1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT Budget Workshop Friday, August 20, 2004 9:00 a.m. Commissioners' Courtroom Kerr County Courthouse Kerrville, Texas PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge H A."BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4 3 v O C~o 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I N D E X August 20, 2004 PAGE 9:00 COLA consideration 3 9:20 County Clerk 7 Records Management 20 Elections 26 9:40 County Treasurer 41 Direct Deposit 42 10:00 216th & 198th District Courts 55 10:40 J.P. 1 63 J.P. 2 72 J.P. 3 84 J.P. 4 85 11:00 Constable 1 86 Constable 2 88 Constable 3 96 Constable 4 108 1:00 County Attorney 117 Victims' Rights Coordinator 131 1:20 Tax Assessor/Collector 149 1:30 KARFA request 167 ---- County Auditor 194 ---- Adjourned 215 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 On Friday, August 20, 2004, at 9:00 a.m., a budget workshop of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court: P R O C E E D I N G S JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning. Let me call to order the Commissioners Court workshop scheduled for this date, Friday, August the 20th, at 9 a.m. It's that time, or just a smidgen after that right now. We've got a schedule here. I appreciate Commissioner Baldwin doing this. I did note that one thing we failed to do is plug in a break in the middle for our court reporter, but we'll figure out how to squeeze that in. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, sure. JUDGE TINLEY: The first item on the schedule is, I believe Commissioner Letz was asking that we try and get a COLA consideration roundabout going up here first off, so that we could be thinking about that. Ms. Mitchell was kind enough to do some inquiring about and got some information with regard to it, and she's attached the information that each of you have. COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is a -- this is exactly what we needed, I think, to get started looking at what we should -- where we should be on the COLA. And, just 8-20-04 wk 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 by glancing at these numbers, it appears to me that it's somewhere between 2 and a half and 3 percent. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I've got penciled at the bottom of my sheet 3 percent. I think that probably represents a fair cost-of-living adjustment. Based on all of these others, it's not out of line, and it's in keeping with what's going on in the real world. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's an interesting comment from the City of Kerrville. It's -- the comment from City of Kerrville was they do not give a COLA; they give a merit increase. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's interesting. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: When Ms. Mitchell was gathering this information, she asked me about it, and I said, "Just write down their response and just whatever they tell you." And some of them are kind of -- I note Kendall County, for example, 2 percent COLA across-the-board, and then each department head gets 3 percent, apparently, of their total payroll cost in their department to give merit increases to spread around. And -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: We did that, what, three years ago? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, we actually had money in the pot last year; didn't use it. 8-20-04 wk 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This current year. JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 2 and a half or 3 sounds about right to me, based on this -- this data. It would be -- I'd like to know before we finally decide whether or not we're going to -- like to know whether or not we're going to fund all the positions that we currently have; if we're going to have fewer employees, thereby have more money to give, or we're going to have the same amount of employees. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- I don't think that's relevant. I mean, if we -- if we can at all afford it, we -- the COLA, to me, we should decide on a COLA that we should give. And then, if we can afford to give something on top of that later, that'd be great. And I think you have to look at some of the departments that are cutting back and redoing some schedules. That's fine. But, to me, you know, the -- I'd like to get a COLA plugged in, and then we worry about, you know, positions. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with that, and I also agree with the number 3. So -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, 3 percent looks 25 ~ in line to me, from what... For those that, you know, don't 8-20-04 wk 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 know, K.I.S.D. is giving a 3.5 percent. Kerr Central Appraisal, 3 percent. Upper Guadalupe River Authority, 2.6. Ingram, 2.75. Sid Peterson Hospital, basically 3 percent. KPUB, 2.5 percent. And then various counties around, 2 to 3 percent variance -- yeah, 2 to 3 percent. So, 3 percent seems in line to me. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think so. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We'll plug that in, rerun it, and see what it looks like. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: I think the Auditor just nodded, indicating message received. COMMISSIONER LETZ: This -- you know, and I like this approach of using a -- you know, having a little bit of, I guess, information and some research to justify the number that we use. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think this is also in line with the cost-of-living, which is what the COLA actually is for the state of Texas. Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We ready to move on to the County clerk's request? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have one question before we get started, so I know which packet of numbers I'm looking at. I see we had a new budget run. Are there 8-20-04 wk 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 changes -- what's different between this one -- MR. TOMLINSON: The changes are in the Sheriff and Road and Bridge personnel costs. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. So, there are pretty significant changes, okay. MR. TOMLINSON: The rest of it's not going to change. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One other housekeeping thing before we move on. KARFA has asked to have a few minutes to explain the capital request that they have, which would be a matching grant to improve emergency communications. And, as you know, all those KARFA members are workers and employed, so it's hard for them to get in here, so I suggested they come in at 1:30 this afternoon; we'd give them five or ten minutes to explain why they're going to ask for some $12,000 or $15,000 in a matching grant. We won't be able to act on it, but we can listen to them. Won't take long. JUDGE TINLEY: I've got it noted here at 1:30. Okay, I guess we're ready to go with the County Clerk. MS. PIEPER: Okay, gentlemen. You want to just start with the general budget, 10-403? COMMISSIONER LETZ: What page are we on? 8-20-04 wk 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page are you on? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Page 5. MS. PIEPER: I don't have that printout, so I don't know what page. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You don't? Don't you know where you are? MS. PIEPER: I have mine right here. Mine says Page 5. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it. I mean, I think the -- what we talked about -- I don't know if -- you probably weren't in the room; is there's no need really to go down every line item. It's kind of more personnel changes, capital improvement changes, and anything directionally as to where you think -- like, election machines is probably a topic. Things that are, I guess, important to discuss in your mind. Then, if we had questions, we'd ask them then. MS. PIEPER: The first change or amendment that I need to let you be aware of is when I was working this budget up, I forgot all about the longevity. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MS. PIEPER: And I have a couple of employees that are due their longevity for 2005. JUDGE TINLEY: Those should have been plugged in in the position schedule. That was the reason that we 8-20-04 wk 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 did the position schedule, so that those would be automatically plugged in in accordance with that policy. And if -- certainly, if they've been missed -- and you need to check that schedule. If they've been missed, we need to know about that, 'cause they do need to get plugged in, because that's mandatory. MS. PIEPER: Okay. Also, on that same line number, the Deputy Salary line item, I am requesting my one employee back that I did not replace last year. If you'll remember, I said that I would try to work with one less employee, and it's not working out at all. We're not accomplishing the things that we need to get accomplished. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm going to have the same questions for -- for most departments that I have for you. Looking at this survey of four other counties, it shows that Kerr County government is a good bit more expensive than the other four. The question I have is, what do we know about what they do different in their County Clerk's office that enables them to operate in a more cost-effective way? MS. PIEPER: Most of the other counties don't have as many courts as I have. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Have as many what? MS. PIEPER: Courts. Criminal courts, civil court, juvenile court, mental health court, probate court. 8-20-04 wk 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Most other counties don't have County Court at Law. MS. PIEPER: That's correct. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But they do have juveniles and all those others. MS. PIEPER: Most of the district clerks, for whatever reason, in the small -- counties our size, the District Clerk does the juveniles. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. MS. PIEPER: I don't know why that is. JUDGE TINLEY: Have you got that survey with the four columns on it? It inquires whether there's a County Court at Law in each of those counties surveyed. I think it's towards the bottom of the first page. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Does it have that? JUDGE TINLEY: County Court at Law, and it'll say yes or no. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They all answered yes. JUDGE TINLEY: That they all have County Courts at Law? I was thinking they did. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They do? JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, in the selected counties. Cherokee, Rusk, Hood, and Lamar, I believe, are the four counties, aren't they? 8-20-04 wk 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do we have what the Commissioner is looking at? COMMISSIONER LETZ: We did. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We did? Oh, yes, I remember that. Gave it to us too early, Dave. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I probably have it. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Certainly, there are differences in -- in each of these counties, but I don't think those differences could account for us having more than twice as many employees per -- per population as does Cherokee County. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm going to go get mine so I can look at it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge? MS. MITCHELL: May I say something? On the Cherokee -- I mean, I'm sorry, Hood County, I spoke with them, and I know one of the differences in the -- the County Clerk's office over there is they do not handle the juvenile, the probate, or the mental health. That comes from the County Judge's office. So, that's another -- that's one of the reasons also they don't handle those cases in there. The County Clerk's office does not do it in Hood County. JUDGE TINLEY: All the administrative support 8-20-04 wk 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 comes through the County Judge's office in Cherokee County? MS. MITCHELL: Hood. JUDGE TINLEY: In Hood County. MS. MITCHELL: In Hood County. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, the answer is we don't know what they're doing differently to operate more economically than we do. MS. PIEPER: It's my understanding that throughout the years, when all these surveys have been done, we've never got anything accurate, because Kerr County Clerk's office does a lot more than the other counties. And I've been in that office since '92 with the same amount of employees, you know. So, I mean, the workload increases and the employees do not. And now it's just getting to the point to where the employees can't handle it. On -- on that Deputy Salary line item, I plugged in 260,885, and that's my longevity plus one employee. JUDGE TINLEY: Did you say 260,185? MS. PIEPER: No, 260,885. JUDGE TINLEY: 260,885? MS. PIEPER: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MS. PIEPER: And then on the FICA, that should be 23,190. 8-20-04 wk 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, those roll-up costs are MS. PIEPER: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: They're going to follow whatever that payroll number is. MS. PIEPER: Well, actually, it's down -- it is down a little bit from what I had plugged in, so I don't know how that happened. And Group Insurance is the same way. That should be 71,916. Then the other change I have is on the employee training. And on my notes, if you'll look at that, most of that is from The Software Group training. Software Group, in 2005, is going to be upgrading our civil case management, our court administration, and our criminal case management, and they're going to be doing this free; however, they are charging us for the training on that. And they have -- the little brochure that they sent out shows how many days that they're estimating the training, and I plugged this full amount into my budget. However, I think me and the District Clerk could go together on the training to save money, because our packages are basically the same. And I don't know what she plugged in on hers, if she plugged in the full amount of training or what. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What's the number? 25 ~ MS. PIEPER: 17,184. 8-20-04 wk 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. JUDGE TINLEY: That's what I recommended after talking with Ms. Pieper about the additional software type training. And -- but if she and the District Clerk combine together to reduce that number, so much the better. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. JUDGE TINLEY: That would certainly be helpful. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, while I was out, did we arrive at any consensus about the 261 request? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: For deputies? JUDGE TINLEY: No. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm curious what you have been doing this year when you reduced your staff by one. What have you been doing to -- to -- was it part-time? MS. PIEPER: No, it was a full-time -- it was my Commissioners Court deputy. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, no, I'm not asking that question. I'm asking, what did you do in place of? MS. PIEPER: I'm doing the work, me and my administrators. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. MS. PIEPER: Not only did -- did that person 8-20-04 wk 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 do -- you know, sit in court, do the court orders, which sometimes takes an average two to three days to complete, and then it takes a couple of weeks to get all the contracts back and forth before we can actually get those scanned in, and then they also work the front counter. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I know that you've been using part-time. MS. PIEPER: I got desperate; I had to. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. And I'm a part-time fan. I think -- personally, I think part-time is the answer to a lot of our problems. And I was wondering if -- I mean, I know you've been using part-time. Was that in lieu of this full-time -- MS. PIEPER: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- position that was cut? MS. PIEPER: Well, that, and because I did have some employees out on F.M.L.A. leave. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah. Is that workable? Am I wrong to think that part-time is the answer? MS. PIEPER: Part-time would work if -- if I could have a full-time part-time. You know, I mean, if -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. MS. PIEPER: If that makes any sense. And it's hard to get somebody that's going to work full-time 8-20-04 wk 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 part-time without benefits. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How many part-time employees do you currently have? MS. PIEPER: I have one full-time part-time, which is Betty Burney, and she works 16 hours a week. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How many? MS. PIEPER: 16. And then I have Jim, who is working generally five days a week for me now up until the end of September, and then my money runs out. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would your operation be better served if your full-time part-time was full-time, instead of adding another full deputy on top of that? MS. PIEPER: I'm sorry, I didn't understand you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would your operation be better served if your full-time part-time was full-time, and not request another full-time on top of what you already have? MS. PIEPER: Yeah, that would work. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is my question clear? MS. PIEPER: Basically, yes, that would work. I mean, that's what I'm asking. I would get rid of my full-time part-time, and -- or get rid of -- basically, it would get me another person. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you'd delete -- you'd 8-20-04 wk 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 go up to 26,885 under deputies salaries; you'd delete your part-time salary? MS. PIEPER: No, I would decrease the deputy salary line item and increase the part-time salary. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, we're not on the same page. MS. PIEPER: No? Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You have one full-time part-time, by your definition? MS. PIEPER: Yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who works "X" number of hours per week? MS. PIEPER: Yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My question to you is, if you put a big "X" mark on that position -- notwithstanding who's in it, just put the "X" mark on that position and replace it with a full-time deputy, would your operation be better served? MS. PIEPER: No, because it's -- it would be two different jobs. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nobody's cross-trained down there? MS. PIEPER: She -- she's -- my full-time part-time basically is working on old records. She assists the public in the Land Department, but the person that I 8-20-04 wk 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 need full-time will be up front. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, your question about methods, about cross-training and things like that, I think, gets at the heart of the issue here. I'm looking at this data comparing us with these other four counties, and it's a year old or so, and it shows that we have 13 deputy clerks. The next highest is nine. The low is four. So on the average, we have about five or six more deputy clerks than these other four counties that are comparable to us in terms of population and size and activity and all that. So, my question again is, what are they doing differently to get by? MS. PIEPER: They're not doing a lot of their work. They're not doing records management. There's a lot of stuff that's not getting done in these other counties, because they don't have the employees to do it with. JUDGE TINLEY: Let me express a concern, and I -- I've talked to Ms. Pieper about it. Last year, when -- when the arrangement -- the accommodation was made to not fill that full-time deputy position, part of the consideration, as I'm sure the rest of you recall, was that the duties of that individual was to be spread to, as I recall, four, maybe five other individuals, and there was additional compensation that was over and above the normal longevity or COLA's given to those four or five persons in 8-20-04 wk 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 consideration of them absorbing some of this additional work. And I'm concerned now that we just went through a mental exercise last year in an effort to try and achieve some sort of increased productivity and efficiency and to compensate for it, and now we're just back in the same soup that we were in before. MS. PIEPER: Well, the agreement was that we would work with it and try to make it work. But you can only put so much work on a person; it doesn't matter how much you pay them. If you overload them with work, there's something that's going to have to be stuck on the back burner. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Could you add a -- add another person in there like her -- her request is, and then draw that money back that you had given, spread out amongst the troops last year? JUDGE TINLEY: That was my understanding of what the trade was. You know, in consideration of those four or five people absorbing this additional workload, why, they were getting additional compensation. And, you know, if -- if we're going to reverse the trade, I think we ought to reverse all of it, it would seem to me. MS. PIEPER: Well, it was my understanding that we would -- you know, with the Court, that we would try. If it didn't work, it doesn't work. 8-20-04 wk 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what the Judge is saying. If it doesn't work, you just reverse it. MS. PIEPER: It's not working. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you go over, I guess, on the records management -- it seems to be two things. Records management -- MS. PIEPER: I have two, Records Management and a Records Archive. Those were brought on by the Legislature to play catch-up and restore -- and maintain the records that we have, and that hasn't gotten done for the last year. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bigger than I thought. JUDGE TINLEY: Do you want to go join them? COMMISSIONER LETZ: No -- well, maybe. Records management, I know the District Clerk spends a lot on that. I know you have a lot, and I think Paula's responsible for records management as well. Is there a way that we can consolidate all the records management -- I mean, it's basically -- we're archiving old records. And it seems, you know, if we could combine that, both from an equipment standpoint and personnel standpoint, it may be more efficient. Have y'all -- MS. PIEPER: I don't believe so. By law, every elected official is responsible for their own records. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, you -- I mean, you 8-20-04 wk 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 can still do it jointly. I mean, it doesn't mean you can't -- I mean, we could contract it out to a third party -- or you could contract it out to a third-party. I mean, it's -- you know. Which probably -- I mean, I'm not saying da that. I mean -- MS. PIEPER: I could do that; however, in order to do that, this third party would have to come into my office and do it. I don't have room. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not saying use a third party. I'm saying there's a way that we could, you know, try to be more efficient with records management. I mean -- MS. PIEPER: Well, the only way I'm going to be able to do that -- only way I can see is more personnel. If I don't have the equipment and the people, I can't do it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other area is the Commissioners Court person, this other area where you're short. And I guess -- MS. PIEPER: Well, that one person would handle Commissioners Court and help do records management. I mean, there's a whole array of duties that that one person would help do. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, you know, I don't understand -- I don't know or try to say I know exactly your legislative things that you have to do, but is there a way 8-20-04 wk 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that you can use more Kathy's records to determine the -- you know, to get the court orders and all that prepared, rather than -- it seems to me like you're duplicating -- MS. PIEPER: Yes, there are times that I do have to get Kathy's records because I don't hear who made the second, but then, because of her time schedule and all the court stuff she has to do, it's sometimes a week later before I get her transcript. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that a problem? I mean, is there a problem to wait a week to get the court orders out? MS. PIEPER: Yes, especially if it's bills or something. The Auditor and the Treasurer, they need to know, you know, if not that day, then at least the day after. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I'm not saying that you -- I mean, I can see that -- I'm not saying you have -- shouldn't be in here, or one of your deputies be in here. I think that's a requirement, as I understand it. I'm just saying, for some of the recordkeeping, some of the -- seems like we're keeping double minutes, almost. And -- MS. PIEPER: No. I do the orders and Kathy does the minutes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But, I mean, it's 8-20-04 wk 23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. PIEPER: Right, but by law, that's what we have to do. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to go back to this -- this last year of cutting this person and spreading the money out amongst the -- the troops. Mrs. Treasurer, I'm wondering, did we -- when we gave money -- extra money to these other people, did we do that in a -- in a merit way? And the second part of my question is, did we change the classifications in any way? Is everybody still in their classification area that they should be? How did we do this? MS. NEMEC: I believe they were just given a merit for extra duties that they took on. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Merit? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Didn't we do it as a grade -- increasing the grade? 'Cause, I mean, otherwise, it gets way out of the schedule. I mean, don't we -- MS. NEMEC: We went across in the grade. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We just -- we jumped up to get, you know -- JUDGE TINLEY: Some of them. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We went from a -- a 15-3 to a 15-6. MS. NEMEC: Right. That's exactly -- 8-20-04 wk 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: There were some, I think, had two steps, and others that had one step, as I recall. And I'm speaking off the top of my head, so that may not be totally accurate, but we stayed on the schedule, as I recall. MS. NEMEC: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, if we reversed this thing that we're talking about, just -- this is one of the options on the table. If we allowed her to have that full-time person back and reversed the whole deal, then those people that were given two merit steps would be brought back, and that money would be taken away from them. That's what's being said here. I mean, I want to hear your comments. MS. PIEPER: Well, the only thing that's running through my mind is, unless you demote somebody, I don't know that you can take some of their salary away. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're reducing duties. I mean, we increased duties to give -- so if we add another, we're decreasing duties. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can you take a merit away a year later? MS. NEMEC: If -- if it was understood at the time that the merit was given that they were given that merit for the increased duties they were taking on, and now 8-20-04 wk 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 it's not working; it was -- it was understood that it was to be worked -- checked to see if it would work for a year, and then a year later you come and you say no, we're going to need this other person -- another position, and you're taking those duties away from these people, so you're bringing them back to their old duties, I don't think there is a problem with that. I would have to doublecheck, but just knowing what I know, if it's done in that manner, I think we'd be okay. I think the law would allow you to do that. And I even think that our personnel policy might even make reference to something like that, too. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: If they're reclassified for, like, a change in job description. MS. NEMEC: Right. I would just hope that those employees at that time were told that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Did we change the job descriptions of those to whom we spread those dollars? MS. PIEPER: No. JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think their -- MS. PIEPER: All the deputies do everything in there anyway. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, the understanding was that they would assume additional duties in consideration for them getting additional compensation. 8-20-04 wk 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But we didn't formalize it by changing the job description. JUDGE TINLEY: No. I'm -- I feel confident that we didn't. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was just concerned about that, and I wanted you to understand what's being said up here. If we go that route, you've got a tough decision to make. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How many people did you spread that money across? JUDGE TINLEY: Four or five. MS. PIEPER: Four or five; I don't remember. I -- I don't know. I don't remember. JUDGE TINLEY: I would point out, in the Elections Expense sheet, I think that's going to be a -- Page 4, there is a typo on the Employee Training line, Item 216. That should read 11,000 in the far right-hand column, the basis for that being these new machines. She had originally put in 117,9 -- 118, roughly -- down in Capital Outlay for the machines, $10,000 in training. I moved that up to include it in employee training, and put the net amount of the machines, 108, down in the bottom. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Excellent. JUDGE TINLEY: So there's a typo there, and that needs to be 11,000. 8-20-04 wk 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, on that topic, based on what we were told in Austin, I think it's wise to budget for this, but do not MS. PIEPER: COMMISSIONER sometime next spring. Beca federal government may pick don't -- spend the money. Right. LETZ: For -- until, you know, ase there's a feeling that the up part of this. But if they MS. PIEPER: They will pick up -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, but pick up more -- more of it. MS. PIEPER: Oh, I would hope so. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because there -- or delay the implementation, because there's a pretty big uproar about this, evidently, nationwide, and certainly in the state of Texas. And they just said, you know, if nothing changes, yes, it has to be done by -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: '06. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- January 1, '06. But they think something may change, you know, on the budget side of this. So, it's a -- their recommendation was budget for it, but don't spend it till sometime in the spring. JUDGE TINLEY: Be somewhat similar to the federal act on the jail security that the Sheriff's looking at. That's kind of in limbo about when that's -- and how 8-20-04 wk 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 it's going to become effective. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Expecting no money COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I attended a subsequent session, Commissioner, that dealt with this topic almost exclusively, and while I'm concerned about a couple things, first of all, I don't know whether we need to budget all of it this budget year, but I think we need to budget some of it. But what I'm concerned about is, from what I heard in the subsequent session, which had featured two speakers, one the County Clerk in Travis County, who's been through this, and secondly, a woman from the Secretary of State's office who oversees this, there are a good number of ancillary costs associated with the D.R.E.'s. My question to you, Jannett, is, are -- is this Capital Outlay number just for the D.R.E.'s? Or is it for all associated equipment, software, and everything else that you have? MS. PIEPER: No, it's just for the D.R.E.'s and the training. There is no programming figured in here. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah? You've got a machine you can't use? MS. PIEPER: But we don't have -- we don't start using this until '06. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand that. But, you know, a nice flat screen is pretty to look at. If 8-20-04 wk 29 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I had one in my office, but didn't -- it wasn't hooked up to my computer and software, it's not worth a damn. MS. PIEPER: Right. But this -- the 2004-2005 budget, we won't be programming it in this budget. We may be purchasing it and training, but -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're saying we'll have October, November, December next year to -- for the other expenditures. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What are those ancillary or associated costs? What are they, and how much are they? MS. PIEPER: Depending on what type of machine that we get, the programming. Our ballot expense, you know, we have the ballot expense now, having the ballots printed. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand that. MS. PIEPER: Whatever other kinds of programming that may be required. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, my concern is that this is not a -- this doesn't reflect the obligation. And this also is a gross number, not a net number, and the net number is less than what the feds are going to give us for each of those machines. JUDGE TINLEY: She gave me that information, 8-20-04 wk 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: About $3,000 a machine. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. $51,000, I think, was the information. MS. PIEPER: It's, like, $3,000 per precinct, based on our precincts that we had prior to redistricting, which was 16. So I think it's, like, $48,000. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. MS. PIEPER: That would make it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: $3,000 a machine times the number of machines. MS. PIEPER: Times 16. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the way we budget, though, we budget the gross amount here, and the revenue side will come in on that other mystery page. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about -- there's also talk of having an interpreter at the polling place. Have you heard -- MS. PIEPER: That's been the law for -- since 1975. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You have an interpreter at each voting place? MS. PIEPER: I have one available if I do not have one there, yes. 8-20-04 wk 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the Commissioner was talking about -- there was reference that I think the practice you have now is over the phone. Now they have to be on location. You know, I'm -- MS. PIEPER: Well the Secretary of the State -- because on some of our precincts, we cannot find bilingual election workers, and whenever I ask the Secretary of the State's office about that, as long as we do our very best -- between the Republican party, the Democratic party, and myself -- as long as we do our very best to find somebody, and we can't find them, then we just can't find them. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. MS. PIEPER: But we do have to make a good effort. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sounds like the County Engineer law to me. MS. PIEPER: But we -- we generally have one in almost all of our precincts. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, what -- what I heard in Austin is, all the way from the -- from the voting machines, the paper, interpreters, every bit of that, nobody's sure of anything. MS. PIEPER: Right. 8-20-04 wk 32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nobody. So -- but I agree with Commissioner Letz that we need to budget some of it. So, what's the number that goes in there? MS. PIEPER: What item are you -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 11,000 -- let's see. JUDGE TINLEY: On the machines? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Is that Capital Outlay? Is the 108 figure -- JUDGE TINLEY: 108. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- the real figure? JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. Okay. Is that everything with regard to the County Clerk's items that we need to discuss here today? MS. PIEPER: I don't believe so. JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon? MS. PIEPER: I don't believe so. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we're running pretty short. MS. PIEPER: Back to my general budget, Your Honor, the office supplies, I had cut that back from 20,000 down to 18,000, because at the time that I did that, we still had quite a bit left in our office supplies, and I thought that would be the 18,000 -- lowering that amount would be good. However, I'm not so sure, because I have been good all year long with no budget amendments, but I'm 8-20-04 wk 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 putting in a budget amendment -- not Monday, but the next budget cycle, for birth records and death records and marriage licenses, and so I'm now -- I'm thinking that I am going to need this full 20,000. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 20? Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Been 20 in previous years, and she was trying to cut it, and -- MS. PIEPER: I was trying to cut it back to the '02-'03 budget cycle where we used just a little over 18. That's strictly up to you all. I mean, we will try to work with the 18 if you want to keep that figure there, but I don't like doing budget amendments. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Neither do I. MS. PIEPER: And I have been so good and so careful. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if you think you're going to need 20, we go with 20. MS. PIEPER: Because our bank note paper is going up, but I have just found a vendor that has a state contract, and we're checking them out to see if it's cheaper than the vendor that we've got. JUDGE TINLEY: One more item that you mentioned to me over on the next page, Software Maintenance with your -- with your new scanner. MS. PIEPER: Right. On one of the Records 8-20-04 wk 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Management, I am putting in for three new scanners, and so in order to do that, then my Software Maintenance will go up slightly. And I have misfigured on this; it should be 23,200, which is not a lot. JUDGE TINLEY: It's up 400. She mentioned that to me. The items that she's purchasing that she'll need this on come out of a separate dedicated fund that she has the funds for. MS. PIEPER: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: The Records Management for these -- these items. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why wouldn't the Records Management fund pay for software maintenance? JUDGE TINLEY: I'm not sure that it lawfully can, can it? MS. PIEPER: Truthfully, on that, I don't know. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon? MS. PIEPER: I don't know. I don't know if it -- I believe it can, because it's paying for my license. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If it pays for the equipment, it should pay for the software. JUDGE TINLEY: If it's paying for your license, that's part of your software. Okay. Let's leave 8-20-04 wk 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that at 22,8. MS. PIEPER: Wait, wait, wait. Come to think of it -- let me think. It will not pay for software. It will pay for license -- it will not pay for -- it's kind of odd how it's written. It will not pay for the software, but yet it will pay for the license. It will not pay for a computer, but yet it will pay for a scanner, so go figure that one. We have to be careful on how we use that. But I have -- JUDGE TINLEY: Bottom line here, will it pay for this, or does it need to be included here in your regular budget? MS. PIEPER: But, considering this is software maintenance, I think it will, since it's not the actual software. I have the software. So, I think it will. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. We'll move it to Records. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Remains 22,8? JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. And then Maintenance Contracts on Page 7 will go from 2,300 to 2,700, correct? MS. PIEPER: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon? MS. PIEPER: Yes. On that Records Management budget, I do have two employees that are being paid out of 8-20-04 wk 36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that line item, and I forgot to include one of the longevities on that one. JUDGE TINLEY: Here, again, that should be in the roll-up in the personnel position schedule. MS. PIEPER: Okay. On this Page 116 -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Page -- MS. PIEPER: I don't know where I was at when I was working on my budget. I was just too busy. Microfilm expense, I did not -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait, take us -- take us to the right page here. MS. PIEPER: Okay. This one says 116. COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the heading? MS. PIEPER: It is 28-635, and it says Records Management. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 635. That would be 93, I think. COMMISSIONER LETZ: 103. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 28,635? MS. PIEPER: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Page 92. MS. PIEPER: On Records Preservation, I did not include anything in that line item, because we put it into the other Records Archival line. However, on Microfilm Expense, I think that was just an oversight, and I think I'm 8-20-04 wk 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 going to need 2,000 -- $2,000 in that, just in case that we have some microfiche that in time goes bad and we have to redo it. JUDGE TINLEY: There, again, that's out of a dedicated fund. MS. PIEPER: Yes, sir, it is. And then the only capital outlay on this is just another plat cabinet, because I'm running out of room. JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. Okay. Is that it? MS. PIEPER: Okay. This on this 41-634. It's above Records Preservation. I've also changed that, Judge, since you and I talked -- or, no, you and I did talk about this. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Page 107. MS. PIEPER: I had 26,000 in there; however, because I do have money in that budget, I went ahead and submitted a $15,000 bill to the Auditor's office. So, that can be decreased to 11,196. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Line 411? MS. PIEPER: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: The 15,000 that she's expended this year out of that dedicated fund. MS. PIEPER: Right. And then I do have -- just for your information, I do have a part-time in there, because I want my part-time person to start doing the old 8-20-09 wk 38 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Commissioners Court records, because they're not backed up at all anywhere. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that a new line item, or is this -- MS. PIEPER: COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER MS. PIEPER: MR. TOMLINSO it's included in that? MS. PIEPER: It's in the 411. LETZ: It's in 411, okay. WILLIAMS: 11,000 what? 196. V: Where? Oh, it's in the Yes. I'll give you all my figures. MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: 'Cause we're going to need to -- you're going to need to do the roll-ups that go with it, the payroll -- MS. PIEPER: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: -- expense and so forth. MS. PIEPER: Right. That also included the FICA. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, yeah. MR. TOMLINSON: Is this a part-time person? MS. PIEPER: Yes. MR. TOMLINSON: I have a question about the -- the software maintenance on this -- on these three 8-20-04 wk 39 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 scanners. Since you're buying -- you have archive money, wouldn't it go with maintenance -- wouldn't maintenance go in the same budget? MS. PIEPER: That's what they had just said, yes. MR. TOMLINSON: That wasn't what they said, though. I mean, they put it in -- JUDGE TINLEY: I understood that -- MS. PIEPER: Oh, wait. JUDGE TINLEY: -- that the maintenance had to come out of your regular budget; that the license could come out of the Records Management, but the maintenance couldn't, is what I understood. So that we needed to -- where'd we end up on that? MR. TOMLINSON: We're talking about two different Records Management moneys here. MS. PIEPER: Yes, I think he's right, Judge. Let me see what I have here. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. No, we did increase records -- Maintenance Contracts under Records Management by 400. That's where we ended up, in the Records Management budget. MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Well, that -- that's okay, but I just -- I just want to make -- let y'all know that the money for the scanners is coming from a different 8-20-04 wk 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 place than -- JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. MR. TOMLINSON: -- the maintenance. Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, I realize that's a dedicated fund. Okay. We ready for the Treasurer? MS. PIEPER: Is there any other questions? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just one general comment. We have -- one thing we haven't talked about, and I meant to bring it up earlier today, is elected officials' salaries. At some point, you know, during this process, I think we need to go over that. I've asked Kathy to go back, and she's prepared a list of salaries. I thought I really -- I'd like to go back and have her also add when the last increase was to those salaries, but just to be aware that we -- we have been at a point a number of years that every time we give any kind of salary adjustments, all of a sudden, elected officials are getting paid less than some of their deputies. And, if that's the case in some of your departments and you feel that your salary should be increased, let us know. MS. PIEPER: At this point, gentlemen, I don't care about a raise for me, but I just need my other employee back. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MS. PIEPER: I mean -- so, if -- if I can 8-20-04 wk 41 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 even switch that, I will do that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. MS. PIEPER: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: We've got the County Treasurer. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Page 36. JUDGE TINLEY: Looking at my draft and the notes that I've got on here, Ms. Nemec, you must have caught me at an extraordinarily weak moment. MS. NEMEC: You have weak moments, Judge? (Laughter.) JUDGE TINLEY: Looks like you convinced me that everything that you asked for was -- with one minor exception. MS. NEMEC: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: When we got down to the copier. MS. NEMEC: Okay, right. And I checked on that. The -- the -- I do need that higher amount that we had discussed, because I didn't figure on -- I figured the maintenance on it per month, and I did not -- I failed to figure the higher amounts that were coming in was when they actually come and meter the copier. JUDGE TINLEY: So you've got -- rather than a 8-20-04 wk 42 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 flat charge per month, you've got one that you got a flat charge, plus a copy cost that they impose? MS. NEMEC: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, that explains it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So it goes back to the 18? MS. NEMEC: 18, please, uh-huh. JUDGE TINLEY: You got any other complaints? You got no one to blame but yourself at this point. MS. NEMEC: Okay, sounds good. May I address the direct deposit cost that y'all asked me to look into at this time? Or would you like to put this on a separate -- JUDGE TINLEY: Might as well. You got extra time. You caught us up. MS. NEMEC: In speaking to The Software Group and to Security State Bank, The Software Group's charge for this software is $2,500. And, for some reason, Security State Bank -- to me, the rate sounds lower than what they gave us last year. It's $25 per month for direct deposit, and they're also offering us $4.95 per month if we wish to do once-a-month bills that we pay on a certain date. Like, for instance, we automatically -- without coming to the Court on the 1st of each month, the rent checks are due, and there are some other checks that are due quarterly on such-and-such date. They would just direct-deposit those, 8-20-04 wk 43 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and that would come in handy, because a lot of times those bills are due on a certain date, but if we're taking them out of -- for instance, if they're due on the 1st, then we need to judge it where that check is going to get there on the 1st, and not on the 31st, because then it's going to mess up our books, because we don't book it in our system until the 1st. So, for $4.95 per month, I thought that was a good deal. JUDGE TINLEY: That's per month or per transaction? MS. NEMEC: Per month. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All transactions? MS. NEMEC: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: So, as many as we can plug in. If we can plug in 65 transactions that we've got a recurring cost each month -- MS. NEMEC: $4.95. JUDGE TINLEY: -- we can get it done for one $5 cost. MS. NEMEC: That is what they told us. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sounds good to me. JUDGE TINLEY: Sure does to me. Is that dependent upon us being in the direct deposit program? MS. NEMEC: No, it's not. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So we can choose one or 8-20-04 wk 44 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the other or both. MS. NEMEC: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How many employees have indicated a desire to have direct deposit? MS. NEMEC: Within the last five years is when they've been really requesting it. I'd say about 35 employees. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I see the Sheriff and Road and Bridge nodding that they think a lot of people would like -- MS. NEMEC: Right. And those are just -- those are just employees that I know of. They might have expressed it to their own department heads or elected officials. JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff, what's your estimated percentage? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Off the top of my head, I'd say at least 80 percent would want to do it. JUDGE TINLEY: Leonard? MR. ODOM: I'm going to run that way. Majority of everybody's got a checking account. That just makes sense, and productivity -- you know, I think that's the way to go. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Saves them all from 8-20-04 wk 45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 having to run down to make deposits. MR. ODOM: Making deposits, worrying about it. This way, they can stay at work and not worry about it. MS. NEMEC: A lot of times employees try to get their checks early if they're going out of town or going on vacation, they're not going to be here, so this would solve that problem, definitely. It's direct deposit on a certain day; it's in their account. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You also have to give somebody else a deposit slip and have them try and get your check. MS. NEMEC: We do that a lot in our office. They give deposit slips to someone and say, "Please give the deposit slip to Cindy." We don't have to do that, but -- JUDGE TINLEY: It's kind of you to do that. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Only thing I can see wrong is if my wife finds out I get paid twice a month. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That was my only problem. There's a certain amount of -- MS. NEMEC: If you want one check to go into one account and another check to go into another account, maybe we can work that out. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Separate account. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there -- you still have to give a receipt to the employees -- 8-20-04 wk 46 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. NEMEC: Yes, but that receipt can be on plain paper, as opposed -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- as a backup. MS. NEMEC: Yes, check backup. Absolutely. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, there should be some printing savings over a long -- I mean, probably not that much, but some savings over a long -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How does that help the employee that wants their check early? MS. NEMEC: Well, employees cannot get their check -- they can get their check early if they promise me that they're not going to deposit it until the date the next day. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right. MS. NEMEC: And so, really, the banks should not be taking -- if an employee gets their check on the 14th and the check is dated on the 15th, because they tell me that they're going to be out of town that day, and they go and try to deposit it at the bank on the 14th, the bank should not take that check. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But they do. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But what she's saying is, if you're on vacation, your money's going to go into your account either way, so it's not that you really get it early. It's just that you don't get it late. 8-20-04 wk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 47 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Solves the problem. MS. NEMEC: So, you know, if they're leaving early, they don't have to worry about trying to get it early, because -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, I see. MS. NEMEC: -- it's going to be in their account no matter where they're at. MS. PIEPER: Just recently I had an employee in the hospital, and she called and she said, "My mom's going to come pick up my check a day early." And which that was fine with -- you know, we called the Treasurer's office, and that was fine. However, the mother was going to go deposit it a day early for the daughter in the hospital, and the bank wouldn't let them. JUDGE TINLEY: I would be real interested in the number of transactions that we could get plugged into a direct payment scheme. MS. NEMEC: I can tell you, it's not going to be that many. We don't have that many. JUDGE TINLEY: Doesn't have to be many to justify 5 bucks a month. MS. NEMEC: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: In my mind. MS. NIX: It's about four rent checks. MS. NEMEC: And then the quarterly -- 8-20-04 wk 48 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. NIX: And the quarterly payments, two of those -- two or three of those. Not that many, but it is time-saving if we can leave it up to the bank. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not counting deductions, all that type of thing? MS. NEMEC: Everything -- yeah, we're not including those in there. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Withholding taxes and FICA, all that stuff. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: On the direct deposit, if any of my employees even want their spouse to come by and pick up their check, they have to bring a written note to do that, because you never know when there could be marital problems and one spouse tries to pick it up, and then you give it to the wrong one. And direct deposit solves that. JUDGE TINLEY: If we got an authorization for direct deposit, we're covered. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's something we ought to add. I think the cost is pretty minimal. It's a pretty good service, and probably the savings are just close to offsetting the cost over the long-term. MS. NEMEC: Like the Sheriff was saying, there's a lot of times the spouse will come into our office, 8-20-04 wk 49 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 but if we have not gotten the okay from the employee, we don't release it, and then there's -- they're upset with us, and we have to wait and call their -- you know, so it -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is The Software Group, $2,500, is that a one-time charge? MS. NEMEC: From what I understand, yes. Now, it -- I don't know if it's 2,500 -- MR. TOMLINSON: It is, one time. MS. NEMEC: One-time charge. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, after the -- so, over several years, it would probably pay for itself, 'cause there would be some reduction in cost. I think we ought to include it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that included in your Line 563? MS. NEMEC: No, sir. I would think that would come out of 409 somewhere. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 409? MS. NEMEC: We're talking about all employees. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't see a 409. MS. NEMEC: We have not included that in the budget anywhere; we didn't have those figures. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't see 409. MS. NEMEC: No, not in my budget. 8-20-09 wk 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Nondepartmental. Nondepartmental. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is the 1,600 on yours on Line 570, Capital Outlay? COMMISSIONER LETZ: PC, scanner, and printer. MS. NEMEC: Oh, yes. That's for a new PC and a scanner and a printer. We're operating -- both of my employees are operating out of the old terminals that we've had. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we'd add that 2,500, the other cost, into Nondepartmental on Page 10. MS. NEMEC: And my figures come out to $2,859.40 for everything. So, I don't know if you want to put $2,900 in there or put $2,860. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably $2,900. Probably a new item, Direct Deposit, I guess. I don't know where we should put it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're adding the $2, 500 -- JUDGE TINLEY: How about Computer Software, 562 there? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Computer Software? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Computer Software, yeah, 562. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, but the -- the 8-20-09 wk 51 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 monthly payments -- really, that's not a software charge. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's not a clear picture, Tommy. What do you think? MR. TOMLINSON: What? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't yell at me. MR. TOMLINSON: I mean, there may be some ongoing expenses that might -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're saying create a new line? MR. TOMLINSON: No. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What are you saying? MR. TOMLINSON: I'm saying put it in Computer Software. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Computer Software? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 562. MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Under Nondepartmental. JUDGE TINLEY: And what was the total figure? COMMISSIONER LETZ: $2,900. MS. NEMEC: 10-409-562. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 409-562. JUDGE TINLEY: That's going to show Direct Deposit. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, my question in 8-20-04 wk 52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 this whole thing is, the bank, to me, is taking on extra duties to handle -- it seems to me, on their end of it, there's a lot of things that they have to do to receive all of these new issues. Did they -- how many employees did they expand by? Or did they -- did they simply give merits to their employees to handle the extra workload? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just another card on MS. NEMEC: Also, on -- also, we were discussing the retirement, cost-of-living for the retirees, and I believe that Tommy plugged in a figure in there. But, just for your information, I do have a representative coming in on Monday at 10 o'clock to speak to y'all about just all the -- the plan as it is now, and what we do participate in. JUDGE TINLEY: Percentage increase or cost-of-living? MS. NEMEC: Mm-hmm. Just so that y'all can make a more wise decision. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're going to talk about the COLA's that we give, giving it to the retirees too? Is that one of the -- MS. NEMEC: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- topics? MS. NEMEC: Retirement system. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's one I want to 8-20-04 wk 53 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 talk about. MS. NEMEC: Okay? Is that it? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Barbara, I've got an unrelated question, since you've got two more minutes. MS. NEMEC: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Or maybe more than that. Employee's health insurance premiums. We don't charge an employee anything for their coverage. MS. NEMEC: No. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just for spouse coverage. So, I would guess that every single employee is enrolled in the health -- MS. NEMEC: You'd be surprised; there are some that have, like, military benefits or something like that, and if they're enrolled in -- in the County's insurance, then they don't get those benefits, and so they -- they have to sign a form that says that they opt not to do it. But they do mostly choose the life portion of it. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That gets right at my question. If we had some charge -- I don't know how much, but if we charged something for employee health insurance, we -- would we expect that a number of people would not enroll because they have coverage through their spouse or through retirement or some other reason? If we charge 50 bucks a month, how many employees would get out, 8-20-04 wk 54 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 would you guess? MS. NEMEC: If we charged the employee $50 a month for their insurance -- you know, I really don't know, because then they'll start shopping around. And what happens if we start doing that and if we lose numbers, then our rates will go up, because the liability is smaller than if you have more employees. So -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: We'd lose the low risk, probably. MS. NEMEC: Right. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So what -- and maybe there's nothing to be gained here, but when I came to work for the County, I enrolled in the insurance 'cause it cost nothing. I enrolled for myself only. So, when I have a claim, Kerr County pays first, 'cause they're primary. MS. NEMEC: Right. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And if I wasn't enrolled, my retiree insurance would pay. So, it's costing Kerr County to have me enrolled. If you charge me -- if you charged me $50 a month to be enrolled, I wouldn't be enrolled. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Couldn't we accomplish the same thing by adjusting the deductible, basically? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't know. That's a -- 8-20-04 wk 55 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. NEMEC: I understand what you're saying. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- difficult subject to resolve, but it's something I've thought about. MS. NEMEC: Okay. Is that it? Thank y'all very much. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Okay. Next one we have is the District Courts. As anticipated -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 17. JUDGE TINLEY: -- I don't see anybody here from the District Courts. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, Tommy. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, yeah. What page are you on? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 17. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Appears to me you gave them more than they asked for. JUDGE TINLEY: Just the kind of nice guy I am. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Those judges stick together like that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's a true statement. COMMISSIONER LETZ: They asked for 332, and 8-20-04 wk 56 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you gave them 335. JUDGE TINLEY: I did increase their court-appointed attorneys, and I did so because, in annualizing those costs, the indications were that they weren't going to have enough money. I think there was another one. When I annualized their telephone cost in the 216th, at least, that wasn't enough. I cut them in a couple of -- cut them pretty extensively in court transcripts. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I have a question. You mentioned telephone; that's what made me think of this. And this is really kind of for Tommy, too. Is there a possibility of switching to cell phones for most of our phones and going with someone like Sprint, and eliminating a whole lot of these costs? I mean, it just seems there are more people that are eliminating hard lines. Obviously, you need some for computers, but our phone bills are petty big. JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff just asked that he be put on a committee of one to totally investigate that. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The problem you -- what we face, the problem with Sprint or Verizon or any of the others, with wireless, when you go west, you don't have service yet. They don't have enough towers out there. I checked into that a long time ago, 'cause personally, I'd like to do away with our Five Star contracts. I think we can get a better contract with Sprint on all our telephones; 8-20-04 wk 57 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I've got about almost 30 of them. But you do not have the coverage yet in Kerr County inside the county that you need with those -- that we need, at least. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It just -- you know, just a thought, 'cause the -- the land lines are becoming fewer and fewer, and probably be obsolete before too much longer. And the way some of these phone plans are, there may be a savings there across the board. I mean, obviously, we need some land lines in various offices. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We have to have land lines, because you don't get the reception you need out there. years. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a thought for future SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But if Sprint ever increases their coverage a little bit better, I think it would be very advantageous for this County to seriously look at all cell phone contract changes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think I agree totally. I think that the Five Star contracts are less competitive than they used to be. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They are. JUDGE TINLEY: Five Star is less competitive. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: More expensive. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Five Star's a lot more 8-20-04 wk 58 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 expensive. JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Their plans are more expensive. JUDGE TINLEY: But they're more competitive than what they used to be. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, but they still got a long way to go. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Long way. JUDGE TINLEY: The only other thing I'd point out in the District Court budgets, the personnel costs that they've got specified there, the court coordinator, court reporter, and part-time items are up 5 percent. The receptionist is up 7 and a half percent. The difficulty that is encountered in those is that those costs are spread over several counties. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: And we're paying a pro rata share, and County A incorporates a 5 percent increase, County B incorporates a 3 percent increase, County C incorporates a 4 percent increase. I don't know what the solution is to the problem, if there is a good solution, other than just getting a collaboration of all the counties within the respective districts, and everybody lighting on the same figure, as it were. That, in and of itself, would 8-20-04 wk 59 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 seem to be somewhat of a task, but you need to be aware that those figures are included within those budgets. And -- MR. TOMLINSON: Judge, I -- one comment about -- about the court coordinators -- well, all the district employees. I know that there's provisions in -- in the statutes that allow for office personnel, including a court coordinator for each court. I think -- I think we are fortunate in that these two courts agree to -- to share office personnel. So, for -- for that reason, I -- I think that we're -- that they're trying to be as efficient as they can, to try to use one person rather than two, and that -- that is an option for these courts. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, between the two courts, we would be giving a $12,500 raise for the court coordinator. Our share, is that prorated through other -- MR. TOMLINSON: This is prorated. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Say that again? I'm not sure I heard that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In the 216th, -- let's see. JUDGE TINLEY: About a $300 raise. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, $300. JUDGE TINLEY: On each court. So, a total of $600 from Kerr County, looks like, mas or menos. MR. TOMLINSON: Actually -- actually, that 8-20-04 wk 60 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 salary is spread amongst eight counties. JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, is the $300 our share? Is that -- MR. TOMLINSON: That's our share. JUDGE TINLEY: That is just our share? MR. TOMLINSON: Our share, yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- we're done on that topic? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the special trials, that includes the 216th, the Seard capital murder trial; is that correct? JUDGE TINLEY: I've got to assume that's the one that is being referred to. There's no -- there's no mention in the information that was originally turned in as to who that was dedicated for. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the only one pending in the 216th, isn't it, Rusty? Isn't the other one in the 198th? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Trying to remember if the other one's in the 198th or the 216th, but I don't know if -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: The reason -- 8-20-04 wk 61 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm sure the other's in the SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Depending on the competency, and that's coming up -- of course, that's right after the new budget takes effect, too. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it's -- again, I mean, we just don't know, but you have to budget for it because it may happen. The other option is not budgeting and declare an emergency when it does happen. MR. TOMLINSON: The one good point about -- about -- if there is a good point about a capital murder trial, if -- when they go to appeal, the County can get reimbursed from the State for -- for the legal costs of -- of an appeal. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, out of the Capital Projects -- Capital Punishment Projects Fund, or whatever that's called. MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, right. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I would think one of the biggest expenses in this one is going to be if there happens to be a change of venue. 25 ~ COMMISSIONER LETZ: Happens to be a what? 8-20-04 wk 62 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: A change of venue. If the competency goes all right, you end up with a change of venue. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I don't think that's something we can -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's just part of what Jonathan's saying; budget for it and hope you don't have to. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Probably the best we can do. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Best we can do. 'Cause if they're -- we're wrong, we have to declare an emergency, and we're budgeting a bunch. So, we're trying. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, we're turning back what we budgeted this time. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Same thing that is -- it's going back in reserves, coming back out. JUDGE TINLEY: I'm hopeful we get the same result next year. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So -- from a budget standpoint, but I'd like to see justice done on this one, personally. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'd like to see it over. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Is there anything else on the District Courts that we need to give attention to? MR. TOMLINSON: I don't know of anything. 8-20-04 wk 63 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, that gives us a break time. JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, it does, and you were -- you were reading my mind here. And it gives our reporter a break time also. I had hoped -- been hopeful that that's where we would get the extra time, is from the District Courts. So, why don't we stand in recess until about -- oh, say 10:30, and maybe we can -- I see we've got one constable here. Maybe we can -- if the others are not here by then, we can at least start with him. Or, excuse me, I should have said J.P. We've got a constable here. We got J.P.'s scheduled at 10:40. I expect they'll come in a little early, though. (Recess taken from 10:11 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.) JUDGE TINLEY: order to our budget workshop. little bit ahead of schedule. the Peace. Judge Elliott, wh regard to yours? JUDGE ELLIOTT: duty. Okay. Let's come back to Thank goodness, we're a Next ones up are Justices of at do you have for us with Present and reporting to COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good democrat. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Got a hole in your 8-20-04 wk 64 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 swift boat? What page? JUDGE TINLEY: Page 25. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 25. JUDGE ELLIOTT: The only -- only thing that we need to add is -- this budget was prepared prior to my appearance in Commissioners Court at the last session, so the secretary's salary of $23,564, which Barbara just handed me that from their office, was a 17-1. She was approved to be a 17-2 pay scale, which is $24,153. MS. NEMEC: That should already be reflected. Is that reflected in that line item? JUDGE TINLEY: It shows $23,564, and apparently it just didn't get caught from what we did last Commissioners Court meeting. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 24-what, Vance? JUDGE ELLIOTT: 153. The only thing about that, that $24,153, that's going to adjust a little bit of those other numbers; you know, the FICA and the group and -- JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, yes. JUDGE ELLIOTT: So -- or the retirement. But, other than that, everything is in order. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we would say at that point, "Thank you. Bye." JUDGE ELLIOTT: Very good. And that's where I say, "No, thank you." 8-20-04 wk 65 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're learning. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, let me ask you a question, since you're way ahead of schedule. State law requires that -- that judges have their office in the precinct where they -- you have to have your office in Precinct 1. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And it is. JUDGE ELLIOTT: I think that's the case. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. Where I was going with that was -- and I see some other counties do some things different with constables and judges and those sort of things than we do. If you could get the judges all in one place, could you pool resources and cut costs? JUDGE ELLIOTT: I would think so. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Something to think about. We probably won't solve that today, will we? JUDGE ELLIOTT: No, but that's not a bad idea. MS. PIEPER: In order to do that, though, we would have to redistrict. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Putting all the precinct lines at one place. JUDGE WRIGHT Yeah, we have to be in our own precinct. 8-20-04 wk 66 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 efficiency. MS. PIEPER: Because the courthouse is split COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 2 doesn't come into COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. JUDGE ELLIOTT: Still a great idea for COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner Baldwin gets the old part of the courthouse, and I get the new part. JUDGE ELLIOTT: Exactly. That's the way it should be, the new basement. JUDGE TINLEY: Judge, before you leave us, J.P.'s have a technology fund, and you have requested out of that fund to be able to expend -- have a collective fund amongst all of them -- $3,000 for some technology-related items that that fund is restricted to. For the information of the members of the Court, the present balance in that fund is roughly $1,400 a month. of July, so you put it to about that -- 450. A amounts. I had could take some $15,650, and it grows at the rate of about The figure that you have is through the end can add roughly $2,800 to that, which will $18,350, I think. 18 -- no, be more than zd various offices have requested varying hoped that there would be enough that we of those software costs out. of it, but it doesn't look like that. But, just for informational 8-20-04 wk 67 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 purposes, that's where we are on that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are all the J.P.'s requesting some expenditure from that fund this time? JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. And, unfortunately, in all -- just the technology items only, they're requesting almost $22,000, and we're only going to have -- what did I say, $18,450? So, we're not going to have enough to cover them, and -- and software items are going to have to, in that respect, remain in their individual office budgets. JUDGE ELLIOTT: I don't know where the $18,000 -- obviously, some other J.P.'s are asking for quite a bit more technology than J.P. 1. JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. JUDGE ELLIOTT: We're asking for $3,000. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Yeah. JUDGE ELLIOTT: That's just to upgrade our PCs that are over five years old, and -- and get a printer that is compatible with our Software User Group. Instead of doing the dot matrix, the form printout, we can start using the laser printer. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is -- where is that reflected, the $3,000? Is it on a separate -- JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, it's a separate -- separate budget. MR. TOMLINSON: 126. 8-20-04 wk 68 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: 111, I think. MR. TOMLINSON: I have a different number, but I may have missed something. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it's not 111, I can tell you that. MR. TOMLINSON: It's -- I'll find it for you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fund 26, isn't it? JUDGE ELLIOTT: Yes, 26. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 16 -- 26? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fund 26. JUDGE TINLEY: Looks like Page 90, 91. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. MR. TOMLINSON: 89. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 89. JUDGE TINLEY: 89, okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: 656. JUDGE TINLEY: The number that all four of those J.P.'s have requested to expend out of that, however, is $21,932, according to the information. JUDGE ELLIOTT: What is your number? JUDGE O'DELL: What number? JUDGE ELLIOTT: For the technology. JUDGE O'DELL: I'm really not here. How much am I asking for? JUDGE ELLIOTT: Yeah, how much? How much -- 8-20-04 wk 69 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 how much am I asking for? JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE you guys doing out t JUDGE TINLEY: O'DELL: TINLEY: ELLIOTT: TINLEY: ELLIOTT: here? TINLEY: 3, 683. How much? 3,683 out of technology. 36. And yours is what? Five. Oh, $5,000? My god, what are Y'all have narrowed down who the big -- JUDGE ELLIOTT: Listen, we've -- we're going to get Power Point things. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We conduct a lot of business out there. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The amount in the budget shows $13,149. Why isn't that 18 -- whatever we're going to have, why don't we take all we can out of the technology fund? JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we should. But I -- how that figure got there, I don't know. MR. TOMLINSON: When I was looking through the request, this is what I came up with. I may -- I may have misinterpreted what I was seeing on those requests, but -- but there were some -- there were some changes on the request from -- and I thought I had it added up to 13, 8-20-04 wk 70 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 whatever it is, but I'll have to -- I'll just have to look at it again. JUDGE TINLEY: I think there was at least one J.P. that amended their technology request after the initial numbers came in. That may be the reason. JUDGE WRIGHT: But that was at his request, so he probably got it. MR. TOMLINSON: No, all I got was what came from the original request. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. There was -- there was some later amendments that came in to me that I didn't -- JUDGE ELLIOTT: That's not included that software stuff, is it? JUDGE O'DELL: Mine is for a laser printer, so I can get rid of the dot matrix. JUDGE WRIGHT: Mine is for software for -- the language that we use on Software Group. JUDGE ELLIOTT: That's a different -- MR. TOMLINSON: Word Merge. JUDGE ELLIOTT: So, then, one of those is in there, then, so part that of that money was that Word Merge. You're talking about Software User Group. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. JUDGE ELLIOTT: So one of those -- some of that money is being used for that, so that's -- so they are 8-20-04 wk 71 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 using -- JUDGE TINLEY: Well, but the difficulty is, we don't have enough to fund all of the technology requests, so the -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: We should Lund as much as we can out of that line item. JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, because it's dedicated. Because the software requirements can come out of that fund, according to what the Auditor tells me, so we need to -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: -- we need to have as much of that kind of item come out of there. JUDGE ELLIOTT: All right. JUDGE TINLEY: That's 21 -- MR. TOMLINSON: I'll have to figure it out. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll just make a general comment before you leave, Judge, that I mentioned a few minutes ago, and now we have quite a few elected officials. At some point, we'll address elected officials' salaries, so get feedback back to us if you think an adjustment is needed. JUDGE ELLIOTT: Just be as generous as you'd like. (Laughter.) JUDGE TINLEY: Let your conscience be your 8-20-04 wk 72 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 guide, right? JUDGE ELLIOTT: That's right. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. JUDGE ELLIOTT: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Judge Wright? JUDGE WRIGHT: Okay. I'm here to try to get the 3,344 back into my budget that was taken out of it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 3,344? JUDGE WRIGHT: The one that I submitted totaled 89,024, and the one that I got back totaled 85,680. And the one cut that I'm really concerned about is on my software maintenance, and I verified with Tommy that it is going to be $2,900, and it was cut to 2,500. The copier lease -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's do one at a time. JUDGE WRIGHT: I spent all but just two or three dollars of it last year, and it was cut by $400. Machine repair was cut by 100. I understand it's because I haven't used this, but if you'll go back and look at last year's budget, I was down to $2 here and $3 there; I came in right under budget. Office supplies have been cut from 1,570 to 1,350. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I want to go to the top and find out why your salary was cut. 8-20-04 wk 73 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: I think I can explain that. On the mental health portion that comes out of the County Court budget, that portion increased this year, so a pro rata portion of that increase that's going to come from there was deducted here, I assume. Is that not -- MR. TOMLINSON: That's right. JUDGE TINLEY: -- correct, Ms. Nemec? MS. NEMEC: That's correct. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, where do we find -- JUDGE WRIGHT: That's not on there. Where would that supplement be? JUDGE TINLEY: It's over in -- MR. TOMLINSON: Department 426. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon? MR. TOMLINSON: Department 426 on Page 11. JUDGE TINLEY: Page 11? Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Page 11, okay. That goes from current four to 4,500. JUDGE TINLEY: The 16,150 to 19, you take that -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: -- the difference, divide it by three, and that's the amount by which hers was reduced. But she'll pick it up here under the current -- the current 8-20-04 wk 74 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 scheme. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's cool. MR. TOMLINSON: The gross is the same. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that cool, Judge? JUDGE WRIGHT: I understand that. My next question is, should, by some miracle, we get a pay increase, is it going to be on the total salary, or is it going to be what mine was cut to? JUDGE TINLEY: That's a real good point, Judge. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But it wasn't cut. The salary wasn't cut. She used the word "cut," and it wasn't cut. JUDGE WRIGHT: But my base salary shows to be one thing. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. JUDGE WRIGHT: The question is, will it be totaled for -- JUDGE TINLEY: If there's a percentage increase, that should be added to it. JUDGE WRIGHT: Also -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, the COLA should be on the total amount. MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. 8-20-04 wk 75 1 2 question. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE WRIGHT: Okay. Well, that was my JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. JUDGE WRIGHT: The only thing I asked for an increase in was part-time salary, and that was dropped back down to what I had previously. That was $700. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think -- I mean, I don't want to speak for the Judge. JUDGE TINLEY: I can tell you why it's 700. It's 700 across the board with every one of them. Obviously, if she's got some particular -- a particular personnel issue that requires that it be more, you know, we need to look at it. Just like if her -- if her software maintenance is going to be that amount, it needs to be increased. The other thing the Judge mentioned was about -- on her copier. I amortized that cost, thinking it was a straight monthly cost. She also has one of those add-ons, just like we had -- JUDGE WRIGHT: Per copy. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, in a previous department head. And -- and so -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, we need to take COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we're adjusting software maintenance and lease copier to what was requested? 8-20-04 wk 76 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE WRIGHT: Even the Miscellaneous was reduced from 250 down to one -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's do one at a time. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Try to -- JUDGE TINLEY: Your software maintenance cost is, in fact -- JUDGE WRIGHT: 2,900. JUDGE TINLEY: -- 2900 bucks, or just a few bucks more. JUDGE WRIGHT: That's my understanding. Lease copier should be 1,000 instead of 600. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Now, what else? The office supplies, did you say? JUDGE WRIGHT: Office supplies was reduced from 1,570 to 1,350, because I hadn't spent but 986. But I've got all kinds of forms that are going to need to be replaced in about a month. I just order once a year. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you going to deplete the 986 this year? JUDGE WRIGHT: I've already spent 986. I've got -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm talking about -- 8-20-04 wk 77 1 2 3 4 out. 5 6 1,570? 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE WRIGHT: A lot of this I'm doing on the JUDGE WRIGHT: -- 1,570, and I -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. JUDGE WRIGHT: It'll be close when I close it COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. So you need JUDGE WRIGHT: I need the 1,570, yes. Several different items were combined into office supplies at one time. Photocopy supplies, dockets and forms, all that went into one lump sum, and it was increased at that time because it encompassed several -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you need it, I guess you need it. What else? JUDGE WRIGHT: Books, publications, and dues is reduced from 500 to 350. We're on -- we've got the every other year coming up next year. The 500 is probably not going to be enough, but I just stop whenever I run out of money. When the legislative session is over, then all the new books come out changing the laws. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, your expense tracks the biannual Legislature, basically? JUDGE WRIGHT: I won't be spending it this year, but next year I'll need it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 8-20-04 wk 78 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 computer now, what I need to research a law. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, can I ask you a question? JUDGE TINLEY: Sure. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: She is -- on books, publications, and dues, she's wanting to go back to 500. How could Precinct 1 do 200, and her need 500? I mean, how does that -- I'm not fussing about it. JUDGE WRIGHT: Precinct 1 can go upstairs to the Law Library. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait, wait, wait. I just wonder how that works. Does -- does one J.P. do things that other J.P.'s don't? I mean, I can't -- I can't get my brain wrapped around that. JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know, Commissioner. You know, obviously, they can better answer those questions. But some -- a lot of these figures that I come up with that are different than what are submitted or requested are based upon my annualizing their expenditures for the current year at various points during the year -- generally at least two, sometimes three -- to try and peg what their annual cost is going to be. But, as we've heard, there's some cases where you can't truly annualize some figures like you can, for example, utility bills or a lease payment, something like that. And sometimes there are special needs, and probably 8-20-09 wk 79 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the best example I can give is the Tax Assessor last year; her postage took a big jump. When I sat down with her, she said, "It's real simple. We got voter registration mailout this year." COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: So that -- she had the numbers calculated; showed the postage. You betcha. This year, you're going to see her postage is down, because she doesn't have that mailout. But if -- if I get the benefit of that information, certainly, I can -- I can act with it then. Unfortunately, I didn't -- Judge Wright and I went back and forth on the phone a time or two missing one another, and I wasn't able to get the information from her. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Books, publications, and dues, you're saying that when the Legislature goes through their session and the new laws -- JUDGE WRIGHT: Every other year we get new law books. I don't have the Law Library out where I am, and I have to have some sort of reference material. Some of it I can find on the Internet. Most of it I need the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Penal Code, the Traffic Code, all of these. Every other year, they change. So, this year it's going to be very low; next year I'll run out of money. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good explanation. Number 1, you don't -- you don't comply with the law or 8-20-04 wk 80 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 what? How do you -- how do you -- how do you function? JUDGE ELLIOTT: I'm sure there's been a lot of times I didn't comply with the law. (Laughter.) However -- no, we -- we have access to the Law Library upstairs. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. JUDGE ELLIOTT: And also, I think Linda Uecker, who -- her office now administers the Law Library or is responsible for that, so when we need books, we can actually order them through her, and she takes them out of the Law Library budget, and they come to us. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. JUDGE ELLIOTT: So we don't even have to go up there. The book will still come to us, even though it goes through her budget for the Law Library budget. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can we do the same thing for you, Judge Wright? JUDGE WRIGHT: I'd love to have her spend her money on my books, oh, yes. MS. NEMEC: We had talked about that last year, that every -- all the books we were going to order were going to go there. JUDGE TINLEY: I think that's where we're trying to -- trying to go, isn't it? JUDGE ELLIOTT: Yeah, that's what we've done 8-20-04 wk 81 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 this year, is just go through the Law Library budget. And this money -- and my money is mostly for dues, not for books. Some publications, but not much of it's for books. Unless they got real big pictures. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's your portion of dues? What's your portion of dues on that 500, Judge? JUDGE WRIGHT: I don't know. JUDGE TINLEY: I don't have it. JUDGE WRIGHT: I didn't -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What dues do you have? Membership to the J.P.'s association? JUDGE ELLIOTT: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is there other things besides that? JUDGE ELLIOTT: That's about it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And how much is that? JUDGE ELLIOTT: Oh, it's 150, 170 -- it's about 170 bucks or so. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 200 bucks covers it. JUDGE ELLIOTT: It includes the clerk. JUDGE O'DELL: That includes the clerk also, sorry. JUDGE WRIGHT: And I get a court publication from an individual that puts out updates on all of the laws. I didn't apply for that this year, and I sure do miss it. 8-20-04 wk 82 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why don't we try getting your books through the District Clerk's Law Library fund? JUDGE WRIGHT: I'll be happy to order them through her. JUDGE ELLIOTT: I would order more of those law books, but they just don't have enough pictures in them. (Laughter.) JUDGE O'DELL: Oh, brother. JUDGE ELLIOTT: I'll see y'all later. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thanks for the warning. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, it needs to be 200? And then the balance comes from the -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Will that work? Take care of your dues, and books coming out of Law Library? JUDGE WRIGHT: Well, if it doesn't, I'll be back. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All right. So, we'll put in $200 for your dues; then you'll get your law books through the District Clerk. That work? JUDGE TINLEY: And, if I'm not mistaken, your portion of the technology -- JUDGE WRIGHT: It's for two monitors and that software. 8-20-04 wk 83 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm showing, under your budget items, software maintenance of 2,900, and out of technology, 5,000. Is that correct? JUDGE WRIGHT: About that. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. The 5,000, of course, will come out of the -- I didn't write the account number down; it was the one we were just looking at a little bit ago. MR. TOMLINSON: Judge, which software are you talking -- the Word Merge? JUDGE WRIGHT: Whichever one it -- yeah, Word Merge. MR. TOMLINSON: How much is JUDGE O'DELL: Three -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We did what they said each department head needed MR. TOMLINSON: I couldn't then -- and then two monitors. JUDGE WRIGHT: And two flat yeah. it? 3,200, I think is in your budget. remember. And so, screen monitors, JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm, that's what she's showing here, Word Merge software and two monitors to comprise the 5,000. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: That's what I'm showing you 8-20-04 wk 84 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 showing. Okay. Do we have anything else, Judge? JUDGE WRIGHT: No. JUDGE TINLEY: All right, thank you. Judge O'Dell? JUDGE O'DELL: Well, I really don't have anything. I'm fine. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. JUDGE O'DELL: I don't even know why I'm here. But -- JUDGE TINLEY: We're glad to see you. JUDGE O'DELL: Well, good. Thank you. But, no, everything's fine. JUDGE TINLEY: On your technology items -- JUDGE O'DELL: Yes, sir? JUDGE TINLEY: -- the Word Merge, 3,683, I think you're -- you're proposing to come out of the technology portion of it? JUDGE O'DELL: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. JUDGE O'DELL: All right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. Why are your books 450? Do you get your books from -- do you get yours through the Law Library? JUDGE O'DELL: I'm going to start, yes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we can reduce that. 8-20-04 wk 85 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE O'DELL: We can reduce that, yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Take yours down to -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: 200, and yours comes from the Law Library. JUDGE all. Anything else, COMMI JUDGE JUDGE here. O'DELL: Yeah, that's not a problem at Commissioner Letz? 3SIONER LETZ: Thanks, Kari. O'DELL: You're welcome. TINLEY: And I don't see Judge Ragsdale COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge Ragsdale has the highest degree of respect for the wisdom of the Commissioners Court, so he didn't think he'd need to be here; just to trust our judgment on his budget. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, you want to cut his books and publications back to 200? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Done deal. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You got to explain it to him, though, right? JUDGE TINLEY: Explain that's the wisdom, right? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. It's amazing, we're 8-20-04 wk 86 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 remaining on schedule. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got goosebumps. This is so exciting. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We now have constables. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know where they are. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They ought to be right behind this, but they're not. COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, they're over by the Sheriff. JUDGE TINLEY: 18 -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Page 45. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Page 45. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I had a phone message on my recorder this morning that Constable 1 would not be in attendance with us today; he was at a school in San Antonio that he had had scheduled for some time. So -- JUDGE TINLEY: I talked to him the other evening. He indicated he was in training yesterday and today both, I believe. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can we cut his books, publications, and dues back to -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: He was on the Steve and Harley show this morning. 8-20-04 wk 87 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Was he really? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Must have been on the way to San Antonio. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mr. Billeiter, would you like to make some comments at this time? Or would you like to participate in this in any way? MR. BILLEITER: Well I appreciate the Court letting me have the opportunity to be here. I've kind of been over the -- I've been over the budget with -- or our proposal with the Judge, and I sat down with Joel, and we talked about what we thought we would need, and I think that's what you have before you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, good. Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: I might make one mention here. The -- the capital outlay items started out for at least 2 and 3 -- actually, 1, 2 and 3, I believe. MR. AYALA: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: It did not get included on 1's request. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is on there. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I don't see it on 1. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought you were going to talk about the reduction of -- JUDGE TINLEY: Well, no, there's -- it should 8-20-04 wk 88 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1E 1i 1~ 1~ 2( 2. 2: 2: 2 2 -- they all went in at 11,5. And the reason they went in at 11,5 was, of course, we got the lease payments on the three vehicles. Each of them have those vehicles, and then there was $5,000 they were requesting for their video cameras. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: Because we had made several efforts to wring out some -- some funding sources for those cameras, and we couldn't find any. Well, the constables called me one day, quite excited, and said that the D.P.S. had come through, so we're going to get three of those cameras on that, and -- and the only thing we need to fund is, there's an upgrade package that we need to provide for an installation, and then some -- some soft goods that go with it -- the tapes that go with it. And I believe they're each asking for 1,000; is that correct? MR. AYALA: 1,500. JUDGE TINLEY: 1,500? Okay. Rather than the -- rather than the 5,000. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So -- i JUDGE TINLEY: Those changes are going to be on 1's capital outlay. Your lease payments are actually '. 6,500 now; is that correct? MR. AYALA: Real close. MR. TOMLINSON: $7,153. MR. AYALA: They are? 8-20-04 wk 89 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 7,153. JUDGE TINLEY: So, we need to have 72 plus 1,500; be a total of 87. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I have put in a new line item for lease payments. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. TOMLINSON: You'll see. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I got it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 462, lease, 7,153. JUDGE TINLEY: So, 1's budget, down at 570, that should be reduced to 1,500. Likewise on 2 and 3, 'cause we got the lease payments covered otherwise. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, 1,500? JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And that's the upgrade for the County -- JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, that's the upgrade installation and the soft goods for the camera. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Used cameras? New? MR. AYALA: New. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Brand new? MR. AYALA: Brand new. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where do they go? MR. AYALA: D.P.S. They're mobile vision 8-20-04 wk 90 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 cameras that D.P.S. gives out on their grant deals. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. JUDGE TINLEY: Is this something that needs to be plugged in right now? MR. GARZA: I wanted to give a copy to the Court of the letter that I got from D.P.S. about the cameras. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We'll -- we'll get to that in a minute. That's fine. MR. AYALA: They're used by all the D.P.S. troopers. They're really good cameras. The upgrade is -- is a night -- it gets a better quality picture at night. Wireless mic. It's several bells and whistles that they recommend to go with it. JUDGE TINLEY: They really need that. Otherwise, they're not going to be -- number one, they won't get the audio with it. MR. AYALA: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: And, number two, they're not going to be nearly as effective at night, which is probably, from the safety standpoint, where you need it most, isn't it, Sheriff? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We don't have any upgrades. Never have, far as what D.P.S. is, 'cause they're not that -- 8-20-04 wk 91 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, you might have asked the wrong question. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The wrong person. JUDGE TINLEY: You didn't ask for any, did you? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Nope. JUDGE TINLEY: Good. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, all that shows that persistence pays off in searching for grant money. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Amen. MR. AYALA: They told us those programs were run -- they'd run out, and we sent the paperwork off anyway, hoping to get a letter, you know, back from them. And, to and behold, they had three cameras left somewhere. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Very good. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is there maintenance money built in here in case one breaks? Or -- MR. GARZA: That's what I was going to ask. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Your turn. MR. GARZA: Okay. I'm the one that got the cameras. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, there's got to be a warranty period for these things to begin with. MR. AYALA: I would imagine there's a 8-20-04 wk 92 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 warranty period, but I don't know. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There is a warranty period on some of those. Now, installation is going to run -- if they use D.P.S. that we used when the -- when they come up and install them in the new cars, it's normally 100 to 150 per car to install them. Now, if a unit breaks, then you've got to take it out and actually ship it off to the factory. If it's under warranty, great. If it's any other thing, that's very expensive to have those units worked on. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just don't break your cameras. to. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's what it amounts JUDGE TINLEY: They were so excited when they got them, they assured me they wouldn't break them. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought you were going to say they were so exited, they came running in, dropped one and broke it. JUDGE TINLEY: They assured me they -- they'd take good care of them. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But one of their expenses that they do need is the video tapes, 'cause you go through those. And with the retention period you need to keep, and -- and that shows your records, that is an expense that you need to be in supplies. 8-20-04 wk 93 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. AYALA: Yeah, and that's in the $1,500. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Anything else, constable? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably shouldn't be in the $1,500, though. Can you -- do you reuse the tapes one time, or do you -- MR. GARZA: You can reuse them. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Just depends. MR. AYALA: They recommend a certain quality tape, and they recommend for it to be reused one time. JUDGE TINLEY: And then there's a retention period. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess the first time, leave it where it is; it's a package deal. And then, in future years, it comes out of another line item. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You have to erase them after -- and you can after so long. Now, if it's an actual criminal case and that, that you've taken on that video, you may end up having to keep that tape for a year before it ever goes in -- if there's an appeal in that case, you may have to keep that tape for five years. So, a lot of them you don't get to reuse. But we have found through experience, the most you ever reuse them is once. After that, the quality's not good enough to reuse it again. JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else, constable? 8-20-04 wk 94 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. AYALA: Insurance, I was concerned about. JUDGE TINLEY: I got that figure from the Auditor. MR. TOMLINSON: I think it's good. MR. AYALA: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Long as you're insured, that's all you care about. MR. AYALA: That's all I care about. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Talking about the vehicle insurance? JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. MR. AYALA: Well, I had an incident where my car was vandalized, was scratched, and they took the deductible out of my vehicle maintenance line item to handle the deductible. JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. MR. AYALA: And is there a way we can put everything in one line item to cover the deductible in the event there's a -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is the deductible? MR. TOMLINSON: 1,000. JUDGE TINLEY: Thousand. MR. AYALA: Thousand. JUDGE TINLEY: I think the numbers are 8-20-04 wk 95 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 showing, according to what the Auditor's indicated to me, that the -- increasing the deductible, absorbing that when necessary, we're still money ahead. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, I don't think we need to budget for vandalism. I mean, I think if you -- if something happens, it's an emergency situation, and you take it out of your Commissioners Court Contingency or something like that. I don't -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why don't you just put the deductible under equipment repair? If we don't use it, it's there. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, is it -- I mean, there's $1,000 -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But that wasn't intended to be for that. 21 22 23 24 25 county. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Don't hit deer. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Try not to. MR. AYALA: It happens. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Impossible in this SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's going to be -- normally, you're going to have brakes, tires, all the rest of that come out of it, and then if you hit a deer or you have vandalism, each time that happens, that's another $1,000 deductible. 8-20-09 wk 96 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. NEMEC: A deer will hit you in this county. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. Thank you, Barbara. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- to me, I kind of look at -- at deductible on insurance kind of like I do the pots of money we put under Nondepartmental for computer repairs. I mean, you may need to budget for it, but you don't need to budget for deductible everywhere. I think you do it under -- handle that the same way; makes more sense to me. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just so it's covered. MR. AYALA: Right. That's all I care about. Okay? JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. MR. AYALA: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Constable Garza. MR. GARZA: Just -- you're basically going to -- good morning, Commissioners, humble Court. I just want to, I guess, come before you. I've got a copy of the letter that I received from the D.P.S. I want to just give everybody a copy of it. I'm very proud of that. I had made contact with the different various agencies, D.P.S., governor's office, and when we submitted the bid, of course, they said there was no money available. And then I said, 8-20-09 wk 97 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 "Well, if you can just have us on a consideration list or what-have-you." And when I came back to court, of course, I explained to the Court that day there was no funds available; that I told them that I -- they had put me on a list. And, apparently, they put us on a list and we got the cameras. And I just think that's a -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Congratulations. I appreciate you doing that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Did everybody get a letter, or just you? MR. GARZA: 1, 2 and 3. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Everybody got their own letter? MR. GARZA: Yeah, but I just -- it was through my efforts. I don't want -- you know, I just want to specify the fact that I'm the one that came to court to plead for the -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we remember. MR. GARZA: Yes, sir. For the cameras, and I feel very great that I was able to save all us taxpayers funds to do that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the Court recommended that you go this route. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Aren't you glad we told you? 8-20-04 wk 98 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We helped you save us money. MR. GARZA: Yeah. Well, that's good. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let him take the credit for it. MR. GARZA: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You guys. MR. GARZA: I think they'll come in handy. I just want to relate to you a story. Tuesday night, I -- I assisted a Texas Highway Patrol trooper, Steve Brockman, on a traffic stop on the interstate along with the 5.0., stopped two males, and he found about 60 pounds of marijuana in the vehicle. And so that would help us out really great on the interstate with these cameras and stuff. So, I think that's a real good deal. And the cars have really helped me out as far as doing my job better, being more visible, so I appreciate the Court's help in that. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. What else you got for us on your budget? MR. GARZA: I just -- I didn't get another copy. I just -- the copy I submitted, I never got a copy of the recommended to me. I don't know if some of the other officials got a copy of what you had put down recommended, so I don't know if I -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: You don't know where you 8-20-04 wk 99 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. GARZA: I -- yes, sir, Your Honor -- I mean, your Commissioner. So, I want to know what I got cut or what I didn't. Now, I had put in the telephone and supplies a little bit more money, because I just wanted to get a little money in there that I wouldn't use for cell phone service. I've been using, for the last two years, my own personal phone; I get a lot of calls, and it's what we call a Trakfone. I just buy the minutes, and I was budgeting maybe $20 a month for -- to buy a 30-minute card in case somebody calls. I've been using my own phone, and I just wanted to budget maybe about $20 -- it's, like, $19 for a card, like, at Walmart or what-have-you for 30 minutes, and I could buy a card every month. And that way, if I -- if I get calls for business, which I do, that would alleviate my -- coming out of my own pocket. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, you had requested a total of 600. I realize you've got some telephone costs allocated to your office. MR. GARZA: Uh-huh. JUDGE TINLEY: And based on your actual use, I cut that all the way back to 200. You tell me that's not going to be enough? MR. GARZA: That's not going to be enough. You got to -- I never put it in, but I've -- some of these 8-20-04 wk 100 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 other officials have cell phones, and the County helps them a little bit on their cell phone usage, and I feel I need to ask for it now, 'cause I haven't been doing it. So, that's why. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, if you're using it in connection with your duties as constable, we need to be paying for it. MR. GARZA: Thank you, sir. Thank you. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we add just $20 a month, so $240 back? MR. GARZA: No, sir, Commissioner. What do I got here? I figured $20 a card for 12 months. JUDGE TINLEY: That's 250, okay. MR. GARZA: About 240, 250 somewhere. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, add 250 back. MR. GARZA: I'm just very excited that we got the cameras. Like I said, I appreciate the Court's help and everything on this. JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate your help in just being doggedly determined. MR. GARZA: Determined. JUDGE TINLEY: Staying after it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's right. JUDGE TINLEY: So, we're going with 450? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 450. 8-20-04 wk 101 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. GARZA: Thank you. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Gasoline? MR. GARZA: Gasoline, yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: You requested 23. I cut that back to 15. It still -- you're going to be spending $1,240 this year. Is 15 going to be enough, or do we need to raise that? MR. GARZA: I'd say I need a little more. The cost of gas, I mean -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Number 2 had 2,000. MR. GARZA: That's what I -- if we could get along the same route, I would -- I would welcome that. JUDGE TINLEY: Going 2,000 on that one? Okay. MR. GARZA: I've been frugal. I've been trying, you know. Just the cost of the fuel has gone up. Like I said, I apologize; I don't have a copy of what was recommended, so I don't know what other line items that the Court -- JUDGE TINLEY: I can tell you. MR. GARZA: I'd appreciate it if you would. JUDGE TINLEY: We cut your postage -- not we. I cut your postage in half, based upon your historical use, from 250 to 125. Your current budget was 100; this is a 8-20-04 wk 102 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 little bit more than your current budget. But office supplies I left at 100. MR. GARZA: So, I got to put down -- JUDGE TINLEY: You know, on that, you're going to have to get some new ticket books too. I talked to the others -- MR. GARZA: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: -- and we probably need to increase your office -- can you survive on the postage? MR. GARZA: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: That far back? MR. GARZA: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We probably need -- after my discussion with the others on your office supplies, we probably need to increase that by maybe another 125 to 225. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You put ~5U in orrice supplies in Precinct 2. MR. AYALA: That's for ticket books. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know. We're talking about the same thing for him. MR. AYALA: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably both could go to 225. I mean, that's -- this year, precinct -- Constable 2 has -- you spent 40 as of July -- whatever it was. Which is 8-20-04 wk 103 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. GARZA: I'm out of -- I'm out of postage right now. I took some money out of another department, 'cause I've been getting a lot of mail -- have to send a lot of certified letters and what-have-you, and that's where my costs have increased. But right now, I'm out of postage. My line item's, like, $20. I bought a 37-cent roll of stamps, you know. Of course, submitted the bill to the Court, but they're going to take that -- some out of another line item just to make it up. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why would one constable have 250 in postage and the other one 125? I mean, do you -- do you not mail out things like other -- I mean, I can't get my brains wrapped around this for some reason. MR. GARZA: Yeah, I do mail. I mail out mail, but a lot of what I try to do is, I ask people to send me a self-stamped envelope, you know, to -- but now the -- recently, I've been getting a lot of having to send certified mails, so that makes -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good. MR. GARZA: -- that's why it comes down -- you know, like a lot of these places that say, "Send me a self-stamped envelope and I'll send the papers and send it right back to you." And some do and some don't, you know. 8-20-04 wk 104 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You say you're out of postage money now? MR. GARZA: Right now, yes, sir. I had -- I had -- I don't want to say -- I need about $17 or something. And Friday I bought a roll of stamps, $37, so I submitted my -- a bill, and I put in there I'd take it out of postage, and then there was another line item in there I said could maybe make up the difference. But I'll go with what the Court recommends, but I just recommended a little bit -- they'd give me a little bit more money on the postage in case it's incurred. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Go to 200. MR. GARZA: I would welcome that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Two? MR. GARZA: Thank you, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What did we decide to do about your -- JUDGE TINLEY: Office supplies? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- office supplies? You're using -- MR. GARZA: I haven't bought many supplies yet, but I need some supplies. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, the ticket book costs are going to be the same for you as they are for Constable Ayala. 8-20-04 wk 105 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. GARZA: We're going to try to go to the same outfit, yes, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good question. That's what I've been trying to get to. MR. GARZA: I'll go with the lowest bid, and that's what I always try to do, and we try to go with that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So you see 550 necessary, Joel? MR. AYALA: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 550. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 550? JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's look at vehicle repair and maintenance. MR. GARZA: Your Honor, so how much am I going to be getting in gas? JUDGE TINLEY: Two. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 2,000. MR. GARZA: Okay, thank you. COMMISSIONER LETZ: What? JUDGE TINLEY: I've got a disparity in vehicle repair. 1's got 1,000, 2's got 1,000, so there's equipment repair, and 3 and 4, I've got it 500 apiece. 4 is a little bit different because of his own vehicle. MR. GARZA: Vehicle -- sorry. Vehicle repair 8-20-09 wk 106 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and maintenance? JUDGE TINLEY: But -- but 3 is at 500, and the other two are at 1,000. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But they all should probably need to do tires this year. MR. GARZA: Yeah, exactly. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's why we put in tires or possibly brakes. JUDGE TINLEY: So we need to go to 1,000 on that one. MR. GARZA: I had put 1,200. I don't know where you got the figure of 600. Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: 500. MR. GARZA: Or 500, yeah. That's not going to make it for me, Your Honor. JUDGE TINLEY: That's where it came from, right here. MR. GARZA: Thank you. Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I think that'll -- MR. GARZA: If I can add just one last thing, I'd appreciate it. Just as far as the -- since I've got the vehicle and stuff on traffic enforcement and what-have-you, I just want to present just a -- not an official figure, but just a good figure on the type of stops I've made and 8-20-04 wk 107 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 what-have-you. Since getting the vehicles back in November up until this date, so far -- not this month included -- I have 191 citations issued. I figure I collected $26,281 in revenue back to the County. Warning tickets, I had 89 tickets issued so far. Warrants that I've served between last year and this year, 63; income of $12,240 back to the Court. The vehicle has very -- helped me in my job be more visible, and people acknowledging, you know, "Who are these guys?" You know, we're a couple, you know, law enforcement officers. So, the vehicle makes a big difference in doing a better job, more safer job. I appreciate the Court's -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Angel, let me ask you a question. One of the -- one of the issues that triggered you getting a new car was that community down near Comfort off the interstate, that they were in here that day, and -- MR. GARZA: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- requested that your presence be down there. Are you patrolling that area? MR. GARZA: Yes, sir, I am. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. That's all I ask. MR. GARZA: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. We appreciate you being here. MR. GARZA: Thank you. Yes, sir. 8-20-04 wk 108 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Terrill, good to see you, sir. MR. TERRILL: Good to see you, Commissioners Court. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He still doesn't have doughnuts. MR. TERRILL: Still no doughnuts. Can't do doughnuts; I swell up. But, here, I would like to give -- JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. MR. TERRILL: -- Commissioners Court copies of what I've prepared here. I did prepare this prior to receiving the recommended numbers. They're not going to be exactly the same. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. TERRILL: But there's no major problems here. It pretty much is like it is. What I've got on here, that the request of $100 on the added line item, 554-206 -- JUDGE TINLEY: I've got that up to 200. MR. TERRILL: You've already got that up to two. Now, the bond for the constables is $50 per year; that would cover me for four years. But, in the past, our history has been that we pay for it one year at a time. JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. MR. TERRILL: And, somehow or another, we overlooked it this last year. When I wrote this letter, 8-20-04 wk 109 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that was to cover my deputy and myself for a year. JUDGE TINLEY: So, 200 is the correct amount? MR. TERRILL: No. Actually, 100 would be the correct amount for a year, for one year for both of us. JUDGE TINLEY: For both of you? MR. TERRILL: Yes, sir. It's 50 -- is that right? Bonds, $50 per -- JUDGE TINLEY: So we need to reduce that back -- MR. TERRILL: Back to -- JUDGE TINLEY: -- to 100? MR. TERRILL: To $100. And we'd just do that annual thing. JUDGE TINLEY: We need to take his temperature, see if he's okay here. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. What else do we need to look at? MR. TERRILL: Based on all the history of me driving my own car and all that kind of stuff -- JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. MR. TERRILL: -- I suggest that line item 554-480, the vehicle insurance that's allocated -- JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. MR. TERRILL: -- be deleted from this budget. 8-20-04 wk 110 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 There's no sense in it. I own the vehicle. I get as much use out of it. I've got to have it insured anyway. I've got three vehicles on the same policy, and I -- based on that -- and kind of combine the amount of insurance and the amount on the other -- next item that I've suggested here. It is -- I think it's a good, even parity; it just works out about even for everyone. And that would be the line item 554-331, that vehicle gas and oil, and 554 -- be 454, vehicle repair and maintenance, be consolidated into Line Item 554-001, which is travel, as we've previously done in years past. And we did well with that, you know, until we -- the other constables are driving a County vehicle, and this works out real good for myself and the way we're doing our business out there, and my deputy. COMMISSIONER LETZ: If it goes into a travel allowance, you get taxed on that. MR. TERRILL: That's all right. That way it's also added onto your -- onto your retirement. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's true, too. MR. TERRILL: It benefits you there, which I thought was -- and I'm only four years away from that. And these changes would reduce paperwork, result in a savings of about $550 to the taxpayers. As far as ticket books and such as that, I've still got -- I still have a supply left over from years past. Our approach to civil process and 8-20-09 wk 111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that is different; we have different needs out in the rural area than what we have down here in the -- in the city. JUDGE TINLEY: These heavily populated areas? MR. TERRILL: Right, a lot of deer out there. But, otherwise, everything -- everything is just fine. The figures recommended by the Court are fine. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I would agree, the vehicle insurance -- I don't know -- I don't think I'd delete the line. I think I'd zero it out, but I -- MR. TERRILL: Zero it out. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- I want it left in there, 'cause you may want to run for County Judge one of these days, and -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And then you'd need it. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 'Cause if we zero that out -- you know, you want to consolidate 554, vehicle repairs, in with -- MR. TERRILL: Maintenance, yes, sir. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- in with -- JUDGE TINLEY: Gas and oil. Talking about taking that 1,800, zero those two items out, putting it up at the first line item. MR. TERRILL: Those -- the numbers that we -- 8-20-09 wk 112 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that we're currently under are -- are adequate, and it -- I'd say I'm paying about 50 percent of the repairs out of my pocket, and the 500 allocated as of a couple days ago, I put a new set of tires on the car. And, to and behold, it come to exactly $500, which is just fine. The other repairs, I did a $163 repair on my car this morning, but that's just normal wear and tear, so I'm going to share it with the County. I don't believe that I should get it all back, since I own the unit. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I -- I understand about moving it up to travel. The only problem I have with that is that we tried to get away from having a travel allowance. MR. TERRILL: Mm-hmm. you know, I know you drive a lot out there; I know you've got a big country, so I think you're probably shortchanging -- I think you probably should have more gas and oil. I think you should be comparable with the others. If you don't use it, you don't use it, but I think that the -- the County should give you basically the same gas and oil. MR. TERRILL: It's still difficult for me to differentiate which is official mileage and my personal mileage. 8-20-04 wk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 113 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know. But, I mean -- MR. TERRILL: I've got to be fair. Sometimes I'll take a receipt out of the -- out of the machine; instead of bringing it down here for reimbursement, it gets -- this. But that's personal. That's -- that's for personal miles. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've already written down 2,000 in gas. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think when you're -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We can force it on him. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a hard time figuring out a time when you're not on duty. When you're driving somewhere, I mean. MR. TERRILL: That's right. That's right, sir. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, so, I mean, I don't have a problem paying for that gas. And that's just my personal feeling. I mean -- MR. TERRILL: Very generous. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we're just trying to be fair. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My only question of the thing is the same question I had before; is if you start 8-20-09 wk 114 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 consolidating or changing things around and putting it -- putting it back into travel and all that, and then years down the road, when he is no longer here and you have a new person out there, are we going to remember how that worked? Or two years from now, we have a -- Mr. Billeiter forgets that we did this in here, and he comes in screaming, "Why does he have more money in his travel?" And -- you know, instead of trying to explain all that, remember all those things, why don't we just leave it like it is? I mean, do you see a problem with that -- all that, Tommy? MR. TOMLINSON: I think we ought to leave it like it is. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do too. JUDGE TINLEY: Increase the gas and oil up to 2,000? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: On parity, okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: Leave the repair and maintenance the same, essentially. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Got him sharing fifty-fifty with regard to the County-owned units. Is that all right with you, constable? MR. TERRILL: That's great. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Constable, there's 8-20-04 wk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 115 no line item for office supplies or postage. MR. TERRILL: We work very closely with the Justice of the Peace office in there, since we -- our desks are just a few feet apart. On the postage, most of the things that I tend to are by phone -- either by phone, or I go out there, and I'm able to handle the workload down here. As far as what needs to be going out certified mail, a lot -- I'm sure their load is different than mine, but when I do have something as far as certified mail, two or three letters a year at the absolute outside, at the most. JUDGE TINLEY: And you just -- MR. TERRILL: And as far as the normal little postage, when I have to notify -- send out a notice, I have -- I have postcards printed notifying the person in great, big red letters that, "A warrant has been issued for your arrest. To avoid embarrassment of being arrested at home or at work..." And that's a postcard; only costs me 21 cents, so it's a very small amount that's going out. Most of it, when it's warrant stuff, is done in -- I'm out on the road, and if I'm unable to accomplish that, then that's going to go back in and Rusty gets it. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Same reasoning; I think you ought to have a line item for postage and ought to have some money it. 25 ~ JUDGE TINLEY: Postage and supplies. 8-20-04 wk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 116 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. You're going to -- you're not going to work forever, and the next guy that comes along doesn't have to come in here with his hat in his hand and ask for it. MR. TERRILL: All right, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Add postage item? JUDGE TINLEY: We can probably go up under -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: $125. JUDGE TINLEY: -- 310. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What do you have for Number 3? COMMISSIONER LETZ: 200, I think. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 200. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 309? JUDGE TINLEY: Postage. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 309. JUDGE TINLEY: 310, office supplies. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see, okay. JUDGE TINLEY: What are you putting in -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 200 in postage, and 100 in office supplies. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. You don't have to spend it. MR. TERRILL: I won't spend it. 8-20-04 wk 117 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: And I know you won't. You'll probably have the same amount here come the end of that year. MR. TERRILL: I'm a taxpayer too, you know. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. What else? MR. TERRILL: That's all I've got, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Thank you, sir. MR. TERRILL: Thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thanks, Bob. JUDGE TINLEY: We are amazingly on schedule. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're neat and cool. JUDGE TINLEY: There you go. We're scheduled to come back at 1:00 with the County Attorney. Why don't we, then, just go ahead and break for lunch, come back and reconvene at 1 o'clock. We'll stand in recess till 1 o'clock. (Recess taken from 11:29 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.) JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's -- let's come back to order. We recessed about 11:30 to reconvene at 1 o'clock. It's now that time. Next one up is the County Attorney. What page are we on, gentlemen? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 33. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Okay. What do you have for us, Mr. Motley, that you'd like to discuss on the 8-20-04 wk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 118 budget? MR. MOTLEY: Well, much of what was submitted is -- is fine, and there's some changes made which will probably be okay. I have a few items -- line items in the budget I need to talk about, and also, just -- just generally speaking, we have discussed this issue of Victims Rights Coordinator, county-wide position, the idea being this is a position that is more of a County responsibility. We had talked about the idea of putting that position in my budget, just to give it a home. I don't know how to say that any other way. And, so, what I did is I worked up -- and I -- and I really -- this has kind of come a little bit late in the game, the budgeting game, so I've worked up a tentative supplemental budget request talking about this position, and what increased expenses and costs and such I saw associated with that position as of this time. That's going to have to have some tinkering done on it at some point in time, but, again, these are tentative. So, I have that; I'll present it to you after we go through these line items. We just -- let me just look here. The first item of some significance is 103 -- Line Item 103. We had asked for a -- let's see, 90 -- if I got this right, 94,088 -- I think we have that right. Just a minute. JUDGE TINLEY: How did -- how did we end up with the 90,941? Do you know? 8-20-04 wk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 119 MR. TOMLINSON: That came off the position schedule. MR. MOTLEY: As -- JUDGE TINLEY: As an entry level for an assistant, rather than a higher level for the one that we recently lost. MR. TOMLINSON: I think it's what we're paying right now. MR. MOTLEY: I think there's an error on that. The current salary on one position is 46,870, and the current salary on the vacant position is 44,923. When those numbers were placed in the budget in the Line Item 103, '04-'05 recommended, for some reason, that 44,923 on the vacant position was put back to the salary pre last year's COLA, so it's just 2 and a half percent low. So, I think that number should be 91,793 for those two added together, if I have that right, and not 90,941. There's just a -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct. MR. MOTLEY: You know, $1,100, basically. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct. MR. MOTLEY: 1,123. So, that one's 1,123 off. Let's see. The secretary salary, I think that one was actually -- I think that one is correct, right? Did you want me to say that was right? MS. HANNA: Yes. 8-20-04 wk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 120 MR. MOTLEY: We figured out -- MS. HANNA: That 2 and a half percent for this year. MR. MOTLEY: And the 108 and 112 are, I guess, yet to be determined, and also that -- also that salary. JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go back to 105, if we can. MR. MOTLEY: You bet. JUDGE TINLEY: You're showing a request of 103,130. MS. HANNA: That -- JUDGE TINLEY: And did that include -- MR. MOTLEY: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: -- some sort of a COLA? MR. MOTLEY: Yes, it did. And, again -- JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, without it, it's going to be the 100 -- do we have anybody that's got a mandatory coming this year? MR. MOTLEY: No. Only one we had was last year, and she got it in, I think, March or somewhere in there. JUDGE TINLEY: So what it needs to be, then, is what it was last year, 100,615, before any add-ons that may be discretionary with the Court. 8-20-04 wk 121 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. HANNA: The -- if I may? MR. MOTLEY: That one right there? That -- that's right, plus the COLA's. MS. HANNA: We had a COLA -- excuse me, a longevity increase this year on one employee, so that's the reason that last year's figure was 100,615, and y'all are showing recommended as 100,895. JUDGE TINLEY: Should that not be 100,615? MS. HANNA: No, sir, because one employee received a longevity increase in March, so her salary is now different. And that's the $280 difference between those two figures. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I'm with you. MR. MOTLEY: One-oh -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Position schedule that we got from the Treasurer? JUDGE TINLEY: Well -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: It -- JUDGE TINLEY: -- that's how, apparently, we got the 100,895, so I just want to be sure that number was correct. (Discussion off the record.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How many secretaries does this salary -- MR. MOTLEY: Four. 8-20-04 wk 122 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- represent? MR. MOTLEY: Four positions essentially are secretaries -- yes, four. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Four? MR. MOTLEY: Legal secretaries or administrative legal secretaries. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. MR. MOTLEY: And so 108 -- 100,895 is last year's, and that's -- JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. MR. MOTLEY: That would be the same as the 103. We did put the COLA on there, so -- and also, the 103, assistant's salary, by the way, what is requested has COLA on there too. (Discussion off the record.) COMMISSIONER LETZ: David, what was the COLA you figured? MR. MOTLEY: Two and a half. See, we're doing better than that. Well, I didn't know. I didn't know what was going on. I just put that in there. I've not been -- MS. HANNA: We've always been encouraged to add that in, so that's what we did. If I may go back to that 103 -- MR. MOTLEY: Yeah, sure. 8-20-04 wk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 123 MS. HANNA: The original -- the current budget, '03-'04, on Line Item 103, shows $91,793. '04-'05 shows $90,941 as a recommended. The reason those are different is that, for some reason, Mike's position did drop back to the lesser salary before the COLA. JUDGE TINLEY: We've already got that. MR. MOTLEY: They got that one. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We've got that corrected. MR. MOTLEY: Then the group insurance -- you guys may have more current information than what we have, but we just mathematically calculated the 48,345. JUDGE TINLEY: That'll work itself through. MR. MOTLEY: Right. So that's -- that was just mathematical. The retirement, again, I think that's probably explained by the little differences in the pre -- the -- that one empty salary -- or that one vacant salary, excuse me, at -- you know, putting the COLA back in. Maybe that's the difference right there. The bonds are okay. I guess really the only items we have any -- any question about would be -- everything is okay except for -- let's see, Number 310. On the office supplies, I know that the Judge cut those down, and what I want to point out is we had asked for 6,500. We currently budgeted 6,500. I realize year-to-date, at this point in time -- and this was 8-20-04 wk 124 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 presented -- well, I guess this was the 17th, so three days ago -- was 4,253. We had asked for 6,500 because we don't buy office supplies in -- you know, just as we need them; we save up and get a large shipment at one time. So, last -- let's see, '02-'03, actual expenditure was 6,655. We went down from $6,655 to 6,500, believing we were going expend every penny of that by the time the year's end rolls around. So, going from 65 to 6,000 may -- you know, it's -- I know it looks like, mathematically, you know, so much per month expenditure, that that's probably what we're going to end up with, is the 6,000, but I'm thinking we're going to -- we`re going to come up short $500 or more, really, actually on that one, on 310. Going to the next one, books, publications, and dues, unless y'all want to -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: David, back on office supplies -- MR. MOTLEY: Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you think you probably need 6,500 just for office supplies. Did you make any adjustment for a change in personnel, a new County Attorney? Is that -- there would be additional costs because -- MR. MOTLEY: You talking about this other matter, the victims' coordinator? COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. New letterhead and 8-20-04 wk 125 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 business -- you know, new things for new employees. MR. MOTLEY: You know, to be honest with you, no, I did not include anything in office supplies for new stationary, and that's a really good point. I did not do MS. HANNA: We don't order large amounts of stationery, so we probably wouldn't be that far off. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wouldn't be that far off, so 6,500 would cover it, then? MR. MOTLEY: My only question is, I -- I feel like we're going to come up short probably this year on what we were on the 6,500. Last year we came up, you know, 60 -- we went, '02-'03, 6,655. You know, we lowered it to 6,500, and 6,500 is going to be pretty tight, I think, when all the bills come in for this calendar year. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: David, on 311 -- MR. MOTLEY: Yes? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- you don't show anything on photocopy supplies. How are those handled in your office? MR. MOTLEY: They're folded in, I think, MS. HANNA: Right. All the departments -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All bundled into office supplies? 8-20-04 wk 126 1 2 item at 3 let's s 4 Helena? 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. MOTLEY: Yeah. It's kind of a dead line MS. HANNA: Yes. MR. MOTLEY: Computer supplies is also on the next page, Number 565. It's folded into office supplies. The other two have been kind of moved around somewhere else. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. MS. HANNA: Several categories that were folded into other line items a couple years ago, and that's why. MR. MOTLEY: On 315, books, publications, and dues, you know, you -- everybody's aware that we have a -- Linda Uecker is managing some economy of -- I don't know how many it is, but it's based on some fees that she's collected, and really, to centralize and perhaps better manage the costs of books, publications, and dues, she is now paying for those ones that we've got established subscriptions for through her office. Anything we want that's new or different outside of what we've already been subscribing to, we basically present to her. We've had nothing like that this year. Everything we've had has been something that we already have an established relationship for. And I realize, at this point in time, we have really 8-20-09 wk 127 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 nothing out of this line item whatsoever. The only reason don't have anything. JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. MR. MOTLEY: Only reason we asked for 7,000 -- it may not be this year, it may not be next year; we don't know, but we figure at some point in time, the moneys that Linda manages are going to run out, and that was literally just to say if they run out, we'll have the money here to do what we need to do. If they don't run out, we won't spend it. Just like we haven't spent the 7,000 this year. That's the only reason we asked for 7,000. I don't know what type of -- kind of shape the fund is in. Y'all may be up on this. I think there was quite a bit of money; seemed like at least a couple-three year's worth of purchases, to my understanding. But that's just an effort to be cautious about that. So -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You don't have any association dues or anything like that that come out of this line item? MR. MOTLEY: We pay dues for -- those come out of -- those -- Assistant County Attorney and all those comes out of Hot Check. We pay dues for the Assistant County Attorneys to the -- the State Bar. We pay -- pay all three of our dues to the District and County Attorneys 8-20-04 wk 128 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Association, as well as dues for all three of us to the National District Attorneys Association. So, all those come out of the Hot Check fund. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. MR. MOTLEY: There are no dues. JUDGE TINLEY: A considerable chunk of money -- you're talking about probably three lawyers -- to the State Bar. MR. MOTLEY: No, our Bar dues continue to come out of there. My Bar dues come out of my pocket. Those are just the assistants' Bar dues. JUDGE TINLEY: Just the assistants, okay. MR. MOTLEY: Right. And I think they run 280 or something like that, 240. About 500 for that, and then annual dues to the District Attorneys Association times three, and National District Attorneys Association times three. And I don't know -- those aren't terribly high, I don't think. JUDGE TINLEY: Probably looking at 1,500 bucks . MR. MOTLEY: Association fees are not too terribly high. And -- oh, also we -- oh, yes. Yes, sir. Also, the District/County Attorneys Association has an investigator's section and a key personnel section, and we do pay the District/County Attorneys Association dues for 8-20-04 wk 129 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 our other office personnel to the key personnel section. we're paying his dues to the investigator's section. I don't think those are -- any of them are over $50 per person per year, so they're not as substantial as the State Bar dues, but I would imagine we're probably talking about $800 to $1,000, probably something like that, out of the Hot Check fund. That's where that comes from. Publications, a lot of our publications come through the membership to those various associations. And we -- when we use the most -- 403, attorney's fees. We asked for 500 last year. We realize we spent 163. The one thing I want to urge at keeping it toward 500 rather than 250 is that our -- our major conference every year is the last week of our fiscal year, the last week of September. That is when those attorney's fees for outside attorneys to come in and handle things for us are most likely to be incurred, is that last week of the budget year. So, what we've done so far, and only spending 163, if you use a monthly calculation to get at the estimate or the recommendation of 250, it -- it's -- ours is really skewed toward that very last week of the budget year, so we'll have to have somebody go do our mental health hearings probably for us, and maybe any juvenile hearings that come up, and we pay those people at a rate of about $50 an hour. So, it's 8-20-04 wk 130 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 not going to take but, you know, basically seven hours worth of time to wipe out that 500 for the year. That's really the only thing in the budget that any -- JUDGE TINLEY: So, you need that back at 500? MR. MOTLEY: Well, I think it would be closer to being what we need. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. MOTLEY: To be honest with you. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. MOTLEY: That's really the only issues at all that I have relative to the budget. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: David, the budget contemplates that the vacant assistant position will be filled on October 1? MR. MOTLEY: Yes, it does. Well, we're interviewing now; as a matter of fact, I have an interview today and one tomorrow. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So we have a plan to fill that job? MR. MOTLEY: Oh, yes. I'm actively -- I've made an offer to an individual, and she decided she didn't want to take it, so I'm in the process of getting that filled A.S.A.P. And I will say, there's certainly a need for it. Mr. Phillips has taken three days vacation this week, so it's really been a -- a fun place in my office. 8-20-04 wk 131 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 The other thing that I want to present to you -- and this is kind of -- it's a little bit -- this was after I submitted the budget to y'all, so that's why I'm calling this supplemental, rather than incorporating into this. And I think I have just five of these, I hope -- yeah. Commissioner Baldwin is, I think, fairly familiar with this. But let me tell you what I tried to do. I have not spoken with Mrs. Nemec about grade/step salary and an actual title to be decided about this person who is going to serve in the -- the function as a County-paid Victims Rights Coordinator. Other issues that I have not nailed down, we don't know where this person would be physically located. The person needs to be in the courthouse. We don't know where that person's office is going to be. If it were arranged such that the person were somewhere in our proximity, I suspect we could extend a phone extension over there, take care of the phone expense. Probably put that person -- give them capability to use our printer, our fax machine, a lot of our stuff where we are, and in that event, probably we'd only need to get some sort of office furniture, equipment. I'm talking about very basic office furniture, like desk, chairs, file cabinet, trash can. And that's really about it. This person will not spend a great deal of time in that office, although there will be times when that 8-20-04 wk 132 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 person needs to be physically present in the office to receive people to come in and talk about their victims rights, complete forms, and such as that. So, I'm a little iffy on that part of it. And I will tell you, the phone, office space, possibly the person -- you know, I put down there rent as a possibility, but I think there'll be a way to locate the person physically within the courthouse, if not within our office, you know, or right next to our office. If we were to locate that person somewhere else in the courthouse, they would need a phone and still need the furniture and equipment, such like that, office equipment. So -- but up to the things that I want to say that are more known at this time, it's my understanding that we're -- in Boerne, that the lady who is functioning in this very same capacity, the capacity I think envisioned by the people who are thinking it's appropriate for Kerr County, I believe her salary at this time is $32,000. I did kind of a rough benefits calculation to include retirement, FICA, and insurance, and came up with 10,650. That's a little less than 16 percent for FICA and insurance -- excuse me, FICA and retirement, and then I put in -- I plugged in the rate that -- you know, the 5,500 something dollars. It was the monthly rate for every other employee times 12 months, and put that in there. Laptop PC -- and that's what all the attachments are about. What 8-20-04 wk 133 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you have is just from a Dell catalog. I figure a suitable laptop PC -- by the way, this PC, the function that -- one of the functions this person will have, and the PC will be instrumental in completing, will be to create and maintain a database of cases where we have victims. So, this person not only is going to be receiving victims and doing intake and -- and completing paperwork for people who have new cases involving violence and such that come under the acts, but it's going to go back to some degree in the older cases of family violence and try to pick up and create databases on the old stuff that's already in existence, and try to get those connections reestablished. So, they're going to -- there's going to be a retroactive aspect in that. A database is pretty much critical for either a laptop or an office -- you know, it's going -- laptop is going to be necessary, 'cause it's going to be a mobile position. But, in any event, I looked through here. About $400 upgrade is what Dell charges to go from the XP, either small office or home, up to XP Professional. The reason we need XP Professional is that it's the only suite that they offer in XP that has a database in it, the access database, so I think that's going to be an addition -- you know, about a $400 expenditure on top of the basic PC. We -- we're not looking for any kind of PC to -- to ring the bells as far as everything, but we -- you know, having the best of 8-20-04 wk 134 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 everything. We prefer something that is, you know, current technology, you know, just adequate for the -- for the task at hand. Only thing I see in the way of anything really extra is that XP upgrade to the Professional XP. Pager, I figure about $10 a month. Cell phone, I figure maybe $100 a month, and that would also include -- that's the cost of acquisition built in there. I figure we establish some new account; you probably get the phone for, you know, a hundred bucks, and then maybe $100 a month, something like that. You know, that's ballpark on that. Travel, there will be some travel around the county to meet with these people. Office supplies, again, that's very basic office supplies for that office, which is including, you know, cards, stationary, pens, pencils, very basic stuff. And training education, my understanding, there is some required courses for this person. I believe for either -- for certification to commence the work, or else for annual, you know, certification renewal. And that all totaled up to $48,500. And what I did -- I mentioned this before. Beginning July 1st of next year, if we're successful in obtaining the grant we're seeking from AACOG, beginning that date, that's the date that the grant would begin funding this position, and it's an 80/20 percent split; they're picking up 80 percent. So this 38,8 is nine months of this 8-20-04 wk 135 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 budget year at 100 percent of this cost, and then the last three months of the budget year at 20 percent, is the way I came up with that. So, 36,375 plus 2,425 is where I came up with 38,8, and that's an estimate of what I think it would cost the County. Again, not really knowing really four things; where the office is going to be, if the phone will need to be necessary, if there's going to be any rent, and what kind of furniture we might have to put in there. I will also say -- you know, last thing I'll say about this, I have to -- I need to attend a budget -- excuse me, a grant-writing workshop. I believe it's going to be in October. I don't know precisely how our 20 percent share has to be paid. I suspect it's like any other grant; there's going to be some in-kind that can be involved in that. So, really, that -- those numbers could go down if we -- if it's an office space, and we say we're giving office space and it's worth $500 a month for this little office or whatever, we might be able to use that on the post July 1st, 2005, you know, 20 percent share. So, I -- I haven't really gone to school; I'm not educated to the point where I could give you any intelligent estimate of what, you know, that would look like. But I am saying surely some of that will be in-kind. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When -- when I presented this a couple weeks ago to the Court, the plan at 8-20-09 wk 136 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that time was that your office and the two D.A.'s offices would pick up the tab until the other moneys would kick in. What happened to that thought? I know there wasn't a plan, it wasn't coordinated, but it was just kind of a thought out there that it would work that way. MR. MOTLEY: Well, I mean, maybe I misunderstood you, 'cause the way I kind of looked at this time-wise was sort of a three-prong deal. July 1, '05 is when the 80/20 kicks in, and County's responsibility is clearly established at that point, 20 percent funds or in-kind. The time, October 1 of this year through June of next year, meaning the time that we think we need this service for the citizens of the county, being a time which, in my mind -- and maybe I misunderstood or we understood differently that the County would be funding this at 100 percent. The time prior to 10/1/04 would be the time left in the year, which is growing short. The budget -- this current budget year, where we would try to get some funds together, shift moneys around and see what we could do to fund it, you know, starting A.S.A.P., and fund it through the end of this fiscal year. I have talked to both D.A.'s, and -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We did hear that differently. MR. MOTLEY: Huh? Yeah, I think that was 8-20-04 wk 137 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 just a misunderstanding, maybe on my part. I -- I've talked to -- well, my answer will probably fill you in on what you want to do. The D.A.'s really were not -- I mean, they are in support of this project. They are in support of it, and they have told -- I think Judge Prohl has, you know, talked to him about it, and they've indicated their support to him as well, I believe. They were not -- nether indicated an ability at this time to be able to -- and, really, the fund shifting is really not the issue so much as coming forward with forfeiture funds or, you know, drug forfeitures or alcohol forfeitures, or something in the way of extra funding. Neither has indicated an ability at this time to be able to fund it, you know, from now through June of next year. But, then again, I want to say, I haven't really sat down with them and really gotten on -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does that mean -- when you say they don't have the ability, does that mean they don't have the funds? MR. MOTLEY: No, I'm not saying that. I'm not saying that. What I'm saying is, I've talked to them about it, and really, almost in passing. I had a hard time -- Ron Sutton has called me early this week, and I haven't had an opportunity to call him back. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. MR. MOTLEY: I've talked to Mr. Curry about 8-20-04 wk 138 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 it really, I would say, in passing a couple times. And I'm not saying that they're -- they're not able to do it. I'm just saying, at this point, they have not said yeah, this is what we can do or will do. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. MR. MOTLEY: So I really haven't gotten down to the -- you know, the nitty-gritty with them. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It sounds to me that they're not near as excited about it as we are, even. Or I am, even. MR. MOTLEY: Well, they think there's a need COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, they need to cough up some money, then, if they -- I mean, and they've got plenty to do that. MR. MOTLEY: Well -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would think. I don't know that. MR. MOTLEY: One of the things the -- if we're talking about shifting moneys around for the coming fiscal year up until the thing funds it in July, I got to thinking about it and saying, well, Mr. Sutton needs extra money in his budget for a victims' rights coordinator. Mr. Curry needs extra money in his budget. I need extra money. To get it all in there, then turn around in a month 8-20-04 wk 139 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and say let's shift the money out from Sutton's, Curry's, and my budgets so we fund it under one umbrella, is almost just a waste of time for, you know, an account. And so I'm looking at it like, if we're going to do it, put it all in one hat rather than three hats, and then put them all together. So, I mean, either the County wants to do that and feels it's a County responsibility at this time, you know, beginning this budget year, or it doesn't. And I'm going to tell you, I do believe that they are in support of the idea. As far as having money, I think that, you know, at least Mr. Sutton, I sense, thinks more that it is a function of county government to -- to do that, rather than for him to do that out of whatever asset forfeiture funds or whatever. You know, I don't know that, and I have not talked to him, so I don't want to -- you know, he's able to talk for himself. But I haven't spoken with him. I went to try and find him the other day; he was in trial upstairs, and I sat there and waited for a break, and there was never a break. And I passed his investigator a note, and he called me pursuant to that note and left a message, and I -- I read the message. I just can't -- haven't called him back. I think he called yesterday. But, in any event, that's -- that's what the deal is on this. I -- you know, and I'm sorry it's sketchy, but it did come up as a serious matter after I had 8-20-09 wk 140 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 submitted, you know, what you have already. And so I apologize for the supplemental nature of this. And I -- I feel like it's important enough an issue to not put it in with my budget now, in the sense of an amended budget, because the costs of it would sort of somewhat be obscured. I'd like to keep it out here as a separate thing, show what the costs are independently, and add it in later. Probably make it clear as to what I'm proposing. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner Baldwin, who -- who would be the supervisor for this position? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that would be -- MR. MOTLEY: Be me. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, he'd be the supervisor. I guess you could do the hiring and firing as well. MR. MOTLEY: Well, yeah -- yes. I hadn't thought about that, but yeah. I hadn't thought about that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 'Cause we looked at it as a County issue; therefore, County Attorney's office would be the likely place to put it. MR. MOTLEY: Let my say also, it is, you're correct, a County function. It is a responsibility of each prosecutor' s office in the case -- in the county, in the 8-20-04 wk 141 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 state, who handles a specific type of case to have a person on board that acts as the victims' rights coordinator. All three of us do have a person; we're required to by law. The idea of this, I think, is to put them all in -- all those responsibilities, those three offices, into one place, and have a more modernized and more consistent effort to provide these essential services to people. This is a more important service to the -- to the District Attorney's office than to mine. I -- our -- our affiliation with the statute requires that we have assault cases, and a person has bodily injury; then they are entitled to victims' rights. There's a victims' rights -- Bill of Rights that they're entitled to be informed of, and that's what we're supposed to do, give them this information and help them coordinate through the system to get the -- the services that they're due as a victim to take their thoughts into consideration in sentencing and plea bargaining and let them know when hearings are, such as that. So, a person needs to really be up on, you know, coordinating all these different cases. The D.A.'s -- not that we have just a huge number of horrible assaults or whatever, but, you know, if you have kidnappings, sexual assaults, you know, rapes, murders, et cetera, a lot of times you have higher expenses and loss of -- and loss of higher hospital bills. There are 8-20-04 wk 142 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 cases, certainly, where -- I mean, funeral costs associated with these things, and the victims' families and the victims have these costs. It's not often that we have those kind of costs. We have what you might consider more of the simple assaults. We're kind of the bottom of the severity of involvement in this deal, but we do have people that have -- you know, have a broken nose or whatever, and they need to get the -- the hospital bills paid. So, we -- it happens as more of an issue with the D.A.'s than with us. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Seems to me that each one of y'all -- each one of your offices has a person designated in there, because the law tells you to. But it -- I can -- I can see probably in your office, as an example, that that person just does it whenever that person can get to it. I mean, it's not a -- you don't focus on this issue. It's just a -- MR. MOTLEY: It's a -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- "If I can get to it, I'll take care of some of this stuff" kind of deal. MR. MOTLEY: It's a duty that has been put on that person. I don't think the person receives any additional compensation. They're -- let me say, it's not required by law. It is certainly required to know what you're doing, to take training in that, and that's part of the key personnel portion of the District/County Attorneys 8-20-04 wk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 143 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. MR. MOTLEY: Those people are going to receive training. They get -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See, that's what bothers me, is that -- at least I read the law that says that you shall have a victims' person in the -- in the county. And -- and it being such an important issue, and we -- you hear that out of the state as much as you do any other issue, and the D.A.'s are not -- I mean, you know, seems like to me they'd be jumping all over this thing, willing to participate in it financially as the startup cost. And I don't understand -- I don't get the -- their point. I don't understand their side, of why they're not down here holding a gun on us to take their money. MR. MOTLEY: Well, let me say -- let me say that I'd hate for you to take what response I'm giving you at this point as being their official or final response. I've really only scratched the surface with them. Since we last discussed this, Mr. Sutton and Mr. Curry, who was away during the time -- was on, I want to say, a two-week vacation to Alaska, so I was not able to communicate with him, and nobody in his office is really in a position to talk. 8-20-04 wk 144 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who was in Alaska? MR. MOTLEY: I think Curry was in Alaska for a week or two. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Golly, there goes our money. MR. MOTLEY: Ron was in this trial, and when I tried to get him -- and he's rather hard to get ahold of, so I want you to know that I have really only scratched the surface with them. I'd hate to come to you and be representing some sort of a position on either one of these gentlemen's part that they're not -- they're one way or the other, because I -- if you want to say their response is kind of iffy, it's because maybe I haven't more fully fleshed that out with them. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, what I'm hearing today, though, is that you're asking us to come up with $38,800. MR. MOTLEY: Well -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So I'd rather hear you say, "Why don't y'all come up with 5,000, and the D.A.'s and me are going to kick in 32,000." You know, that's what I'd rather hear in here. We don't -- MR. MOTLEY: I understand that. I understand that. And then we might even talk about post-June of '05, what to do in that deal. That's going to be the 20/80 8-20-04 wk 145 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 thing. And maybe -- but I -- but, again, I am going to say that another reason that you're talking about maybe you don't have an answer to that is 'cause I really didn't see the goal as being participation -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. MR. MOTLEY: -- during this fiscal year. I thought it was just at some point in time, we'd start talking about it up to September of this year, as far as next year. I figured it's ultimately going to be a County responsibility, and you're talking about opening up a forfeiture fund, et cetera, during the next fiscal year, and I didn't even ask them about that. And I didn't understand it that way, so I apologize for that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think Tommy has a comment. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I don't know about the 198th D.A., but I know that all -- all the -- all the seizure money that comes through the 216th court goes to the task force. So, Curry does not, on a regular basis, have any -- have any revenues to support that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm through. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess, to follow up a little bit on what you're saying, I'm confused. I thought the point of this was, it was being done right now in each 8-20-04 wk 146 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 office, and it was to try to consolidate and do it better with one office. But if each office is doing it, obviously, there's personnel doing it. Where there's personnel, there's money. So, I mean, to me, it should almost be 100 percent paid for by reductions in the two D.A.'s and your office. I don't think it should be a -- it should be a budget decrease, not a budget increase. MR. MOTLEY: Well, this is -- again, let me say that there are other counties around Kerr County -- Bandera's included, and Kendall County's included -- who have taken this job and this function to a higher level. I'm not saying anybody's not doing it now. I think we're doing what is required by the law. But I'm telling you, in my experience, we -- we send the required information to the people, or they're provided the information, and I'm going to say in excess of 90 percent of the time, we get no response. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. MR. MOTLEY: And I think Bruce has said the same thing. And, you know, it may be that what we ought to do to fulfill the intent of this law is to say, "Maybe you don't understand," or maybe approach them -- more bells and whistles the first time. I'm not sure. Maybe what we're doing is just a little bit dry, and they're not -- they're not interested. This is a right -- victims of crime have 8-20-04 wk 147 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 rights under this article in the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Victims, you know, Bill of Rights. And they have all -- you know, y'all are familiar with being informed when the guy's let out of prison, being informed when the sentencing is. They have a right to make statements, and all that takes coordination, time, and effort. What we do, and I think what Mr. Curry does, is send them a letter fairly routinely and say, "These are your rights," you know. "Call us if you've got any questions" kind of a deal. And I think that complies with the statute. And -- but if you want to comply with the spirit of what they're saying, I think they want to recognize that people who are victims of crimes -- violent crimes, assaultive crimes and such, have been left out of the system forever, and that we -- the system tends to look only at the defendant and what that individual's rights are under the law to not incriminate himself and to have due process, have an attorney at all critical stages of the proceedings. So, we've always focused on this person, and the victim over here is saying, you know, "I've lost my job." You know, "I'm not ever be able to work again; I'm in a wheelchair. Who's going to look out for me?" And I think that the Legislature, you know, many years ago has decided that was somewhere that we ought to be looking, and -- and also giving some meaningful assistance and information to 8-20-04 wk 148 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 people who have been victimized by violent crime. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MR. MOTLEY: So now we want to take it up a notch. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we need to probably talk to the D.A.'s about it as well, get their input. MR. MOTLEY: And I will continue, you know. And I -- my understanding is -- and I apologize on this thing. I really -- I kind of thought we were in the interim deal, very -- maybe more preliminary budget stages than we're in now. I apologize for not having a little bit more information about this to you now, but it may be, by the next time that we meet, that I can have something a little bit more fleshed out and give you some more definitive position by the D.A.'s. Maybe something in writing would be good. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And some money. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It sounds like one possible alternative is not to staff this until June '05. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But it needs some -- needs the D.A. input. Needs some more -- MR. MOTLEY: Let me say, on behalf of my office, I have some funds available if -- if a line item 8-20-04 wk 149 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 transfer were allowed by the Court. I'm going to tell you, it's not -- you know, I mean, we're talking more in the neighborhood of maybe $4,000, something like that. These funds are due to the vacancy in my office. It's going to be, you know, a couple-three months worth of salary that will not be expended for that Assistant County Attorney position, so that money, by the end of this year, would be available this year or carried over to next year, something like that. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. MOTLEY: To partially fund it. But I know that's not the 10,000 bucks or whatever y'all are looking for. JUDGE TINLEY: Is that it? Thank you. Ms. Rector, are you -- you owe us three minutes. MS. RECTOR: I owe you three minutes? I thought, since I was last, I could talk the rest of the afternoon. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, if you give us your three minutes back, maybe we'll give you a little of it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where is she? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Page 38. JUDGE TINLEY: 38. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But she's standing right in front of you. 8-20-04 wk 150 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. MS. RECTOR: I'm right here. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Paula, Paula. MS. RECTOR: I'm right here. JUDGE TINLEY: Number one, I'm glad you didn't make a liar out of me when I said your postage was going to come down this year, 'cause I made you my poster child on -- MS. RECTOR: Well, you can even paint a bigger picture, 'cause I think I'm going to be able to lower it a little more. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, you can have a little time to do that. MS. RECTOR: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Take your liberty, ma'am. MS. RECTOR: Yes, okay. I think, first of all, I have been doing some research over the last several weeks, and -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: God. MS. RECTOR: -- for your reading pleasure. (Handed out documents.) Kind of a little information on the kind of money that passes through my office on a yearly basis. The kind of money that we generate from collecting from other taxing jurisdictions that goes into the General 8-20-04 wk 151 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Fund. And I did use the counties Cherokee, Hood, Lamar, and Rusk Counties as a basis for my information, and I put some graphs and charts together for everyone, and kind of -- so we can compare apples to apples on some of this information, and why some of these other county offices -- why the staffing is so different than mine. And, hopefully, this will paint a little bit clearer picture. Some of those counties do not do anything but vehicle registration. They don't collect taxes and they don't do voter registration. They farm out their collections, a lot of them, to Appraisal District. In some counties, that works well, and some counties it doesn't. And also, some of the added responsibilities that we will be seeing coming our way this next budget year from the state level as they're -- the trickle-down effect; they're dumping more and more on us as we go, and there's going to be a lot more duties and responsibilities that we're going to be liable for this next year. And also, a little bit about how many more -- how much more work my office has done this last year compared to the year before in motor vehicle transactions, and what the State bases their work -- number of workstations on and that type of thing. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I -- I appreciate you doing this, spending the time doing this, because this is a -- you know, it's very, very difficult to compare county 8-20-04 wk 152 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. RECTOR: It is. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I went -- I think probably every Commissioner up here, and probably the Judge, have tried to do this and gone through counties, and it's just really hard to do. MS. RECTOR: It's very difficult. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mr. Nicholson made a stab at it this year, and information like this goes a long ways in explaining the basic information that Commissioner Nicholson did, and there are some differences. JUDGE TINLEY: I would be ecstatic if each office in this county were to do this same thing. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: And provide this information COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: We can scratch the surface, like I started doing last year, but this is much more definitive information, and it's much more meaningful. MS. RECTOR: Well, it kind of got my interest, because I know that -- that it was just on the surface information that we started off with, and I thought I'd jump into it a little deeper. Some of the information I could not get from the counties, because they don't perform 8-20-04 wk 153 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that particular function, but I think it gives you a good idea of what actually takes place in those counties. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it shows the -- the big difference -- where the big difference is and why there than that, but I'm sure you don't want to hear about how many square miles of water they have in each county and how many residents they have and how many -- whether it's a bedroom community or that type of thing. So -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see you have beer and wine in your office, though. MS. RECTOR: Yes, I have beer and wine, if you'd like to join me at 5 o'clock. JUDGE TINLEY: And she's got the key. MS. RECTOR: And I've got the key. You know, I just wanted to kind of touch on the amount of commission that goes to the General Fund from performing these duties, as far as, like, collecting for the City of Kerrville, City of Ingram, the school districts that I collect for, the water accounts, and also the commissions that we collect off of issuing tax certificates for the title companies when properties are sold. And this past year, there was $326,656 that went into the General Fund, just generated off of commissions from my office. There was 27 million 336 8-20-04 wk 154 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 dollars passed through my office last year in taxes, vehicle registrations, sales tax, that type of thing, and my office accounts for every single penny of that. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's a good piece of work. MS. RECTOR: Thank you. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Appreciate you doing that. MS. RECTOR: And also, all of this -- as the county grows, and I've also put in here the number of new registered voters in the last year, that we are averaging about 255 new registered voters a month in my office. That's new registered voters. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Really? How many? MS. RECTOR: 255. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A month? MS. RECTOR: A month. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: New? MS. RECTOR: Yes. Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is a lot. MS. RECTOR: My Vehicle Registration department -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A lot of voters. Need to go get them. MS. RECTOR: -- we did 5,255 more 8-20-04 wk 155 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 transactions last year than the prior year, and we're averaging about 51 new residents coming from out of state into Kerr County a month. JUDGE TINLEY: How many? MS. RECTOR: 51. JUDGE TINLEY: 51? MS. RECTOR: Mm-hmm. That -- we're basing that on the vehicle registration numbers. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What transactions is -- total account of everything that goes on, right? MS. RECTOR: Yes. Yes. And I think on one of the pages, I showed -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The last page. MS. RECTOR: Yes, on the clerk transactions, they did 65,944 transactions, compared to 60,689 the prior year. And that's with five clerks. The State averages 10,000 transactions per clerk, and we're averaging over 13,000 per clerk right now. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good document. MS. RECTOR: Thank you. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you want to reduce your staff there, you're telling us? MS. RECTOR: Oh, no. And I'm not asking for any more, either. As a matter of fact, I've only added one new person in 18 years, so I think that -- 8-20-04 wk 156 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Would you like to hold a workshop on how you put all this information together so that the other departments could do likewise? MS. RECTOR: Well, they could do the same JUDGE TINLEY: I understand that. Let's get on the phone, start calling. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Looks good. MS. RECTOR: Dig, dig, dig. Okay. My deputies' salaries are going to be a little different than what I anticipated. I did have a higher paid clerk that left, and hired a new one in at an entry level, so there's going to be a little bit of difference in salary there. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you speaking to the requested line or the recommended line? MS. RECTOR: The requested line. And the amount that's -- that Barbara has given me on the salaries are up to date, 'cause the new employee is reflected on these salaries, yeah. And it's a little bit less than what I'm showing you. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MS. RECTOR: That's because the new employee was hired at a little lower level, okay. And, of course, that's going to change the -- the FICA and -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 8-20-04 wk 157 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. RECTOR: -- retirement line items also. My Bonds and Insurance, of course, are up this year, because it is a new term, and all of my big bonds come due; my four-year bonds and crime prevention bonds come due this year, and that's an every-four-year thing. Employee training is staying the same. My postage, I think I did a little more refiguring on my postage, and I had lowered it. Well, of course, because last year was mass mailout of voter registration cards and everything else that goes along with that, so every other year you're going to see an increase in my postage line item. But I think -- with what I still have left and what I anticipate for this next year, I had asked for 29,600; I think I'm going to take that to 27,6. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, Paula. MS. RECTOR: Well, our delinquencies have really gone down. We're -- our taxpayers are just -- they're good. They're paying their taxes. We're staying on top of the contracts, and we're not mailing as many delinquent tax statements as we had in the past. JUDGE TINLEY: Is it because you're so sweet to them? Or because they know if they don't pay, you'll be something other than sweet? MS. RECTOR: It's a little of both. JUDGE TINLEY: I see. Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Could mean we're not 8-20-04 wk 158 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 taxing them enough, if they' re happy. MS. RECTOR: No, we just work with them. We work with them. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whoa, did you say MS. RECTOR: We didn't hear you say that. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm not one of the happy ones, by the way. I'm taxed too much. MS. RECTOR: Okay. Office supplies also is down for that very same reason, because this is an off year for mass mailout. But, again, I would like to lower that -- I had originally requested 22,700 -- to 20,700. I think we can work with that. And Books, Publications, and Dues remains the same. Telephone -- everything remains the same, except conferences, I have asked for a little more this year. And I see that -- I just got this recommended when I got back from lunch, and that it has been lowered. This year it's showing that I still have a little more than usual. That is because I haven't gone as much this year because we've just been extremely busy, but I will be gone this next week. JUDGE TINLEY: You got a late-year MS. RECTOR: I've got two. JUDGE TINLEY: That's why I didn't amortize. 8-20-04 wk 159 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. RECTOR: That's going to wipe out this here. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 24? MS. RECTOR: So I'd like to keep it at -- JUDGE TINLEY: 24. MS. RECTOR: -- what I requested, yes. JUDGE TINLEY: We'll trade you 400 for 4,000 any day, Paula. MS. RECTOR: And I have some additional CEU's that are coming up that I need to get. And then my Capital Outlay, I have asked for a -- a new computer for my supervisor in my Motor Vehicle department; it's just on its last leg. And another -- there's one thing that I would like to put before you and get your feedback, comments. A few years back, the in-county travel, of course, was separated from our actual salary, and then it was incorporated into it, and all elected officials -- Barbara, Linda, me, Jannett -- all received $600. My travel, because of the jurisdictions that I collect for, I find myself going to the city, going to the U.G.R.A., my Ingram office, sometimes twice a day, and it's costing me $60 to fill up my truck. And I am -- I mean, it's just -- it's more than the $600 can -- can handle. And I would like to request some supplement to my in-county travel salary, if at all possible, to make up for the difference in the travel. 8-20-04 wk 160 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that's basically just a -- that adjustment just goes to the salary line item. That's a good point, though. I mean, I think it affects all the -- when that was done, anyone that does not have a separate gasoline line item, their out-of-pocket expenses are increased because of the higher gasoline costs. MS. RECTOR: Years ago, there was a line item specifically in the Tax Collector's budget for city travel, that the city -- and that's part of the commission that I charge the City, is -- for the things that I do for them, and that should be part of it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is it -- everybody that travels like that, does everybody have the same number, $600? COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's different. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They are different? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. As I recall, they're different. I don't know. I mean, 'cause the Commissioners had one, too, 'cause we travel around. Ours was $1,200, as I recall. And yours was $600? MS. RECTOR: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The constable used to be 1,200 -- or it varied up to 1,800, but then we got rid of that because now we increased the gasoline line item. I'm 8-20-04 wk 161 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 not sure we didn't -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can't -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Constables are real good at shell games with us. But I think it's a good point that really affects all elected officials, every one. All of them travel, drive around the county. MS. RECTOR: I think I probably -- you know, I probably go a little more than the other ones, since I'm going to the City, sometimes I have to go to Hunt, sometimes I go to Divide School, since I collect for them. Just whenever they call and want my presence, then I -- I'm there. U.G.R.A. or Headwaters, City of Kerrville, the banks, sometimes twice a day. My Ingram office, sometimes twice a day. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where are you on working with K.I.S.D. in -- for collecting taxes? MS. RECTOR: We're still waiting for the final word from the staff in the Tax Office as to their actual date of retirement, and then hopefully they don't -- and I've told the School Board, please don't dump it on me all at once. It's going to take me a while to get their records converted over, since they have a different system. And that's something else next year that we may want to look at, as far as that's the system that I would like to go to, is what they have. And they've already got the software, 8-20-04 wk 162 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and we may could work a deal with them, because they're not going to need it, and it's brand-new. They just got it in place; this is their first year. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that something that'll happen in the 2004-2005 budget year? MS. RECTOR: Yes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or -- MS. RECTOR: Well, I'm thinking it's going to happen the end of this next budget year, in order for us to get ready to collect for them come next tax season. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we -- is that something that you just handle directly out of your office, or is there an interlocal agreement that we have to be involved with? MS. RECTOR: Well, it would just be a contract through my office to collect them. It would be for Center Point and K.I.S.D. And I know they're in the talking stages of it right now, but -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What's the number we're going to put in for travel? MS. RECTOR: 600. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought that's what it was. MS. RECTOR: An additional. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Another 600? 8-20-04 wk 163 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That goes to the salary line item. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But I think it's something that we discuss on all of them, and we'll do the elected officials all at once. I mean, I think it needs to be noted, and just remember if we forget. MS. RECTOR: I know I shouldn't drive such a big truck, but -- JUDGE TINLEY: I thought you were going to ask us to get you a more fuel-efficient vehicle. MS. RECTOR: Well, if the County would like to supply me with a vehicle, I'd be -- JUDGE TINLEY: I've got one. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bicycle with some saddlebags. MS. RECTOR: I've got a horse. JUDGE TINLEY: Maybe we don't need to provide that, then. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We can buy oats. MS. RECTOR: Take me all day to go to Ingram and back, but that's okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other thing, something I talked about in your office the other day, I thought was interesting; the direction may be going allowing payment of taxes and other fees online. 8-20-04 wk 164 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 MS. RECTOR: Well, not taxes yet. That's COMMISSIONER LETZ: Further away. MS. RECTOR: -- further away. But one of the things I'm looking at right now -- and, like I explained to you, we're waiting for all the bugs to get worked out with TexDOT, is online vehicle registrations. We've got point-of-sale stickers coming September the 9th, and that is -- we will be actually printing the registration stickers in my office, instead of the books that are supplied to us by TexDOT where we peel it out, write the information in, punch a hole in it. They've come in and installed new equipment that will enable us to -- as the person comes in to renew, all the information is keyed in, it spits out a receipt and a sticker on an 8 1/2-by-11 sheet of paper also. So, that's -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: State buys the equipment? MS. RECTOR: Pardon? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: State buys the equipment? MS. RECTOR: Yes. It's already in place. Training is going to be the 8th, and we'll be up and going on the 9th. 25 ~ JUDGE TINLEY: How many T-1's have you got in 8-20-04 wk 165 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 your office now? MS. RECTOR: The state computers? JUDGE TINLEY: T-1 lines. MS. RECTOR: Oh, T-1 lines. I don't know. I don't know, 'cause, you know, all my equipment in my Motor Vehicle department is all State-supplied equipment, as well as the one in Ingram. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Are there any fees that you're collecting that are discretionary, like not set by law or contract or something like that -- MS. RECTOR: No. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- that could be raised? MS. RECTOR: No. I'm tax certificate fees, the maximum is charging, is $10. JUDGE TINLEY: Isn't could add to the vehicle -- I forget COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: at the maximum -- well, $10. That's what's I'm there one other that we the name of it now. To the license plate fee? JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. I think it's a $2.50 deal or something like that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're at 10 on that? MS. RECTOR: The child safety -- the school 8-20-04 wk 166 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 crossing. But we don't MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. MS. RECTOR: That's to pay a school crossing guard, but we don't do that here. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. That's one we can choose to elect or to adopt or not adopt. MS. RECTOR: One thing I am going to do that I haven't been doing, and it's getting to be a bigger and bigger problem each year, is hot checks. I'm going to start charging a hot check charge. I have not done that in the past, because if they write me a hot check for the vehicle registration or the taxes, chances are they don't have the money to begin with, and if I tack on an additional $25, I'm not going to get paid. And we're having to turn more of them over to the County Attorney's office for collection, so I am -- I'm going to start charging -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good. MS. RECTOR: -- a hot check charge. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I need some new plates. Do you take hot checks? JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, she says she does. MS. RECTOR: We do. JUDGE TINLEY: She won't hang on to them. 8-20-04 wk 167 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll be down there this afternoon. MS. RECTOR: Any other questions? JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you for your work. We appreciate that. MS. RECTOR: Certainly. (Discussion off the record.) JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We've got Mr. Danny Feller with KARFA here. Apologize for the delay, Mr. Feller. MR. FELLER: That's quite all right. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Afternoon, Chief. MR. FELLER: How are you doing? Well, I guess the question I got for you, is there any left? And if there is, we'll just take it. We'd like to have it. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Danny, this is a Commissioners Court workshop, and we don't -- we're not able to make decisions on things like this, so I thought we'd just take this opportunity for -- to give you an opportunity to educate us a little bit on the need for improving communications. MR. FELLER: Yes. The reason that I'm here is, I don't know how many of you are aware that last year, we were offered a grant through the Forestry Service of $130,000, and which it would require that either the county 8-20-04 wk 168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 or any agency put in a -- a 10 percent fund. This $130,000 grant was offered for communications for Kerr County for fire, EMS, and -- and emergency repeaters to enhance our communications out here in Kerr County. I know that the Sheriff's Department has -- has got an upgraded system; y'all spent a bunch of money on it, but it hasn't -- it hasn't really helped the real outlying areas in far east Kerr County and far west Kerr County. We've still got a lot of areas out there that are inaccessible by radio or pager, or some of them are still inaccessible by phone. And we -- we've had several incidents over the past few months. We're still having a problem with the paging systems, and we had a Life Flight incident about two months ago out at Camp Mystic in which no one could communicate with the helicopter, because the guy's on the scene; we're down in -- in the canyon by Camp Mystic. And the problem that we have there is, we don't have a repeater that sends service or signal up that canyon. We've got a similar problem down here toward the county line for service down to Comfort, to their V.F.D. They serve the fire needs and EMS needs on that end of the county on the extreme end. They had an incident -- JUDGE TINLEY: When you say "that end," you're talking about southeast or -- or northeast? MR. FELLER: I'm talking about southeast. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 8-20-04 wk 169 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. FELLER: Yes. They had an incident; it was on -- I can't remember what y'all renamed the road. Used to be Wilson Creek. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Still is Wilson Creek -- no, Roane Road. No, Roane went with Wilson Creek. Wilson Creek is just longer than it used to be. MR. FELLER: Okay. Well, it was, I think, down on the -- down past where Lane Valley is, and which there was an accident there, and the dispatchers were trying to get hold of Comfort Fire Department, and they couldn't get through to them for quite a while. And, finally, I think Boerne was notified, and Boerne sent a page to Comfort to respond to the accident, to come out to the ambulance, and -- and a Life Flight landing there. Those kind of instances can be hopefully taken care of by adding to our existing communications system. And what we had in mind was adding at least one more tower that would -- that would point up toward Camp Mystic, up in that valley, South Fork, and adding another tower on the east end of the county, and putting three more repeaters on existing towers. And what that would do, it would -- it would not only give us -- enhance the signal that we've got, but it would give us a few more channels that could be isolated for instances when we have -- you know, if we have another instance like Sheppard Rees or something like that. And then you've got 8-20-04 wk 170 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 these other little fires that are going on at the same time, and it would clear up the traffic on the radio so that police, EMS and -- and whatever else, you know, city fire department, where the traffic isn't overlapping on the radios, where you have separate channels for those kind of things. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Danny, would $130,000 buy two towers and the needed repeaters? MR. FELLER: I think with -- with the figures that we had last year in the -- from David Marrs, I believe his estimate was just a little bit under $130,000. What we have in mind right now is -- is, with everything going up, the price of everything around is -- is drastically going up, we're figuring on at least a 10 percent increase. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Two more questions. One, who would own the tower -- the equipment? Two, would there be any ongoing expense for maintenance? MR. FELLER: The tower would -- the tower would essentially belong to the County, and the funds that are given are not for maintenance or repair. That's -- those are funds that are for erection and -- and activating the towers. But, ostensibly, the County -- the County would take ownership of it as soon as it's up. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I wanted to ask you a question. And it's just -- I just simply don't understand 8-20-04 wk 171 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 how those things work. Let's say that you put a tower on that hill by Camp Mystic -- MR. FELLER: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- as an example, and it can -- it can reach down in that little valley right under it, but you go on out the South Fork, and there -- and that road winds up in there, and there's many of those kinds of canyons as you go up through there. How do you -- how do you reach down into those canyons for -- for radio service? MR. FELLER: Some of those canyons are really -- I guess they're going to be inaccessible. But what we're looking at right now is, the only access that we've got to it is -- is a tower that is in the northern part of west Kerr County, and it has to come completely over the hill to even start to reach down into that canyon. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that up by T.D. somewhere? MR. FELLER: I think so. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. MR. FELLER: Yes. And, so, it has no -- it doesn't have a shot at -- at it at all. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, there's nothing out in your area -- out in the Hunt area, then? MR. FELLER: There's very little. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does Rusty -- Rusty 8-20-04 wk 172 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 have one out there? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Remember, we put one on Black Bull? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, but that's -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's out there further. MR. FELLER: That's the west tower, yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But there's nothing in the Hunt -- MR. FELLER: But there's nothing -- there's nothing there, no. JUDGE TINLEY: Hunt and South Fork area. MR. FELLER: Right, there's nothing. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is -- JUDGE TINLEY: Question. What about tower sites? Have you secured sites that there wouldn't be an ongoing lease cost for? MR. FELLER: We haven't secured a site yet. We've -- we've had a couple guys doing some studies on it, or investigation, if you will. And Camp Mystic would be an ideal site. I have not talked to the Eastmans about it, but that would be an ideal site, because you'd get out kind of in the central area of those canyons. You go in both directions, and you've got a pretty clear shot from both directions from that hi11. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. 8-20-04 wk 173 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- and, again, I don't fully understand the communications that y'all use, or the Sheriff's Department for that matter, but is this system -- like, would it be just an expansion of the Dailey Wells system that we put up for the Sheriff's Department, or is this a completely different system? MR. FELLER: It -- my understanding is -- is that it is a system that is compatible with the system that's in place, and which, when the total upgrade is done, it can be -- can be used in either direction, you know. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Upgrade of what? MR. FELLER: Upgrade of the system that is in place right now. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The Sheriff's system? MR. FELLER: Yes. And the county system, you know, the system that we use for 9-1-1, for radio, for all of our -- our fire department needs and EMS needs. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does the -- as I understand it, the Sheriff, I guess, controls -- for lack of another word, uses two channels. One is their standard channel they communicate on, and they've got another channel that they can switch to during an emergency, whether it's a fire emergency or anything else. They can put everyone on to one other channel. MR. FELLER: Mm-hmm. 8-20-04 wk 174 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you all use one of those channels when you're talking about -- in your communications, or do y'all have a separate channel that fire departments use? MR. FELLER: They have to switch those channels, yes. They come in to either the east Kerr or the west Kerr channel, and at which time we -- you know, we share communications. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think the -- MR. FELLER: And what we'd like to have is -- one of the -- one of the things -- the advantages that that would give us with the repeaters and everything, we'd be able to add more channels, and we could designate channels strictly for fire and EMS. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess, have you all -- my concern is that we just spent a million dollars on a communications system, and I want to make sure that any upgrades -- so that system is basically upgrading that same system, not putting a new system out there, and all of a sudden, us having -- creating a problem. MR. FELLER: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So I'd want Dailey Wells, who is our contractor on the other one, to have some input, you know, as to selection of locations, and will those locations really buy us $130,000 worth of coverage. 8-20-09 wk 175 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think we need a COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: From Dailey Wells. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah, and maybe COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Maybe they need to COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The timing of this whole thing is the reason Chief Feller is here today. We got a budget process going on, and -- and if we don't -- if it's the right thing to do and we don't get it done now, it's going to be another year. And it's a safety and security issue. Rightfully so, the Sheriff says that we've improved his ability to communicate to where we have coverage for 95 to 98 percent. In 1,100 square miles, that means 50, 55 square miles are maybe out of the range of the Sheriff's Department with being able to communicate with one of its deputies or an ambulance or First Responder that's not able to communicate back, so that's a lot of square miles. That may not be very dense in terms of population, but I think if we talk to deputies and First Responders and EMS and firefighters, they would all say it's kind of scary being out there, not being able to be heard back at the base 24 station. 25 8-20-04 wk COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- you started out 176 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 talking about a Forest Service grant. So -- and I -- that's MR. FELLER: That grant opens with a very short window. Last -- last year, that grant opened with a 30-day window. They offered $130,000, and we acted as quickly as possible, but I don't think we acted in time enough for you guys to -- to have a meeting and come up with $13,000 to -- to put in the 10 percent. This year, what we'd like to do is to -- you know, I'm almost sure that the window will open again this year. It'll be a very short window. They'll open it for 30 days again, and -- and offer that grant, and after that 3 0-day period, it's -- it's closed for another year. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. So, the amount -- I'm sorry, Jonathan -- the amount you're talking about is a grant amount of 130; is that correct? MR. FELLER: Yes. Last year they offered 130. This year they may offer 150,000. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My question is, we don't know that we can get done what we'd like to get done for 130, do we? MR. FELLER: According to estimates that -- that we had last year from the guy at Advantage, David Marrs, yes, we can -- we can get that done. And -- 8-20-04 wk 177 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. I mean, so, if -- I mean, I don't -- I'm pretty sure we don't have $130,000 or $150,000 laying around. MR. FELLER: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So the grant becomes a necessity. In the fire department's mind, is spending the $13,000 or $15,000 on this grant more important than increasing all the fire departments $1,000, $1,500 this year? MR. FELLER: I think so. I think so. It's -- communication is -- is the whole source of being able to get your job done. And if we can't -- if we don't get communication out there, as -- as we have in several instances, we can have the shiniest truck in the lot, but if we don't know about it, it doesn't do us any good. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where would the additional tower to the east be? MR. FELLER: I'm not sure yet. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Jon Letz' ranch. MR. FELLER: The -- what we talked about on the -- on the tower site, they -- they've said maybe put up a tower -- we've got a couple of opinions on that. Maybe just simply adding repeaters to the existing towers that would take the -- take the signal -- take that signal to an analog signal -- or digital signal, which is longer than the 8-20-04 wk 178 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 analog signal. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right. Wide-band, narrow-band. MR. FELLER: I've got some notes here. I don't know where I have them. But they would -- they would enhance the system there. (Discussion off the record.) COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One explanation I got was that if you set -- if you situate a tower somewhere in the Hunt area, that you can point the repeaters up the North Fork and up the South Fork, and it might cure all of these black holes in order to -- this may be a little ambitious; I don't know, but that's one explanation. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You know, I'd feel -- MR. FELLER: That is one of the solutions. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- more better about this analysis if we were listening to a presentation of -- of what -- what were the fire guys' needs, as developed by the Dailey Wells people, as opposed to having been developed by Advantage Communications, who had no part in the engineering of this system. I'd feel a lot more comfortable about whether -- what 130 would buy, et cetera. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. It's got to work with what we have today. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's got to expand what 8-20-04 wk 179 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 we spent a bunch of money on. MR. FELLER: I think that's right. But, also, remember that Advantage Communications is the one that provides the service. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's true. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. They've got to be compatible, or it's not going to work. But what I'm hearing from you today, Mr. Feller, is that you guys on your end are continuing to work on the technical end of it, and you merely want us to kind of be on standby if -- if it comes open. If the technical and the compatibility are good, you want to be in a position to come to us and not have to reeducate us if we -- we're, you know real smart about it; is that right? MR. FELLER: Yes, that's right. And also that, you know, if you have a heads-up with the money now, it won't be as -- as drastic a -- a request if the opportunity comes up. COMMISSIONER thought would be -- on that under Volunteer Fire Depart COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER happens, and after today we right thing to do, allocate LETZ: My recommendation -- my would be to add a line item vents . WILLIAMS: For 13? LETZ: For $13,000. And if this all feel comfortable it's the it for that. If we don't 8-20-04 wk 180 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 allocate it, $1,000 to each volunteer fire department. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is your window of opportunity for your grant? MR. FELLER: Like I said, it's 30 days, but we don't know when that window is going to open. Last year I think it opened in -- I believe it was in July, and we had 30 days. And so it -- it may come up in September. I just don't know. I don't know when they'll open that window. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But you need 10 percent? MR. FELLER: But we need 10 percent of whatever the funding is. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 13 or 15, whatever it might be. So, how do we know what we're going to put in there? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, if you get close enough, Danny will have a barbecue and get the other -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or get it out of his pocket, one of the two. Danny, you're the Fire Chief at Hunt? MR. FELLER: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fire Clef at Hunt. Are you president of KARFA? MR. FELLER: Yes. 8-20-04 wk 181 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good. Very good. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What is this company -- contractor that built our Sheriff's system? What is that name? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Dailey Wells. D-a-i-1-y, dash, Wells, W-e-1-1-s. It's an engineering -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So we can contact them? JUDGE TINLEY: I've got some information on them. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Big old contract with them. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Aren't they out of San Antonio? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: These people he keeps talking about up here on the highway, they did most of the work. MR. FELLER: I think that's right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Dailey did -- Advantage. Advantage did all the work. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what I'm concerned about, the engineering. I'm not worried about the dumb work. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Danny, I think 8-20-04 wk 182 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you've given us the information we need to start studying this, find out what we can do. MR. FELLER: I appreciate it. JUDGE TINLEY: We thank you for being here. MR. FELLER: Thank you for your time. Y'all have a good one. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, gentlemen. What else we got? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Set dates. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- we've been talking a lot about a lot of numbers, but never asked the very important question as to what's the revenue side look like? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. MR. TOMLINSON: I think I gave you a copy of -- of -- JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. Have y'all not gotten that? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't have any idea. JUDGE TINLEY: Then I am remiss. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We've been through about seven big trees of paper -- JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- in the last few days. JUDGE TINLEY: I am remiss. 8-20-04 wk 183 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (Discussion off the record.) MR. TOMLINSON: Let me make a copy of this. MS. MITCHELL: Here. (Discussion off the record.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Like Number 4 said this morning, you gave it to us way too early -- or somebody said that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I said it. Too early. JUDGE TINLEY: I assume that's what you're talking about. MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay, yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're smiling, so we must be in good shape. JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think that's why he's smiling. MR. TOMLINSON: What I -- what I've done here is -- is started out with what my estimation is of the 9/30/04 cash balance. On the second column, my estimate of tax revenue is -- is the new -- the new values times the current rates that we now have. I did that for -- for the General Fund, and all the fire protection, public library, parks, Indigent Health, and the sinking funds. I did the same thing for Road and Bridge operating fund. And then the 8-20-04 wk 184 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 second column -- I mean third column is my estimate of upcoming non-tax revenues. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fees and fines. MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. The fourth column is actually 2003-2004 budget. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What? MR. TOMLINSON: It's the budget we're operating on right now. And I did that just to show you what our fund balances would be, assuming that we -- we had the same budget this year -- or for '04-'05 as we did in '03-'04. So, you know, you -- with the budget -- with the budget number, you could -- and then they're available -- the totals are available on that printout. You can determine what the new budget will do to the fund balance at the end of '05. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, the estimated balance, the far right-hand column, tell me how you reached that number. What did you subtract from what? MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I started with Column 1, which is the September 30th, '04. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. MR. TOMLINSON: Added the new tax revenues and the new non-tax revenues. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Uh-huh. MR. TOMLINSON: And subtracted '03-'04's 8-20-04 wk 185 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 budget numbers. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, what you're saying is there's about $313,000 of additional revenue, if we had the same budget in place, which we are not going to have. MR. TOMLINSON: Right, for the General Fund. That's correct. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We just look at the -- not counting the COLA, if you look on Page 71, you get a total for the General Fund in the recommended column is 11 thousand -- 11 million, 842 thousand -- almost 843. So, we're 400,000 -- we're already 400,000 over the 2003-2004 total. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Say that again? We're already $400,000 over, before COLA or any other add-ons? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, including all the add-ons that are in the budget right now, but there's no COLA in here, so we're about $400,000 more than last year, which is the fourth column. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 400,000 plus COLA, and what do you expect, just a little over 300,000 more revenue? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, all I said was 8-20-04 wk 186 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 if we kept that same budget in place, the ending balance -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's enough. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- with the new revenue against the current expenses would be a gain of 313 on the ending balance. MR. TOMLINSON: Right. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Approximately. JUDGE TINLEY: There were a couple of adjustments that -- corrections, as it were, that needed to be made that we caught after the first run. Making those adjustments, my rough calculation revealed about $893,000 excess in requests over revenues. And that does not allow anything with regard to the COLA, of course, nor does it allow with regard to any of the adjustments that we may have made during the last couple of days. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. I'm a little bit brain-dead right now. Is the Sheriff's proposal in 18 here? 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 than $200,000. MR. TOMLINSON: No. JUDGE TINLEY: No. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That could be more COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My quick calculation of what he gave us, I got something like 260,000, if we give 8-20-04 wk 187 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 him everything he asked for. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How much? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me find it. I thought it was 260-something. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Dollars? American dollars. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: American dollars. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: American. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The proposal I made was about 225 plus payroll and rollup, which could be pretty close to that. JUDGE TINLEY: Pretty close to 260. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Then the Sheriff came along and wanted to do more for the clerical people. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm sorry. 236, by my reckoning. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $236,000 increase from one year to another. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On this sheet right here. Whoopee. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Maybe if you say it fast. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nice work if you can get it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Letz, are you through 8-20-04 wk 188 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 whining about not having enough money? Or -- JUDGE TINLEY: I thought I had given y'all a JUDGE TINLEY: -- capital expenditure stuff. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You did. JUDGE TINLEY: It's in that package, I think. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You did. JUDGE TINLEY: There were some other things attached to it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But you gave it to us JUDGE TINLEY: Oh. Well, I'll treat you like a mushroom henceforth. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to bring up another issue, if you -- just real quick. This -- the idea of eliminating the County Engineer's office, and the Attorney General's opinions and et cetera, et cetera. There's a -- there's some rumbles in the community of maybe we cannot do what we're trying to do, so I think it's -- I'm with Mr. Letz, you know. We really need to get the County Attorney in here and give us an opinion pretty quick, I think. JUDGE TINLEY: When you say rumbling in the 8-20-04 wk 189 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rumbles in the community. There's some folks that are maybe not real -- I mean, I know a couple of lawyers, but I are not one. But I know -- I can read, and how I read this thing is different from some people. There's some folks in town that say that we cannot do what we're doing, and I totally disagree. It's not the way I read it. I read it that you can't -- you can't do away with the unit road system. I understand that. You have to take that back out to the voters again; that's clear. That's half of what this thing deals with. But the other half is, do you -- does the law require you to have a licensed engineer? And no is the answer, in my opinion. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But there are some folks in town that have the opinion that, yes, you do. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the little rumbles have -- you know, I've heard from three people. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that the only A.G. opinion that's out there that we're aware of? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There are others? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think that's why -- I mean, I think that because it is, you know, not black and 8-20-04 wk 190 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 white, we need an opinion from the County Attorney. Which we've been -- I've been trying to get for going on a year. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One year, yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: I understand. I understand. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why don't you use your influence, Judge, and give us an opinion? JUDGE TINLEY: All my considerable influence, as it were, correct? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. MR. TOMLINSON: While I'm here, do you have time to go over my budget? JUDGE TINLEY: You're not on the schedule. MR. TOMLINSON: I'm not on the schedule? I know I'm not. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, yes would be my suggestion. But I have a -- a question. Do you recall what the estimated -- the first column, the bottom number, 6,665,000 -- MR. TOMLINSON: Which column, Jon? COMMISSIONER LETZ: First column. The last -- the very bottom. MR. TOMLINSON: Oh, okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's estimated balance? MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you recall what that 8-20-04 wk 191 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 amount was projected a year ago for the end of this year? MR. TOMLINSON: If I have the budget, I do. JUDGE TINLEY: Tell you what it is. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I want to see how good we were at budgeting. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You talking about the grand total down at the -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, that one. We estimated it to be -- yeah. We estimated that to be 5 million -- MR. TOMLINSON: Four hundred COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- 417,832. So, we're -- JUDGE TINLEY: 1 million, 240 thousand -- 50 thousand off. 1,250,000, approximately. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we spent 1 point -- we either spent or had additional revenue come in of $1.2 million. JUDGE TINLEY: Spent that much less. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Spent that much less, or had that much additional revenue. MR. TOMLINSON: Right, or a combination thereof. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's why -- and the reason I bring it up, I didn't know exactly what it was, but 8-20-04 wk 192 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I knew it was going to be a large number, and that's why -- when you budget a deficit budget, because we are so conservative in our expenditure side during the year, a deficit budget generally -- you know, within reason, a couple hundred thousand dollar deficit budget usually means you have a surplus at the end of the year, and you can build on. MR. TOMLINSON: That's right. And that's the way it's always been. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's always been that way. But you're just bringing that up, that -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Is it both underestimating revenues as well as overestimating costs? Or -- JUDGE TINLEY: Could be both. MR. TOMLINSON: Could be both. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably could be both, but we've always just -- I mean, as long as I've been a Commissioner, I think way before that, this County's been -- you know, we budget for everything to make sure we budget properly. And then we -- on the other side, we count the -- we're conservative on our revenue estimates as well, and you end up keeping your reserves in real good shape. JUDGE TINLEY: Instead of a train wreck. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, the Tax Collector 8-20-04 wk 193 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 touched on it a little bit in that our collection rates for -- for taxes are virtually 100 percent. And, so -- and in budgeting, it's -- for revenues, typically you wouldn't budget for 100 percent collection. So -- so, always, the collections -- the tax collections are more than -- than what we budget. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: recommends three months reserve, or is MR. TOMLINSON: We esta last -- last budget session. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: MR. TOMLINSON: I don't but I think it was Comptroller it four months? dished a policy, sir, Three. recall what that was, COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Three, wasn't it? MR. TOMLINSON: -- 25. JUDGE TINLEY: 25 percent. MR. TOMLINSON: 25 percent. COMMISSIONER LETZ: 25 percent, less than three. Or 25 percent of the total. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. MR. TOMLINSON: 25 percent of the total. I think that's right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Where's your budget? What page? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 35. 8-20-04 wk 194 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 35. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In your hymnals. It's "Bringing in the Sheaves." Money, money, money. MR. TOMLINSON: I just -- I really just wanted to explain to you what -- what I've done here. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You can start with Line Item Number 1. MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. Well, that, and plus go to -- let's see -- Page 18. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Computer? MR. TOMLINSON: No. No, I'm sorry, it's Page 17. The top number, Account 106, that's gone to zero. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which page are you on? MR. TOMLINSON: I'm sorry, Page 9. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Page 9? MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 106? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MR. TOMLINSON: That's -- from 6,125 to zero. COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. MR. TOMLINSON: Then go back to my budget on 35, and I've lowered my salary from 41,786 to 27,500. The reason I've done this is, we desperately need another 8-20-09 wk 195 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 part-time person, or at least a part-time person in my office, and for several reasons. We've had two people in there since 1990, and the volume of -- of invoices and problems have -- have continued to go up. And so what I've chosen to do -- I call it job sharing. And I'm going to start -- I'm at the age that I can draw my retirement, and so what I've opted to do is cut my hours to two days a week, or 900 hours a year, and be in the courthouse three days -- part of three days a week, and add a part-time person, plus give some of my duties to the two clerks that I have now. I -- I estimate that this will probably save the County around $8,000 to $10,000. I've -- I visited with my -- my bosses about this, and they're -- they're okay with it, so I just -- you know, I wanted -- I want to tell you what -- what I had in mind. And another aspect of -- of gaining a part-time person in the office is that I have -- I have done some -- some research, and I want some software that will allow us to do our own Indigent Health Care billing in-house, rather than -- than contracting with a third-party. Right -- right now, we're -- we're contracting with a firm called VeriClaims out of Houston to do -- to do our Indigent Health Care bills. I -- I ran across a software company in one of my conferences that -- that's named Indigent Health Care Solutions. Right now, they -- 8-20-04 wk 196 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 they are in approximately 75 counties in Texas, primarily in -- in small to medium-size counties, and they -- they offer their product at no cost to the County, except for an annual maintenance, which is -- for Kerr County, it would be approximately $12,000 a year. Our cost to VeriClaims to do the same thing is 4 percent of all -- the total cost for Indigent Health Care, so it's about -- it's about $24,000 a year. So, by -- by doing the billing in my office with another person, we can save half of that contract fee. So, what -- what I've -- what I want to do is change the job descriptions of -- of the two people that I have now, take -- take part of the -- part of their job and give it to this third person, let one of my clerks now do the Indigent Health Care work, plus do bank reconciliations. Right now, the way -- in the Treasurer's office and my office, we have -- we have four people that have signature authority on checks, and we don't -- we really don't have anyone that has the ability to do bank reconciliations that are -- that are not currently on the signatory. So, we -- we've been criticized by our auditors for that in the past. So, what I would like to do is, by having a third person, is adding that duty to one of the persons that exists in my office today that does not sign on -- on the checks. So, that -- that's still another reason that -- that I need -- that the combination of both offices, we need someone 8-20-04 wk 197 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that -- that can do the bank reconciliations that don't -- JUDGE TINLEY: The $12,000 savings essentially is going to fund this part-time person? MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, plus the savings in my salary. JUDGE TINLEY: Right. Well, even disregarding the savings in your salary, it's about $12,000, is what I'm seeing, for part-time. The other thing is, are you going to pull that Indigent Health Care services system in for the jail? MR. TOMLINSON: That we're -- I think eventually that's something that we can do. There is a provision -- well there's an A.G.'s opinion that essentially says that a person that's incarcerated automatically is indigent, and what's happened in other counties is that they -- the Commissioners Court has passed a resolution that says that they are, in fact, indigent. And when -- when that happens, all the medical expenses that are associated with inmates can be paid at the Indigent Health Care rate. The -- the company that I saw this demonstration on showed me the invoices for one month, and from Limestone County. They had -- they had bills totaling approximately $10,000. They reentered each one of those invoices under their system under the Indigent Health Care rate. That same $9,000 would 8-20-04 wk 198 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 have cost them $2,200. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Give me the figures again. It was going to cost them? MR. TOMLINSON: They paid $9,000. They would have paid $2,200 had they paid under the Indigent Health Care rate. JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff's current budget for health care, I think, is what? 60? MR. TOMLINSON: 60,000. JUDGE TINLEY: 60 to 70. COMMISSIONER LETZ: What -- doesn't it -- I mean, the flip side of that, though, is a little bit -- it gets us closer to meeting our maximum. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: For Indigent Health Care each year. But if you get -- once we hit that, it goes to the State after that. MR. TOMLINSON: That's right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But then we come pretty close to hitting it. Aren't we right under it? MR. TOMLINSON: We're close. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're close every year. MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the State picks it up if they have the money. 8-20-04 wk 199 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. TOMLINSON: Right. Another part of this -- of this program, too, it offers an automated system that -- that helps qualify people for Indigent Health Care. And that -- that part of it would go to hospital for our person over there to use to -- to qualify people with. Right -- right now, they're just using -- they don't have an automated system to do that, so I -- I think it would be beneficial for -- for -- just to save money on the contract, as well as have an automated system to be able to qualify people for Indigent Health Care. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That piece, to me, is -- is of equal importance. I think there's a savings just on that alone, qualification. MR. TOMLINSON: I didn't really look too closely at -- at that part of it, because I really didn't understand it, but I know that -- that they do have safeguards in the program to where that there's -- there's a -- a database that shows whether or not a person has already qualified for Medicare or Medicaid, or they have -- there's a database that shows addresses. And they -- when a person applies, they match that -- that information against their database. And if they have -- if they have a match somewhere, then they -- then they disqualify them. So -- so, for that reason, it helps on -- on the qualification side as well as the -- as the billing side. 8-20-04 wk 200 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When do you propose these changes take place? MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I would like -- I've already filled out my retirement papers. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I see a lot more tee times in the future. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, no. I -- you know, I intend to do -- you know, to be available to do my job. I really do. COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is October 1 would be the kickoff date? MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I -- I'd like to start trying to change -- to do the Indigent Health Care in the immediate future. JUDGE TINLEY: Phase into that starting now, huh? MR. TOMLINSON: (Nodded.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You bet. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I heard -- I think we had -- a talk that I went to was on this topic. Indigent Solutions? Is that -- MR. TOMLINSON: It's Indigent Health Care Solutions. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it looked pretty interesting. Glad you looked into it, and -- 'cause I think 8-20-04 wk 201 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 it's a way to save some money. MR. TOMLINSON: I know the last county that contracted with them was Navarro County. They're slightly larger, population-wise, than -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're pretty comparable. MR. TOMLINSON: We're fairly comparable. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sounds good to me. MR. TOMLINSON: Oh, wait, one other thing. I have one line item in my budget, 569, or Operating Equipment. If I get a new person, I need a desk, office furniture, computer for that person, so I -- I need -- I really need the $2,200 for that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that all, Tommy? 'Cause I got a question for you. MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Talk to me about our computer guru. Where are we, and where are we going with that? MR. TOMLINSON: Well -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or is this -- isn't this the proper time to do it? JUDGE TINLEY: As good as any. MR. TOMLINSON: I mean, I recommended a part-time person for -- for that department. It's in the 8-20-04 wk 202 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 budget. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did it make it? MR. TOMLINSON: I don't know; I haven't looked. COMMISSIONER LETZ: What page is that? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Technology. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you know what page it is? JUDGE TINLEY: This would be 8. MR. TOMLINSON: It's -- the part-time person is on the -- is the first item on Page 8. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, yeah, I see it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is a helper to Shaun? Is that what we -- MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, exactly. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that going to fix the problems? 'Cause the problems are back in our face again. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I -- y~ I think I made this speech last year, but - some -- some research on that with other -- counties to see how many -- how many bodies have or how many employees they have. The one -- in fact, there was one in the County ~u know, I've -- - but I have done with other they -- they -- the last Progress 8-20-04 wk 203 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 magazine about three months ago, Tom Green County. They're a larger county, but they had -- they had five people in their I.T. department. And I -- the counties I've visited with -- Guadalupe County, for example, which is slightly larger too, has -- they had four full-time people. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is probably a pretty good time for this discussion, since we -- MR. TOMLINSON: At one time -- at one time, Bandera County had one and a half people. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did they really? MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're down to where the audience -- we're just among friends here, and I don't have an opinion on this issue. I do have an observation, that the problem here is -- is dissatisfaction with Shaun's performance. And, again, I don't have any experience with Shaun, so that's not -- that's not my evaluation or my opinion. But I do hear -- recently gotten some documentation that suggests he doesn't get the job done. MR. TOMLINSON: Partly because he -- he can't; he's spread too thin. I mean, technically, he is as good as anybody I've ever known. We had a situation with -- with J.P. 2's software when we were converting from eDot Tech over to software, her system crashed right in the middle of the transition. eDot Tech would not let us have 8-20-04 wk 204 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 their code, and we didn't have any way to fix it, and he -- he is good enough that he went into their software, along with some help from -- with -- with somebody else's system, to reconstruct her database. I mean, there -- I mean, so from a technical standpoint, I mean, he's -- he's one of the only people that I -- that when we interviewed -- I think we interviewed, like, 16 to 20 people. He was the only one out of all those people that had a clue as to the kind of system that the county-wide system is. And, I mean, they had -- I mean, so those kind of people are not available that know that system. I mean, there -- there are some, but they're few and far between. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, you said -- you said -- part of your speech last year was that he was -- he's just inundated just so much more. But the other part of your speech last year was that the work that he was having to do is because of some of these offices, how they use the computer. MR. TOMLINSON: That has improved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Locking them up, and they're downloading things and basically screwing things up. MR. TOMLINSON: That's improved a lot. It really has. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That has improved? MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, it has. 8-20-04 wk 205 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or are we busy doing MR. TOMLINSON: No, that has improved. It really has. It's dramatic; it's improved a lot, really. The problem -- the problem is with -- with him and his time is that a lot of what he does has to be done off hours. Or when he -- when he's doing work on -- on the mainframe or the county-wide system, it's done when nobody else is here, because we -- you know, we choose to do that when there's not much use of the system. And so, you know, there's a lot of maintenance to be done on a daily basis for -- for the county-wide system. And, I mean, so there's -- there's times that -- on weekends and nights that -- you know, that those kinds of things have to be done, and that takes up time that -- when he should be doing something for somebody in the courthouse during -- you know, during the week, during business hours. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, what you're saying is that one of the complaints is that he's not available and physically not here, and that's probably true, because he's working after hours when no one else is here? MR. TOMLINSON: That's right. And my purpose -- my thinking is that, with a part -- with one part-time person, we would at least have -- have a body available for -- for, you know, problems during -- you know, 8-20-04 wk 206 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 during the time that he's not here. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Who's the part-time JUDGE TINLEY: Tommy's not going to be here on that frequent a basis. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What kind of person -- MR. TOMLINSON: Well, what I'm thinking is maybe a -- an I.T. major, like out at Schreiner College -- Schreiner University, that -- that wants some on-the-job experience. That has some, you know, basic knowledge of PCs. I think that's a great possibility, you know, to find a young person that's really eager to learn. I think that would be -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know if you've noticed or not, but those kind of people are a little bit different. MR. TOMLINSON: Oh, I know they are. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Boy. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've always wondered, how do they get along with each other? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, with Tommy giving up System Administrator on Page 9 and cutting back his hours along with his proposal, is this not time for us to think about that -- that work to slide under 8-20-09 wk 207 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Commissioners Court, the frontline jurisdiction over it? COMMISSIONER LETZ: We were almost there when MR. TOMLINSON: We're not -- yeah. Now, I won't -- the reason I brought this up -- I mean, the reason I wanted to talk to you about my budget today is that I just wanted you to -- you know, I mean, the -- I wanted you to be comfortable with -- with what I plan to do. And, I mean, at some point it will happen, but I don't -- you know, I don't plan on full retirement until I just know I can't, you know, do it any longer. But right now, I think that -- I feel sure that I can -- that I'm available to do, you know, the job that I need to do now. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you -- we've always -- the Court has also relied heavily on your computer knowledge to kind of oversee that whole side of the county. But in five years, ten years, whenever you decide to fully retire, is that a logical thing to leave on the Auditor, or does it fit better probably under Commissioners Court? MR. TOMLINSON: Well, it may be in that -- I hate to say this, but -- but the longevity of auditors seem to be fairly constant. I mean, so you need -- you need someone that -- that has some background or some history, knowledge about the system to be able to go from -- from one year to the next. You know, if you have a different court 8-20-04 wk 208 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that has no background knowledge of -- of the system, and you -- then you go from -- you go from zero to -- if you happen to have -- to get a new person in I.T. and you have, you know, a relatively new Court, then you have a problem. So, I -- I think there has to be some continuity in that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who in this building, besides you, has that knowledge? MR. TOMLINSON: There is no one. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The wolves are baying outside. MS. NEMEC: I know a part-timer that might have the knowledge. I'm not real sure. Jim Bullock. I think he's real computer-literate. I'm not sure how much background and education he has, but I think it's pretty extensive. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He sure is good. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Jim Bullock. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bullock. MR. TOMLINSON: Be great. MS. NEMEC: And I know he's looking for something with the County, more permanent part-time. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I know, the part-time full-time. JUDGE TINLEY: It's full-time part-time. 8-20-04 wk 209 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, full-time part-time. (Discussion off the record.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, what I'm hearing from you is you're getting old. That's all I'm hearing. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I hear differently. I hear he wants to play more golf. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, maybe that's right. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, no. My -- my bosses really don't want to appoint another person. And that's -- that's always a problem for -- for a District Judge to, you know, really find someone. And -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. MR. TOMLINSON: And, typically, they -- you know, a full-time person -- I know the -- the Auditor in Navarro County, I just mentioned a while ago, her salary's, like, $76,000. And so, you know, I -- I feel relatively sure that the next go-round, the, you know, full-time person will be costly. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you still going to serve Bandera? MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 8-20-04 wk 210 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I know Tommy's not getting old, because 38 years ago he and I were starting our next semester of classes at Baylor together. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that true? MR. TOMLINSON: That's right. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: He can't be getting old. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, our diplomas have the same names on them. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, can you still read them? The ink hasn't faded? How many years -- between you and old Don, how many years have y'all been Auditor, if you add the both of you together? MR. TOMLINSON: Don Williams? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. MR. TOMLINSON: I don't know how long Don served. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How long have you been -- MR. TOMLINSON: Since '90. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's about 14 years. MR. TOMLINSON: 14 years, yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And he was about that, something like that. So, you're right. Auditors, once they 8-20-04 wk 211 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 get in here, you can't get rid of them. That's a good thing, though. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: Let's figure out our next meeting, type of meeting, workshop or otherwise. COMMISSIONER LETZ: How long, Tommy, will it take you to come up with -- I guess rerun the report with the changes that were made today, and add a COLA in, but leave the Sheriff out still, and leave out some of the other -- MR. TOMLINSON: Leave the Sheriff out? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He's not here; we can say that. MR. TOMLINSON: Probably Wednesday would be a good day. Is that too late? COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, I don't think so. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Monday' s court. Wednesday is a real bad day for me. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, you've got -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm out all day. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thursday. MR. TOMLINSON : Should we wait till we talk to everybody else? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the ones we 8-20-04 wk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 212 haven't talked to have -- well, we haven't talked to Maintenance. I have a big -- or the District Clerk, either. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: District Clerk, Courthouse Maintenance, Juvenile Probation, Environmental Health, Rabies and Animal Control, Extension Service, County-Sponsored. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioners Court and County Judge, Collections. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tuesday afternoon to go over all those? Tuesday morning? Either one. Or, rather, Tuesday afternoon. JUDGE TINLEY: Tuesday afternoon. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tuesday afternoon, 1 o'clock? MR. TOMLINSON: I mean, I can go ahead and do a COLA without meeting, and that's the -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. MR. TOMLINSON: -- the worst part of this, is trying to calculate the COLA and then recalculating all the benefits. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What about Monday afternoon? We got a short agenda. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can't get it posted in time, can we? Not unless we meet at 3:00. 8-20-04 wk 213 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, there -- there is a -- just for information, there -- and you may have already told them and I didn't hear it, but the retirement number, it includes the -- the possibility of -- of cost-of-living raises for retirees. JUDGE TINLEY: That's what Ms. Nemec was talking about, and I think it's on our next court agenda. MS. NEMEC: For Monday at 10 o'clock. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, we're going to hear about that Monday. So, we're looking at Tuesday afternoon? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, going back to Commissioner Williams' idea, we can -- I believe we can recess this one and reconvene it Monday. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we could, too. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That way we don't have to repost the meeting. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And then we can post a separate one for later in the week. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can't -- I mean, as I -- I know it's 24 hours, but is it -- is it a strict 24 hours, or is it 24 business or work -- you know what I'm saying. Do you count weekends? JUDGE TINLEY: I, frankly, don't know. I'd, at this point, have to err on the side of being 8-20-04 wk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 214 conservative, and say anything past Saturday at this time, out of luck. But I don't know. COMMISSIONER LETZ: 72 hours, right? So that's -- earliest we could meet would be Monday at 3:00 right now. JUDGE TINLEY: That's if we post it. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just tell me when to be here, and I'll be here. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I -- I customarily have my juvenile detention docket Monday at 3:00. At this point, I don't know whether I'm going to have any youngsters incarcerated or not that I'll need to act upon, or whether I've got any others, necessarily. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, let's just go with Tuesday. Can we make it -- can we make it a little -- JUDGE TINLEY: 1:30 Tuesday? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. I'll move something up a little bit. I've got a meeting scheduled with L.C.R.A. and U.G.R.A. both at 1:30, but I can probably move that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Don't forget. JUDGE TINLEY: Is that where -- where we're shooting for, 1:30 Tuesday? COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's fine. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let me suggest also 8-20-04 wk 215 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that -- he's shot Wednesday; I'm shot Thursday. We can go ahead and post -- include on that posting for 9 o'clock Friday also, in case we need it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sure. COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the date, then? What -- is that the -- is that Friday before Labor Day weekend? JUDGE TINLEY: Today's the 20th. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It would be Friday, the 27th. COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, that's -- Labor Day weekend's the following week. That's fine. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: 'Cause I won't be here that Friday, but I will be here the 27th. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's your ultimate alternate date you want to shoot for? JUDGE TINLEY: 27th. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 27th. JUDGE TINLEY: Do it next Tuesday at 1:30, and then the 27th beginning at 9:00. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: That it? We'll stand adjourned. (Budget workshop adjourned at 3:09 p.m.) 8-20-04 wk 216 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF KERR The above and foregoing is a true and complete transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 22nd day of October, 2004. JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk BY : ______ _~_ -w_i_fG -- Kathy anik, Deputy County Clerk Certified Shorthand Reporter 8-20-04 wk