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 10, 2001

Be it remembered, Commissioners Court of Denton County, Texas was called to order at 9:05 am on this the 10th day of July, 2001 by Judge Scott Armey. Commissioners Sandy Jacobs, Jim Carter, Bobbie J. Mitchell and Cynthia White were present, along with deputy clerk Kathleen Bransford.

Court opened with an Invocation by Pastor John A. Williams of the New Testament Church of Pilot Point and was followed by the Pledges of Allegiance to the American Flag and the Texas Flag led by Ross Rogers of Boy Scout Troop 236 of Lewisville.

Pastor Williams: Holy God, we thank You again, we thank You for this day. Thank You for blessing us, Holy God, on your earth. Holy God, as You look on all the day, Lord, and supervise everyone in Your holy name, but Lord, it's You that can guide, teach us in all truth and righteousness. Lord, I'd ask You to bless this day. Lord, bless all in this building, Holy Father, that they would come forth and do as You would instruct them to do. So, Father, I'd ask You to bless us to accomplish what is set before us. And, Lord, I'd ask that You help us this day by recognizing and regulating our minds, Holy God, because You know the heart of man. You know the heart of everyone. So, God, as You bless all this day, Lord, keep us in the unity of Your Holy Spirit by doing the right thing in Your name. And, Holy God, I'd ask You to bless this day, Lord, and bless all around about. Keep us in the unity of Your Holy Spirit, Holy God, that we may be strong and in the power of Your might. So, Father, I ask You to help us this day and help everyone who's all around, Holy God, teaching God, every one. In the name of Jesus, we pray and say thank God. Amen.

ITEM 1 PUBLIC INPUT
Comm. Jacobs thanked the Denton County Fire Department for their diligence and time spent on assuring a safe fourth of July for the county.
Constable Floyd presented Dallas Morning news articles and emails from citizens praising the work of his License & Weight Department and Deputy Kay for his traffic "Rage Unit".

ITEM 2 CONSENT AGENDA (Items 6.C, 7.B & 8.A were pulled for further discussion)

PURCHASING

6.A) Approval of specifications and authority to advertise for annual contract for Voice and Data Cabling Purchase and Installation, RFP #12-00-1402, and any appropriate action. (Briefing 07-03-01)

6.B) Acceptance of report of proceeds from Miscellaneous Computer Surplus Sale and donation of unsold items to the Texas Correctional Industries. (Briefing 07-03-01)

BUDGET

7.A) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #101690 for various utility line items for various County Operations Building's in the amount of $32,900. (Briefing 07-03-01)

7.C) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #101720 for Training and Education for Juvenile Probation and Juvenile Detention in the amount of $8,900.

COUNTY CLERK

11.A) Approval of the minutes for June 26, 2001, Formal Session.

OTHER DEPARTMENTS

13.C) Approval of privacy notice for Denton County Internet web sites - Information Services. (Briefing 07-03-01)

13.D) Approval of petition for an H-1B Visa for Saovanee Wonganirut, Web Designer/Developer - Information Services. (Briefing 07-03-01)

13.E) Approval of Resolution for the Denco Area 9-1-1 District Fiscal Year 2002 Financial Plan - County Judge. (Briefing 07-03-01)

LEGAL

14.C) Approval of: a) the Project for Road Improvements to Loop 288, and b) the Interlcoal Cooperation Agreement between the City of Denton and Denton County, Texas. (Briefing 07-03-01)

14.D) Approval of renewal for the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for Tax Collection between Denton County and the City of Little Elm. (Briefing 07-03-01)

14.E) Approval of renewal for the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for Tax Collection between Denton County and the Town of Clark. (Briefing 07-03-01)

14.F) Approval of renewal for the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for Tax Collection between Denton County and the Town of Double Oak. (Briefing 07-03-01)

Move to approve Consent Agenda with the exception of Items 6.C, 7.B & 8.A by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0369

ITEM 5 AUDITOR/TREASURER

5. Approval of Bill Report/Payroll.
(Payments from Adult Probation, Community Corrections, Pre-Trial Services and District Attorney Check Fee Fund are presented for recording purposes only.)

DELETION from General, $75.00 to Chance Oliver, incorrect amount.

ADDITIONS:

To General Fund, $200 to County Clerk Criminal for Change Fund;
To General - Sanger Annex/DPS - three invoices totaling $1,157.94 for Utilities;
To General - Constable#2/L & W - two invoices totaling $150 to SW Texas State Univ.,
registration fees for L. Floyd, I. Hicks & Jerrol Sanders;
To General - Print/Mail - $17,672.56 to HGAC for a van;
To General - Co-Wide Tech - $70.00 to Network Solutions for Domain Registration;
To CSID, $125.00 to Sigifredo Marquez for Austin Travel Advance;
To TNCP, $457.50 to Chevron for May & June's gasoline.

Move to approve Bill Report, as amended, by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-0370

ITEM 6 PURCHASING

6.C) Approval of Minute Order to join the CUC Aggregation Project, Inc. (Briefing 07-03-01)

6.C-1) Move to appoint Danny Brumley, Director of Facilities, as the Denton County representative to the Texas Conference of Urban Counties Aggregation Project, Inc. (TCAP) by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Mitchell.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0371

6.D) Approval of recommendation from Vehicle/Radio Assessment Committee to increase the Sheriff Department by two units for the Greenbelt grant program and the Operations fleet by one unit, and any appropriate action. (Briefing 07-03-01)

Move to approve by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Mitchell.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (White nay)
Court Order 01-0372

6.C-2) Move to approve the Minute Order to join the Texas Conference of Urban Counties Aggregation Project, Inc. (TCAP) by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Mitchell.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0373

ITEM 7 BUDGET

7.B) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #101700 for Court Appointed Attorney-Juvenile for County Court at Law #1 including the transfer of funds from Non-Departmental Unappropriated Contingency-Court Ordered and Regular Contingency in the amount of $62,200. (Briefing 07-03-01)

RETURN TO ITEM LATER IN THIS SESSION

ITEM 8 HUMAN RESOURCES

8.A) Approval of Order Making Appointments. (Appointments have been posted and advertised. 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 constraints.) William Mills, Detention Officer I/County Jail; Jennifer Russell, Detention Officer I/County Jail; Tonya Cundiff, Corporal/Communications; Rick Moore, Maintenance Scheduler/Dispatch/County Operations.

Move to approve Order Making Appointments with a freeze on any future voluntary
demotions by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. White.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0374

ITEM 10 PUBLIC WORKS

10.A) Approval of any appropriate action regarding project development, construction progress, and change orders to Denton County Building Projects - Commissioners Court.

Move to approve the following Change Orders for the Denton County Courts Building Fourth Floor and Lower Level Project by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Jacobs: CO #3 (PCO's #35 & 41), backcharge G-S Company for breaking valve at holding cell and replace P-trap and add access door for an add of $604.00 to CBS Mechanical, Inc.; CO #1 (PCO #36), furnish and install two (2) grab bars for an add of $173 to TBS, Inc.; CO #2 (PCO # 40), Institutional locks and drill cylinders for an add of $2,792 to Performance Door & Hardware, Inc.; CO #3 (PCO #42), broken valve in chase of holding cell, backcharge to CBS for a deduct of $298 to G-S Company; CO #1 (PCO #43), change light pole bases to the bell shaft type for an add of $800 to Calvert Paving Corp.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (White nay)
Court Order 01-0375

10.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

ITEM 13 OTHER DEPARTMENTS

13.A) Approval of any action regarding Denton County boards and committees - Commissioners Court.

Move to appoint Gustavo Hernandez, Loss Control Coordinator, to the Vehicle Assessment
Committee as a non-voting member by Comm. Mitchell, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0376

13.B) Approval of Denton County Redistricting 2001:

1) Splitting and Realigning Voter Precincts,
2) Redistricting of County Commissioners Precincts,
3) Potential Redistricting of Justice of the Peace and Constables Precincts,
4) 2001 Redistricting Committee - County Judge.

NO ACTION - The next meeting of the 2001 Redistricting Committee will be August 7, 2001 at 7:00 pm in the Courthouse on the Square.

ITEM 14 LEGAL

14.B) Approval of any action regarding Denton County's obligations regarding the Juvenile Alternative Education Program, and the opinion by the District Attorney's Civil Division, dated June 6, 2001.

NO ACTION

ITEM 17 RECESS - 9:40 am

ITEM 18 RECONVENE - 1:30 pm

ITEM 15 EXECUTIVE SESSION

The Commissioners Court reserves the exercise of its discretion and may convene in executive session as authorized by the Texas Government Code §§551.071, et seq. on any of the agenda items previously listed.
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. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 4-0-0 (Comm. White absent for vote)

15.A) Real Property: Texas Government Code, Section 551.072: Real Property.

15.A-1) Move to approve the recommendation of the District Attorney, Civil Division, that on the right-of-way acquisition project for the extension of Parker Road at FM 544, accept the counter offer of Mr. Griffith so this matter can be closed by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Mitchell.
Motion Carried 4-0-0 (Comm. Jacobs absent for vote)
Court Order 01-0377

15.A-2) Move to approve the recommendation of the District Attorney, Civil Division, authorizing this division to retain an appraiser in order to proceed with the acquisition of right-of-way along Lois Road, east of I-35 by Comm. White, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 4-0-0 (Comm. Jacobs absent for vote)
Court Order 01-0378

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

16.A) EXECUTIVE SESSION - Consultation with Attorney: Pending Litigation, Texas Government Code, Section 551.071 (1)(A): Save Our Sanger, an unincorporated association v. Commissioners Court of Denton County, Commissioner Jeff Krueger, Commissioner Sandy Jacobs, Commissioner Scott Armey, and Commissioner Jim Carter, Cause No. 2000-50212-367 in the 367th Judicial Court of Denton County,
Texas.

NO ACTION

15.C) Consultation with Attorney: Contemplated Litigation, Texas Government Code, Section 551.071 (1)(A): ATC Associates, Inc., (formerly ATEC Associates, Inc.), David Baldwin, Inc., Landscaping, CCRD Partners Professional & Consulting Engineers, Phillips Swager & Associates, Thornton-Tomasetti Engineers (formerly Ellisor & Tanner, Inc.), JRJ Paving, Inc., Landscape Design & Construction, Hunt
Construction Group (formerly Huber Hunt & Nichols), Pacheco Koch, and R.C. Small & Associates regarding the Denton County Courts Building.

Move to approve the recommendation of the District Attorney, Civil Division, to retain the law firm from Dallas of Gardere for a reduced rate of $225.00 per hour plus expenses (the County will be seeking attorney fees) and direct the Auditor to secure the funding from Unappropriated Contingency by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0379

ITEM 7 BUDGET

7.B) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #101700 for Court Appointed Attorney-Juvenile for County Court at Law #1 including the transfer of funds from Non-Departmental Unappropriated Contingency-Court Ordered and Regular Contingency in the amount of $62,200. (Briefing 07-03-01)

Move to approve Budget Amendment Request #101700 for Court Appointed Attorney- Juvenile for County Court at Law #1 (CCCL#1), including the transfer of funds from Non-Departmental Unappropriated Contingency - Court Ordered and Regular Contingency -in the amount of the deficit of $55,300 and request the Judge of CCCL#1 for an explanation of the requested amount over $55,300 by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Mitchell.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0380

7.D) Presentation of Denton County's 2001-2002 Recommended Budget by the Budget Officer and approval of any appropriate action related to the 2001-2002 Budget.

The following is a paraphrasing of the essential points made during this discussion on the Budget.

Ms. Stewart, Director of Budget: The initial request was submitted to Budget on May 1, 2001. The current budget is $80 million and the current tax rate is 0.23193 cents per $100 valuation. The initial request for FY 2002 totaled $119.1 million, an increase of $31.2 million above the current adopted budget and would result in a 49.98% tax rate increase, requiring a tax rate of almost 35 cents per $100 valuation. 225 new hires were requested with 139 of those included in the recommended budget for Jail Expansion. The recommended budget is $96,833,854, representing a 10.06 increase over last year's recommended budget.

Mr. Wells, County Auditor: The auditor is responsible for the revenue side of the budget, the Budget Director for the expenditure side. The largest source of revenue for the county is Taxes and tentative projections are for an increase of $4.43 million for 2001. Motor Vehicle Registration revenue must be deposited to the Road & Bridge Fund and an increase of $330,000 has been budgeted. Intergovernmental Revenue has increased over the years but offer little budgetary relief. Fees of Office Revenue - for services rendered by the county - have been budgeted at approximately $500,000 in additional revenue for 2002, but these are set by statute and generally expended on existing contracts for upgrades in those departments. Fines, as received from the various courts, are also set by statute and are expected to exceed budgeted amounts by $240,000, raising the revenue estimate for fines by $460,000 to a total of $3.635 million. Interest Revenue will be lower, with most County funds not reaching budgeted totals, so no significant increases are expected. Miscellaneous Revenues are primarily refunds/reimbursements and fees not connected with a specific office with expected growth from such items as inmate phone fees, court appointed attorney refunds and bail bond forfeitures. Fund Balance & Reserve Funds will still protect the County in the event of unforeseen occurrences. Recent legislation will produce no significant increase for revenue driven statutes now in place.

Comm. Jacobs: What is our collection rate on fees and fines?

Mr. Wells: Fees are close to 100% because of services rendered after the county receives the fee. There is no accurate collection figure for fines.

Comm. Jacobs: In relationship to the fines, can you give us a report that shows a history showing the amount of fines that were declared by the judges compared to the amount collected over a five to ten year period? Could we get a collection agency to help us and get a certain percentage of what they collect over and above an anticipated amount, like the county does for delinquent taxes?

Mr. Wells: There is new legislation that will take effect that will allow the court to hire an outside firm for a collection return as high as 30%.

Comm. Jacobs: I would like to see this item placed on the briefing agenda for further discussion.

Judge Armey: Mr. Wells, could you see to that?

Comm. Jacobs: I noticed in reviewing some of the bills passed for county government, that there are new revenue fees that have been passed. One is a technology fee.

Mr. Wells: …for Justice courts.

Comm. Jacobs: Do any of your revenue estimates include those new bills?

Mr. Wells: Again, from my reading there are not that many that will be effective for the county.

Ms. Stewart: The Budget Office had to trim $22 million from the initial request. Major increases included Reclassification Recommendations of $500,000; Debt Service payments of $4,500.00; Health Insurance Premium at $800,000; Road & Bridge Increase of $200,000; Utilities Increase of $585,000; Outside Counsel Increase of $450,000 (Denton, Tarrant County Line lawsuit and the lower level of the new courts building); Court Appointed Attorney Fees, an increase of $150,00, including a contingency fund in the amount of $200,000 (Senate Bill 7 may effect this); County Criminal Court #5 (eff. 01-01-02) is already on-line and will be an impact of $444,000 for new hires, etc;

Judge Armey: Did you see what the cost would be for a 10-01-02 start date?

Ms. Stewart: Approximately $100,000 more.

Ms. Stewart: The new County Court at Law #1/Civil, with an effective date of 05-01-02 increased the recommended budget by $223,000. The other increases are for Postage and Gasoline to approximately a half of million dollars. $300,000 for Computer related increases. Fire Calls have gone from $210 to $252 per call, an increase of $125,000 and miscellaneous increases, $43,000 for a Grand Total of $8,800,000.

Comm. Jacobs: The master computer licensing for $250,000 was not on this list.

Ms. Stewart: That was not included in the Recommended Budget. The three new hires for the DA's office is offset by grant revenues. Seventeen new positions are recommended.

Comm. Jacobs: Which are mandated out of that list?

Ms. Stewart: Everything up to Fire Calls and Computer related positions.

Comm. Jacobs: So pretty much everything on this list is required. Thank You.

Judge Armey: Seventeen new hires? Go over those, please.

Ms. Stewart: Four for County Clerk, two for Sheriff, two court administrators, two court reporters, one judge, two prosecutors and an investigator, and the three positions mentioned earlier for grant positions.

Ms. Stewart: Unfortunately, the Recommended Budget does not include salary increases for employees. That was a tough decision to make. The court needs to address that issue and I will be encouraging the court to do whatever it takes to increase salaries. I go on record now to support a tax increase, if necessary.

Judge Armey: This budget year, more clearly than any other, really illustrates the choice is to cut as much as we can so that we can address our most important asset - our investment in our employees. What can we eliminate, in order to provide for raises?

Ms. Stewart: Issuing tax notes is another suggestion.

Ms. Stewart: Written appeals must be received by my office by Thursday, July 12, 2001. Appeals give department heads an option to make line item changes without affecting the bottom line and/or to ask for and explain their need for additional funds.

Ms. Stewart: The chart on Page S-14 gives a Summary of Tax Levies and Projected Fund Balances. We continue with a tax levy required @ 98.5%.

Comm. Jacobs: Am I correct, James, outside of Property Tax, our revenue is about 22 million?

Ms. Stewart: Total non-tax revenue is almost $33 and a half million. Estimated Beginning Fund Balance is $16.7 million and Estimated Ending is $9.6 million. That's about the same Estimated Ending we have seen in the past.

Ms. Stewart: The chart on Page S-15 is a list of automatic budget increases going into this process. The first section shows the new hires. The second section shows New Positions and Reclasses Approved After Budget Adoption totaling about $227,000. Other items the court has taken action on this year total $993.000 for a Grand Total of all of the above at $1,397,467.

Judge Armey: Does the Recommended Budget have positions funded through attrition?

Ms. Stewart: At this point, the only positions were the ones that were carried over from the last couple of years.

Judge Armey: Is that number reducing?

Ms. Stewart: That number remains the same.

Judge Armey: Are there people in those positions?

Ms. Stewart: Just recently, there are people now in those positions.

Judge Armey: Now that those positions are filled, wouldn't it go to regular budget?

Ms. Stewart: There's going to be so much turnover…..

Judge Armey: If we reduce the amount budgeted for salaries by a certain percentage, that might be something we want to clean-up, since we are reducing attrition, anyway. Get those positions that are filled into the regular budget.

Ms. Stewart: The next report beginning on Page S-18 is the Departmental Summaries by Function. Page S-19, I want to bring to your attention, an increase in the County Clerk's budget of $120,489, specifically tied to reclassifications, health benefits and new hires for Courts. Non-Departmental jumped significantly with an increase of $596,854 due to consultants, attorney fees and insurance. Financial Information Systems increased by $39, 500 for computer maintenance, supplies and replacements. On Page S-20, Dept. of Information Services increased by $51,255 for reclasses, health benefits and software. Courthouse on the Square Museum jumped $30,068 due to a decrease in HOT Fund salary supplement, contract labor, tourism and supplies. On Page S-21, CHOS Museum/Tour Preservation Grant increased by $81,780 for maintenance and operation, with a small portion for personnel. Elections Administration fluctuates every other year, with this year seeing an additional $114,319 for reclasses/benefit increases, postage, printed material and voting equipment. On County-wide Technology, an additional $142,280 for software, lease payments/supplies and replacement of computers. For the Historical Park Museum, the City of Denton is applying their 30% rule supplement to salaries, adding to an increase of $25,323.

Judge Armey: What is the net change in the amount of HOT Funds?

Ms. Stewart: The amount has not changed, they are just re-applying it toward maintenance and operations.

On Page S-23, County Court at Law #2/Civil is budgeted for an increase of $167,996. The District Clerk's Budget on Page S-24 increased by $40,038 due to reclass/benefits, postage and training and office machines. On Page S-25, the Justice Information System increased $135,724 mainly for software, HW maintenance, and lease payments.

Comm. Jacobs: Members, this is an area where we might be able to get some grant funding that I referenced earlier, from Senate Bill 7.

Comm. White: Who was in charge of submitting this?

Ms. Stewart: Information Services. They are responsible for three separate budgets: Administrative, Criminal Justice Systems and County-wide Technology, as well the telephone system.

Ms. Stewart: On Page S-26, Death Investigations is up $35,000, approximately $20,000 being an increase for the medical examiner contract with Tarrant/Parker County and $10,000 for body transportation. The Criminal District Attorney's Office is up $172,000, which can mainly be contributed to new hires for new courts and several reclassifications.

Comm. Jacobs: And those were the ones that were approved by?

Ms. Stewart: DMG. The DA-Child Abuse Prosecution Unit shows a $93,000 increase related to two new employees. On Page S-28, the County Auditor's budget went up by about $30,000 attributed to several reclassifications and additional computer equipment. The Tax Assessor/Collector budget is up $92,000 due to reclassifications of $60,000, $17,000 for postage and $34,000 for supplies. On Page S-29, the Food Lion Building is up $41,000 for utilities and pest control. Law Enforcement Facility has an increase of $91,000, due mainly to utilities for the new jail. The Recommended Budget does not include funding for jail expansion at all, other than the utilities. Operations Budget is up $554,000 for reclassifications/benefits, supplies and equipment; a significant part of this increase is the contract with DSI ($150,000), the energy efficiency consultants. $130,500 is included for the space study and $70,000 for a service contract on the A/C units.

Ms. Stewart: On Page S-32, County Jail budget increased by $128,000 mainly due to reclassifications and small amount for gasoline and supplies. The Jail Health budget is up by about $86,000 primarily for a new hire approved by court this year for mental health transport. The Communications Division of the Sheriff's Department is up $87,000 for increases in benefits and supplies. The Sheriff's Dept. is up $400,000 and that is $140,000 for reclassifications, $143,000 for software, gas, animal control, remote access and $89,000 for Radio Tower and testing equipment.

Comm. Jacobs: I thought that was coming out of a special fund.

Ms. Stewart: There is money left over in that. There are two radio consoles that we are recommending here for tax notes to be issued or they be funded through this…..

Judge Armey: And they are presently reflected here?

Ms. Stewart: The Consoles are not but the testing equipment is.

Ms. Stewart: On Page S-33, the Greenbelt Public Safety Grant is $129,000. It is a new grant and was not in the adopted budget that is why I am showing an increase.

Comm. Jacobs: Will this be offset by revenues?

Ms. Stewart: A portion of it will be.

Comm. Jacobs: What is the net?

Ms. Stewart: I will provide that.

Ms. Stewart: The Underage Drinking Grant is a new grant, $35,000 increase. On Page S-34, the Juvenile Accountability Grant, another grant acquired by the Sheriff's Dept., is also new and reflects an increase of $51,000 in the budget.

Comm. Jacobs: This is a 100% covered?

Ms. Stewart: Not this second year, only the first.

Comm. Jacobs: Do we know the net?

Ms. Stewart: I apologize. I need to do a report on that and show you what the county funds will be.

Ms. Stewart: At the bottom of that page, Constable Pct.#3 is up about $83,000 that is for contract labor, one employee on maternity-leave as well as several vehicles. Constable Pct. #4 is down $76,000 since we gave all the cars to Jerry Raburn. Actually, the Vehicle-Radio Assessment Committee did recommend several new cars for Constable Pct.#4 last year. Constable Pct. #5 got $22,000 for additional vehicles. Constable Pct.#6 is down because they got two vehicles previous to last year and one this year. Emergency Services Dept., $870,000 looks like an increase but what we have done is combine the fire and ambulance service into one budget, previously fire calls were tracked in one appropriation. The only increase you see in this budget is an increase of about $124,000 and that is because fire calls are going from $210 to $252 per call.

Comm. Jacobs: So what would be that actual percentage increase, that $124,000?

Ms. Stewart: About 20%. Actually, I reduced that budget by $100,000 from what was requested based on the number of calls. The Emergency Management Budget is up $37,000 for reclassifications as well as an increase in gasoline, software and pagers. Appropriations on Page S-37 reflects a slight increase of $40,000 for library. We fund library at $1.25 per capita, they requested $3.75 per capita and I have a report including more specific details. I did move MHMR out this section into the Health Care Relief budget. The only other increase was for the Appraisal District for about $30,000.

Comm. White: Can you go back to the library funding and how much is that?

Ms. Stewart: Library funding is about $772,000 per year.

Judge Armey: Is the $1.25 per capita plus the $10,000 matching?

Ms. Stewart: Yes. The Transfer of Funds Dept. is down about $85,000. We're still recommending a transfer to Juvenile Probation of a little over $100,000 but we're not recommending funding for the County Clerk Records Management Dept. as we have in the past. Activity is down and James and I feel confident that they will be able to continue funding that contract out of their own budget this year.

Judge Armey: Donna, MHMR, should they not have their own budget, like Parks & Wildlife, that type of thing, because that is not a social service but a state agency?

Comm. Jacobs: We're required to fund a portion of their budget.

Judge Armey: What is the extent of our requisite funding?

Comm. Jacobs: If the county had to provide those services, it would cost us a whole lot more than the $350,000. I would suggest we put MHMR outside appropriations so it's in a state fund but I am not saying it shouldn't be reviewed by Human Resources.

Ms. Stewart: The primary reason I moved it from appropriations to the health care, there is $388,000 of tax related monies and I consider that to be health related function.

Judge Armey: We will look at that in more detail.

Ms. Stewart: Bottom of Page S-37, Centralized Road & Bridge increased by $204,000 due to reclassifications/benefit, software, gas, consultants, lease payments. We are recommending financing for a request of $1,000,000 for capital equipment. On Page S-38, the Right-of-Way fund, James and I are recommending that this fund be eliminated, and the remainder of $35,000 be transferred into the General Fund.

Comm. Jacobs: Now that we have bond money, right-of-way monies come of the Road & Bridge Fund.

Ms. Stewart: On Page S-40, Public Health Funds are up about $67,000 for reclassifications, contract labor and computer equipment. Indigent Care is down $106,000 and it's based on a history of that fund. It still has a $200,000 contingency fund, just in case they exceed what they have done traditionally. The Health Care Relief Fund reflects an additional $65,000 as recommended by the Social Service Agency Committee.

Sheriff's Forfeiture Fund on Page S-41, looks like an increase of $99,000 but is already supported by the Sheriff's revenues. The DA/Hot Check Fund increased by $31,000 for reclassifications/benefits, supplies, contract labor and legal ads and is supported by revenue.

Judge Armey: And, traditionally, the DA has supported a number of positions out of those funds.

(Comm. White left at approximately 3:45 pm.)

Ms. Stewart: On Page S-42, the Jury Fund shows a $30,000 reduction but that is jury fees that are not anticipated. $6.00 per day if they are called, $10.00 per day it they serve.

Comm. Jacobs: Has there been any discussion of increasing those fees? Can we mark that and put that as an agenda item please?

Ms. Stewart: Debt Service is up about 4.5 million due to debt service payments for jail, roads and buildings. Page S-43 is a breakdown of county services based on mandated, non-mandated and essential projects. You'll see on Page S-48, about 66% is mandated, 27% essential and & 7% is non-mandated.

Comm. Carter: May we go back. James, is there a rule of thumb indicating for counties what the debt service ought to be in the total budget? Ours looks to be about 14%.

Mr. Wells: Not for counties, per se. I will be glad to review some information from the rating agencies because they do look at the debt service. Of course, part of our increase is for the SIB loan, which will be paid by the cities.

Comm. Jacobs: On Page 46, I would like to ask the court to look at those non-mandated areas of about 6.5 million dollars. We need to re-look at the ones $50,000 and over to see if there are any revenues which is missing from this page. If you could do a report on the non-mandated expenditures and show if there are any revenues which offset that.

Judge Armey: Not just revenues but non-tax source funds. For instance, the Health Care Relief Fund.

Comm. Jacobs: And, also, it is my understanding that all the law enforcement contracts that we have with the cities, that we can collect 100% costs.

Mr. Wells: Under the Governmental Cooperation Act, we can recover reasonable charges. I cannot find the law that limits no more than the cost.

Comm. Jacobs: My understanding is that we can collect 100% of costs and that is why we went into this whole thing in the first place because it wouldn't cost the taxpayers any additional dollars. Why should the citizens of Lewisville pay for a law enforcement contract for another city? I see here, however, that we have a law enforcement contract that is under non-mandated that is costing our taxpayers over $61,000 for another city.

Ms. Stewart: They do reimburse us according to the contract schedule.
Comm. Jacobs: Is it 100%?

Ms. Stewart: The salaries and benefits we calculate according to the person in that position.

Comm. Jacobs: And if that is the case, where are other law enforcement contracts?

Ms. Stewart: We do have some with the school districts, like with NWISD.

Mr. Wells: This year we have two with NWISD and one with Shady Shores.

Comm. Jacobs: So it will help to get that report to see where the money is offset.

Judge Armey: The other area is the dispatch services that the Sheriff's Office provides to smaller entities at no cost but do we have any type of interlocal agreement with them. If we are going to continue providing that, we need it in writing. There may be some liability issues there. Maybe there should be a charge or at least some type of credit so it is equal participation.

Comm. Jacobs: That is another good agenda item for us.

Ms. Stewart: Page S-52, we have a complete list of all the new employees that were originally requested. Beginning on Page S-56, is the list of the recommended. Page S-60 is the list of all recommended reclassifications by DMG Maximus for an almost $400,000 increase. These are included in the recommended budget.

Comm. Jacobs: I would like to ask Ms. Phillips if you feel this was an effective way to do it and do you feel the choices recommended are good?

Ms. Phillips: Yes, I do. This was a several months' project. They did meet with all departments and their feedback was positive.

Comm. Jacobs: Now if we get a request through this appeal project and someone says DMG didn't grant my request, is our contract still open so these people can go back to them or is that going to cost us more money?

Ms. Phillips: I believe they have completed their contract. Anyone who wanted to make a appeal, should already have done that.

Judge Armey: Do you know how many appeals to DMG there were? If you could check on that so that we have an understanding of what needs to be addressed.

Ms. Stewart: On Page S-62 is a quick review of the Salary and Benefit Increases.

Comm. Jacobs: In plain talk, the recommended budget, which has no salary increases and a no increase tax rate, if this court decided to give an increase to employees, that would require an tax increase?

Ms. Stewart: If the budget were approved as being recommended, yes.

Comm. Jacobs: As we look at this across the board, there is a 4%, 8%, 12% - at which point do we hit the rollback rate?

Ms. Stewart: Over 8%.

Comm. Jacobs: If we were to approve an 8% tax increase - just as an example - and the total amount was 4.5 million we got from that, what percentage increase across the board would that give our employees?

Ms. Stewart: Probably somewhere between 8-10%.

Comm. Jacobs: So the three cents that was on the referendum would give us about 7.2 million but that would put us into the rollback rate….

Ms. Stewart: It could…

Comm. Jacobs: So in order to prevent a rollback, the most we could give is 8-10% and that is assuming that we wanted to increase taxes. Thank You.

Ms. Stewart: Page S-72, is a chart for the non-classified employees, elected officials….

Judge Armey: Are they included in the recommended budget?

Ms. Stewart: Yes, they are. You can see what a 2% increase or more would mean. On Page S-74, is the County/District Court Judges Salary Information. The Governor did veto the 2002 pay raise for district judges so all salaries will be frozen at their current rate. On Page S-75 is a Summary of all Intern Positions, should the court decide to give an increase. On Page S-76, begins the surveys of Elected Officials, Dept. Heads and Employees throughout other counties. Amy will answer any questions you might have.

Ms. Phillips: Pages S-94 & 95 compares average salaries from the survey to our salaries.

Comm. Jacobs: When the average is higher than the Denton County salary, shouldn't the percent difference be negative?

Ms. Phillips: We looked at it in the opposite direction, as the other counties being paid more….you may have noticed, when the regression analysis is run, statistically the bigger disparity is in the pay grades 20-30 rather than in the pay grades 10-19.

Judge Armey: Relating to the regression analysis, the difference between the starting salary of our pay grades are not percentages, it is by an actual amount.

Ms. Phillips: That is correct.

Judge Armey: So Pay Grade 10-19, there was about a $1200 difference in each starting salary. Then in Pay Grade 20-30 it went to….

Ms. Phillips: Close to $2,000 between each pay grade from 21-30.

Judge Armey: Page 94, the regression analysis difference is roughly the same from 10-19, tapering some toward the end. The graph on Page 95, the disparity widens. We might want to consider, between Grades 20 & 30 to widen that amount between starting salaries a little more which would effectively put it on a different slope and mirror the slope on Page 94.

Comm. Jacobs: Have we done a regression analysis for Elected Officials and Department Heads?

Ms. Phillips: No, we have not.

Comm. Jacobs: Can we do that?

Ms. Phillips: Yes we can.

Comm. Jacobs: Let's separate those elected officials with supplements; also, with department heads, from the lowest to the highest. I would like to see on four specific points on Page 95, the three over $60,000 and the lowest one on the far right. We want to know what position that is. Also, on Page 94, the one just under $35,000.

Judge Armey: In addition to that, on Page 95, the two at the 24,000 level, the top at the 25,000 and at 26,000 level. I appreciate these graphs.

Ms. Stewart: On Page S-96, the List of General Fund Non-Departmental Contingencies. $560,000 for Regular Unappropriated Contingency, $100,000 Incentive Pay, $40,000 Vehicle Repair, $25,000 Alternate Fuel, $200,000 Court Ordered, $75,000 Worker's Comp and $400,000 for Outside Counsel. We have received notice that our Worker's Comp rates may increase significantly but we will not know that. From what I understand, our ratio is pretty good so we may not see a huge increase.

Judge Armey: Isn't that in relation to the recognition that we received a couple of weeks ago about our safety in the workplace? Where do you have the Overtime Contingency listed?

Ms. Stewart: That is listed in each individual department's budget.

Comm. Jacobs: Can I address that, Judge? Could we have all overtime as a contingency? We have one line item, as well, for all the attrition based on the percentages of a three-year period. Would that be difficult for you to do?

Ms. Stewart: Actually, we talked about that in our office and we are preparing you a report. Continuing our Personnel Contingency, it has $70,000 in it for our smaller departments. So the Grand Total is $1,470,000.

Comm. Jacobs: Is there anything in this budget that addresses an incentive plan for employees?

Ms. Stewart: No.

Comm. Jacobs: Is there anything in this budget that addresses some kind of volunteer recognition, like a dinner?

Ms. Stewart: No.

Comm. Jacobs: I would like to ask the Budget Office to recommend where some volunteer recognition line item could be placed.

Ms. Stewart: All right.

Ms. Stewart: Starting on Page S-97 is the reimbursable car allowance with 28 cents per mile being recommended in the budget. The Personnel Policy Committee recommended paying the IRS rate of 34.5 cents per mile. If we were to approve that, it would be about a $41,000 impact for reimbursable, $34,000 for fixed. Page S-109, a list of all the Capital Equipment Items that were requested and being recommended.

Comm. Jacobs: I would also like the opportunity during these budget discussions to talk about some reorganization of the county department heads for efficiency and to save money.

Ms. Stewart: On Page S-141, a list of all the computer equipment requested and what was recommended. I included approximately $150,000 for lease payment agreements, Kevin Carr had requested $250,000. Page S-165 relates to the presentation last week on software licenses. Those funds are not included in the Recommended Budget. Page S-167 is a list of the recommended computer software. Not all of this is included in the recommended budget - I will give you a report on that. Page S-170 is the Vehicle Radio Assessment Committee Recommendations.

Judge Armey: Wasn't there some talk last year about raising the mileage levels?
Ms. Fleming, Director of Purchasing and a member of the committee: We did discuss it but did not change the guidelines.

Judge Armey: Let's see if we can evaluate when these cars are turned in, what there condition and mileage is. Using a benchmarch of $75,000 maybe we can do some forecasting.

Ms. Fleming: We are transferring a lot of the higher mileage cars to other departments.

Ms. Stewart: Page S-195 I wanted to point out the differences in what the committee recommended and what our office was able to recommend.

Judge Armey: I would not mind if the committee and the department review these changes and make swaps where necessary.

Ms. Stewart: Page S-198 is a list of all the Social Service Agencies and the committee recommendations. You'll see the adopted budget for this year is $738,805 and the committee is recommending $829,000.

Judge Armey: What is the Water Conservation District. Anyone remember?

Mr. Wells: It is an organization that oversees the maintenance of flood control lakes on private property and goes as far back as the '60s.

Comm. Mitchell: Why would it be listed in Social Services?

Judge Armey: Is that their entire budget?

Ms. Stewart: I think it is just a supplement and I agree, it is really not a social service agency and it needs to be transferred back.

Judge Armey: Next time, let's ask Dr. Burton about that and if there is anything else in here such as MHMR that might be placed elsewhere.

Comm. Jacobs: Are we still looking to take funding for these social service agencies from the tobacco settlement monies?

Ms. Stewart: Yes.

Comm. Mitchell: What is Denton City County Day School?

Ms. Stewart: We will ask Dr. Burton.

Judge Armey: We need to review the questionnaires and familiarize ourselves with these agencies.

Ms. Stewart: Page S-199 is the Health/Dental Benefits Plan Financial Statement and information from Human Resources recapping health insurance on a monthly basis based on claims, etc. The recommended budget includes a $600 increase per employee per year.

Comm. Jacobs: That increase is paid by the county or the employee?

Ms. Stewart: By the county. At this time, employee paid increases have not been discussed.

Comm. Jacobs: We need to let our employees know the good deal that they are receiving on insurance.

Judge Armey: I have been discussing with the Treasurer a way to detail on each paycheck stub exactly what the county contributes to their retirement, etc.

Comm. Jacobs: Let's put that down as an agenda item and ask Cindy to come in and address that idea. What is the total amount of this increase?

Ms. Stewart: $800,000 additional. Right now the county is paying 3.4 million.

Judge Armey: On that posting of an agenda item, I would like to include discussion on joining the consortium that Dallas and Tarrant County put together for third party administrator. It would not necessarily save us dollars but it could streamline our process. In addition, I think it was mentioned to me by Ms. Phillips, to bring on staff a doctor, nurses to establish our own health department for our employees. Both Dallas and Collin County do this. Included in this could be our physicals and our drug screening. We will ask Dr. Burton to look into these ideas.

Ms. Stewart: The initial request that the Library Board submitted is on Page S-224. Page 227 they updated their proposal and asked the court to consider an incremental increase for three years.

Comm. Jacobs: We provide a $10,000 matching fund. Does every library match that?

Ms. Stewart: Yes.

Comm. Jacobs: One alternative as opposed to increasing the capita funding, is to increase the matching funds. We want to encourage the cities to put more money into their libraries and the matching fund is that incentive. So we could decrease the per capita, increase the matching funds amount thereby encouraging a double match to that, costing the county taxpayers less. Perhaps the smaller cities could keep the per capita but decrease the per capita for the large cities.

Ms. Stewart: That proposal needs to go before the library advisory board.

Comm. Jacobs: Donna has enough on her plate and we do not need to get those numbers; too late in the process for new proposals.

Judge Armey: I do not think their request to look at the per capita is out of line because that has been set for many years.

Ms. Stewart: On Page S-230 are items not included in the Recommended Budget but could be funded through tax notes. One exception is the HLM Space Study, so if you were to use tax notes on that, it would free up $170,000.

Comm. Jacobs: If the court is agreeable, let's put that Space Study in this tax note area right away.

Judge Armey: Let's also include the recommendations of the Bldg. & Property Sub-committee because that all falls into the area of tax notes or external financing.

Comm. Jacobs: And I would like to put this list in the order in which the Bldg. & Prop. Committee prioritized it or have them do that if they have not already.

Comm. Carter: We need to look at some things that we could fund through this year's budget or within this year's ability to issue tax notes. It might give some relief to next year's budget.

Ms. Stewart: The other item for which there could be funding is at the bottom of Page 230 in Sheriff's Office Communication.

Comm. Jacobs: Why don't we place this item on the agenda for next week so we can take action on that because I believe the majority of us would like to see this taken out of this year's tax notes.

Ms. Stewart: Would you like me to start scheduling appeals?

Comm. Jacobs: Would you notify us during the week who has appealed? Who has appealed so far?

Ms. Stewart: Yes, Juvenile Probation, the Sheriff's Dept., DIS, Emergency Management. We will provide that list to you.

Comm. Jacobs: As we receive these appeals, can we continue to categorize it in mandated and non-mandated requirements.

Judge Armey: Some items we want to discuss and take action on early in the process: reclassifications, social service committee recommendations, County Criminal Court #5, Enterprise Agreement, Jury Pay, Radio Tower, Law Enforcement contracts, volunteer groups, increasing mileage, reorganization of department heads, computer recommendations, health department and the issue of raises - specific positions and grades. We do not want to give the impression that there will be any specific raise guaranteed to anyone or any percentage across the board. There is no other issue that our employees care about but this one.

Comm. Jacobs: I would also suggest that we do any housecleaning before we hear any appeals. I would like to have the next two meetings for this and not hear any appeals. So when we hear the appeals, the budget is already 99% complete.

Judge Armey: I think that is a good way to proceed. Of course, any 0 impact we can do up front.

Comm. Jacobs: I agree with that. I will need everyone's organizational chart -everyone that addresses Commissioners Court.

Comm. Carter: We have got to address salaries on as-the-need basis rather than across the board. Employees must realize that there are some sacrifices required on their part as well. Any increase in taxes must be well justified.

Judge Armey: I think we have a rare opportunity from the voters on that issue, however it is incumbent on us to tighten our budget.

Comm. Jacobs: We owe Donna and her staff a big thank you and every department who has aided her in this monumental process. I have never been big on across the board raises. We need to be more specific in certain positions. The biggest mistake we could make is to do an across the board raise.

Judge Armey: We thank all departments. We are happy with our budget. Any items we need to return to? Hearing none, we have a motion from Comm. Jacobs, a second from Comm. Carter to adjourn. Commissioners Court is adjourned. (Court adjourned at 5:10 pm)

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