1 1 2 3 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COURT 4 Special Session 5 Monday, November 4, 2019 6 9:00 a.m. 7 Commissioners' Courtroom 8 Kerr County Courthouse 9 Kerrville, Texas 78028 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 PRESENT: ROB KELLY, Kerr County Judge HARLEY BELEW, Commissioner Precinct 1 24 TOM MOSER, Commissioner Precinct 2 DON HARRIS, Commissioner Precinct 4 25 2 1 I-N-D-E-X 2 NO. PAGE 3 1.1 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 3 action regarding the County's Annual 4 Merit Pay Process. 5 1.2 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 50 action regarding a "Town Hall" type 6 meeting, November 16, at the Martin Marietta Bedrock Facility, regarding 7 TCEQ Application for Permit #41849. 8 1.3 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 59 action on request from Matt Grossman to 9 promote the Altice USA Hispanic Heritage Month Essay Contest. 10 1.4 Pay Bills. 59 11 1.7 Court Orders. 60 12 *** Reporter's Certificate. 62 13 * * * * * * 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 1 JUDGE KELLY: It is Monday, November 2 the 4th, 2019, and the Kerr County Commissioners' Court 3 is now in session. First item on the agenda today is 4 1.1 consider, discuss and take appropriate action 5 regarding the County's Annual Merit Pay Process. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Thank you, Judge. 7 First of all, I don't like to see things like this get 8 on the off-Monday agenda, but this has got time critical 9 action that needs to be taken if we so choose. So what 10 I would like to do is I would like to -- there's -- I 11 think everybody's got a draft up here so then I can talk 12 about it. 13 JUDGE KELLY: We do; they don't. 14 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah, I know. I said 15 up here. Yeah. Everybody come up here -- no. And I'm 16 going to walk through the process. It's a concept on 17 how to establish the merit pay, the amount and who gets 18 it. And I want to say the way that this was -- doesn't 19 have a long shelf life, this process, but it was evolved 20 or developed last Wednesday by the Sheriff and Dawn and 21 myself after about an hour we sat there, and we said 22 ah-ha, this sounds pretty good. 23 So this is -- this is a concept and a 24 schedule to go with it. So I'm going to walk through it 25 before I take a bunch of questions from -- from the 4 1 Judge or from Dawn. 2 Step 1 is Commissioners' Court would 3 establish the guidelines for those to be nominated for 4 merit pay. We have a policy in place, and it's sort of 5 a frame work. It doesn't say how we establish who gets 6 merit pay, if anybody does, or what that amount should 7 be, or when it should be done. So this is the details 8 of you have a destination, which we have with the 9 policy, this is the road map of how to get there. 10 So number one is Elected Officials and 11 Department Heads are not eligible. It is part of the 12 process. Now we can come back to that in a minute. 13 Temporary workers are not eligible. That doesn't say 14 part time, it says temporary workers. Employees that 15 have accomplished -- accomplishments that are above and 16 beyond their job responsibilities and/or that had 17 exemplary performance. 18 There's two different things. Somebody's 19 gone above and beyond, or somebody with their peers has 20 been exemplary in the work that they've done and 21 consistent with what their responsibilities are. 22 That's step 1, Commissioners' Court will do. 23 Step 2 is to determine the maximum number of 24 recipients, and the way that would be done is with -- 25 I'm going to give an example. Merit -- the merit pay 5 1 budget divided by the average merit pay. This -- right 2 now we have in the budget $60,000, and after you take 3 out FICA and all the other stuff, it comes down to 4 about -- about $50,000.00 in cash that could be given as 5 merit pay to the employees. So that says you have 6 50,000 -- I mean, let me just make it easy. Say 45,000 7 rather that 49,000. 45,000. And you said a merit pay 8 oughta be an average of $1,500 per person, that's 30 9 people that would get merit pay, as an example. 10 The third thing is, determine the maximum 11 number of nominees from each department or office, and 12 something that seems reasonable on that. No more than 13 ten. Equal to or less than ten people from each 14 department or office would be eligible. 15 The fourth thing is Commissioners' Court and 16 the recommendation is to reserve a nominal number of 17 nominees, okay, that the Court could decide once you get 18 to the end of the process, and I'll show you the end of 19 the process here in a minute, just a reserve, okay? A 20 marginal reserve. 21 Once Commissioners' Court has gone through 22 those four steps to establish the guidelines, and I'll 23 just call that guidelines, then the Department Heads and 24 Elected Officials, with the input of the employees, will 25 determine the nominees for their department. In other 6 1 words, Kelly, okay, with her employees will determine up 2 to ten, okay, no greater than ten from Road & Bridge and 3 say, here's who we think should be considered for this 4 award. 5 All Department Heads -- then the next step 6 is the hard one. Once the Department Heads and Elected 7 Officials have got their list for their department or 8 their organization, then they bring that back to a, 9 quote, a committee of all Department Heads and Elected 10 Officials; not Commissioners' Court, okay? We're not 11 involved in that other than setting the guidelines so 12 far. 13 Then they decide who -- in my example I gave 14 awhile ago of 30 people, they decide who that 30 should 15 be. And that will be what they then recommend to 16 Commissioners' Court to receive the merit pay. 17 Then the Court determines the recipients, 18 okay, take the input from -- from that committee and 19 they consider that is -- is determining who the awardee 20 should be. In a case there Commissioners' Court will be 21 able to ask questions of whoever nominated and why this 22 and that, and etc. But also, there may be somebody that 23 perhaps was overlooked that should be considered, and 24 instead of deviating from what was recommended by the 25 committee, when I said maybe there would be some 7 1 nominal, two or three or five, or something like that, 2 that would be kept by Commissioners' Court. 3 And there's some other ideas that 4 Commissioners' Court has the flexibility then to use -- 5 to award to those -- those few. Then it would be 6 recognized at the Christmas Party on December the 6th -- 7 I think that's when it is, isn't it Jody? December the 8 6th? 9 MRS. GRINSTEAD: Yes. 10 COMMISSIONER MOSER: -- the people who are 11 the recipients of the award, and it would be handed out 12 to them at that time. So if you -- let me just finish 13 this now with a -- what a schedule could be, to show you 14 the -- the need to do something. It says that, like 15 today, November the 4th, that's when we need to 16 establish the guidelines. 17 By November the 8th, which is Friday, 18 Department Heads establish their nominees from their 19 department. And November 15th, the Committee establish 20 who the nominees would be and present it to 21 Commissioners' Court. And November 18th, we have that 22 on the agenda, is the recipients would be determined, 23 and then between November the 18th and December the 6th 24 is when the checks would be cut for the -- for the 25 awardees. 8 1 So again, this is -- this is a concept, a 2 way to do it. In my previous life, I had 650 employees, 3 I think, and ten divisions, and we did it similar to 4 this, but it was -- this is the best thing that I've 5 ever seen on how to do a merit pay, okay, award. A 6 merit pay, excuse me, Counselor. Can't say that. Merit 7 pay. 8 So it -- it hopefully will be something that 9 will be very significant, and there's always pros and 10 cons of awards or merit pays. Because somebody --it's 11 going to be very positive for a lot of people, it's 12 going to be negative for some. Because they think it 13 wasn't fair or whatever. So -- so this is something for 14 Commissioners' Court to consider, and the Sheriff and 15 Dawn are here. I don't if they want to comment further 16 on what we've laid out. Okay. 17 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Well, I -- I think 18 you're exactly right in the time factor is in place. 19 And so whatever we come up with, there's going to be 20 pros and cons, but I think we need to move forward. 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: If we want to do it by 22 December the 6th, exactly. Right. 23 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Exactly. And we can't 24 have a whole lot of debate and move forward. And I see 25 no problem. 9 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Do y'all want -- 2 COMMISSIONER BELEW: No. 3 JUDGE KELLY: County Attorney, what is the 4 policy right now? What's our -- what's our default 5 position? We're talking about tweaking what we have. 6 MRS. STEBBINS: It's really very broad. I 7 don't think I kept a copy of it with me, but I think 8 that the Commissioners' Court decides -- you have that 9 policy in there? 10 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Rusty's got it on his 11 phone. 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, I got it. 13 MRS. STEBBINS: It's not really very helpful 14 when it comes to even y'all -- guidelines or how to 15 pick, but that's -- 16 JUDGE KELLY: I know it's very general. 17 MRS. STEBBINS: Yeah. 18 JUDGE KELLY: I'm just trying to figure out 19 what universe are we working with to start with and how 20 are we going to make it more specific. I think between 21 500 and $2,000? 22 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes, sir. 23 JUDGE KELLY: And the employees apply to 24 their -- 25 MRS. STEBBINS: No, sir. The -- 10 1 JUDGE KELLY: It's just a particular 2 recommendation from the Department Heads and Elected 3 Officials? 4 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes, sir. The 5 Commissioners' Court may provide a line item in the 6 budget each fiscal year for a merit pay for outstanding 7 performance. Merit pay recognizes outstanding 8 performance and therefore is accompanied by a 9 performance evaluation of the employee to be submitted 10 by the Elected Official or Department Head. All 11 evaluations shall be received in HR no later than the 12 second Monday of November. All evaluations and/or 13 recommendations will reflect the previous year's 14 performance. If authorized, merit pay may only be 15 granted for outstanding performance in the same 16 position. Merit pay should not be used to recognize 17 increased duties or responsibilities. Merit pay for 18 outstanding performance will be paid in a one-time 19 payment not to be less than $500.00, and no greater than 20 $2,000.00, the first payday in December. The 21 Commissioners' Court would select outstanding 22 performance recipients and the amount to be awarded 23 based on the performance evaluation submitted. All 24 evaluations are considered part of the employee's 25 personnel record, and therefore must be filed with Human 11 1 Resources. Elected Officials are not eligible for merit 2 pay for outstanding performance. 3 JUDGE KELLY: But Department Heads are? 4 MRS. STEBBINS: It did not exclude 5 Department Heads at the time and -- 6 JUDGE KELLY: Unless we adopt that 7 limitation today? 8 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. And I -- 9 JUDGE KELLY: And just for calendar 10 purposes, what -- what deadlines do we have in place 11 with that? 12 MRS. STEBBINS: The second Monday in 13 November is when they're due, but this second Monday of 14 November is Veteran's Day so they'll be due on the 15 Tuesday following. And then the first pay -- or the 16 first payday in December is when they will be paid out, 17 pursuant to this policy. 18 JUDGE KELLY: So they're actually due on the 19 12th? Is that right? 20 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes, sir. 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Uh-huh. 22 JUDGE KELLY: And that -- we don't have that 23 deadline on this post? 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, we would have -- 25 it would come to Commissioners' Court no later than the 12 1 15th. No. That's when -- that's when -- no later than 2 the 15th is when the Department Heads and Elected 3 Officials determine the nominees. That's the committee. 4 JUDGE KELLY: So right now we have with the 5 existing policy, a deadline for the applications to be 6 received by November 12? 7 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes, sir. 8 JUDGE KELLY: Okay. And your policy -- 9 proposed policy would change it to what, Commissioner? 10 COMMISSIONER MOSER: The 15th. 11 MRS. STEBBINS: Would that include the 12 Electeds and Department heads getting together and 13 having a meeting before that time? 14 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yes. Yes. Yes. That 15 would give one week after the individual departments get 16 together and decide who their nominees are going to be, 17 then the next week is when the committee of Elected 18 Officials -- not these Elected Officials, but other 19 Elected Officials and Department Heads decide who out of 20 that group of nominees had just narrowed down to the 30, 21 or whatever is determined. 22 MRS. STEBBINS: So all of the committee, 23 which is Elected Officials and Department Heads, would 24 then be looking at performance evaluations of all of 25 those employees and making a decision? 13 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, looking at the 2 recommend -- the performance evaluations and the 3 recommendation from that Department Head, okay? Like if 4 Rusty -- okay, he's got performance evaluations, 5 whatever he uses. He uses a different one, okay, than 6 the rest of the County does. But he would come forward 7 to the Committee and he say I recommend, you know, A, B, 8 C, D, these people, okay, and here's why. And then you 9 would do the same thing for your department, okay? And 10 then the Committee -- this is going to be the hard part. 11 Then the Committee is going to determine how to narrow 12 that down to the 30 in the example that I gave you. 13 JUDGE KELLY: Well, the first thing I'm 14 trying to understand is we have different dates. And I 15 want to get the dates clear in my mind and understand 16 why are we shortening the period to submit these 17 applications by four days? 18 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, because that's 19 what was in the policy, the 12th. Now we could change 20 that, okay, and make it the 15th. That would give us -- 21 JUDGE KELLY: The policy just says the 22 second Monday, right? 23 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes, sir. 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 25 JUDGE KELLY: And it defaulted -- 14 1 COMMISSIONER BELEW: The way it worked out 2 this year, yeah. 3 JUDGE KELLY: Right. Well, in -- in 4 November it's always going to work out this way. 5 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Sure. 6 JUDGE KELLY: Veterans Day is November the 7 11th always. 8 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 9 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Right. 10 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Couldn't we move your 11 15th to the 12th? 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Could. Sure. 13 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: I think that would be 14 simplifying, I think. 15 COMMISSIONER MOSER: This is just -- this is 16 a concept. But the problem with that is it only gives 17 the quote Committee from the 8th, 9th -- 10th to the 18 12th, gives them three days maximum to come up with who 19 the -- 20 JUDGE KELLY: I'm just -- I'm just trying to 21 understand the differences in what's being proposed and 22 what we have. We know what we have right now, and that 23 is they're due by the 12th. And we as a Commissioners' 24 Court have to make a decision in time to get the 25 paychecks out, but we have already set that date for the 15 1 18th. 2 COMMISSIONER MOSER: 18th, correct. 3 MRS. STEBBINS: I think -- 4 JUDGE KELLY: So that's when we're going to 5 meet. And what this is going to do is to have the 6 Committee make the decision rather than the Court prior 7 to the Court ratifying what -- the work that they've 8 done. 9 COMMISSIONER MOSER: You got it. 10 MRS. STEBBINS: I think you're going to have 11 a real hard time getting -- I don't know how many 12 Elected Officials and Directors together to have a 13 meeting to evaluate this appropriately, and to make a 14 recommendation to y'all in time. I think that would be 15 a very, very difficult task. 16 COMMISSIONER MOSER: And you might want to 17 -- and -- and I thought about that, or we thought about 18 it and talked about it a little bit. But we didn't want 19 to give a recommendation, Rusty and Dawn and myself, a 20 guideline or a criteria or anything like that. We 21 thought, let's let the -- let the Department Head -- 22 let the Committee decide how they want to do it. 23 JUDGE KELLY: Say that again? 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Instead of having a 25 criteria -- you could do -- you could do -- 16 1 JUDGE KELLY: I thought we wanted to 2 establish guidelines, that you had -- 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: No, no, no. I'm 4 talking about by the Committee. The Committee -- let's 5 just say the Committee has 50 people that have been 6 nominated through all the departments. They gotta 7 narrow that down to 30. What criteria do they use, what 8 scoring system or whatever, to go from 50 to 30, okay? 9 We didn't go there. We didn't go to the -- to the 10 process by with which the Committee would -- would 11 finally determine the final number of nominees. The 12 final nominees. 13 JUDGE KELLY: So the Court would delegate 14 its -- its authority at this point of deciding who these 15 recipients would be to the Committee. 16 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Correct. 17 JUDGE KELLY: And then we're not going to 18 establish any criteria for the Committee to make the 19 decision? 20 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Correct. 21 JUDGE KELLY: Why? It seems like the 22 guidelines that are good for the applicant oughta be 23 good for the Committee. What am I missing? 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, because they're 25 different -- we're given a very broad set of guidelines, 17 1 okay? Department Heads, you can't have any more than 2 ten, okay? That's -- that's a guideline. Elected 3 Officials are not allowed. Those are the -- that's -- 4 we don't tell -- we're not recommending -- the 5 Department Heads with their employees come up with who 6 they think it oughta be, okay? 7 and so we're not -- we're not going beyond the general 8 guidelines of the amount. We're going to establish the 9 amount of the award, the average awards to be made -- 10 merit pays to be given. We're going to establish the 11 schedule, but we're not going to -- we're not suggesting 12 to Department Heads or anybody else, or that committee 13 how they need to choose. 14 JUDGE KELLY: Would there be any reason to 15 think that an Elected Official or Department Head that 16 serves on this new committee that we're going to form 17 under this proposal -- 18 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Uh-huh. 19 JUDGE KELLY: -- is not going to continue to 20 recommend the person that they recommended in the first 21 place? 22 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Sure, they will. They 23 will. But they have -- they have to -- they have to 24 defend that, or present that to the other Department 25 Heads. 18 1 COMMISSIONER BELEW: But that's where the 2 Judge's concern about guidelines comes in. Because if 3 everybody's playing off the same -- singing off the same 4 sheet of music -- 5 JUDGE KELLY: Well, we -- we don't know 6 what's going to happen when that Committee gets 7 together. We don't have a clue. 8 COMMISSIONER MOSER: That's right. 9 MRS. STEBBINS: And then the Committee has 10 the evaluations of all of the people who are -- 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Not necessarily, 12 Heather. 13 MRS. STEBBINS: But why -- that doesn't make 14 any sense if -- if we don't get to all start with here's 15 a packet of the applicants and here are the evaluations, 16 which is what the Court adopted to have submitted for 17 those evaluations. This is how they're going to make a 18 decision, and we don't get those? And then we all have 19 to sort of go "my employee gets it"? 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. We do and we 21 don't, both. We do, okay, you get those. 22 MRS. STEBBINS: It just seems to complicate 23 things. 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, yes and no. And 25 that's what the Judge is saying about it's delegating 19 1 that authority to the Committee, that's not true. What 2 the deal is, is if the Court says we're going to give 25 3 or 30 of these awards, okay, and the Department Heads 4 are limited to at the very most ten per department that 5 they can nominate, we could end up with 50, easy, that 6 are nominated. 7 So what happens is that Committee gets 8 together and sits down and just talks about it, use 9 whatever criteria you want, because you've got yours, 10 they got -- and we narrow that list of 50 down to 30 or 11 25 in one day. 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: It's not going to just 13 be -- 14 MRS. STEBBINS: But if there's -- 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Now -- 16 MRS. STEBBINS: -- not criteria established, 17 that's risky. 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Then you don't -- 19 MRS. STEBBINS: That's risky. 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- then you don't -- 21 JUDGE KELLY: Well, no, what you're doing 22 is -- 23 MRS. STEBBINS: For this Court when they 24 make a decision that they're using a recommendation that 25 doesn't really have -- it has willy-nilly criteria 20 1 established and then what if someone doesn't get it 2 and -- 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The criteria is what 4 those -- all those Department Heads and Elected 5 Officials have decided. Such as, I'm not going to be 6 evaluating Shane's employee out there that does 7 maintenance for my office or does the custodial work. 8 But I may know that that person does a heck of a job and 9 goes above and beyond giving that, so why would -- if 10 Shane came up with that one being nominated, well I also 11 as a different department have a little bit of input in 12 there. Well, I see that person every day. I think, 13 yeah, I -- I might limit one of mine down so that that 14 one could do it. 15 It -- it makes the employees -- the 16 employees are the ones that originally recommend, I 17 think. I think it should come from your own employees 18 so that they're buying into this. And then it goes to 19 you, and then you evaluate those they recommended 20 however you want to, okay, so that you narrow it down. 21 But it gives the employees a buy-in in it. Now, I'll be 22 honest, I told -- 23 JUDGE KELLY: Let me just interrupt right 24 there, on that topic. I agree with that completely. 25 For the Department Heads and Elected Officials to go to 21 1 their employees and ask them to make the recommendations 2 from within their own ranks, I buy it. I -- I believe 3 in that wholeheartedly. And that goes to the -- to the 4 supervisor, and the supervisor considers what the peers 5 think of their -- the people that are being nominated. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And the supervisor may 7 know a little bit more. 8 JUDGE KELLY: Absolutely. 9 SHERIF HIERHOLZER: Whether they're ten 10 minutes late every day or whether -- you know, that may 11 change, but -- 12 JUDGE KELLY: But to get employee input and 13 to get supervisor input and to get Department Heads or 14 Elected Officials input, to get that, I think is 15 invaluable. I think it's essential. 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The hard part is going 17 to be what Heather is alluding to, if a group of Elected 18 Officials and Department Heads coming together and 19 looking at each other's employees -- 20 JUDGE KELLY: We got 14 Department Heads. 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- and deciding in one 22 meeting which ones to cut out of that recommendation for 23 that -- 24 MRS. STEBBINS: And giving us three days to 25 do it, or a week. 22 1 JUDGE KELLY: Okay. 2 COMMISSIONER MOSER: You can -- you can 3 grade it or however you want to do it. You can listen 4 to it and -- 5 MRS. STEBBINS: I don't want to. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: -- you can score -- 7 score it however you want to. If you -- 8 MRS. STEBBINS: I don't want to grade 9 Rusty's employees. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Why not? 11 MRS. STEBBINS: Why not? Because I don't -- 12 they're not my employees. I don't want to be 13 responsible for a grade on them. 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But -- that's right, 15 they're not. But you do know what kind of case report 16 those employees turn over to you, who does a good job 17 for mine. You see a different perspective of my 18 employees than I do. Because they're all County 19 employees, okay. I see a different perspective of 20 Dawn's or Bob's employees from just dealings we have 21 with those. So I think you can. It's not a simple 22 task. Now, I told you if you talk to my employees -- 23 COMMISSIONER MOSER: -- it's up to Department 24 Heads to make a case for their employees, that's what it 25 amounts to. It's up to the Department Heads or Elected 23 1 Officials to make the case. 2 COMMISSIONER BELEW: But if you take that 3 combined -- in other words, Heather, it's -- instead of 4 having a form where you check off yes, they did this, or 5 they're always on time, that's very sterile. You have 6 somebody that actually goes to bat for their employees, 7 this ones does X, X, X. 8 MRS. STEBBINS: Okay, I get it. 9 COMMISSIONER BELEW: And then the employees 10 -- the others that work with that employee say yes, 11 absolutely, stellar performance, so on. The combination 12 of those, what you're going to do is you're going to 13 have -- you're going to cull some people out. They 14 didn't have that. They didn't have that. You're going 15 to end up with the last few. 16 MRS. STEBBINS: Yeah. I understand. I 17 understand. 18 COMMISSIONER BELEW: I'm an old radio guy. 19 If it was up to me we'd have the first 30 callers get 20 it -- 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, and then I think 22 when it -- when that -- 23 COMMISSIONER BELEW: -- and we'd be done 24 with it. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Just because we have 24 1 all finally thought it out or whatever and given it to 2 30, or 25 -- 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Discussed it. 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- and it goes to the 5 Court, that's up to y'all then. 6 JUDGE KELLY: Right. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It doesn't take any -- 8 it doesn't say you have to give those 25 or 30 the 9 merit. Now it's up to y'all. And you can pull in each 10 Department Head at that 18th meeting or whatever and ask 11 them why should we give this one, and y'all make that 12 final final decision. 13 JUDGE KELLY: And what -- what are the 14 additional five that you are talking about? That's kind 15 of like -- 16 COMMISSIONER MOSER: That was another thing. 17 I thought on something like this, it just would be good 18 to have something in reserve in case there was something 19 overlooked or somebody -- for some other reason, the 20 Court -- we may not do any, okay. But I thought -- 21 that's the reason I said, you know, if we had $50,000. 22 00 is about what we have, and you say okay, I'm going to 23 take 45,000 and distribute it. You may take 5,000 and 24 just hold it on the side. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, I think the 25 1 additional five -- three or five whatever y'all set, at 2 that point -- this is just personal opinion. That three 3 or five could go to the Department Heads or even an 4 elected official. Because that three or five are 5 totally up to this Court on what y'all have seen out of 6 Department Heads you have working or Elected Officials 7 and who's done there. So you could give those three or 8 five additional to those people. 9 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. Correct. 10 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Is that right? 11 MRS. STEBBINS: The policy excludes 12 specifically Elected Officials. But I think that at the 13 time it was contemplated that your directors, your 14 employees, the Court's employees, would certainly have 15 an opportunity to get a merit pay because they work 16 hard. 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Then leave out Elected 18 Officials because you're still within the policy, but it 19 would -- that three or five could be your Department 20 Heads. 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Let me give you an 22 example of something like that. A Constable, okay, he's 23 an Elected Official. There's a department of one, okay? 24 This Court may decide, you know, Constable number X 25 really should be -- should receive it. 26 1 MRS. STEBBINS: I think that there -- I'll 2 have to go back and look, but I feel like a conversation 3 we had back then there's a prohibition from giving 4 additional pay to the Elected Officials. But I will 5 have to look. I think that y'all had to exclude Elected 6 Officials. You can't include them. 7 COMMISSIONER BELEW: That's why I asked 8 that. Is that not written in the policy in black and 9 white? 10 MRS. STEBBINS: That's written in the policy 11 but I think it -- I think that it is a -- 12 JUDGE KELLY: I think it's a legal 13 requirement. 14 MRS. STEBBINS: -- prohibition that you 15 can't do it. 16 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I see. Okay. 17 COMMISSIONER BELEW: That's what I was 18 thinking. 19 MRS. STEBBINS: I think you're going to have 20 to -- 21 JUDGE KELLY: Our salaries are set by law 22 and -- 23 MRS. STEBBINS: Yeah. 24 JUDGE KELLY: -- and they can't give us 25 anything else. 27 1 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Gratuity or gifts. 2 JUDGE KELLY: It's illegal. 3 MRS. STEBBINS: And so, you can't include 4 the electeds, but you can include the Directors. 5 MRS. GRINSTEAD: And I think that's because 6 we have to publish their wages in the newspaper every 7 year. And we can -- 8 MRS. STEBBINS: That's been prohibited from 9 that. 10 COMMISSIONER MOSER: All right. Good point. 11 MRS. STEBBINS: But you can and should 12 include your Directors. Those guys and gals work real 13 hard. 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But those -- I'd say 15 those final ones should be made public by y'all for the 16 directors. 17 JUDGE KELLY: Well, from my point of view, 18 and this is just my observation. I think we counted it 19 up, I think there's about 14 departments. Does that 20 sound about right? 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Uh-huh, yes. 22 JUDGE KELLY: And Elected Officials, 23 counting the County Surveyor, who doesn't get paid 24 anything, there are 25 of us at this Courthouse. 25 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Correct. 28 1 JUDGE KELLY: And so we're going to exclude 2 the five of us because we're not going to participate in 3 this, and we're going to exclude the Surveyor because he 4 doesn't need to be at any meeting deciding everything 5 else, but everybody else would qualify to have a 6 committee of 40 people, 35 people are going to make 7 these decisions. It just seems too unruly to me. 8 MRS. STEBBINS: If the Directors are going 9 to be included, then they should probably be excluded 10 from that Committee. So that maybe then someone from 11 the Court should be a spokesperson -- 12 JUDGE KELLY: That's a good point. 13 MRS. STEBBINS: -- on the Committee instead 14 of the Directors. 15 JUDGE KELLY: That's a good point. 16 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Say that again. 17 MRS. STEBBINS: If -- 18 JUDGE KELLY: If a Department Head is 19 recommended for a merit pay -- 20 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Oh, I see. Okay. 21 Yeah. 22 JUDGE KELLY: -- then they're recused from 23 participating -- 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah, right. 25 JUDGE KELLY: -- in this -- this gang of 30 29 1 or whatever we've got. 2 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But I don't think 4 they're recommended in that gang of 30 or whatever you 5 want to call it. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The Department Heads 8 are solely the Commissioners' Court. 9 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They have nothing to do 11 with that committee. 12 MRS. STEBBINS: But the -- 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Not only Department 14 Heads -- 15 JUDGE KELLY: Department Heads are not going 16 to be on the selection committee? 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They're going to be on 18 the selection committee, but whether or not they get a 19 bonus or a merit pay is at -- is at the sole discretion 20 of the Court. Y'all are the ones that work with the 21 Department Heads. 22 MRS. STEBBINS: Right. 23 JUDGE KELLY: So there won't be any 24 applications for them you're saying? 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's right. Not for 30 1 that committee. 2 MRS. STEBBINS: Unless y'all submit an 3 application for them. 4 JUDGE KELLY: Well, but -- 5 MRS. STEBBINS: They're employees. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. 7 JUDGE KELLY: -- what he's saying is if we 8 do it this way, with all these steps and everything in 9 it, by the time it gets to us, we would have the 10 discretion of recommending a Department Head if we chose 11 to. 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. That's totally 13 outside -- 14 MRS. STEBBINS: You can -- 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- of what the 16 Committee does. That's up to y'all. 17 MRS. STEBBINS: Pursuant to the policy, you 18 can do that now. You can do that now and it should be 19 part of that first batch that's reviewed that's 20 submitted by the 12. That's pursuant to the policy. 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, we thought when 22 we met the other day, too, you know, I think that Dawn 23 in open session the other day recommended well, we've 24 got all this stuff quantified with performance 25 evaluation. There isn't anything to keep a department 31 1 -- now, I'm not saying anybody would do it, but there 2 isn't anything to keep a Department Head from giving 3 outstanding to everybody in their department. Period. 4 So now you take that as the quantification of how you 5 select and it's -- it's not the same as going before 6 your peer Department Heads or Elected Officials and 7 defending what you have. That -- that's the beauty. 8 And this was Dawn and the Sheriff's idea here and I 9 think the same thing. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You know, the reason I 11 say that Department Heads should be the sole discretion 12 of the Court and not part of that committee 13 consideration, is because I think the Department 14 Heads -- you know, Kelly needs to be in that committee 15 consideration for her employees, but she doesn't need to 16 be in that committee consideration for herself. 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Correct. 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So that's why 19 Department Heads are totally at their discretion. 20 They're the committee for the Department. They give -- 21 she's still part of that committee. And as far as the 22 committee getting it done, it's kind of like if the 23 Court sets the date, that committee is going to meet at 24 9:00 a.m. on November the 15th. Then whoever shows up 25 at 9:00 a.m. on November the 15th is that committee to 32 1 vote. And if another Department Head or Elected 2 Official says well, I can't be there, too bad. We're 3 not going to go searching for dates for them to meet and 4 not get anything done. Either they're going to be there 5 or they're not. Period. 6 COMMISSIONER BELEW: I agree with that. 7 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Yep. Yep. 8 COMMISSIONER MOSER: And I -- I'm confident 9 that committee would come up with a way to do it. And 10 it's going to be each person presenting and defending 11 their recommendation. And some people can present 12 and defend better than others, but that's -- life is 13 unfair. I shouldn't have said that. 14 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Now I -- I have a 15 question about our permanent part-timers. And what's 16 the actual term for that? Full-time? Part-time? 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: They're not excluded. 18 COMMISSIONER BELEW: They're not excluded? 19 COMMISSIONER MOSER: They're not excluded. 20 COMMISSIONER BELEW: All right. That was 21 it. 22 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Only temporaries is the 23 recommendation here. 24 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Okay. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And you have to get 33 1 back to it's above and beyond and exceptional. It may 2 end up -- 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Exemplary. 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Exemplary. It may end 5 up that if people are really doing it correctly that you 6 don't even have 30 that are recommended throughout the 7 County. Just because it's there doesn't mean everybody 8 has to use it. It should truly mean something and be 9 for above and beyond for the previous year or exemplary 10 performance previous year. Not just because I can or 11 because we're favored. 12 JUDGE KELLY: And these applications are due 13 to the HR Director? 14 MRS. STEBBINS: Y'all and the HR Director. 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's the way to file 16 it? 17 MRS. STEBBINS: Oh, filed with HR. 18 JUDGE KELLY: And then HR would then give us 19 our folders and notebooks or whatever? 20 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 21 JUDGE KELLY: Okay. 22 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Sure seemed a lot 23 simpler when we proposed this. 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, when you get down 25 -- it gets -- you know, you have 300-something 34 1 employees, you gotta have some way to get there. 2 COMMISSIONER BELEW: That's in the detail. 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah. And I think the 4 three of us and others, you know, I really like the idea 5 of the employees getting -- being part of the process. 6 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: I do, too. 7 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So it starts -- it 8 starts with the employees, goes to the supervises, goes 9 to Commissioners' Court. So I think that that -- it 10 percolates up, rather than Commissioners' Court saying 11 here's the way we think you should do it. I don't like 12 that. I don't know what other Commissioners think. 13 COMMISSIONER BELEW: So what would be 14 changed from what Commissioner Moser has proposed here? 15 What would be different or added to based on this 16 discussion? 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, I -- I don't 18 think anything so far. 19 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Well, I think there was 20 a date added to it, wasn't there? 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, we said in the 22 policy it would be the second Monday it has to go to HR, 23 which would be the 12th, I think. And this says that 24 the Committee has to have their recommendation by the 25 15th. And I -- 35 1 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Well then I'll move for 2 approval of this proposal. 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. There's 4 something we got to do first -- 5 COMMISSIONER BELEW: What? 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: -- before we do that. 7 Excuse me. We have to -- if we want -- we're going to 8 establish guidelines today. So one of the guidelines is 9 determine the number of recipients based on average 10 merit pay. So what I'm proposing -- 11 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Maximum? 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah. So what I'm 13 proposing we have $49,000 something after FICA, $49,000 14 in cold hard U.S. currency that can go to recipients. 15 JUDGE KELLY: $49,562.00. 16 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So I'm -- I'm 17 recommending that we make it 45,000 and that the average 18 merit pay be $1,500, so that would be 30 merit pay 19 recipients. Okay. So I'm just going to go through. 20 Okay. So that's the recommendation. I'm going to also 21 recommend that it be no more than ten from each 22 department. Okay. And I'm going to make a motion 23 that -- 24 JUDGE KELLY: Whoa, whoa, whoa. We've got a 25 motion on the floor. Harley's made a motion to adopt 36 1 this piece of paper right here. 2 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, but there's -- 3 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Right. 4 COMMISSIONER MOSER: -- there's blanks in 5 here that have to be filled in. 6 JUDGE KELLY: I understand there are blanks. 7 But he's got a motion. 8 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. 9 JUDGE KELLY: Now, are we talking about 10 amending more -- 11 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I want -- I want to 12 amend it. 13 JUDGE KELLY: How complicated are we going 14 to make this today, guys? 15 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, you gotta -- you 16 gotta establish -- Judge, you gotta establish what the 17 average is going to be to determine the number of 18 recipients. You gotta do that as part of the 19 guidelines. 20 JUDGE KELLY: I've got a policy right now 21 that says that if I want to give somebody $500 and the 22 majority of us want to do it, we can do that. And what 23 we're doing is rewriting the policy. We've got a 24 simple, albeit somewhat vague, a general policy, that I 25 think we can do this entire thing with. And what we're 37 1 trying to do, I think, is unnecessarily complicate a 2 situation that we're doing for the first time anyway. 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, you and I -- 4 JUDGE KELLY: And we're learning as we go. 5 COMMISSIONER MOSER: -- you and I can 6 disagree. 7 COMMISSIONER BELEW: And -- and when you 8 establish -- this is like anything. When it's new, 9 there's going to be revisions. We're going to find out 10 what works and what -- 11 JUDGE KELLY: Sure. So I'm not really 12 worried about going forward with this. This year we'll 13 learn. Next year it will be refined a little bit and it 14 will probably get more so as we go. 15 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: The only thing I don't 16 see is that we have to cap it. We have to come up with 17 a number. Because we might give more five hundreds than 18 we do fifteen hundreds. You know. I don't know why we 19 have to set it at 30 or whatever. 20 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Well, you have to have 21 an amount you're going to -- 22 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Well, we have the 23 amount. The money is going to determine the max. 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, if you have an 25 amount then you have an average then you got the number 38 1 of recipients. By definition. 2 COMMISSIONER BELEW: But as the Sheriff has 3 stated, you might not give it all away. You might not 4 have that -- as many as you think you're going to have. 5 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I said average. 6 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Yeah, I know. Well, 7 if you say we're only going to give 30, and you want to 8 give 40, you know, much more of them are going to be 500 9 or something. 10 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So when are you going 11 to decide that? 12 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Well, I think the 13 committee would. 14 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Yes, exactly. That's 15 what I was thinking. The committee, let them decide. 16 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Yeah. 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think you have to be 18 real careful giving different amounts. Because it's 19 already going to create a big enough issue. 20 COMMISSIONER BELEW: I think they should cap 21 at $500 personally. This is year one. Let's not, you 22 know, go crazy with it. Let's cap it at five hundred 23 bucks. There's a lot of people that -- 24 JUDGE KELLY: That's 90 recipients. 25 COMMISSIONER MOSER: That's 90 recipients. 39 1 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Yeah. 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But the thing is -- and 3 this is what -- 4 COMMISSIONER MOSER: That's a third of the 5 employees. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- you know, when I 7 talked to my Department Heads this is where they got 8 into that, what y'all just said, that's 90 recipients. 9 That's not what this is about, okay? This should be 10 about exemplary and above and beyond service. 11 You know, the dollar amount, whether it's 12 50,000, a hundred thousand, ten recipients, shouldn't 13 even be known really, okay, not to us. Not to the 14 Elected Officials and the Department Heads, because 15 that's none of our business. We should be recommending 16 only people that truly deserve it, and however many 17 y'all decide is what it is. 18 You know, saying right off the bat, well, if 19 we do 500 now y'all can nominate 90 people, that's -- 20 that's the wrong approach. It shouldn't change the 21 number of people I would nominate that have gone above 22 and beyond and exemplary. 23 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Well, hold on a minute. 24 I thought there was a maximum of ten people per 25 department. That has been stated earlier. 40 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: That was an example. 2 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Okay. You didn't -- 3 you're not stating that it should be a maximum -- 4 COMMISSIONER MOSER: No, I didn't -- I 5 didn't say what the average merit pay should be or the 6 number of employees. 7 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Well, that was my 8 understanding is we were doing a maximum of ten, that's 9 why I suggested what I did. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Now, and I'll be 11 perfectly honest -- 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: It says for example. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- when I visited with 14 Department Heads in my office, the first thing most of 15 them said is, you know, the County did good, they're 16 paying holiday pay now, which they hadn't done before 17 which is a big jump, they gave a cost of living. If 18 they really wanted to do something and they got $50,000 19 to quote, to just out there to do what they want, bump 20 the lowest people in the step and grade up one. That 21 was their recommendation. Get them closer to the living 22 wage. Period. Whether it's your custodians, whether -- 23 if you got that much money, 60,000 total to put out 24 there, the heck with this merit stuff because it's all 25 going to be a favoritism anyhow, bump those lowest ones 41 1 on the -- on the pay grade up a step and let's go on. 2 COMMISSIONER MOSER: That's -- that's a 3 different objective than -- 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's -- but that's 5 the opinion of -- 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. Some people. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- of a Patrol Captain 8 and a Jail Administrator when you're talking to them. 9 JUDGE KELLY: Okay. As the Presiding 10 Officer of the Court, I'm going to exercise my privilege 11 and I'm going to call the question. We've been debating 12 this for 41 minutes. We've got people waiting out there 13 to talk to us, business that we need to hear. We need 14 to make a decision. So I'm calling the question. We've 15 got a motion. Is there a second? 16 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I'd like to amend it. 17 JUDGE KELLY: Well, what's your amendment? 18 COMMISSIONER MOSER: My amendment is that it 19 be no greater than ten people from each department -- 20 JUDGE KELLY: Isn't that already in here? 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: No, that's an example. 22 JUDGE KELLY: Okay. 23 COMMISSIONER MOSER: It says right there, 24 for example. 25 JUDGE KELLY: I'm going to scratch out e.g. 42 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. Scratch out e.g. 2 Okay. And I would like to also amend it by saying that 3 the merit pay -- average merit pay should be $1,500. 4 MRS. STEBBINS: May I suggest another 5 amendment? The first payday in December is the week 6 after the Christmas party. So maybe the recognition at 7 the Christmas party and then pay at the -- 8 COMMISSIONER MOSER: That would be fine. 9 MRS. STEBBINS: Thank you. 10 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. Okay. So that 11 -- I'll -- I'll accept that. Recognition at the 12 Christmas party and the pay be on, when? 13 MRS. STEBBINS: The first payday in 14 December. 15 COMMISSIONER MOSER: The first payday in 16 December, okay? Good. 17 COMMISSIONER BELEW: So you said average 18 though, Tom. I think they all ought to probably be the 19 same amount. 20 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I agree. I agree. 21 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Okay. 22 COMMISSIONER MOSER: But that establishes -- 23 that established the number the peak committee will 24 choose. So it would be 30 people. 25 COMMISSIONER BELEW: I'm not opposed to any 43 1 amount, I just think that they ought to -- 2 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. Well, that's the 3 way -- you get -- you gotta give this committee 4 something. Okay. So my amended recommendation is 30 5 people to be nominated by the committee, okay, and 6 that's based on $45,000 divided by $1,500 per recipient. 7 And that's 30. And that the -- 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Maximum of 30. 9 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Maximum of 30. 10 Correct. 11 COMMISSIONER BELEW: No Department Head or 12 office nominates more than ten at a time. 13 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 14 COMMISSIONER BELEW: All right. 15 JUDGE KELLY: And then everything else is in 16 this -- 17 COMMISSIONER BELEW: I'll agree to that 18 sure. 19 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Everything else is -- 20 everything else is presented. 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only thing is with 22 your budget you have -- if you do 30 and you actually 23 give those 30, it's not going to leave y'all any room to 24 give anything to a Department Head. 25 COMMISSIONER MOSER: $5,000. 44 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Because you don't have 2 35, do you? 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: We got $5,000.00. 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So do you want to knock 5 it down to 25, or leave it at 30? 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I'd leave it at 30. 7 MR. ROBLES: It will be $4,562.00 left over 8 if you gave 1,500. 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's up to y'all. 10 JUDGE KELLY: You've accepted the amendment. 11 We have a motion. Is there a second? 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Second. 13 JUDGE KELLY: Motion has been made by 14 Commissioner Belew, seconded by Commission Moser to 15 adopt the policy as amended and presented in our packet 16 today. Everybody clear what that includes? 17 MRS. DOWDY: Was it amended to include the 18 Directors -- 19 COMMISSIONER MOSER: No. 20 JUDGE KELLY: No. 21 JUDGE KELLY: Okay. Any further discussion? 22 Those in favor raise your hand. Those opposed? Three 23 to one decision. 24 (Judge Kelly opposed.) 25 MRS. GRINSTEAD: Real quick. Well, before 45 1 we move on. Are you going to set now the date that that 2 committee is going to meet and who is going to notify 3 all these people? 4 COMMISSIONER MOSER: They have to decide by 5 the 15th, or they can choose a date. Just decide by 6 then. 7 MRS. GRINSTEAD: But you need them all in 8 one place at one time. So I assume you're going -- 9 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 10 MRS. GRINSTEAD: -- someone will set a 11 meeting and then someone will notify all these 12 Department Elected Officials? 13 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Somebody. Right. 14 Right. 15 MRS. GRINSTEAD: That's what I'm trying to 16 pinpoint now. 17 COMMISSIONER BELEW: You need to designate a 18 point person. 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Y'all need to set a 20 meeting now. That way there's no squabble or wiggle 21 room on the meeting. 22 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Well, can we do that 23 when it's not on here? 24 MRS. GRINSTEAD: I assume it would be HR, 25 but I don't want to make any assumptions. So -- 46 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: What would you 2 recommend? You've got a bunch of Department Heads out 3 there. 4 MRS. DOSS: Well, I'm going to need some 5 time, depending on how many people are on this committee 6 to make copies for everyone. 7 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 8 MRS. DOSS: You know, per the policy I've 9 made, five for you and one extra. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Copies of what? 11 MRS. DOSS: Of the nominations I've received 12 thus far. 13 JUDGE KELLY: I think there's probably going 14 to be about 25 to 30 people. Now, we don't know who's 15 going to elect to come. The way we -- we've already 16 passed the policy, so if -- if a Constable wants to 17 come, they're entitled to sit on that committee because 18 they're an Elected Officials. 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They are. 20 JUDGE KELLY: So we got 20-some odd electeds 21 that get to come, right, 20? 22 COMMISSIONER BELEW: How do they get word of 23 this? 24 JUDGE KELLY: Well, that's what Jody is 25 asking? 47 1 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Jody is going to send 2 out an e-mail to everybody? 3 JUDGE KELLY: I don't think Jody wants to 4 head this up. 5 MRS. STEBBINS: I would recommend to HR 6 because she's the one getting all the applications from 7 all the -- 8 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I -- I think we should 9 let HR decide when and where. 10 MRS. DOSS: Well, we've already stated that 11 they're due to HR by the 12th. 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, wait a minute. 13 The nominations are going from HR to the Commissioners' 14 Court, okay? The Elected Officials and the committee is 15 going to decide on those nominations, or all nominations 16 at the committee meeting. 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Not everybody's going 19 to have an application to HR that will be recommended at 20 that committee meeting. 21 JUDGE KELLY: Whoa. What? 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We're not -- that 23 evaluation form, that was the whole thing. We're 24 getting away from -- from that evaluation form. 25 COMMISSIONER MOSER: As being the sole 48 1 source. 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So that the employees 3 have input into that. The employees and that Department 4 Head or Elected Official are going to come up with their 5 people that they want to nominate for the merit pay. 6 And then -- and it can be a maximum of ten or whatever 7 y'all set from each department. Then at that meeting is 8 where the committee is going to break those down to 9 however many you want, by whatever form they want to. 10 JUDGE KELLY: So these applications are 11 moot? 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's right. 13 JUDGE KELLY: This committee's going to do 14 whatever they want to do with every applicant? 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They -- they're -- not 16 necessarily, because Heather may still like to use it 17 that way. You know, Jackie may want to, but it doesn't 18 have to be done that way. I have a total different 19 evaluation form I use for my employees. I don't use 20 that. And to be honest, I don't want to get caught in 21 an issue later, in a liability claim that well, the 22 County uses this employee -- this app -- this appraisal 23 form, and you don't use it? No, I don't. Well, why 24 don't you evaluate your employees the same way every 25 other department does? I don't think you can tie that 49 1 down to Elected Officials. I think liability you're 2 asking for something. 3 MRS. STEBBINS: Well, when -- when they 4 adopted the policy that was the conversation. We're 5 going to consider the merit pay and we're going to 6 require the evaluation. And HR, at that time, sent out 7 the evaluation to everyone and said these are 8 recommended. And so for your employees to be able to 9 get the merit pay you have to submit an evaluation. 10 That's what the policy says. 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But we just changed the 12 policy. 13 MRS. STEBBINS: So you haven't rescinded -- 14 you haven't rescinded the policy. You haven't -- 15 COMMISSIONER MOSER: We have complemented 16 the policy. You still use the -- 17 MRS. STEBBINS: But it doesn't say you can't 18 -- you don't have to submit an evaluation. The policy 19 says you must. 20 COMMISSIONER MOSER: That's fine. Let's 21 submit it. That's something the committee can consider. 22 Okay. It doesn't say it has to be the only thing. 23 JUDGE KELLY: I can tell you right now, just 24 so everybody knows, I'm not voting for anybody getting a 25 merit raise that has not gotten an application and a 50 1 recommendation from their boss. 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Oh, I agree they have 3 to have that. 4 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah, I agree 100 5 percent. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. But how I do my 7 evaluation and recommendations to that committee is 8 going to be different than Heather does her evaluation 9 and recommendations to that committee. I shouldn't have 10 to use that same way. And I shouldn't have to use that 11 application to even get them nominated. 12 JUDGE KELLY: Well, that's what we were 13 talking about before. You don't have -- 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And we shouldn't have 15 to spend an hour in this Court trying to decide -- I 16 agree. 17 JUDGE KELLY: This is a waste of time and I 18 apologize to the public. I'm frustrated. 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, we can go back 20 to -- 21 JUDGE KELLY: We've got a policy. We'll 22 figure it out. 23 Next item on the agenda, 1.2 consider, 24 discuss and take appropriate action regarding a "Town 25 Hall" type meeting, November 16, at the Martin Marietta 51 1 Bedrock Facility, regarding the TCEQ Application for 2 Permit #41849. 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Judge, this is for 4 information, no action to be taken. Martin Marietta at 5 their Bedrock Facility, which is close to Center Point, 6 it's Sutherland Road and Highway 27, has a permit 7 application in for an extension of an existing permit 8 for rock crushing at that facility. They've been rock 9 crushing there. So that permit is about to expire so 10 they had to amend it. 11 In so submitting the application to TCEQ, it 12 says the same thing it did before, I believe, it said 13 the rock crusher could work 24/7. It has to adhere to 14 the air quality. It's an air quality permit. So a lot 15 of -- a lot of citizens, okay, saw that and they got 16 very concerned about it, and appropriately so. 17 So this date of November the 16th is the 18 date by with which Martin Marietta said let's -- and I 19 want to have a Town Hall Meeting to get Martin Marietta 20 there to say here's what it is, here's what we're doing, 21 have the community there to say here's our concern and 22 see if we couldn't have a communication session to 23 alleviate some of the objectives of -- the concerns 24 about Martin Marietta's permit. 25 So Martin Marietta said we will host that 52 1 Town Hall meeting. They want to call it an open house 2 at their facility on the 16th at 10 o'clock, which is on 3 a Saturday, so people can go out and see what it is that 4 they're doing, and look at the rock crushers, and see 5 what the whole process is, and answer any questions. 6 So I just wanted to use this opportunity to 7 say that's what's going to be. It's already a set -- 8 you know, at least the schedule has been set to do that. 9 And so the purpose of it is for communications, and let 10 everybody understand. And if Jana Colgate is here -- I 11 want to mention one thing. Jana Colgate sent to me -- 12 this is an article out of the Austin Statesman. 64 13 pages. I sent everybody on this Commissioners' Court a 14 link to that. I would encourage you to read it. Okay. 15 It will take you an hour to read it. It's worth it. 16 But it talks about all of the gravel mining, quarry 17 operations and rock crushing operations that are going 18 on in the Hill Country and it's increased -- Jana, 19 correct me if I'm wrong here -- like from 2012 it's 50 20 and it's now up to close to 2000. 21 So it is a big, big deal. Okay. There's no 22 regulation in the state other than air quality. There's 23 nothing on noise, there's water quality and air quality, 24 but there's nothing related to reclamation which Andy 25 Murr has introduced in the last legislative session, it 53 1 hasn't gotten out of committee. So one time somebody 2 said, Houston, we got a problem. I think the way I'd 3 characterize it, Hill Country, we've got a problem. 4 And this meeting on the 16th is just to 5 discuss the situation. That's all I have to say. 6 JUDGE KELLY: Okay. We do have people that 7 want to speak on this. Daniel Able. 8 MR. ABLE: Good morning everyone. Thank you 9 for having me. I'd first like to apologize for my 10 English. I'm not a native Texan. I came from Brooklyn, 11 New York. So if you have trouble with my English, I've 12 had trouble with it my whole life. So I just want to 13 give you some information, what I found out about Martin 14 Marietta. And this is what I know. 15 During a zoning board to pass whether or not 16 they could do rock crushing operations in there, they 17 agreed to two things. To have berms around the entire 18 sight -- 19 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Let me interrupt you. 20 That's a different facility. 21 MR. ABLE: What do you mean? 22 COMMISSIONER MOSER: They have two 23 operations. They have the bedrock facility and they 24 have the one that's in the City of Kerrville. This one 25 is at the Bedrock Facility. 54 1 MR. ABLE: That's the one I'm talking about. 2 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Then it's -- it's not 3 zoned. 4 MR. ABLE: I was under the impression, sir, 5 that the zoning board had to pass that site. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: That's the City. We 7 don't have a zoning board in the County. And I'm not -- 8 I don't want to interrupt you. I just need to clarify 9 that we're talking about -- 10 JUDGE KELLY: Well, let's not interrupt 11 Mr. Able. You waited very patiently. I -- we need to 12 hear what you have to say to us. Whether it's 13 absolutely accurate or not. 14 MR. ABLE: During the zoning board process, 15 two things were agreed to by Martin Marietta. To have a 16 berm around the site and to put trees on top of it. 17 What was rejected by the zoning board was the rock 18 crushing operation. So what they had to do was haul the 19 rock to another operation and crush it there. Okay. My 20 concern is this: As a native New Yorker, I will tell 21 you that I'm a cynic, okay. And I see scam central is 22 what's going on. This is a money issue. They want to 23 have their crushing operation on-site so they don't have 24 to haul it someplace else. And I get that. But here's 25 the deal. At the close of business Friday on the New 55 1 York stock exchange, Martin Marietta was worth 16.67 2 billion dollars. They recently finished an acquisition 3 called a bluegrass materials operation in the State of 4 Georgia. It has 22 active operations that now fall 5 under the Martin Marietta umbrella. 6 My concern is this. If they're going to 7 complain that this is a money issue, my recommendation 8 is Martin Marietta probably spends more money on ink 9 cartridges at the cost of a month than it cost to move 10 that rock from one location to another. 11 There's two other things involved here. I 12 think you're going to have sludge going into the river. 13 They can say what they want to say, it's going to 14 happen. 15 The other thing is noise. I don't know if 16 there's a noise abatement program. But a rock crushing 17 operation 24-hours a day is going to drive the cost of 18 aspirin through the roof. I think we got to look at it 19 closer, sir, and that's my recommendation. And I think 20 we got to find out what Martin Marietta really wants to 21 do. That's it. Thank you. 22 JUDGE KELLY: Thank you for your input. 23 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I'd like to comment 24 just for -- 25 JUDGE KELLY: Just a second. These people 56 1 have waited. Did you want to talk to us? 2 UNKNOWN SPEAKER: No, I'm just listening. 3 JUDGE KELLY: Okay. 4 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Judge, I want to 5 comment on that. Just -- I'm not arguing with him, but 6 I think it needs to be clear. Okay. Number one, there 7 are two -- and I'm not defending Martin Marietta at all, 8 okay. Their permit application is for the Bedrock 9 Facility; it's not for what they call the Kerrville 10 Facility. Kerrville Facility is the new one, which they 11 put the berms around. There's not a rock crusher there. 12 Okay. There's not a permit application to put a rock 13 crusher there. This is for the rock crusher at the 14 Bedrock Facility where they haul material from the 15 Kerrville Facility to the Bedrock Facility to crush the 16 rock. That's what that's about. 17 So, you know, that's just for clarification 18 for the medias here, you know, I just -- you know, go 19 look it up for yourself, media, but that's what -- 20 that's what it is. So I appreciate what you've said, 21 but just wanted to make sure that, you know, it was 22 clear what it's about. 23 JUDGE KELLY: Ma'am, you had your hand -- 24 MS. COLGATE: I didn't fill out a form but 25 Jana Colgate, Center Point. I'd like to clarify about 57 1 the rock crusher. Right now Martin Marietta has three 2 crushers on-site. The request is to remove one of them 3 and to bring in a portable rock crusher. The permitting 4 for portable equipment is much different than what is a 5 permanent fixture on the property. With bringing in the 6 portable rock crusher, they are able to mine more 7 aggregate, they can have -- one of the things they're 8 asking for is a variation in how tall these stock piles 9 can be. Right now it's 45 feet. In their application, 10 it is with TCEQ's permission to have that go beyond 45 11 feet, which when you really -- I -- you start driving 12 by, they are amassing more stock piles. That's also in 13 their application. But the rock crusher, when they have 14 the permanent versus the portable, a portable does not 15 have to be recertified when it is moved from facility to 16 facility. It's inspected maybe once every ten years. 17 And so -- and that permit goes with that crusher to 18 whatever facility. 19 The request is also for a taller conveyor 20 belt because they're going to be having more aggregate 21 material. They're also going to be washing more gravel. 22 So it's not just simply -- there's a lot more to it than 23 just saying we're going to get rid of one rock crusher. 24 We're bringing another. We want to have more stock 25 piling. Because the truck traffic has increased. 58 1 In one part it's -- under their application 2 it talks about having the dust abatement on entrances. 3 The trucks are bringing the dust in and out. Whether 4 they're turning in or out of the facility. So it's -- 5 we've become very reactive rather than proactive in 6 regarding the aggregate mining in this County. 7 On the link that Tom mentioned, there is a 8 map with Texas Parks and Wildlife and you put your 9 address in and it shows you the number of quarries that 10 are in -- what's in your area. And, for me, there are 11 five. Well, I live off -- you know, in the middle of 12 Center Point. And I have Martin Marietta -- not Martin 13 Marietta, I have Wheatcraft in my lines eye. 14 We are now needing to look at what 15 protecting, and so it's not just simple. The berms, the 16 City has that agreement. It does state the TCEQ 17 regulations, but there is supposed to be some type of a 18 protection around the -- the quarries, around the pits, 19 in the event that a car should have an accident or 20 something. 21 But I wanted to clarify about the rock 22 crusher because bringing in a portable one has more of 23 an impact than the permanent ones. 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Thank you, Jana. 25 JUDGE KELLY: Any other discussion? I 59 1 haven't seen if there's any action to be taken on this. 2 COMMISSIONER MOSER: No action. It was just 3 information. 4 JUDGE KELLY: Okay. Then the next item on 5 the agenda is 1.3. Consider, discuss and take 6 appropriate action on a request from Matt Grossman to 7 promote the Altice USA Hispanic Heritage Month Essay 8 Contest. 9 We had this on the last week's agenda and I 10 was asked to get more information about it. We got the 11 information, we put it in your packets. This is a 12 commercial communications outfit that had these 13 programs. It's part of their -- kind of a public 14 outreach. They had one for Black Heritage month. And 15 this one -- what's this, Hispanic Heritage. It's kinda 16 moot. Deadline was -- is Wednesday. So we missed that. 17 But just reporting back to what it was. And that way 18 next year we'll at least know what it is earlier. So no 19 action on that. 20 So let's pay the bills, 1.4 21 MS. SHELTON: For the budget year of 2018/19 22 Kerr County bills will be $41,902.81. Airport, $818.43. 23 Juvenile Probation, $9,382.72. Fund 75, which is the 24 216th D.A. forfeiture fund, is 25 cents. Fund 78, which 25 is the County Clerk fees, is $289.14. For the budget 60 1 year of 2019/2020, Kerr County, $278,290.80. The 2 Airport, is $4,288.72. Adult Probation, $3,376.76. 3 Juvenile Probation, $3,643.34. And then, Fund 45, which 4 is the District Clerk, is $5,416.04. 5 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Move for approval. 6 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Second. 7 JUDGE KELLY: Motion's been made by 8 Commissioner Belew, seconded by Commissioner Harris, to 9 pay the bills. Any other discussion? Those in favor 10 raise your hand. Four zero, unanimous. 11 Budget amendments? 12 MS. SHELTON: There are not any. 13 JUDGE KELLY: Late bills? 14 MS. SHELTON: There are not any. 15 JUDGE KELLY: Court orders? 16 MRS. GRINSTEAD: Commissioner Letz isn't 17 going to be here, but he did send an e-mail saying that 18 they all looked good to him. 19 JUDGE KELLY: I reviewed the court orders, 20 too. So I make a motion that we approve the court 21 orders as presented. 22 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Second. 23 JUDGE KELLY: I made the motion, seconded by 24 Commissioner Harris. Everybody, we the people, to go 25 ahead and approve the Court orders. Those in favor 61 1 raise your hand. Unanimous, four zero. 2 * * * * * * 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 62 1 STATE OF TEXAS * 2 COUNTY OF KERR * 3 I, DEBRA ELLEN GIFFORD, Certified Shorthand 4 Reporter in and for the State of Texas, and Official 5 Reporter in and for Kerr County, do hereby certify that 6 the above and foregoing pages contain and comprise a 7 true and correct transcription of the proceedings had in 8 the above-entitled Commissioners' Court Approval Agenda. 9 Dated this the 13th day of November, A.D., 10 2019. 11 12 /s/DEBRA ELLEN GIFFORD Certified Shorthand Reporter 13 No. 953 Expiration Date 04/31/2021 14 * * * * * * 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25