Denton County Commissioners Court Courthouse on the Square 110 West Hickory, Denton, Texas * * * * * Formal Agenda Minutes
Not Official Minutes.  For official minutes, please contact the County Clerk at 940-349-2012.

July 25, 2000

Be it remembered that Commissioners Court of Denton County, Texas, met on this the 25th day of July, 2000 with Judge Kirk Wilson presiding. Commissioners Sandy Jacobs, Jim Carter, Scott Armey and Jeff Krueger were present, along with deputy clerk Kathleen Bransford, when the following proceedings were had, to wit;

Court opened with an Invocation led by Corporal William Rogers of the Denton County Sheriff's Office and was followed by the Pledges of Allegiance to the American Flag and the Texas Flag led by Jimmie Vann, Fire Chief of the Mayhill Fire Department.

Corporal Rogers: Merciful and Almighty Father, we come to You in prayer and thanks that Your magnificent love continues to pour down upon Your servants here in Denton County. We ask Your divine blessing upon those here assembled, that all who gather here today and in future generations will know that You are God and through You all things are possible. All this and those prayers which we hold in our hearts, we pray through our Savior and our Redeemer, Jesus Christ. Amen.

ITEM 2 PUBLIC INPUT

ITEM 3 CONSENT AGENDA (Item 7A pulled)

COUNTY AUDITOR

4.B) Accept the Fiscal 1999 Annual Audit of the Jail Commissary - County Judge.

PURCHASING

5.A) Approval of specifications and authority to advertise for Vehicle Parts, Bid #07-00-1380, and any appropriate action - County Judge. (Briefing 7-18-00)

BUDGET

6.B) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102070 for Computers for 211th District Court in the amount of $77 - County Judge. (Briefing 7-18-00)

6.C) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102080 for Evidence Expense for Sheriff's Department in the amount of $3,000 - County Judge.

6.D) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102100 for Polygraphs for Sheriff's Department in the mount of $2,000 - County Judge.

6.E) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102120 for Training/Education for Records Management in the amount of $2,100 - County Judge.

6.F) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102160 for Westlaw Legal Services for Criminal District Attorney in the amount of $1,100 - County Judge.

HUMAN RESOURCES

7.B) Approve revision to the Sick Leave Pool Policy (#3.9B) - County Judge. (Briefing 7-25-00)

7.C) Approve adoption of a Language Pay Policy (#6.5) - County Judge. (Briefing 7-25-00)

COUNTY CLERK

8.A) Approval of minutes for July 11, 2000, Formal Session - County Judge. (Briefing 7-25-00)

COUNTY PLANNING

10.A) Approve Final Plat for Westfield Estates, Precinct 4, and approval of privately maintained public easement which are not dedicated roads to Denton County and are not to be maintained by Denton County - County Judge.

NON-DEPARTMENTAL

12.A) Approval of building usage by Benjamin Lyon Chapter, Natalie Massengale, for the use of the south side of the Courthouse Lawn and the Commissioners Courtroom in case of inclement weather, on Sunday, September 17, 2000 at 3:00 p.m. until 6:00 p.m. - County Judge. (Briefing 7-118-00)

LEGAL

13.B) Approval of A) Denton County Commissioners Court Resolution and B) Tax Abatement Agreement between AIL Investment, L.P., and Denton County, Texas - County Judge. (Briefing 7-18-00)

13.C) Approval of the Trade Contract Agreement No. 90-9472 between Denton County and Howard-McKinney, Inc. for the Pre-Trial Center, Enforcement Center, Kitchen Expansion, Canopy Addition and Security Enhancements of the Sheriff's Department - County Judge. (Briefing 7-18-00)

Move to approve Consent Agenda with the exception of Item 7.A by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0362

ITEM 4 COUNTY AUDITOR

4.A) Approval of Bill Report and the Auditor's Monthly Financial Report..
(Payments from Adult Probation, Community Corrections, Pre-Trial Services and District Attorney Check Fee Fund are presented for recording purposes only.)

DELETION from the General Fund, $300.00 to Michael Weygandt, per department.

ADDITION to Juvenile, $57.00 to 5 Star Vacuum Repair, to repair a steam cleaner.

Move to approve Bill Report as amended by Comm. Krueger, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0363

ITEM 5 PURCHASING

5.B) Approval of award of RFP #08-99-1248 for Energy Efficiency Improvements to Control Systems International and any appropriate action - County Judge.

Move to approve by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Krueger.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0364

5.C) Approval of rejection of all bids for Emulsified Asphalt, Bid #04-00-1332, and any appropriate action - County Judge.

Move to approve by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Armey.
Motion Carried 4-0-0 (Comm. Jacobs stepped out of the courtroom)
Court Order #00-0365

5.D) Approval of specifications and authority to advertise for Emulsified Asphalt (CRS-2, CRS- 2H, AEP, SS-1, CRS-1P), Bid # 07-00-1387, and any appropriate action - County Judge.

Move to approve by Comm. Krueger, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0366

ITEM 6 BUDGET

6.G) Approve the designation of Mary Horn, Tax Assessor/Collector, to calculate and publish the effective and rollback tax rates for Denton County for tax year 2000 - County Judge.

Move to approve by Judge Wilson, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0367

6.H) Accept the submission of the appraisal roll for the 2000 tax year from the Tax Assessor/Collector - County Judge.

Move to approve by Judge Wilson, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0368

ITEM 7 HUMAN RESOURCES

7.A) Approval of Order Making Appointments. (The appointments for July 25, 2000, have been posted and advertised; and interviews were conducted as set forth in the Denton County policies adopted by the Commissioners Court, except as otherwise stated in the appointment orders. These appointments are within the budgetary restraints.) The following Order Making Appointments were approved: Shawna Hoagland, D.O. II/Medical/Jail Health; Lillie Henry, Voter Registration Coordinator/Elections Administration; Jennifer Nations, Deputy Clerk/Recording/Passports/County Clerk; Fanny Orozco, Deputy Clerk/Recording/Passports/County Clerk; Casey Finke, Deputy Constable/Constable Pct.6.

Move to approve with the exception of Items 7A-1 and 7A-2 by Comm. Armey, second by
Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0369

7.D) Approve the structuring of Centralized Road & Bridge and how it relates to the Road Superintendent position and Pubic Works Director, and any appropriate action - Commissioners Court.
Comm. Jacobs made a presentation to the court.

ITEM 9 HEALTH

9.A) Approval for the County Judge to administer the Oath of Office to Doctor Alvarez to continue his role as Health Authority - County Judge.

Move to approve by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0370

ITEM 11 STANDING ITEMS

11.A) Approval of any appropriate action regarding project development, construction progress, and change orders to ongoing Denton County Projects: Sheriff's Office/Jail, Centralized Road & Bridge, Carroll Building, Denton County Courts Building, Denton County Annexes, and future Denton County Satellite Facilities - Commissioners Court.

NO ACTION

11.B) Approval of any appropriate action regarding ongoing, planned, and proposed county and state transportation projects; Denton County's Better Safer Roads Program; and any necessary action regarding the modification of the Denton County Master Thoroughfare Plan - Commissioners Court.

NO ACTION

11.C) Approval of any action regarding Denton County boards and committees - Commissioners Court.
Comm. Krueger is still looking for a veteran in Precinct One to apply to the Veteran's
Advisory Council.

11.D) Approval of nomination for Judge of County Criminal Court Number Five and any appropriate action - County Judge.

NO ACTION

ITEM 12 NON-DEPARTMENTAL

12.D) Approve rental and use of 4 used vehicles for $100 per day, per vehicle by Amadea Production Company - County Judge.

Move to approve by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0371

ITEM 13 LEGAL

13.D) Approval of Confinement Expenses Collection Agreement with Municipal Services Bureau - County Judge. (Formal 7-18-00)

Move to approve by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Krueger.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0372

13.E) Approve clarification of Denton County Commissioners Court Order # 00-0347 to include the duties of Road Superintendent. - County Judge.

Move to approve by Judge Wilson, second by Comm. Armey.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0373

ITEM 12 NON-DEPARTMENTAL

12.B) Approval of Denton County endorsing a Resolution of a cooperative application to seek approval to update and revitalize the Lake Trail Region, under the Texas Travel Trails Regional program being offered through the Texas Historical Commission - County Judge.

Move to approve by Judge Wilson, second by Comm. Krueger.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0374

ITEM 15 RECESS

ITEM 16 RECONVENE

ITEM 12 NON-DEPARTMENTAL

12.C) Approval of any appropriate action regarding the Justice Information System - Commissioner, Precinct 2. (Briefing 7-18-00)

Comm. Jacobs presented the Computer Justice System Proposal and the following people spoke in support of the proposal: Judge L.D. Shipman, 211th District Court; Judge Darlene Whitten, County Court at Law #1; Constable Jim Dotson, Precinct One; Lee Ann Breading, First Assistant District Attorney; Ken Metcalf, Assistant Director of Juvenile Probation Services; Cynthia Mitchell, Denton County Clerk; and, Kevin Carr, Director of Information Services.

The following Court Orders for this item were approved under Budget Item 6.A: Approval of Denton County's 2000/2001 Budget.

6.A) (1) Move to approve the Budget Amendment out of Unappropriated Contingency in the amount of $37,950.00 to go toward the Computer Justice System for the purpose of the warrants and court assignments by Comm. Jacobs, second by Judge Wilson.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0375

6.A) (2) Move to place the entire cost of the Computer Justice System in a separate line item so that the Director for Information Services can better manage and administrate the process by Comm. Jacobs, second by Judge Wilson.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0376

6.A) (3) Move to add additional funding to improve maintenance, support and training of the Computer Justice System in the amount of $138,000.00 with an additional impact of $15,300 added to next year's budget by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0377

6.A) (4) Move to put a commitment in the budget to improve the document imaging system over the next three years, with a placement of $60,000 as a down payment and two renewal payments, by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter with a friendly amendment that a letter be sent to all department heads, who use this system, requesting them to also commit to this proposal, with a dollar amount, if at all possible.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0378

ITEM 15 RECESS

ITEM 16 RECONVENE

ITEM 14 EXECUTIVE SESSION

For purposes permitted by Texas Government Code, Section 551.071 - Contemplated or Pending Litigation or Settlement Offer, Section 551.072 - Real Property, Section 551.074 - Personnel Matters, and Section 551.076 - Security.

Move to Convene in Executive Session by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Armey.
Motion Carried 5-0-0

CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION
RECONVENE IN FORMAL SESSION

14.A) Real Property: Texas Government Code, Section 551.072: Real Property - Commissioners Court.

14.B) Deliberation regarding security procedures and devices - Texas Government Code, Section 551.076 -Commissioners Court.

14.C) Consultation with Attorney: Pending Litigation - Texas Government Code, Section 551.071 (1)(A) Tarrant County v. Denton County, pending in the District Court of Parker County, Texas 43rd Judicial District, Cause No. 44051 - Commissioners Court.

14.D) Consultation with Attorney: Contemplated Litigation, Texas Government Code, Section 551.071(1)(A) Identification of parties and claims regarding possible breach of warranties and defects as relates to the Denton County Courts Building - County Judge.

NO ACTION ON ITEMS 14A THROUGH 14D

14.E) Consultation with Attorney, Pending Litigation, Texas Government Code, Section 551.071(1)(A), Harvard McBrayer v. County of Denton, David Berry, A. Cavazoe, Cause No. 2000-40126-0362 pending in the 362nd District Court of Denton County, Texas - County Judge.

Move to approve the recommendation of Counsel to the Sheriff's Office that this matter be assigned to the District Attorney's Office, Civil Division by Judge Wilson, second by
Comm. Armey.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0379

14.F) Consultation with Attorney, Contemplated Litigation pursuant to Section 551.071(1)(A), Government Code; Discuss potential litigation re: Claim of James Casey - County Judge.

Move to approve the recommendation of Counsel to the Sheriff's Office that the court accept the settlement offer from James Casey in the amount of $20,.000 to come from the Sheriff's Office budget under attrition or the jail budget and move it to the lawsuit settlement line item and that the County Judge be authorized to sign the settlement agreement and the release form by Comm. Carter, second by Judge Wilson.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0380

ITEM 15 RECESS

ITEM 16 RECONVENE

ITEM 6 BUDGET

6.A) Approval of any action regarding Denton County's 2000/2001 Budget - County Judge.

(The following is a paraphrasing of the highlights of the budget discussion.)

Item 6 County Clerk

Cynthia Mitchell, Denton County Clerk, appealed to the court on three items on her budget: Computer Services Expense, New Hires and the Records Management Fund. The Computer Services Expense is a direct line to Austin's State of Texas Bureau of Vital Statistics for birth and death certificates. This cannot be cut; in fact, she pointed out that this amount should probably be doubled from $7,500 to $15,000 because of the increased workload from incorporating into her department the City of Denton's records. She noted that James Wells, County Auditor, has already included the additional revenue of approximately $42,000 to reflect the added revenue from the City.
Ms. Mitchell appealed to the court to allow her the two positions of Assistants to the Chief Deputy Criminal Courts and to the Chief Deputy Civil/Probate/Mental Health. These assistant positions would allow for training, in case of the absence of the Chief Deputy, and greater efficiency within both departments as demonstrated by her Recording Department, in which the Chief Deputy has an assistant. Under the current step-plan, each position is at a grade 19, step 2 at $24,311.00.
Ms Mitchell appealed the Records Preservation Fund Balance deficit and requested the remaining $86,100.00 be taken from the general revenue fund. Total contract award amount to Government Records Services, Inc. (GRS) is $1,017,600.00 for a five-year award, representing a savings to the county of $85,000. Currently, the Records Preservation Fund is $750.00. The deficit comes from the cost of processing a document, $6.16, and the charge to the consumer of $5.00. This deficit would be greater and the processing much slower, 6-8 weeks as opposed to 3-4 days, if this were done in-house. The Auditor's office estimated an increased revenue of $150,000 and, with an increase in the fee to file plats by $10.00 plus a $5.00 fee for certifying assumed name certificates, her department will be offsetting expenses by $31,500.00.
Judge Wilson asked the Budget Director how the deficit was being covered presently.
Donna Stewart replied there is not a deficit now but will be, based on the award of contract scheduled to be approved next week.
Ms. Mitchell informed the court that another offset the contract with GRS provides is three additional services that the county never had before: the automation of plat filing, the automation of marriage licenses and the indexing of Commissioners Court minutes.
Judge Wilson asked if there was anything else her office could adjust in fees to increase revenue.
Ms. Mitchell confirmed that all offsets were already included except the cost for plat cabinets. This expense will be reduced from $3400 to $1800 because only one a year rather than three a year are necessary with the automation provided by GRS, Inc.
Comm. Armey asked Ms. Mitchell if the cost per document to GRS of $6.10 is the same charged to other entities.
Ms. Mitchell believes this is probably a better deal than most other counties because of the additional hardware/software GRS will be providing and the transition provided by them for this department to go from a totally manual operation to a computerized one.
Comm. Armey asked to see the fees charged to other counties so he could make a comparison. He then asked the County Auditor if the Records Preservation Fund required a fund balance at the end of the year.
James Wells replied not necessarily. The paradox of this fund is that every document brought in costs the county more than it generates. But, the fee is set by statute so the county has no recourse.
Comm. Armey inquired as to who pays these fees?
Ms. Mitchell clarified that the fee is assessed on all documents to be filed and recorded, i.e., the buyer and seller of property.
Comm. Armey surmised that the original intent of the fee was to cover the costs of the processing. If the cost of processing has gone up, then perhaps that needs to be added to the legislative agenda.
Comm. Jacobs agreed that not only should it be added to the legislative agenda but also the county clerk's association should be studying the issue, as well as the Conference of Urban Counties.
James Wells noted that an increase to $10.00 was vetoed a couple years ago.
Comm. Armey believes its only fair that this be a user fee and should not depend on tax dollars.
Judge Wilson stated that if there is a $78,000 fund balance, it be reduced down to $10,000.
Comm. Armey agreed with Judge Wilson's recommendation that before using tax dollars, the fund balance be reduced.
Comm. Jacobs also agreed.
James Wells reminded the court that the expense will always exceed the fee by approximately 20%. This deficit has existed for the past 6-8 years.
Ms. Mitchell stressed that this contract will provide a lot of automation the county has never had before.

Item 17 Constable, Pct. 5

Constable Mike Ballard asked the court to reconsider his request for an administrative assistant due to a increase in warrants and reliance on contract labor in the amount of $6300.00. 350 new warrants plus approximately 125-150 civil papers are processed in his office monthly. An additional 850 new warrants will be forthcoming from the JP#5 office due to their backlog, not including the warrants coming from JP#1. Presently, only one person is handling all of the administrative duties in the office. Budget impact would be approximately $23,000 and would be offset, he believes, by the revenue brought into his office by being able to process warrants faster, thereby getting them out to his deputies sooner.
Comm. Jacobs asked how does the number of personnel in this office relate to the number in other constables' offices.
Donna Stewart answered that all constable offices has one clerical position, with the exception of Pct.2.
Comm. Armey compared this request to the request of Constable, Pct. 3. The difference is that Pct. 3 has requested his position to begin January 1, 2001.
Donna Stewart also noted that Constable, Pct. 3 gave up a vehicle in exchange for personnel.
Comm. Krueger asked James Wells does 100% of the $50.00 collected by the warrant officer go into county coffers and what are his revenue projections?
James Wells affirmed that 100% does go into the county and he projects $100,000, although that is not reached every year.

Item 15 County Treasurer

Cindy Yeatts Brown, Denton County Treasurer, requested only a reallocation of $1,000.00 from her recommended Postage Line item of $13,000.00 to her Training and Education line item, increasing that to $3,125.00 with no change in the recommended budget.

Move to approve reallocation in the County Treasurer's office by reducing Postage line item
by $1,000 and increasing Training and Education line item with that amount by Comm.
Armey, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0381

Item 12 Justice of the Peace, Precinct Two

Judge Deborah Hollifield appealed the deletion of the new employee position. Court activity has increased by 1/3 over this period from last year so she expects the court's activity to nearly triple over the entire year. Presently, her office has five people on staff. In order to keep up with the growth in Constable Pct. 2's office from originally 4 deputies to presently 20 deputies and reserves, she needs an additional deputy court clerk with an impact to the budget of $26,000.
Comm. Jacobs asked Donna Stewart how the number of personnel in this office compares to the other JP offices?
Donna Stewart: JP #1 has seven, the others have five and JP 6 has three.
Jeff Krueger asked James Wells about the revenue from this office.
James Wells informed the court that up through June of 2000, fines increased 50%.

Item 19 Child Protective Services

Albert R. Hiller, Child Protective Services (CPS) Supervisor II, presented to the court, along with the President of CPS, Howard Hunt, requested an additional $65,000 to fund new staff to serve the increasing need of families in Denton County. Of that $65,000, there will be an offset of approximately $16,000 from Title IV-E reimbursement. CPS has been able to increase services over the last eight years without increasing the cost to the county due to Title IV-E and jurors donating their juror fee.
Comm. Armey asked if the county provides employees for CPS.
Mr. Hiller said they are asking for the county to fund 1 1/2 employees. Presently, the county does not have any employees funded on staff.
Comm. Jacobs asked Donna if the budget last year for CPS was 103,000, did she place any increase in the budget for this year?
Donna Stewart replied no.
Comm. Armey asked Mr. Hiller and Mr. Hunt to prioritize and, if the county cannot budget for the additional 1 ½ employee, what else might be acceptable.
James Wells explained to the court that there is a direct correlation between county funding and the federal reimbursement, being approximately 25% of the total from the county.

Item 14 Criminal District Attorney

Lee Ann Breading, First Assistant District Attorney, announced that the initial request for additional staff of three prosecutors and one investigator for the County Criminal Court #5 will be not necessary. The office can operate with the current staffing level at least until October 1, 2001, even if the court decides to bring the judge on in January of 2001. If the court becomes fully operational before October, this might have to be revisited. The DA's office requested reclassification of several positions, only one of which the DA is appealing - Chief of Administration. A reduction of contract labor would totally offset this reclass.
Comm. Armey asked if this took into consideration the raises that will be given.
Ms. Breading responded that raises were taken into consideration.
Comm. Armey asked if the Director of Human Resources had been informed about the requested reclass.
Ms. Breading did not believe Ms. Phillips had been informed but will do so.
Ms. Breading said the majority of this office's appeal is the Proposed Attorney Pay Grade and Salary Schedule. Ms. Phillips and she have been continually working on this proposal and have included a review of the DA's operation in Dallas, Tarrant and Collin counties, all of which are themselves undergoing restructuring. Their proposal includes the following: separate attorneys from the step plan; maintain Commissioners control over the fiscal responsibility of the county by setting target salaries; allow the District Attorney to hire, promote, laterally transfer or demote at the target salary of a pay grade for an attorney position or at 4% above or 4% below the target salary and within budgetary constraints; maintain consistency of attorney salaries within pay grades; allow the District Attorney to hire within policy without Commissioner Court approval; and, set one salary for one position to maintain stability of salaries among attorneys at the same level.
Donna Stewart pointed out that the salaries set by the DA's office is slightly less than the 8% proposed by the court and would have an impact on the budget of minus $253,000 .
Comm. Jacobs asked Amy Phillips if she agrees with Ms. Breading's proposal.
Ms. Phillips agrees with the proposal allowing the DA's office to affect personnel changes within policy.
Comm. Jacobs has studied this intensively and feels it is a good approach.
Comm. Carter expressed his concerns to Ms. Phillips about setting salary guidelines distinct and apart from the rest of the county and questioned whether or not other departments would not also ask to be separated.
Ms. Phillips said she has considered that but, as of now, has not defined any parameters except that attorneys are professional employees and other counties do the same.
Comm. Jacobs believes some of Comm. Carter's concerns are addressed in the Wage and Salary Guidelines which selectively qualifies only attorneys.
Comm. Armey suggested that, rather than segregating attorneys, it might be cleaner to leave them all under one heading but with clauses for the attorneys.
Ms. Breading agreed and noted, also, attorneys are classified differently from all other county employees. An attorney is employed "at the pleasure of the District Attorney".
Comm. Armey praised the hard work and time Ms. Breading and Ms. Phillips put into this study.

Item 21 Juvenile Probation

Peggy Fox, Director of Juvenile Probation Services, requested a reclassification of an administrative assistant in Juvenile Detention to Step 19. This position was originally requested at a Step 21, but a reassessment showed that a Step 19 would be more appropriate. This represents a savings of $21,000 which could then be applied toward the cost of a small van.
Comm. Jacobs asked Amy Phillips if this request is recommended by her.
Ms. Phillips has approved this request and the request for the secretary in Juvenile Detention.
Ms. Fox, under Juvenile Probation, requested an officer to begin in April, 2001, for the Intensive Supervision Program. She explained that this is a specialized form of probation which is cost effective because these officers deal with children that otherwise would have to be removed from the community.
Ms. Stewart apologized to the court for not correcting the date in her recommended budget for this position to begin April 1 rather than January 1, 2001.
Peggy Fox appealed the recommended budget figure of $15,000 for mileage of 32 juvenile probation officers to $22, 470. Also, she requested $3600 fixed mileage for herself, Ken Metcalf and Matt Marick. She pointed out that Ken, Matt and herself are administrators supervising 4 satellite offices, twelve school districts and work on various committees.

Item 8 Historical Park Complex

Dr. Georgia Caraway, Director of the Courthouse on the Square Museum, requested that the court grant a new position - Selby House Museum Manager - which the city would partially fund for his duties as a tour guide. This position would be necessary to keep the house open as promised to the City of Denton in order to receive the Hotel Tax Funds. (HOT funds) The county's obligation would be $8,500 for salary and benefits and the HOT funds would pay $23,000. She did cut out her request for two interns, believing she can find volunteers to aid the Manager with tour and educational groups.
Comm. Armey asked Ms. Stewart to rename the first Historical Park Facility Budget to something else so a distinction can be made when discussing the two facilities. 1085, which deals with the operating and staffing budget, what is the total net being requested from the county?
Ms. Stewart answered it is $12, 749.00. The operation of the Selby House is $13,100.00 for a combined total of $25,849.00.
Comm. Armey asked if those costs are under the current contract and for which the county is obligated?
Bob Schell, Assistant District Attorney, Civil Division, stated that his interpretation of the contract that the county is obligated to provide utilities and maintenance. Once the Selby House is completed by the Historical Park Foundation and the county inspects and approves the completion, then the county is obligated to maintain the house.
Comm. Armey asked Mr. Schell if the $13,100 (for janitorial, landscaping, utilties) is the amount currently agreed to by the county's contract?
Mr. Schell said yes.
Comm. Armey confirmed that the $12,749.00 amount is to cover the operational aspect of the house. What is the current status and mission of the Historical Park Foundation?
Dr. Caraway replied that their mission is to complete the renovation of the Selby House at a cost so far of some $300,000, making the house worth over ½ million dollars when completed and turned over to the county.
Comm. Armey clarified that the foundation's mission is to find houses, get them moved into location and renovate them. It is then up to the county to maintain these facilities and that the county and the city will fund the operations.
Comm. Jacobs, in discussing this issue with Mildred Hawk (who gave the Selby House to the Historical Commission), suggested the option that the operations of the house be given over to the Historical Commission to find the volunteers to staff, etc., thereby freeing the county of this obligation.
Dr. Caraway reminded the court all assets belonging to the Historical Commission also belong to the county.
Judge Wilson asked Mildred Hawk to comment.
Mildred Hawk commented that she would like to see the duplication cut out so that everything is under one budget. The Historical Commission could then assign to the museum what is needed and employees work where they are assigned.
Judge Wilson asked if volunteers could be used at the Selby House?
Dr. Caraway explained that she could only relate to the court her experience with volunteers at the museum. The museum has a list of thirty volunteers but they are not always available when needed. Unlike the museum, the Selby House is isolated and would require double staffing - one full time person plus a docent. The Selby House is also two-story, enhancing her concern for the valuable artifacts that could be lifted and carried out. She is trying to protect the county's liability by having a full-time person who is responsible and educated in dealing with the public and the security of the house. To ask so much of a docent is above and beyond their call of duty.
Comm. Armey questioned who has budgetary authority over the museum budget?
Dr. Caraway replied that she, the Director, and the museum committee of the Commission have the authority.
Comm. Armey asked who has budgetary authority over the Historical Commission?
Dr. Caraway said Roslyn Shelton and the volunteer Chairman, Dr. Betty Alford.
Comm. Armey inquired as to who will have budgetary authority over 1085 - the operating budget.
Dr. Caraway answered the museum.
Comm. Jacobs suggested that the museum and commission might combine their efforts to locate more volunteers.
Comm. Armey then asked about the facility and who has the authority?
Dr. Caraway replied that would be Danny Brumley, Denton County Director of Facilities Management.
Comm. Armey said that was appropriate. He wondered if it was this was not the time to organize all entities under one single budget again for efficiency. Everything is now running smoothly under the county and the commission.
Comm. Jacobs expanded on Comm. Armey's suggestion that a combining of the two entities would increase the availability of volunteers and help all parties focus on their needs. All avenues must be studied before using taxpayer funding. She would like to see a proposal brought before the court both she would approve anything relating to the Selby House. Comm. Jacobs understands that the county is committed to the operational fund. Place that $13,100 in Danny Brumley's budget so the court can move on. Then, allow the court to look at the combined budget of the museum and Historical Commission items. She suggested that an organizational flow chart is needed to see how all these entities relate to one another.
Comm. Armey asked Ms. Stewart what is in the recommended budget right now?
Ms. Stewart replied $71,650 with a $25,000 reduction if both budgets were combined.
Comm. Armey asked everyone to focus on efficiency.
Comm. Jacobs stated her hesitancy to pay staffing because it would set a precedent.

Item 1 New County Criminal Court #5

Judge Wilson introduced Judge David Garcia, County Criminal Court #3, to state his opinion on the appointment date of a judge for this court, and his support of Judge Darlene Whitten's (County Court at Law #1) letter read by her earlier in the day during Commissioners Court (See Non-departmental Item 12.C, Formal Agenda, July 25, 2000.)
Judge Garcia, County Criminal Court #3, the local administrative judge representing the statutory county court judges, outlined the continued need for the new county criminal court to be started no later than October 1, 2000. Judge Garcia also supported the court's top priority to raise county salaries, as did Judge Whitten in her letter. In the interim, a judge could be appointed as of January 1, 2000, to act as both a magistrate judge and/or visiting judge, as Judge Whitten's letter suggests. This would assist in the administration of the court system in several ways: improve efficiency, assignment of cases that fall in the overflow, and be cost effective as compared to the rates of a visiting judge.
Judge Wilson asked Judge Garcia that if the court appoints this judge as of January 1, 2000, then Judge Garcia would have the authority to assign cases to this judge besides the duties this judge would be performing for Judge Whitten.
Judge Garcia provided an example of a current case that could be handled immediately if he had the ability to assign it to this judge.
Comm. Carter asked if the person who is appointed to this position has never been a judge, can he qualify as a visiting judge?
Judge Garcia answered that in theory, once a person is appointed judge, he can serve as a visiting judge.
Judge Wilson clarified the proposal that this new judge will be added to a pool of judges and ultimately the judge in authority will assign cases appropriate to each judge.
Comm. Carter suggested another term might be needed.
Comm. Krueger suggested "roving" judge.
Comm. Carter pointed out that there would be savings also, from not having to hire a visiting judge from another county.
Comm. Jacobs noted that the offset from not having to hire visiting judges is $6,075.00 and an offset of $16,000.00 on Judge Whitten's program.
Judge Wilson confirmed that the court may only be able to budget $46,000 to $50,000 as an offset in appointing this judge. But, improving efficiency in the whole court system and allowing Judge Whitten to return to her own duties as a judge in the juvenile court system is well worth the cost.
Judge Garcia agreed and added that the issue really is not a dollar and cents issue but is one of judicial efficiency; victims and defendants hearing their cases heard quicker, witnesses still being available and the targeting of certain cases that are labor intensive
Comm. Carter asked what will be the budget impact of this new judge's position?
Judge Wilson answered that including salary, benefits and training, the total impact will be $93,240.00.
Comm. Jacobs asked will this judge be working full-time? Why not begin this judge in April of 2000? She believes there are many options here.

Item 1 Elected Official Pay Raises

Ms. Stewart asked the court to refer to the revised survey average. At a 95% average with a 4% cap, there would be a savings to the budget of $6,330.
Comm. Armey asked if the 95% was based on the salaries set in October, 1999?
Ms Stewart said yes.
Comm. Armey affirmed that the county will remain one year behind by using the 95% of last year's salaries, and, in effect, will be around 90% of the average with this raise.

A motion was made to pay elected officials 95% of the average of the survey presented by the Budget Office and the Human Resources Department with a 4% cap by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Armey, with comments. (See below)
Motion Carried 3-2-0 (Wilson and Carter nay)
Court Order #00-0382

Comm. Armey expressed his appreciation to Comm. Krueger for taking the lead on this "hot potato" issue. Every single year for the last eight years, this issue has been a major part of the budgetary discussions. This motion accomplishes the goal of keeping the elected official's salaries at a fair level, roughly 10% below average is a fair level for Denton County. He likes the idea of having a not-to-exceed amount because that prevents the court from achieving large amounts in any given year. He likes the underlying component of the raise being half of what the employees receive. The taxpayers will see consistency at a moderate level.
Comm. Carter asked if this also included Commissioners and, if so, asked if they could be eliminated from this motion?
Judge Wilson seconded his motion.
Comm. Krueger reminded the court that one of the reasons he brought forth this proposal was to take the politics out of this issue yet be fair to all elected officials. The court is seeking a balance that would be upset by removing commissioners from this proposal: every year the commissioners would be falling further and further behind. He believes that Comm. Carter's amendment would be penalizing the intent of the motion: to establish a criteria by which the budget office could set rates every year and by establishing this formula, relieve the court of any politics.
Comm. Carter complimented Comm. Krueger's formula but has a philosophical difference about voting oneself an increase.
Comm. Armey shares Comm. Carter's concerns but elected official salaries must be kept in ratio to one another. Commissioners must separate themselves from the positions they hold and vote to keep the positions at a consistent level with other elected officials. In the past, he has not accepted a pay raise, gone through the affidavit process of reducing his salary, not the salary of the position, and did not accept a pay raise until the voters had elected him. He will do so again this year and return the difference to the county until the voters have elected him.
Comm. Krueger supports the raise for his successor and for every elected official across the board.
Judge Wilson asked for a vote on the amendment. The amendment failed with only Judge Wilson and Comm. Carter in support.

Item 1 Employee Pay Raises

Ms. Stewart's proposed an 8% slide plus a step increase for a total budget impact of 2.6 million dollars, excluding the District Attorney's department.

Move approval of a pay raise for Denton County employees, minus the District Attorney's recommendation and minus the non-classified employees, to approve a slide of the pay scale by 8% and the annual step, in addition, by Comm. Armey, second by Comm. Jacobs. (Please see comments below, made before the vote was taken.)
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0383

Judge Wilson would have preferred to look at this item after the effective tax rate was figured but the court must move forward and look for reductions in the budget.
Comm. Armey agreed that cuts must be made before finally setting the tax rate.
Comm. Carter also agreed that the court must make a commitment to bring salaries into parity with other counties and we all must affect some efficiencies.
Judge Wilson restated the goal of the court of ending up below the current rate when setting the effective tax rate.

Item 1 New Hires

Ms. Stewart recommended that new hires - 12 positions - also be given the 8% slide with a budgetary impact of $30,100.

Move approval of the Budget Director's recommendation that new hires be given the 8% slide by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Krueger.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0384

Item 1 Reclassifications

Ms. Stewart also applied the 8% slide to this area.

Move to approve the list of reclassifications that was provided in the Recommended Budget
by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0385

Item 1 Non-classified Employees

Comm. Krueger said it was his understanding that this group would operate off the same formula as the court voted on for Elected Officials.
Comm. Jacobs reminded the court that if this motion is passed, then the Public Works reorganization that she presented earlier would not be included. She offered to make another motion before this one is voted upon.
Comm. Krueger advised the court that he would like more time to speak to the affected departments before voting on any of this.
Comm. Carter agreed and would like more time.
Comm. Armey would also like to look at the criteria before moving forward. Only nine positions would receive a raise based on the Elected Official formula. Does this depart from the average? He needs more time to study.

Item 1 Interns

Ms. Stewart recommended a 4% increase to those that are eligible.
Comm. Jacobs asked why the vacancies - not paying enough, not recruiting enough or do not have the students to fill them?
Ms. Stewart answered that the biggest reason presently is because school is not in session.
Amy Phillips advised that intern positions never stay vacant for long.

Move to approve Budget Director's recommendation that eligible Interns are given a 4% raise by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Krueger.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0386

Item 1 Retirement Option

Ms. Stewart asked the court for a consensus on the 80% with a budget impact of $8,550.

Move to approve Budget Director's recommendation on the retirement option #5 with 80% of the Consumer Price Index for retirees and a budgetary impact of $8,500 by Comm. Jacobs, second by Judge Wilson.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0387

Judge Wilson congratulated the court for making sure that the county's retirees are protected and receiving increases that are acceptable to what people need.
Ms. Stewart enlightened the court that Denton County is one of only 25 counties in the State of Texas to do this for their retired employees.
Comm. Armey added that for $8500 this court is able to give a COLA adjustment of 80% of the Consumer Price Index for all the retirees.
Comm. Krueger pointed out that this is another recruitment tool that other counties do not have.

Item 1 Salaries & Benefits

Comm. Jacobs asked the Human Resource Department to ask the research group, DMG-Maximus, Inc. what it would cost to do in internal salary comparison. The county has not studied this issue since approximately 1994. Equity problems concern the external and internal equity of the county's job descriptions and their market value. DMG did the study 6 years ago.
Ms. Phillips updated the court as to an adjustment in what a final figure might include. DMG had not realized that the Human Resource Department had already conducted several surveys of other counties. DMG would be willing to use these surveys, cutting their costs somewhat.
Comm. Jacobs moves to approve the placement of $57,000 in the budget to hire a consultant to address and improve external and internal equity by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Judge Wilson was not ready to vote for this item until the court gets through some of the other requests. He encouraged members to wait.
Comm. Armey also would like to hold off on this vote.
Comm. Jacobs removed the motion with a plea to the court that this remain a top priority. Across the board raises does not address the real problem of inequities within the county system. The raise that has been approved only addresses about 70% of the problem. This study would address the other 30%.
Judge Wilson agreed to keeping it top priority.
Comm. Armey asked if whoever does the study could also look at reducing the number of job descriptions within the county.
Ms. Phillips replied that that would not be included in this price of $225 per job description.
Comm. Armey asked how may different job descriptions the county has?
Comm. Jacobs answered 492.
Comm. Armey encouraged the Human Resources Department to include that into this survey.

Item 20 Right of Way Fund

Ms. Stewart had no objection to the Road & Bridge department's request to transfer all ROW funds from its own line item to that of the consultant's line item.
Comm. Jacobs so moved.
Comm. Carter seconded.
Comm. Krueger asked Ms. Stewart as to the reason for this transfer of $50,000.
Ms. Stewart explained that most right of way is paid out of bond funds, thereby eliminating the need for a ROW line item.
Comm. Jacobs retracted her motion as did the seconder.
Judge Wilson suggested that Kelly Zwinggi explain his reasoning in a memo to Commissioners Court.

Item 3 Car Allowance Report

Ms. Stewart recommended a no-increase fixed-car allowances for Elected Officials.

Move to approve Budget Director's recommendation by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Krueger.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0388

Comm. Krueger moved to approve an increase from $2700 to $3600 for the Director of County Planning, making it more comparable to the other directors.
Comm. Jacobs reminded the court that this too, falls under the reorganization plan for Public Works Director.
Comm. Krueger insisted that this Director will still do a lot of traveling, whether he remains a department head or not.
Comm. Carter seconded.
Comm. Armey said that under the Public Works reorganization, the court was going to check on certain directors being given the use of a county vehicle as opposed to a car allowance.
Shala Blackmon, Deputy Director of Administration for the County Judge, advised the court that it is the preference of the County Planning Director to have a car allowance.
Comm. Armey cautioned that the $3600 is not justified as compared to other department heads.
Comm. Jacobs cannot support the motion because the court has not yet addressed County Operations, Centralized Road & Bridge or County Planning.
Comm. Krueger withdrew his motion as did the seconder.

Item Health Insurance

Ms. Stewart informed the court that the recommended budget included Health Insurance at $2,964 per person.

Move to approve Budget Director's recommendation of Health Insurance at $2,964 per person by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0389

Item 14 District Attorney's Pay System Proposal

Move to approve the District Attorney's Pay System proposal by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Krueger.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0390

Judge Wilson congratulated the Criminal District Attorney and his staff for all their hard work in reaching a consensus on this proposal.

Item 16 Operations - Reallocation Request

Ms. Stewart recommended the reallocation request as it involves no budgetary impact.

Move to approve the Budget Director's recommendation by Comm. Jacobs, second by
Comm. Armey.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order #00-0391

ITEM 17 ADJOURNMENT 4:28 PM

Move to adjourn by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 5-0-0

This set of minutes prepared by deputy clerk Kathleen Bransford and reviewed by County Clerk Cynthia Mitchell.