got the letter. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I submitted it last week. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: He did. 15 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Did he? Okay, I stand 16 corrected. Sorry about that. 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Originally, we had -- we had 18 asked for a million dollars on patrol cars, and the 1.5 or 19 whatever on the digital upgrade. You can't piecemeal a 20 digital upgrade, so what we ended up spending some of that on 21 was, remember, they changed the -- what was it? -- the time 22 clock deal up in Colorado that synchronizes our system, and 23 we had to get all that upgraded for at least that to 24 continue. That's what we spent that on, and then the 25 showers. That's why you had that -- everything else left 7-29-13 38 1 over we didn't spend. But on vehicles, under the -- what was 2 allocated, there's no way I'm going to be able to make it up 3 to 2016, you know, a five-year plan, on -- on half of what 4 was originally requested. So, what I'm proposing is 5 reallocating what's left over out of the digital upgrade, 6 most of it going to the vehicles so we can keep our vehicles 7 operating. If you'll remember, we get a lot better trade-in 8 at 100,000 miles on them; that was evident this year. And 9 then we also try and rotate them down to using them for 10 investigators or jail or things like that. You've never 11 purchased the vehicles that don't go on patrol. And these 12 are pursuit-type vehicles, so that's why I need to rotate 13 them off at at least 100,000 miles. That's the biggest 14 majority. The other issue that we came up and discovered 15 last week, back when we did this simulcast system -- 16 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Let me ask you, is 100,000 -- 17 that's a mark that you can draw in the sand. Is that a 18 reasonable amount? Or is 150,000 a -- 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, 100,000 is even stretching 20 it. These are pursuit vehicles. These are patrol. These 21 aren't my investigators. These aren't the jail. These are 22 the vehicles that that patrolman's having to -- to live in 23 and survive on. And once you get past that 100,000 mile 24 range, you're taking a lot of risk on having that vehicle run 25 130 miles an hour on the highway if you need it. 7-29-13 39 1 JUDGE TINLEY: I guess the obvious follow-up 2 question to that would be, how many times on average in a 3 year is one of these vehicles running 130 anywhere? 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, okay. First off, we 5 probably average 10 pursuits a year, something like that, 8 6 to 10 pursuits, but you never know when or where or what it's 7 going to be. I can't say, you know, what -- what's going to 8 occur tonight, okay, and when we need that. And as large as 9 our county is, and the open space -- of course, you never 10 want to get into that type deal inside the city. With the 11 open space and the way the economy is, crimes are more and 12 drugs are more. We're getting more and more coming up from 13 Mexico. I just need that capability, and for the officers to 14 be as safe as they possibly can. 15 The other allocation on that funding you'll see is 16 when we went to this radio system -- simulcast radio system 17 we have now in 2000, the one thing, if y'all will recall, 18 that we do not get the coverage on, and we weren't going to 19 as well as what we thought even then, was in-building 20 coverage. And there was two buildings we looked at back then 21 that we really needed in, building coverage. One was this 22 courthouse and one was the hospital when it was right across 23 the street. And the cost to do a repeater for those, an 24 in-building coverage repeater, was about 65,000 in the year 25 2000. 7-29-13 40 1 What we had happen last week, week before last 2 while I was gone, one of ours officers in the courthouse 3 needed assistance quickly. All their portables have a button 4 that they can push that calls all the units, whether it's 5 P.D., us or whoever, saying that there's assistance at that 6 officer's location needed for backup, immediately. He pushed 7 the button; it couldn't get out of this building, so nobody 8 responded. That's -- that's an issue. Right at first when 9 we went to this system 10 years ago, 12 years ago, we were 10 still able to get enough out. I think just the age of the 11 system that it is, we're not quite getting out of this 12 building any more. I'm not worried about the hospital any 13 more, but I am worried about coverage when an officer needs 14 it inside this courthouse. We contacted Dailey Wells. We 15 went back through the plans of when it was done in 2000; we 16 gave them the price that they quoted us in 2000. They sent 17 an e-mail back Thursday saying that they really felt that -- 18 that probably that 65,000 is probably still enough to put 19 that in-building coverage repeater in, but they would have to 20 get back to us later this week to be for sure. But that's 21 where that last 65,000 -- that will be short. 22 I do have some funding -- if you look on that 23 second page of that letter that I submitted, I have some 24 funding that we could pay for the shortage part of that after 25 the vehicles of the 14,301. That I would pay either out of 7-29-13 41 1 seizure fund or whatever, but I need that coverage. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff, if we look at this 3 allocation as submitted by the Auditor, that if that whole 4 thing goes through, we're going to chew up a piece of your 5 379,000. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I know. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: And even if the -- you take the Ag 8 Extension vehicle out of that, you're still going to be 9 chewing up close to 50,000 of your 379,000. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What the choice this Court 11 will have to make, unfortunately, is -- you know, we've 12 tried, as you can tell with how much we have left in this 13 allocation. You know, in 2012 we did not purchase vehicles 14 from any of this allocation. We purchased it -- purchased 15 them from funds we had. Clay's been in charge of purchasing 16 the vehicles. He's got a spreadsheet like you wouldn't 17 believe, but there's just no way we can make it work. With 18 the four we purchased this year, back 10 years ago, Bruce can 19 remember we were looking at going to six vehicles a year on a 20 lease program, is what we were trying to do. We've still 21 been trying to skimp by with four, three, or purchasing them 22 out of other funds, and we're just -- I just can't keep it 23 there. I need this money for patrol vehicles. I know that 24 -- that Jeannie needs it for other vehicles. She looked at 25 one we had under seizure, but I can't use seized vehicles for 7-29-13 42 1 non-law enforcement purposes, okay. So, it's just putting us 2 in a predicament. We really would like to help Jeannie get 3 some of this she wants, but I've got to put safety of patrol 4 officers first on patrol vehicles. We've tried reusing 5 equipment out of a lot of them. We're trying to use the 6 trade-ins out of it, and then we have not asked this Court to 7 buy any vehicles for the jail or for Criminal Investigations 8 or anything else. Everything's been going to the patrol 9 officers' safety first. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff, let me ask you, you 11 mentioned that seizure vehicles, of course, are to be 12 utilized for law enforcement purposes. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Not for non-law enforcement 15 purposes. 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Is there a possibility that you have 18 in your fleet vehicles which are not seizure vehicles which 19 could be allocated for the purposes Ms. Hargis is asking for, 20 and the seizure vehicle can replace that vehicle in whatever 21 that spot is in your fleet, be used for a law enforcement 22 vehicle? You understand what I'm saying? 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I understand what you're 24 saying. Currently, I have one vehicle under seizure that we 25 just got awarded. I'm waiting for the time -- time to run, 7-29-13 43 1 but that one is a 1995 Chrysler 300. 2 MS. HARGIS: 2005. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 2005, I'm sorry, Chrysler 300 4 that has been in a major -- 5 MS. HARGIS: Accident. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- accident, had the air bags 7 deployed, all that kind of stuff. Even Crenwelge is only 8 offering 5,000 on trade-in, and that's the only current 9 seized vehicle I have available, okay, that we have not had 10 any other seizures. Most of them have either -- 11 JUDGE TINLEY: So, it's not usable for your 12 purposes anyway. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It will be a trade-in to get 14 to another C.I.D. vehicle, 'cause I've got several of those 15 with hundreds of thousands of miles on those that got to get 16 replaced too, that we'll figure out a way. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I just don't have -- 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Good thought. 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. I mean, and I don't 21 have a problem. You know, seized vehicles, I think if I had 22 them -- and looking at something such as this, and this would 23 be something we'd have to get an opinion from Rob on, but, 24 like, if it's for Juvenile Probation, Juvenile Detention, 25 okay, I think that kind of stuff is a law enforcement purpose 7-29-13 44 1 that I could use those on. For just the courthouse vehicle 2 to where they are driving it, I don't think I can. I can't 3 even use trade-in. So, if I had them, I wouldn't have any 4 issue doing that. But when I was gone, Clay took Ms. Hargis 5 with the Chrysler over to Crenwelge to see -- but he forgot 6 to realize that that was actually a seized vehicle. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Your vehicle program that you're 8 proposing in your letter, that's not just this year. You're 9 talking about a multi-year -- 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, it's through -- through 11 2016 budget. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That was the original 14 five-year deal that we got, and that is what it's going to -- 15 going to take for us to get through. 16 COMMISSIONER MOSER: What's -- and I'm sure you've 17 discussed this in the past, but just a quick one on Tahoe 18 versus other vehicles. The Tahoe is a pretty expensive 19 vehicle, it appears to me, compared to other comparable 20 vehicles. Am I correct? Or -- 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Clay, come up here. Yes, the 22 Tahoe -- well, it really was -- 23 MR. BARTON: Sticker price on the Tahoe this year 24 was -- was less than 27,000. 25 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Really? 7-29-13 45 1 MR. BARTON: It's just once we get the 2 equipment, -- 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Mm-hmm. 4 MR. BARTON: -- it adds an additional 14,000 to it. 5 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 6 MR. BARTON: So I don't know -- I don't do a lot of 7 -- from what I understand from people running Expeditions, 8 that's also being used by law enforcement, but a lot of those 9 people are swapping over to Tahoes right now. 10 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. That was the 11 impression, that Tahoes were -- sticker was even more than 12 27,000, okay? 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The other vehicle that you'll 14 see in here is a transport vehicle, okay, for hauling 15 prisoners around for my warrant guy that travels all over the 16 U.S. You'll see that we purchased him one -- two months ago? 17 MR. BARTON: Two or three. 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Two, three months ago, and 19 he's got over 15,000 miles on it now. Those I have purchased 20 out of other funds. That is a police vehicle; it's police 21 package. But we get -- we're not getting the Tahoe, okay, 22 for long-term purposes. But as Jeannie can probably tell 23 you, if they start looking at what kind of vehicles you can 24 purchase nowadays that actually will adhere with a cage in 25 them, okay, it's -- the pickings are getting very slim. I 7-29-13 46 1 know we looked all over for the transport vehicles, and most 2 of them you get, if you put a cage in it, even with the seats 3 all the way forward and everything else, and the back seats 4 back, if they'll move at all, you get about that much leg 5 room, and you just can't do it. They just don't make 6 vehicles to accommodate that any more. 7 MR. BARTON: The Impala had adequate legroom. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's what we purchased, was 9 the -- 10 MR. BARTON: The Caprice, I'm sorry. 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Caprice. Caprice, and it's -- 12 there was only one. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rusty, I want to go back to 14 the radio issue. 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In the courthouse, talking 17 about all the new activities that are coming up from the 18 border and all those kinds of things, and the stuff that -- 19 like, the D.A.'s sitting there, and the things that they deal 20 with in the courtrooms, and we live here. You know, just 21 the -- things are different. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: A lot different. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: These days. I'm a little 24 embarrassed that we can't communicate from this building to 25 someplace else. But my question is, who do you -- who can we 7-29-13 47 1 communicate with? I mean, can -- I know the Sheriff's office 2 and I know P.D., but what about D.P.S.? What about Parks and 3 Wildlife? 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The way this that system -- 5 MR. BARTON: Are you talking about -- 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: From inside this building. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Currently -- 8 (Multiple speakers.) 9 THE REPORTER: One at a time, please. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We can only speak one at a 11 time. 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Currently, on a portable radio 13 that an officer carries, you're not going to get out of this 14 building at all. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that's what I'm 16 understanding. But if we've -- if, somehow, we get that 17 fixed, and I hope we do, it would be nuts not to, who are you 18 wanting to be able to communicate with? 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: At this point, an emergency 20 call would go out over our primary channel any time he hits 21 that button, and every agency would get that; game warden, 22 Parks and Wildlife, D.P.S., if they've got our channel 23 programmed in, okay. This is going to stretch that. P.D., 24 us, everybody. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Rusty, can I ask you about 7-29-13 48 1 the digital conversion? Being as we don't have enough money 2 to do that, when does that have to be done? 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There is no mandatory, and 4 that's why we kind of backed off it a little bit when we 5 allocated all this. And I think Clay's been more in on a lot 6 of these meetings with AACOG and with Austin on doing that. 7 I think they're gradually going away. We had to be digital 8 capable. We are digital capable, and we got the time clock 9 button fixed. Those had to be done. I am not digital radio; 10 we're VHF radio, and I think a lot of the thought process in 11 Austin and everywhere around on all this interoperability, 12 they've been discussing this and saying it's going to be this 13 way, and then it's going to be this way. I think they're 14 still looking at VHF, and as long as they are, and going back 15 away from it, as long as you're digital capable, you'll be 16 able to do that. I think we need to hold what we have until 17 there's anything -- I wouldn't recommend spending -- you 18 know, totally doing that. They're even looking at going to a 19 statewide 800 -- 20 MR. BARTON: 700. 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 700. 22 MR. BARTON: It may be a manual VHS system. 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Trunking capability. You can 24 talk statewide all the time. If they do that, that's going 25 to change all the cards in the deck. We're just going to 7-29-13 49 1 have to wait and see, so I couldn't tell you. 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, there's no reason to 3 allocate funds for that anytime in the near future. 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Not right now, no, I wouldn't. 5 I mean, we'll keep -- 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: There will be some notice 7 given, surely, whenever we have to do something. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Our -- our maintenance -- 9 yearly maintenance is going up more and more on the system, 10 because we are simulcast; a lot of our stuff is getting 11 outdated, the timing and all that. You know, it's now a 12 13-year-old system. I do expect that in next few years, 13 we're going to be spending money on it to keep it going. But 14 changing out and reinventing the wheel on another 15 million-plus system at this time, no, I wouldn't recommend 16 that. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff, you've indicated that at 19 the present time, the ability to broadcast from here -- 20 transmit from here to your system out at the jail is -- is 21 limited. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's not just the system at 23 the jail. It's anywhere, yes. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. The system within the 25 courthouse here, if someone needs assistance and they -- they 7-29-13 50 1 activate the system, there's still communication, and that'll 2 alert the courthouse security people, will it not? 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. Your panic button is a 4 different system. All that still works as they were designed 5 inside this courthouse. What it does is automatically set 6 off the radios that the two bailiffs carry here in the 7 courthouse, okay, and alerts them that there's an emergency 8 at -- at whatever location. And then -- and then they have 9 to try and contact us out on the street, okay, which they 10 can. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: That's where it gets -- 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's where we have -- that's 13 where we have the issue. You know, courthouse security, as 14 Buster mentioned a while ago, you know, I think it is getting 15 more and more serious. You have one of your District Judges 16 that seriously wants us to put, any time the courthouse is 17 open, everybody entering the courthouse has to go through a 18 metal detector, okay? I have the equipment to do that. I do 19 not have the manpower to do that. And trying to redesign 20 this courthouse entry and exit out of it to be able to do 21 that, we've looked at it several times. I can't feasibly do 22 it at this time. I think alertness and training and just, 23 you know, being prepared for everything, doing the best we 24 can. An ideal system would be, yes, to have metal detectors. 25 I mean, a lot of courthouses are doing that now. Courthouses 7-29-13 51 1 are -- are an issue for security. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: They still doing that in Bexar 3 County? 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, they do everything in 5 Bexar County. Even Kendall County is starting more and more 6 on the -- on the metal detector, everybody walking in and 7 leaving the courthouse. It's just this courthouse has 8 numerous entries and exits. It's very hard to -- to funnel 9 everybody into one location so that you can do that. What we 10 are trying to do is -- what I do plan on doing is maybe some 11 of our citizens' academy graduates I know all y'all have 12 known that can help volunteer doing bailiff-only duties. A 13 bailiff is somebody that helps take care of the jury, you 14 know, helps get things for the Judge. It does not have to be 15 a certified peace officer, where I can have the two officers 16 up there, spread out more to be actual officers and security 17 officers in this courthouse. And then we're going to try and 18 expand our reserves so that we can get more reserves that can 19 also spend more time in the courthouse as armed officers. 20 But that's the only way that I can feasibly look at -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I like that. 22 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Rusty, when the signal didn't 23 go out the other day from the -- how long has that been a 24 problem? 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, we actually -- 7-29-13 52 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: And what's changed? 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The age of the system. We 3 have a 13-year-old radio system. Our towers, you have to 4 understand, Kerrville P.D. is fine, okay, because we have a 5 tower here in town. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I'm talking about the signal 7 going out of the courthouse. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'm talking -- the deal is, is 9 the repeaters that we have for the system that the Sheriff's 10 Office uses, one is out at Red Rose Ranch; one is down at 11 Center Point off -- it was off Elm Pass. 12 MR. BARTON: Still is. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Still is off. One is off the 14 back end of Upper Turtle Creek off Doyle, Teague, and then 15 the other one is out off Highway 41. Okay. We had to have 16 four towers to make the Sheriff's Office radio system give us 17 95 percent coverage throughout the county, okay? So that 18 puts our repeaters a long ways from the courthouse. And when 19 you get into the courthouse and with the metal and the steel, 20 okay, it will not transmit out on our portables at this time. 21 It did for a while at first. 22 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Why? 23 MR. BARTON: But, Commissioner, there are even 24 places in town that, on portable radio, we cannot talk to our 25 office. 7-29-13 53 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So, this has not been a new 2 problem; this has been an existing problem. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's worsening. In the 4 original deal in 2000, they said we would probably have this 5 kind of issue, okay? We tested it in 2000 back when they did 6 all the tests on the system, and we were able to get out 7 enough. It was scratchy, but it was -- it could cover, and 8 the County decided not to spend the extra for the hospital 9 and for us. Now we're working off a 13-year-old system. 10 Everything's older; it's not getting out, okay? It's not 11 anything wrong with the system other than age, is what it is. 12 We just got an older radio system that -- you know, 13 microwaves, everything else has changed. Whether there's 14 more interference out in the county nowadays, I couldn't tell 15 you, okay, but the system itself is working as it was 16 designed. It just will not get out of here. 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: You're saying it's potentially 18 other interference outside the courthouse? 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That we can't do anything 20 about. There's more radios, more everything. 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: This problem could have 22 existed for a long time; you just didn't know it? 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's a possibility, okay. 24 You know, we've had it all the time inside the jail, because 25 there's so much steel that several years ago, we just put a 7-29-13 54 1 little bitty repeater that just gets it to there, you know, 2 to where they could understand. If you had a jailer back in 3 the back part of the jail, the person in the control room 4 could at least understand him. It doesn't get out on the 5 system. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay, so let's get to the 7 bottom of this. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. What's the answer? 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 65,000. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 65,000? 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Possibly, that I've 12 reallocated. And with that, because of the vehicles that I 13 need, okay, it will include me having to spend about 14,000 14 out of seizure or other allocated funds, but she'll not get 15 her 379,000 back from the Sheriff's Office reallocation. I 16 need those funds to do all this. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Again, the important thing is, some 18 of the major portion of this funding that you're talking 19 about, almost 700,000, is projected out into the future also. 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: So you're talking about cash flow. 22 Conceivably, we could satisfy both needs if we were to be so 23 inclined. 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. I would have -- I need 25 the vehicles for next year, because I don't know if you, you 7-29-13 55 1 know, will do another capital deal. And I need the 2 courthouse fixed, and then we need to just program out. But 3 when we originally went to this, it was a five-year deal, and 4 that's why I kept everything at that five-year deal. 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's all fine and good. 6 I'm -- I'm with you. I mean, we got to take care of this. 7 You know, we have an immediate need that's got to be met. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But if you'll leave me enough 9 in there to do the four to five vehicles next year and fix 10 the courthouse issue I have, and then if you want to look at 11 the end of next year's budget, this coming budget, the end of 12 it, okay, to do vehicles again, we're just going to have to 13 keep rotating these vehicles, and then I don't have any issue 14 with whatever you want. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I got my boy-dummy of the 16 year question, and then I'm through with it, okay? Until 17 next meeting. What -- what fixes the communications out of 18 the courthouse? Little antennas everywhere? 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's a repeater. 20 MR. BARTON: Bidirectional piece of equipment that 21 they can install that boosts the signal coming out of here. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where does that thing sit? 23 MR. BARTON: I don't -- 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Like, on top of this 25 building? Out at T.D.'s place? 7-29-13 56 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's on top of this building, 2 but it's a special type, 'cause it has to -- to synchronize 3 with all the towers, okay? And that's where your costs come 4 in, because you're talking milliseconds to hit every tower. 5 Otherwise, we'd have to go to a system like S.A.P.D., okay, 6 or Bexar County, where they have so many officers and so many 7 deals, they can have one sector that only operates off one 8 tower, and those people in that end or in that portion of San 9 Antonio do not hear anything going on in this portion of San 10 Antonio. We -- we don't have that luxury of being able to do 11 that. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I'm with Bruce. This 13 is not an option. We've got to do this thing. 14 COMMISSIONER MOSER: And 65,000, you think you can 15 do it for that? That's what -- 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They're supposed to get back 17 with us this week, and we can let Ms. Hargis know today 18 exactly what it is, but that's -- they're saying that very 19 well may work, okay. But then I also still need -- if you're 20 going to take the rest of it, I need to be able to purchase 21 vehicles in this coming year. And I would need at least 22 four, preferably five. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, that was almost 24 painless, wasn't it? 25 JUDGE TINLEY: All on paper right now. 7-29-13 57 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. 3 MS. HARGIS: It's up to y'all. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Hargis? 5 MS. HARGIS: Yes? 6 JUDGE TINLEY: I detected a bit ago some concern 7 about trading in a vehicle with $54,000 -- 54,000 miles on 8 it, excuse me, as being a little premature, and I have a 9 tendency to agree with that. 10 MS. HARGIS: Well, again, I cut that from the 11 budget, but I wanted to present it back to you so that you 12 can make the decision. 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm not interested in that 14 one. 15 MS. HARGIS: Okay, we'll cross that one off. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's just -- I mean -- 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you. 18 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Especially when you put 20,000 19 a year on it. That's two and a half years. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Oh, no. If it was 75, maybe 21 we'd be considering it, but not 54,000. I'll tell you what, 22 the price of used vehicles nowadays just blows my mind. When 23 you look at the price of some of those things, it's just -- I 24 do understand trading, you know, at a certain point, but not 25 yet. That's a brand-new vehicle in my world. 7-29-13 58 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Broken in. 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. The agenda item seeks action 4 to approve the purchase of the vehicle as indicated on the 5 reallocation as provided by the Auditor. And, of course, it 6 includes the vehicles and the -- the equipment packages and 7 graphics and radios and so forth for those vehicles. The 8 consensus I'm hearing is the amount of 134,953.95, less the 9 13,5 for the Ag Extension vehicle. So, the -- if that is, in 10 fact, the consensus, the action item would be for that 11 134,953.95 less the 13,5 for those indicated items. 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: 121,453.95. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Say that again, please? 14 MS. HARGIS: 121,453.95. 15 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Correct. 16 MS. HARGIS: And then we don't have the -- his 17 radio on the agenda, so I don't think we can approve that. 18 But it is a digital radio, so he could go ahead and -- and 19 purchase that out of that digital line item. That would be 20 already approved. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it's not -- I don't think it's 22 covered by the agenda item. 23 MS. HARGIS: No, but it's already -- as long as it 24 stays in capital as a radio, he can purchase it out of that 25 capital item, unless the Court wants him to bring it back. 7-29-13 59 1 'Cause we won't meet until August the 12th. 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I would like -- 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Because of the capital allocation 4 for radios generally? 5 MS. HARGIS: Yes. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right, the 379,193; it would 7 come out of there, I think, which is already allocated. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. I just don't know a 9 for-sure price until later this week. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: He's going to have to narrow 11 it down a little closer. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Probably be better if you were to 13 bring it back at our first meeting in August, specifically. 14 The -- the radio item you got here shows to be digital 15 conversion. 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's right. What this is is 17 a repeater. It's probably a digital-type repeater to work 18 with our system, but it's not a digital radio. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, okay. 20 MS. HARGIS: Okay. So, we'll bring that one back. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a -- kind of a general 22 statement. I mean, I'm not opposed to buying any of this on 23 the list. However, these items -- I'm not talking about 24 Rusty's stuff. Some of the other stuff, most of them are 25 really not on the capital improvement list originally, I 7-29-13 60 1 don't believe. 2 MS. HARGIS: No, they're not. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's why we have to 4 reallocate. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, my preference is, that 6 C.O. we did was very specific as to what we were using it 7 for. You know, to me, at some point we're going to need to 8 start getting back into budgeting capital items out of our 9 annual budget, and I would like to look -- see if paying for 10 some of this out of the current budget, as opposed to the -- 11 the other is possible. And I think -- and we just need to 12 look at that. I don't want to approve all this stuff to go 13 back if we're not going to go buy it right away. I just want 14 to look at -- we had a plan, and we told all the departments 15 to come give us a list. We cut some of them, and I 16 understand that you know that. But I think that all of a 17 sudden, if there are things to come up, I want to look at our 18 budget first, and if at all possible, to purchase those 19 things, as opposed to reallocating this money. 20 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I agree. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a general statement. 22 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I agree. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Then what do you do with 24 these leftover moneys? 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think at some point, it gets 7-29-13 61 1 used. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't use common sense and 3 give it back to the public. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's an option; it's possible. 5 I don't know, I'm not answering that. I'm just saying we 6 were very specific on what we were going to -- 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I agree with everything 8 you said. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- do with all the departments, 10 and all of a sudden, we're reallocating it, using it like we 11 have this big pot of money to buy stuff. I'm not saying we 12 don't need them, but I'm saying we did ask for planning. 13 Let's just make it part of the budget process to look at this 14 and see how it fits, if it's necessary. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 16 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I agree. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, the thing is, this 18 doesn't have to be done today, because we're still in the 19 budget process. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's really what I'm saying. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We can just hold off on doing 22 that at all for two or three weeks, or maybe even 30 days. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: I'll tell you, my target date is the 24 same as last year. I want to get through with the budget and 25 tax rate by the end of August. 7-29-13 62 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't have -- I don't 2 object to that whatsoever. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: It seems things went so much 4 smoother last year when we -- when we got ahead of the curve. 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 'Cause this is -- these are 6 not something we have to have in the next week. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: No, surely not. 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Some of those won't even be 9 coming in till sometime six weeks or more. 10 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, you know -- 12 JUDGE TINLEY: What I'm hearing is we're going to 13 take it under advisement. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's where I am. We were 15 taking care of Sheriff's Department, 'cause it's already 16 allocated in the budget. Capital -- 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's a must. 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's -- there ain't no -- I 19 wouldn't even question that. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But back to Commissioner 21 Letz' thinking there, getting back to real life, like the 570 22 department as an example, the -- 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Line items -- capital items. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- capital, getting back to 25 those things, and in a true budget form, where Tom Smith off 7-29-13 63 1 the street can walk in this courthouse and see -- open up the 2 budget and understand it clearly, as opposed to having these 3 kinds of funds floating around. I just think that that's 4 a -- what he's saying is a giant step toward real-life 5 budgeting. That's just my opinion. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then -- and take that a 7 step further, Commissioner, is that even if we're going to, 8 you know, continue to occasionally use the Certificate of 9 Obligations, which I think there's a lot of good to doing it, 10 it can still be put as a line item in the budget. And that's 11 what needs to happen, in my mind. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's true. 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm not opposed to using 14 capital and using bonds to purchase the capital items. Tax 15 rate's already built in. And I do agree that it should be 16 budgeted, and there are things that can be paid for out of 17 budget; they don't have to come from -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- bonds. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Any member of the Court have 21 anything further, or motion to offer in connection with 22 Item 3? Okay. Anything in connection with the special 23 agenda before the Court now? Hearing none, we'll be 24 adjourned from this special Commissioners Court meeting. Let 25 me call to order the workshop -- 7-29-13 64 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Can we have about five 2 minutes? 3 JUDGE TINLEY: You want a little five-minute break? 4 Okay. We'll be in recess for a few minutes. 5 (The special session was closed at 10:27 a.m., and a budget workshop was held, the transcript of which 6 is contained in a separate document.) 7 - - - - - - - - - 8 9 10 STATE OF TEXAS | 11 COUNTY OF KERR | 12 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 13 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as 14 official reporter for the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, 15 Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. 16 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 31st day of July, 2013. 17 18 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 19 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 20 Certified Shorthand Reporter 21 22 23 24 25 7-29-13