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.
|
|
Denton County Commissioners Court |
Not Official Minutes. For official minutes, please contact the County Clerk at 940-349-2012. |
|
August 14, 2001
Be it remembered, Commissioners Court of Denton County, Texas was called to order at 9:00 am on the 14th day of August, 2001 with Judge Scott Armey presiding. 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 Lockadee Newland, Chief Administrator for Commissioner, Precinct One and was followed by the Pledges of Allegiance to the American and Texas Flags led by Jody Gonzalez, Fire Marshal for Denton County.
Ms. Newland: Dear Heavenly Father, we come to You this morning to ask that You inspire the minds of this Commissioners Court to whom You have committed the responsibility of leadership in Denton County. Give to them the vision of truth and justice, that by their counsel, all students and people in Denton County may work together for good. Give the people of Denton County a desire for justice and the strength of those who came before us, that we may use our liberty in accordance with Your gracious will. Forgive our shortcomings and purify our hearts to see and love the truth. We pray all these things through Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior. Amen.
ITEM 1 PUBLIC INPUT
Constable Floyd, Precinct Two, announced that his home will host a German Exchange Police Officer for two weeks.
Mildred Hawk announced the opening of the historic bridge moved from County Line Road to a City of Denton park on August 25, 2001 at 10:00 am.
ITEM 2 CONSENT AGENDA
The following items were pulled for further consideration and/or separate vote: 7.L & Q and 14.G & H.
AUDITOR/TREASURER
5.B) Approval of Payroll.
PURCHASING
6.A) Approval of specifications and authority to advertise for CMAP (Cold Mix Asphaltic Pavement), Bid #07-01-1438, and any appropriate action. (Briefing 08-07-01)
6.B) Approval of specifications and the authority to advertise for Lubricants and Oils, Bid #07-01-1439, and any appropriate action. (Briefing 08-07-01)
BUDGET
7.C) Approval of Emergency Budget Amendment Request #101900 for various line item for Juvenile Justice Alternative Education Program in the amount of $27,366. (Briefing 08-07-01)
7.D) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102020 to increase revenues and allocate expenditures for various line items for County Planning in the amount of $3,609. (Briefing 08-07-01)
7.E) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102050 for Repairs and Maintenance for County Operations including the transfer of funds from Law Library Unappropriated Contingency in the amount of $1520. (Briefing 08-07-01)
7.F) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102060 for Consultant Fees for Non-Departmental including the transfer of funds from Non-Departmental Unappropriated Contingency-Legislative Contingency in the amount of $4,680. (Briefing 08-07-01)
7.G) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102070 to increase revenues and allocate expenditures for Operating Supplies for County Extension in the amount of $13,125. (Briefing 08-07-01)
7.H) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102080 for Cars/Small Trucks for Public Health-Environmental including the transfer of funds from Non-Departmental Unappropriated Contingency-Alternative Fuel and Vehicle Repair Contingencies in the amount of $4,709. (Briefing 08-07-01)
7.I) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102090 for Computers for County Operations in the amount of $1,495. (Briefing 08-07-01)
7.J) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102100 for Solid Waste Enforcement Grant Supplies for Fire Marshall in the amount of $523. (Briefing 08-07-01)
7.K) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102130 for VCR Projection Equipment and the creation of a new line item for County purposes for FY 2000-2001 for Volunteer Fire Department in the amount of $3,900. (Briefing 08-07-01)
7.M) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102160 for Repairs and Maintenance for County Operations in the amount of $6,000. (Briefing 08-07-01)
7.N) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102170 for Cars/Small Trucks for Sheriff's Department in the amount of $10,876.
7.O) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102180 for Computer Supplies for Sheriff's Department in the amount of $3,159.
7.P) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102190 for Computer Supplies for Sheriff's Department in the amount of $9,992.
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.) John Higgins, Detention Officer 1(DO1)/County Jail; Jason Wilkins, DO1/County Jail; Patrick Coultas, DO1/County Jail; Kelli Hemker, DO1/County Jail; Delia Mays, Administrative Technician/Task Force Grant; Deborah Hartley, Court Clerk/JP#5; Terri Bair, Deputy Clerk-Recording/Passports/County Clerk; Michelle York, Data Entry Clerk/Records Management.
8.C) Approve revisions to the Demotion section and Probationary Period section of the Salary Administration Guidelines. (Briefing 08-07-01)
HEALTH
9.A) Approval of contract with the Texas Department of Health through the Bureau of Regional and Local Health Operations in support of Essential Public Health Services. (Briefing 08-07-01)
9.B) Approval of contract with the Texas Department of Health for Immunization Services. (Briefing 08-07-01)
9.C) Approval of contract with the Texas Department of Health/Innovation Grant relating to the reduction of Infant Mortality in Denton County. (Briefing 08-07-01)
PUBLIC WORKS
10.C) Approval of the Final Plat for the Eagles Bluff Addition, Precinct 1.
10.D) Approval of the Final Plat for the Sonora Addition, Phase 2, Precinct 4.
10.E) Approval of the Final Plat for the Camden Addition, Phase 2, Precinct 4.
COUNTY CLERK
11.A) Approve the minutes for Denton County Commissioners Court Meeting, and the County Clerk minutes for Budget Work Session for July 31, 2001, Formal Session.
LEGAL
14.D) Approval of the Agreement between Denco Area 9-1-1 District (Denco) and Denton County, Texas, for the 9-1-1 CAMA Trunking and Database Update for Private Switch ALI. (Briefing 08-07-01)
14.E) Approval of renewal for the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for Tax Collection Agreement for Tax Collection between Denton County and the City of Lake Dallas. (Briefing 08-07-01)
14.F) Approval of renewal for the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for Tax Collection Agreement for Tax Collection between Denton County and Little Elm ISD. (Briefing 08-07-01)
14.I) Approval of the renewal for the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for Tax Collection between Denton County and the City of Sanger. (Briefing 08-07-01)
14.J) Approval of the renewal for the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for Tax Collection between Denton County and the City of Aubrey. (Briefing 08-07-01)
Move to approve Consent Agenda with the exception of Items 7.L & Q and 14.G & H by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. White.
Motion Carried 4-0-1 (Jacobs abstained)
Court Order 01-0501
ITEM 5 AUDITOR/TREASURER
5.A) Approval of Bill Report.
(Payments from Adult Probation, Community Corrections, Pre-Trial Services and District Attorney Check Fee Fund are presented for recording purposes only.)DELETION FROM GENERAL FUND: $100.00 TO Cynthia Henry, duplicate payment;
CORRECTION FROM GENERAL FUND: $23,297.45 TO Vertex, incorrect coding, re-issue to Juvenile Fund.
ADDITIONS TO GENERAL FUND:
To JP#5, $25.00 to Julie Lundberg and $25.00 to Anna Lisa Lyon for Gainesville Travel Advance; to Gov't. Center, Carrollton, $2,468.22 to TXU Electric for services to the Carrollton Gov't. Center; to 393rd, $351.00 to Adam's Mark Hotel for lodging for V. Isaacks/393rd; to CPS, $405.00 to DCAC for registration fee for Kim Sheppard; to Criminal/DA, $74.40 to KSK Publications for High Technology Crime Book;
ADDITIONS:
To Juvenile, $160.00 to Richard Woods & Assoc. for Polygraph Services;
To TNCP, $38,011.97 to HGAC for two 2001 Ford Super Cab Truck;
To Public Health, $2,407.34 to Sam's Club Pharmacy for prescriptions.Move to approve the Bill Report, as amended, by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-0502
ITEM 7 BUDGET
7.B) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #101980 for Lease Payments and the creation of a new line item for county purposes for FY 2000-2001 for County Operations including the transfer of funds from Non-Departmental Unappropriated Contingency-Regular Contingency in the amount of $130,500. (Briefing 08-07-01)
Move to approve with a posting next week for a review of the contract by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-0503
7.L) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102140 for Computers for Public Health-Clinical in
the amount of $43,176. (Briefing 08-07-01)DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM POSTPONED UNTIL LATER IN THIS HEARING
ITEM 8 HUMAN RESOURCES
8.B) Approve revisions to Policy #3.11-Personal Leave.
Move to approve by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0504
ITEM 7 BUDGET
7.Q) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102250 for Supplies for Archival Preservation for
CHOS Museum in the amount of $1,860.Move to approve by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. White.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0505
ITEM 8 HUMAN RESOURCES
8.D) Approve revisions to Policy #3.9B-Sick Leave Pool. (Briefing 08-07-01)
Move to approve by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-05068.E) Approve revisions to Policy #3.8-Vacation Time. (Briefing 08-07-01)
Move to approve a one-week vacation for new employees after a six-month probationary period, otherwise policy remains the same by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Mitchell.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0507
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.
NO ACTION
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 approve the resignation of Kam Daniel and the appointment, effective immediately, of Laurie Manning to the Child Protective Services Board with a re-appointment of Dr. Jennifer Martin to the CPS Board, contingent upon their CPS Board approved credentials, by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-050813.B) Approval of any action regarding the 77th Legislative Session - Commissioners Court.
NO ACTION
13.D) Approval of appointment of Election Judges and Alternate Judges for FY2002 - Election Administration.
NO ACTION
13.E) Approval of Resolution establishing a schedule for appointment of "rotating" North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA) Board positions. (Briefing 08-07-01)
Move to approve by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Mitchell.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (Jacobs nay)
Court Order 01-050913.F) Approval of any possible action on a disaster declaration for the prevention of and threat of wildland fires due to drought conditions in Denton County - Fire Marshal.
NO ACTION
ITEM 14 LEGAL
14.B) Approval of the a) Interagency Agreement between Dallas County, Texas and Denton County, Texas, and b) Resolution supporting the North Texas Auto Theft Task Force Grant. (Briefing 08-07-01)
Move to approve by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-051014.C) Approval of appointment of Indigent Defense Standardization Committee to consider adoption of Standards for Criminal Indigent Defense as adopted by the Texas State Bar Board of Directors, Members of the Committee may include: Bruce Isaacks, James Wells, Kevin Carr, Donna Stewart, Cynthia Mitchell, Sherri Adelstein, Robin Ramsay, a representative from the Denton County District Judges, a representative
from the Denton County Judges and a member of the Commissioners Court. (Briefing 08-07-01)Move to approve with the judges selected being Judge Gabriel, Judge Garcia and Judge Armey by Judge Armey, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-051114.G) Approval of renewal for the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for Tax Collection Agreement for Tax Collection between Denton County and Denton County Fresh Water Supply District No. 1-B.
14.H) Approval of renewal for the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for Tax Collection between Denton County and Denton County Fresh Water Supply District No. 1-D. (Briefing 08-07-01)
Move to not renew by Comm. Jacobs, second by Judge Armey.
Motion Failed 2-2-1 (White & Carter nay, Mitchell abstained)Move to approve 14.G & H by Comm. White, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 3-2-0 (Jacobs & Armey nay)
Court Order 01-051214.K) Approval of, a) the project for road improvements to Litsey Road consisting of Phases I, II, and III, form State Highway 114, to I-35 W., and b) the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between the City of Fort Worth and Denton County, Texas. (Formal 8-7-01)
Move to approve by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-051314.L) Approval of Agreement between Owner, Denton County, Texas, and Engineer, Isbell Engineering Group, Inc., for Professional Services for the Swisher Water Supply Corporation Water System Improvements Step Grant.
Move to approve by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0514
ITEM 16 ADDENDA
16.B) Discussion of changes to the Lewisville Lake Bridge Corridor Feasibility Study Interlocal Agreement between Denton County, Texas and the North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA)-Legal.
FOR BRIEFING ONLY
NO ACTION - NO DISCUSSION16.D) Discussion of update on Financial Management System project with STW, Inc-Information Services.
FOR BRIEFING ONLY
NO ACTION - NO DISCUSSION16.C) Approval of Agreement between the Denton County, Texas and the North Texas State Fair Association, Inc., to provide a water Truck for the 2001 North Texas Fair and Rodeo-Legal.
Move to approve by Comm. White, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0515
ITEM 17 RECESS 11:00 AM
ITEM 18 RECONVENE 1:50 PM
ITEM 7 BUDGET
ITEM 16 ADDENDA
7. & 16A) Approval of any action related to Denton County's 2001-2002 budget.
Judges Gabriel and Shipman appealed to Commissioners Court for the position of District Court Administrator which had been cut from their budget in action taken by the court on July 31, 2001.
ITEM 13 OTHER DEPARTMENTS
13.C) 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.13.C-1) Move to approve the recommendation from the 2001 Redistricting Committee of the Commissioners Precinct lines with the inclusion of the necessary changes to be made by the Texas House and Senate by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-051613.C-2) Move to approve the Justice of the Peace/Constable redistricting lines with that section of Hebron presently lying in Precinct 200 be moved from Precinct 200 to 221, Precincts 200 & 230 to be placed in JP Precinct 6, and direct the Chief of the Civil Division, Carmen Rivera-Worley, and the Director of Elections, Don Alexander, to prepare a letter for the Justice Division of the State of Texas and place on the agenda for review by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Mitchell.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0517
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. Mitchell.
Motion Carried 5-0-015.A) Real Property: Texas Government Code, Section 551.072: Real Property.
15.B) Deliberation regarding security procedures and devices - Texas Government Code, Section 551.076.15.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.NO ACTION ON ITEMS 15.A.B & C
15.D) Consultation with Attorney: Contemplated Litigation, Texas Government Code, Section 551.071 (1)(A), ACS Cabling.
Move to authorize the District Attorney, Civil Division, to take whatever action necessary to protect the interests of the County, including a letter to advise ACS Cabling that this court is considering finding them in default, and allow us to communicate with their performance bond company by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-051815.E) Consultation with Attorney: Pending Litigation, Texas Government Code, Section 551.071 (1)(A); Robert Osburn, P.C. and Blassingame & Osburn, P.C. v. Denton County District Clerk, in the 393rd District Court of Denton County, Cause No. 2001-60515-393.
Assign this Pending Litigation to the Civil Division of the Criminal District Attorney's Office by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Mitchell.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0519
ITEM 7 BUDGET
7.L) Approval of Budget Amendment Request #102140 for Computers for Public Health-Clinical in the amount of $43,176. (Briefing 08-07-01)
Move to approve by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. White.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0520
ITEM 16 ADDENDA
A) Approval of any action related to Denton County's 2001-2002 budget:
1. Salary/Benefit Information
2. County Criminal Court#5
3 Employee Health Care
4. Jail Expansion
5. Transportation
6. SB 7 -Court Appointed Attorney's Fees
7. List of Potential Reductions and Additions
8. Economic Development Funding
9. Budget Planning Calendar Discussions
10. MHMR Additional Funding Request
11. Law Library Computer Request
12. Aide to Commissioners Court Budget
13. Review of Budget Worksheet Item
14. Department Appeals-Impact Above Recommended
Report on New Hire Appeals
Spreadsheet-Court Requests to Hear Appeals
Tax/Assessor/Collector
Treasurer
District Clerk
Various Sheriff's Department Budgets
Constable Pct. #6
Veterans Services
Child Protective Services
County Clerk
Human Resources
Criminal District Attorney-Civil Division
Emergency Management
License & Weight
Constable Pct. #115. Other Discussion Relating to the FY2001-2002 Budget and any Appropriate Action-Budget.
(The following is a paraphrasing of the
motions and salient points made during this budget work session.)
ITEM 1 SALARY/BENEFIT INFORMATION
Ms. Stewart: Page 824 of your packet - that has just been handed out today - is the Summary of Elected Officials/Department Heads vs. Assistants Salary Increase. This report is about giving all the Seconds in Command at least a 14% raise, as was directed by court in the last motion of August 7, 2001. I met with Amy Phillips and we share a concern about the Technical Services Manager. My recommendation is to put it back at the original level that was approved - Grade 28, Step 10 for $76,475.
Judge Armey: Is that the only change you would recommend making on this report?
Ms. Stewart: The Assistant Manager of Facilities on Page 828 was also a concern as far as maintaining internal equity. You may want to look at a Grade 27, Step 7 for $64,228. Also, the court took no action regarding County Planning.
Judge Armey: The County Planning Manager is currently vacant. There is an Interim Appointment. My suggestion would be to allow the New Hire Guidelines determine the appropriate salary for the County Planning Manager with one caveat; that whatever position Ms. Allcorn assumes, she receive a 14% raise. We do not need to take action on this item today. For budgetary purposes, we can use the amounts shown in this report and, if necessary, use the salary contingency.
7.A-1) Move to approve the Technical Services Manager/Information Services at Grade 28, Step 10 for $76,475 by Judge Armey, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (White nay)
Court Order 01-05217.A-2) Move to approve the Assistant Manager of Facilities at Grade 27, Step 7 for $64,228 by Judge Armey, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 3-1-1 (Carter nay and Mitchell abstained)
Court Order 01-0522Judge Armey: We will now discuss Road & Bridge and Department Heads.
Comm. Jacobs: Since court decided last week that de-centralizing Road & Bridge was not a favorable option, I prepared an organizational chart for the Department of Public Works. This scenario saves $8,000 and all salaries are better correlated but this is just a starting point.
Comm. White: I agree with most of the chart except the Planning Manager's salary which I would like to see at $80,702.
Comm. Jacobs: If that is the consensus of the court, fine, but I remind you that the job description for the Planning Manager will be rewritten and expanded, requiring us to possibly increase the salary after advertising for the position.
Comm. Carter: I like the organization.
Comm. Jacobs: With the adjustment suggested by Comm. White, this plan would save up to $12,000.
7.A-3) Move to adopt this organizational chart with the adjustment of the Planner's Salary from $85,000 to $80,702 by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. White.
Motion Carried 4-0-1 (Mitchell abstained)
Court Order 01-0523Judge Armey: Are there questions on Department Heads?
Comm. White: I believe there is some confusion on the action taken for Department Heads. My understanding was that they were brought to the average, as was my intent. Ms. Stewart informed me that not only were they brought to the average but they were also increased by 14%. That was not my intent. Taking them to the average and increasing them by 4% is fair and equitable.
Comm. Jacobs: My understanding was to treat the department heads exactly like we have the employees - taking them to average and applying a 14% raise. Amy, can you explain the action taken by court?
Ms. Phillips: We adjusted pay grades 20-30 to get our pay line proportionately congruent with the average pay line from the surveys. Then we adjusted the entire pay line up 10% and gave each employee a cost of living raise, or step.
Comm. Jacobs: Did that 10% adjustment bring everyone to average?
Ms. Phillips: Yes.
Comm. White: Exactly my point. Department Heads are brought to the average and then given 4%, not brought to the average and given 14%.
Judge Armey: Every employee has received at least a 14% increase. Let me go through the percent increase currently on the table for Department Heads and see if there is a motion to change that: Aide to the Court -14% increase, Human Resources - 16%, Purchasing -14%, Information Services - 14.9%, Veterans Service - 14%, Budget Officer - 16%, Director of Public Works - 11.8%, Elections Administrator - 3.6%, Juvenile Probation - 14%, and Health Department -16%.
(End of Tape Recording #2 of 6)
Comm. White: I have a motion that all department heads be brought to the salary average with a 4% increase and, if they are already over average, then be given the 4% increase.
Comm. Mitchell: I will second.
Judge Armey: This motion would do the following: Aide to Court - 4%, HR - 6%, Purchasing - 4%, IS - 4.9%, Veterans Service - 4%, Budget Office -6%, Elections Administrator - 3.6%, Juvenile Probation - 4%, and Health Department -6%. I will be voting against this motion.
Comm. Carter: I will be voting against it also. I think we have handled this terribly and I think we need to go back and get a recommendation from Amy. We have not given any weight to merit. I would like to see every employee's three-year history.
Ms. Phillips: We do have a merit component to the pay raise. Some people will not be receiving 4% because their merit scores are low.
Comm. Jacobs: I think we need a reality check. Ms. Stewart, do we have time to do what Comm. Carter is suggesting?
Ms. Stewart: A three-year history can be done at a later time but not now. If court wants to adopt this budget by September 11, it must take action today.
Judge Armey: I believe we have made progress this year, being able to give our employees a 14% raise.
Comm. Jacobs: We used to pay on performance but then we had some elected officials who would give all their employees high scores. That was a disaster. If you want external and internal equity, there is no simple plan. I have not seen any plans in writing from the court as to how to deal with salary issues.
Comm. Carter: There are systems to reward performance that would work.
Judge Armey: There is a motion on the floor. Motion fails 1 in favor, three opposed and one abstention. Is there any action related to Elected Official Salaries?
Comm. Jacobs: I would like to hear the report from the Salary Grievance Committee.
Judge Armey: This committee met last night and heard four appeals. Five appeals had been submitted and one was withdrawn. Those who were heard were Sheriff Lucas, Constable Larry Floyd, District Clerk Sherry Adelstein and Constable Hatzenbuhler. The latter two are not being brought forth to Commissioners Court. Sheriff's appeal was to set the salary with a 14% increase at $91,796. The vote was 7-2 puting it on the table to be discussed. The vote on Constable Floyd's appeal was 8-1 bringing his forward for the court to consider a $1300 increase for a salary of $57,997.
Comm. Jacobs: So the Salary Grievance Committee took action on only two elected officials. Let me explain this Committee. It is required by statute, picked at random from the Grand Jury lists, made up of nine members. If they vote unanimously for an elected officials request or appeal, Commissioners Court would have no option but to vote in the salary on which the committee voted. If the committee votes in the majority, as in these two cases, then the court must revisit the salaries requested. I am not in total agreement with what they have done but they must be taken seriously.
7.A-4) Move to approve the recommendations of the Salary Grievance Committee: approve a 14% increase for the Sheriff bringing his salary to $91,796 and the $1300 increase for Constable Floyd for a salary of $57,997 by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Comm. Carter: I seconded with a friendly amendment that we adjust all the constables' salaries accordingly.
Comm. Jacobs: That is not a friendly amendment.
Comm. Jacobs: I am saying to approve what they recommended, nothing more.
Judge Armey: Is that motion now being offered as an amendment?
Comm. Carter: Yes.
Comm. Mitchell: I will second the amendment for discussion.
Comm. Carter: I withdraw my motion and will make another one for all constables.
Comm. Jacobs: My motion is just to accept the recommendation remembering, members, that this committee has more legal power than any other committee this court has in place. This committee took no other action on the other constables.
Judge Armey: The committee is charged with hearing the appeals of officials - not groups of officials and not all elected officials. Constable Hatzenbuhler's request was to be brought to the same level as the Justices of the Peace. The vote on that was 5-3-1, not reaching the majority level required to bring the issue to this court.
7.A-4) Move to approve the recommendations of the Salary Grievance Committee: approve a 14% increase for the Sheriff bringing his salary to $91,796 and the $1300 increase for Constable Floyd for a salary of $57,997 by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 3-2-0 (White & Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-0524Comm. Carter: I would move to raise Constables Precinct 1,3,4,5 & 6 to $57,997.
Comm. Mitchell: I will second.
Comm. Jacobs: I would give strong consideration to vote in the positive for this motion except for the action of Constable Hatzenbuhler. The fact that his appeal was heard and it did not reach a majority of the committee, tells me the Salary Grievance Committee does not see all the constables in the same light. I am not saying that I do or don't, I am just saying that they did not. Based on that, I will be voting in the negative.
Judge Armey: The prevailing sentiment of the committee was that Constable Floyd does additional work, such as the License & Weights and Traffic Enforcement, thereby warranting a higher salary.
Comm. Carter: This is a fairness issue to me and I believe, in order to maintain equity, that all constables be paid the same as are all the Justices of the Peace.
Judge Armey: The committee's conclusion was that if the other constables felt they deserved more, they could have also appealed. Ms. Rivera-Worley, do the constables have to make the same amount of money?
Ms. Rivera-Worley: That is not required by statute. You have met all statutory requirements. They had an opportunity to come before the Salary Grievance Committee.
Comm. Mitchell: If we are going to raise one constable's salary, we need to raise all of them. The Sheriff's appeal should be approved.
Comm. Jacobs: Let me make this clear for the general public that we are not slighting our constables. They are receiving a 16% raise even without this $1300 extra. They are getting one of the highest percentage raises next to the JPs. The Salary Grievance Board only voted for one constable and they had all the same information that we have.
Comm. Carter: The JPs and Constables have always made the same salary and now we are creating another inequity.
Judge Armey: Motion on the floor is to bring the remaining five constables the same level as Constable Floyd with a $1300 increase over and above the 16%. Motion fails 2-3-0 with Commissioners White, Jacobs and Judge Armey voting nay.
ITEM 14 LAW LIBRARY COMPUTER REQUEST
Ms. Stewart: I would like the court to address Law Library funding on Page 9 of 10 for a $5700 increase with 0 impact to the budget.
Comm. Jacobs: It is important to point out that the Law Library Funds do not come from General Funds nor do they come from our taxpayers. It comes through a separate mechanism where revenues are collected for the Law Library specifically. Ms. Stewart is correct, we need to pay for their new computers now rather than over a long term. There is money in their fund balance to do so.7.A-5) Move to approve the transfer of $5700 from the Law Library Fund Balance for the outright purchase of two new computers for the Law Library by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. White.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0525Judge Armey: Ms. Stewart, what do we have available to us at this point?
Ms. Stewart: $302,890.Judge Armey: That is available to us for appeals. And the amount of savings available to us in salaries?
Ms. Stewart: $95,982.
Judge Armey: That amount could be used toward the Sheriff's request for his DO1s and patrol deputies with an impact of $87,000.
Comm. Jacobs: What is the impact of the Sheriff's request?
Ms. Stewart: $73,733 for the jail and $13,087 for patrol for a total of $86,820.
Comm. Jacobs: And do you feel this recommendation is reasonable for the court to consider?Ms. Stewart: It is a lot less than I expected and I would recommend it.
Judge Armey: I believe the only other areas to be affected by salary monies would be the reclasses.
ITEM 15 AIDE TO COMMISSIONERS COURT BUDGET
Judge Armey: Let us discuss the Aide to Court's budget.
Comm. Mitchell: I brought this forward because we had $3000 in last year's budget for training and/or traveling for court members. Two months ago I requested some dollars from Barbara and there wasn't any. My suggestion is that all of us should equally share it. Personally, I would like to see it put in our own individual accounts and use it as we see fit.
Comm. White: I would like to see it in our own individual accounts.
Comm. Jacobs: I am confused. Are we talking about a change of policy or dollar amounts? I would welcome any change to the policy, just put an item on the agenda so we can talk about it. If we are changing dollar amounts, how much are you suggesting?
Comm. Mitchell: I am not suggesting we change the dollar amount - $3000 is fine. I am talking about how it is used.
Judge Armey: We will review that policy on the regular agenda. Is there a motion on changing the dollar amount? We are now to Potential Additions on Page 757.
ITEM 7 LIST OF POTENTIAL REDUCTIONS AND ADDITIONS
Comm. Jacobs: I have more cuts to recommend. Ms. Stewart, will you distribute the sheets on vacant slots. You will see on the first page, third slot, we have already taken action on the Sheriff's dept. slot. The two slots would affect the General Fund and the bottom Road & Bridge. I am suggesting that we eliminate those six slots that have been vacant for over a year in Road & Bridge and apply that $210,287 to more material. Based on the facts that Commissioners for Precincts 1 & 4 have stated their need for more material and having been a road commissioner myself for eight years for one-fourth the county, there are now 2 1/2 times more employees in R&B now than in 1981. This could only be a benefit. The top two slots, one for Accounts Payable Clerk has been vacant for 9 months and in the County Jail the Deputy Impact Officer has been vacant over a year, Donna?
Ms. Stewart: The Sheriff's Office has agreed to cut that slot.
Comm. Jacobs: This recommendation would result in an additional $84,500 to the General Fund. By reducing the slots in R&B, would add an additional $210,287 to the R&B fund.Betty McBride, Chief Assistant County Auditor: (outlined the need for the position of Accounts Payable Clerk)
Comm. Carter: Mr. Gibbs, do you see any problem with reducing these six positions in R&B? Mr. Gibbs, Road & Bridge Manager: With the additional material, we would need more staff to apply it.
Judge Armey: Commissioners Court is subsidizing R&B this coming year with $500,000 for salaries.
Comm. Jacobs: Betty's points are succinct and valid so I would agree to reducing that to 75% for a January start on the Accounts Payable Clerk but I need the assurance that this position will be filled in January. What would that amount be, Donna?
Ms. Stewart: That would be a $8,386 savings bringing the total savings so far to $59,581.7.A-6) Move to start the Accounts Payable Clerk at the 75% level January 1, 2002 reducing the amount by $8,386 and that the Deputy Impact Program Officer be eliminated for a savings of $51,195 by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0527Comm. Jacobs: I agree with Mr. Gibbs to a point but toward the end of every budget year, we are looking for additional funds for materials out of Unappropriated Contingency and we are doing that with the same amount of staff we have now. That tells me we can take this same amount of staff and get this added material on the ground.
Comm. Carter: Mr. Gibbs, have there be any positions added to R&B since 1991?
Mr. Gibbs: There may have been a couple added in the Equipment Operator slot but not in the Truck Driver slots.
Comm. Carter: We can reallocate now from our attrition line item to other accounts. If we leave these positions in the department, could we not use this money later in the year for material?
Mr. Gibbs: Yes.
Comm. White: Eliminating these slots would help this year but in the future the department will be left short on attrition monies.
Judge Armey: But we end up using it every year for materials and the price of materials just keeps going up. Do you want to budget a phantom position or just go ahead and buy the much-needed materials?
Comm. Mitchell: Am I hearing what I think I am hearing? Are we budgeting employees and intentionally not filling those positions? I have a real problem with that. If a slot has not been filled in over a year, than that position is not necessary. We should not be budgeting slots in order to get money.
Comm. Carter: I agree with you but we are trying to balance manpower with materials.
Judge Armey: Is there a motion to eliminate these positions and place the money in materials in the R&B dept?
Comm. Mitchell: So moved.
Comm. Carter: I will second for discussion.
Comm. Jacobs: The recommendation, I believe, would be an asset to R&B but if the two commissioners it most affects do not believe that, then I don't think we should vote for it.
Comm. White: I would like to hear Mr. Gibb's recommendation.Mr. Gibbs: We could eliminate some of the slots but not all of them and not these particular ones.
Comm. White: How many would you recommend?
Comm. Carter: Can you come back to us with your recommendation?
7.A-7) Move to amend to table the motion eliminating 6 positions in Road & Bridge until the Human Resource Director and Mr. Gibbs returns with additional information by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 3-2-0 (Mitchell and Armey nay)
Court Order 01-0528Comm.White: There is a handout for what I am proposing and that is a 5% cut across-the-board on the Operating Budget, outside of salaries. I have discussed this with Ms. Stewart and there are some places that cannot be cut, such as debt service, etc. I am willing to overlook those areas.
Comm. Mitchell: I will second for discussion.
Judge Armey: This is not a cut, this is a statement. You are asking each department to go back and cut another 5% of their own budget. I know I would have a hard time cutting my own budget by 5%. This is micro-managing after Ms. Stewart has already worked many long hours to cut the budget and come up with the Recommended Budget. 5% is not specific enough for me to know what it means. Who determines the 5%?
Comm. White: We can go through line by line and figure out which can be cut and which cannot.
(End of Tape Recording #3 of 6)
Comm. Jacobs: There is a statute on the books that says if we do not provide enough money for elected officials to run their departments, they can take us to court. This is not anything like city government where you can make those kinds of cuts. Ms. Stewart, what percentage have you cut to get us to the Recommended Budget?
Ms. Stewart: My office cut the budget by 23% or 22 million dollars.
Comm. Jacobs: Almost ¼ was already cut. Do you believe, Ms. Stewart, that the Operating Budget is a reasonable amount for the elected officials and department heads to carry-on their required services?
Ms. Stewart: Yes.
Comm. Jacobs: Do you feel if we cut anymore, we would be below that reasonable amount?
Ms. Stewart: Yes.
Comm. Jacobs: I know Comm. White has good intentions and we are looking for places to cut but the end result is we're crossing a line where good intentions become a liability, especially in the area of operations. That is why I was looking in the area of Capital Items because that is safer to cut than operations.
Comm. Mitchell: We do have to make sure the elected officials have enough money to run their budget but I think we are shooting the messenger. I do not think it is Comm. White's intention to micro-manage your budget or to tell the departments how much they need or don't need. Her intention is to tell everyone to tighten their belts and see if there are other places to cut. When I look at the Bill Report every month and see the expenses for Training and Mobile phones, I think it is ridiculous and I think there are those taking advantage of monies not their own. It may be a little late to look for 5% cuts but don't shoot the messenger just because her message is applicable.
Comm. White: I am not saying that Donna did not do a good job in presenting the budget. I disagree with the fact that this has been brought in the ninth hour. I have been talking about cuts and was told we are going to get to cuts. What happens when we have the Public Hearing, possibly September 11, and we have citizens disagreeing?
Judge Armey: We have the opportunity to amend the budget anytime before its adoption. The fact is our tax level has dropped in the last twenty years and our departments are extremely conservative in their spending. Then we ask them to be even more efficient in the Recommended Budget. So to ask them to cut another 5% is being irresponsible on the court's part. Maybe next year we need to have Budget Hearings before we get the Recommended Budget. This year, as in the past, we asked Donna to give us a budget without raising taxes. She has done that and done that every year for the last ten years.
Comm. Jacobs: I would like to make a couple of comments on Comm. White's valid comment about the Public Hearing. The fact is, and this should be in the overhead during the Public Hearing, Denton County is right now at 23 cents and we're looking at possibly raising it 2 cents just to look at salary increases. Tarrant County's rate is 61 cents, Dallas County is 45 cents and Collin County is 34 cents. We are almost a dime lower than our nearest competitor telling me that we have been really efficient. Secondly, the only reason this year we are raising taxes is to address our Non-Binding Referendum. We have not said that enough. We can vote on the 11th to raise no taxes and give no salary increases. We should honor this Non-Binding Referendum but, at the same time, I am suggesting that we ask our fellow elected officials how they feel. I am passing out a draft of a letter that we send out to all of our elected officials. (She read the draft giving them a place to check either the recommendation to raise taxes, thereby raising salaries, or NOT to implement the Non-Binding Referendum, raising no taxes or salaries.) Their responses should be returned by 5:00 on Friday, August 17th to the Aide to Court's Office. Over the last decade, this court has frozen salaries in order not to have a tax increase. This court has frozen hiring in order not to have a tax increase. We can again freeze salaries and give no tax increase. So, there is a choice.
Comm. White: We get their responses, then what?
Comm. Jacobs: The responses of our elected officials will influence my vote on the 11th.
Comm. White: I receive phone calls in my office daily about cutting the fat from the budget and so that is what has prompted me to propose first, my line item cuts and now, for discussion, this 5% across-the-board cut.
Comm. Carter: Let me applaud Comm. White's concerns about cutting the budget.
Judge Armey: The motion on the floor is to cut the Operating Budget by 5%. The motion fails one in favor, four opposed. Are there other areas of cuts?
7.A-8) Move to cut pagers from Commissioner Precinct Three budget for a savings of $192.00 by Comm. Mitchell, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0529Judge Armey: We will now return to the Road & Bridge Positions to eliminate. Mr. Gibbs is ready to present his recommendation.
Mr. Gibbs: We can cut 042-RE/Engineering Tech II/Foreman; 074-RW/Detention Officer I/Crewman, 003-RE/Driver/Equipment Operator; 033-RE/Driver/Equipment Operator; 077-RW/Heavy Equipment Operator and a Field Mechanic to fill in-house so whatever position is left vacant can be cut for a total of six slots.
7.A-9) Move to cut six slots in Centralized Road & Bridge as recommended by the Road & Bridge Manager by Comm. White, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0530Ms. Rivera-Worley: Did you not have an earlier motion on this item?
Judge Armey: That motion was withdrawn.Comm. White: I will move to add $300,000 to the Recommended Budget for asphalt for Centralized Road & Bridge.
Comm. Carter: I will second for discussion. I would like to hear from Ms. Stewart before we take this motion.
Ms. Stewart: $212,000 approximately will be added to R&B from the elimination of those six slots.
Comm. Carter: What is the total for material with that additional $212,000?
Ms. Stewart: The material's budget was 2,278,400 so with the additional $212,000 that budget will total 2.47 or almost 2.5 million as opposed to last year's 2.3 million and the department has used 1.64 million by July 6, 2001.
Comm. Carter: Would you consider $100,000 rather than $300,000?
Comm. White: I would consider $200,000.
Comm. Jacobs: I will be voting against the motion for the following reasons: First, the $10 fee supporting R&B comes from 75% of the area seeing no benefits from this $300,000; secondly, we are increasing R&B expenditures this year by a half of million; thirdly, monies are tight this year with the new courts and the salary raises so this is not the time to spend this kind of money on R&B. Also, there is another option if R&B needs more money and that would be to form Road Districts. I have information about Road Districts when and if members are interested.
Comm. Carter: Would you consider $150,000, Comm. White?
Comm. White: OK, I will amend my motion to $150,000.
Judge Armey: Vote taken, motion fails 2-3-0 with Judge Armey, Comm. Jacobs and Comm. Mitchell voting nay.
Comm. Carter: I will move for $300,000 for property in Roanoke for a government center. The JP's facility is up for sale and we need to be looking diligently for a site and set aside some money for land in that area. We need a first-class facility in one of the fastest growing areas of the county.
Comm. Mitchell: I will second for discussion. Our lease contract expires in October of 2002?
Comm. Carter: No, October of 2001. I would like it modeled after the Carrollton facility plus buying about 6 acres of land for at least $50,000 per acre.
Judge Armey: Vote taken, motion fails one in favor, four opposed.
Comm. Carter: What do we do when we get evicted?
ITEM 5 TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
7.A-10) Move to add $50,000 to the budget for the creation of the Transportation Authority with another $50,000 earmarked in Unappropriated Contingency by Judge Armey, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-05317.A-11) Move to reinstate the District Court Administrator position, as it was in the Recommended Budget, moving $53,519 out of Senate Bill 7 Contingency line item (see Court Order 01-0453) and back into the budget of the District Court with a 0 impact to the Recommended budget by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. White.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (Armey nay)
Court Order 01-05327.A-12) Move to revert the Traffic Enforcement Officer position as was in the Recommended Budget to Constable Hatzenbuhler, Precinct Four, rather than placing that position in Constable Precinct Two (see Court Order 01-0456) for a 0 impact to the budget by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Mitchell.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0533Judge Armey: Ms. Stewart, can you give us a monetary update?
Ms. Stewart: $312,663. And for salaries, $95,982.
Judge Armey: Let us look at reclasses.Ms. Stewart: The Sheriff requested that his Chief Administrator position be reclassed on Page 6 of 10 and Constable, Precinct One is requesting a reclassification of the Administrative Manager.
7.A-13) Move to approve the reclassification of the Chief Administrator to the Chief Deputy in the Sheriff's Office for an impact of $1,608 by Comm. Mitchell, second by Comm. White.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (Armey nay)
Court Order 01-05347.A-14) Move to approve salary revisions in the Sheriff's Office for Deputies, Corporals and Sergeants in Patrol/shift positions for an impact of $13,087 by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-05357.A-15) Move to approve the requested salary revisions in the County Jail for Detention Officers I with a budgetary impact of $73,733 by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-05367.A-16) Move to approve the addition of (1) Part-Time Office Support Specialist position and approve the reclassification of an Administrative Manager to Constable, Precinct One for an impact of $18,448 by Comm. Mitchell, second by Judge Armey.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0537ITEM - WORKSHEET - VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS
Judge Armey: That covers all items but the worksheet. Ms. Stewart, any balance left in salaries goes back to the taxpayers. Page one of the worksheet including appeals.
Comm. Jacobs: Also, I would like a vote on the draft letter to the elected officials.
7.A-17) Move to approve a draft of a letter to all elected officials requesting whether or not they
support raising taxes to pay for salary raises and requiring all Elected Officials' signature and
responses to be returned by 5:00 Friday, August 17, 2001 by Comm. Jacobs, second by
Comm. White.Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0538Judge Armey: Page one of the worksheet. Is there a motion on the Employee Health Care Clinic?
Comm. Jacobs: It is my understanding that we may have some legal questions on this item and this is not the appropriate time to initiate the clinic.
Judge Armey: That item will die. Economic Development item has been withdrawn. SB 7 Court Appointed Attorney fees. No action on that item.
7.A-18) Move to approve the Juvenile Probation In-Home Based Counseling Grant Match for an impact of $75,000 by Comm. White, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-0539
ITEM - WORKSHEET - COUNTY CLERK
Judge Armey: No action on the first three items. Is there a motion on modular furniture?
7.A-19) Move to approve Modular furniture for the new civil court for an impact of $1500 by Comm. Carter, second by Judge Armey.
Motion Carried 3-2-0 (White & Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-05407.A-20) Move to delete the Lease Payment for the Documatch Mail Processor and transfer the savings of $19,000 to increase postage expense by same amount by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 4-0-1 (Mitchell abstained)
Court Order 01-0541
ITEM - WORKSHEET - PAGE 2 OF 10
HUMAN RESOURCES
7.A-21) Move to approve the Benefits Coordinator position and M & O for this position for a half-year for a budgetary impact of $28,246 by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0542
ITEM - WORKSHEET - PAGE 3 OF 10
COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT #5
Comm. Jacobs: Can we come back to this item please Judge?
ITEM - WORKSHEET - PAGE 4 OF 10
Judge Armey: We will return to DA Civil also. Next is County Treasurer for increased mileage and subscriptions. No action on that item.
Comm. Carter: I will move to increase gas mileage to $2400 a year.
Judge Armey: That will die for lack of a second. Next is Tax Assessor-Collector.
7.A-22) Move to approve the Financial Administrator for Tax Assessor-Collector with a budgetary
impact of $39, 375 by Comm. White, second by Comm. Carter.Motion Carried 3-2-0 (Mitchell & Jacobs nay)
Court Order 01-0543Judge Armey: The next item is for a new deputy clerk for Tax Assessor-Collector.
Comm. White: I will move for approval.
Comm. Mitchell: I will second.
Judge Armey: Vote taken. Motion fails 2-3-0.
7.A-23) Move to approve Dues & Subscriptions for $522 by Comm. Mitchell, second by Comm. Carter with an amendment to include Office Supplies at $1,600 and Printed Materials at $2,278.
Comm. Mitchell: Motioner does not agree with the amendment.
7.A-24) Second on the amendment by Comm. White.
Motion Carried 3-2-0 (Jacobs & Armey nay)
Court Order 01-05457.A-23) Move to approve Dues & Subscriptions for $522 by Comm. Mitchell, second by Comm. Carter with an amendment to include Office Supplies at $1,600 and Printed Materials at $2,278.
Motion Carried 3-2-0 (Jacobs & Armey nay)
Court Order 01-0544
ITEM - WORKSHEET - PAGE 5 OF 10
LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITY
7.A-25) Move to eliminate County Criminal Court #4 Janitorial Service as requested by Judge Bridges for a savings of $2,750 by Comm. Mitchell, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0546COUNTY JAIL
7.A-26) Move to approve the new hire of a Deputy Sheriff Transport for the new County Criminal Court #5 for an impact of $42,757 by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 3-2-0 (White & Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-0547
ITEM - WORKSHEET - PAGE 6 OF 10
Judge Armey: We will return to the Sheriff's Department.
ITEM - WORKSHEET - PAGE 7 OF 10
CONSTABLE PRECINCT #6
Comm. Jacobs: I will move to increase Gasoline Expense for $2400. Constable Davis has already surpassed that amount this year.
Comm. Mitchell: I will second.
Judge Armey: Vote taken and motion fails 2-3-0.
(End of Tape Recording #4 of 6)
LICENSE & WEIGHT
Judge Armey: No action on the first three items.
Comm. Carter: I would move to approve the last two items to increase the replacement vehicle cost and increase radios/radars.
Judge Armey: Motion will die for lack of a second. We will return to License & Weight.
ITEM - WORKSHEET - PAGE 8 OF 10
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
7.A-27) Move to increase Operating Supplies for Vests and Fire Protection Gear for an impact of $2700 by Judge Armey, second by Comm. Carter
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-05487.A-28) Move to increase Training & Education at $1250 and increased Mobile Phone Expense of $803 by Comm. White, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-0549Comm. White: I would move for a new hire, Assistant Emergency Management Coordinator/Investigator.
Judge Armey: Is there a second? Motion will die for lack of a second. That takes care of Emergency Management with the exception of a vehicle. We will return to License & Weights.
7.A-29) Move to approve under License & Weights the Remote Access Charges for $3960 by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Jacobs.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0550
ITEM 17 RECESS - 5 MINUTES
Comm. Jacobs: I would move to approve a new hire - a deputy - for License & Weights with an impact of $57,707.
Comm. White: I will second that motion.
Comm. Carter: I believe Constable Floyd recommended this position but could we delay the start date until April 1?
Comm. Jacobs: I will retract my motion.
7.A-30) Move to approve a new hire for License & Weights - a lieutenant position beginning April 1, 2002 - for an impact of $43,431 by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. White.
Motion Carried 3-2-0 (Jacobs & Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-05517.A-31) Move to approve License & Weight request for equipment maintenance for the re-calibration of the scales for $5800 by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-0552Judge Armey: Ms. Stewart, can you update us as to our balance?
Ms. Stewart: $44,163.Comm. Jacobs: I think now is the time to look for more revenue because we still have CCC#5, the civil department, etc. I will go back to my recommendation made early on to finance all vehicles over a three-year period, which would be a shorter time period than tax notes. How much would that save us?
Ms. Stewart: That would be a savings of about $570,000.
7.A-32) Move to approve the financing of all vehicles on the approved list over a three-year period for a savings of $543,000 by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter with an amendment to add two Sheriff's Transport Vans and one Emergency Management Vehicle.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-0553Judge Armey: Page 8 of 10 is Child Protective Services for a Contract Salary Reimbursement at $43,617.
Ms. Stewart: This is in order to add one paid staff member and there will be somewhat of an offset but I do not have that information.
Comm. Jacobs: I know CPS is having some funding problems especially since we have added different alternatives for jury pay. I also know they provide a great service and I do not know what we would do without them.
7.A-33) Move to approve $43,617 for Contract Salary Reimbursement for Child Protective Services by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 3-2-0 (White & Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-0554Judge Armey: Next item under Appropriations is Annual Dues for the Conference of Urban Counties, same Page 8 of 10.
7.A-34) Move to approve $227 in Annual Dues for the Conference of Urban Counties by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Mitchell.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0555Judge Armey: Same Page 8 of 10 is Centralized Road & Bridge, is there any action?
7.A-35) Move to approve $100,000 for materials by Comm. White, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-0556Judge Armey: Page 9 of 10 is Health Care Relief Fund, Increase MHMR Funding for the Millwood Hospital Contract.
Comm. Jacobs: I understand that there have been problems with MHMR Funding but I believe they are addressing these problems. I am convinced that after serving on a committee and reviewing this, that the Millwood Hospital contract is a good contract for us. To replace them would cost twice as much. None of our local hospitals are providing these services so Millwood is our best bet.
7.A-36) Move to approve $30,000 to increase Mental Health Mental Retardation funding for the Millwood Hospital Contract by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-0557Judge Armey: That completes the worksheet except for the following items: Page 3 of 10 is CCC#5, Page 4 of 10 is DA Civil and Page 5 of 10 is the request of the Sheriff for tax notes.
7.A-37) Move to include in the Tax Notes an Increase in Remodeling Expense under Law Enforcement Facility for $140,745 by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 3-2-0 (White & Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-0558Comm. Jacobs: Your Honor, it has come to my attention that our Aide to Court is paying for our coffee supplies out of her own pocket in the amount of $450 to $500. The Aide to Court never asked for this money nor does she know I am bringing it up now. This averages about $75.00 year. I would suggest we create a new line item in the Aide to Court's budget showing $75.00 for all Commissioners Court's use of coffee, etc.
7.A-38) Move to create a new line under the Aide to Court's budget, placing $75.00 in it to be used only for Commissioners Court related meetings for their coffee supplies by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Mitchell.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0559Comm. Jacobs: I cannot make this as a motion but I am asking each commissioner to ante up $85.00 to pay back the Aide to Court for all past years that she has paid for these supplies.
Judge Armey: Ms. Stewart, do you have a running total for us?
Ms. Stewart: $413,244.
Judge Armey: Page 4 of 10 is DA Civil.
Comm. Jacobs: Let me first outline for you the results I would like to see from any motions on this item. I would like to delete the position entitled Counsel for the Sheriff and add three positions to the Civil Division with one having a similar job description as does the Counsel for the Sheriff but be under the Civil Division Department Head. The other two positions would be as you see listed on Page 4 of 10 DA Civil: a new employee, Civil Attorney II effective 04-01-02 and a new hire, Computer Software - County Wide Technology Dept. - Civil Attorney II. With this, we would no longer have a Civil DA reporting to the Sheriff that is not under the head of the Civil Department thereby eliminating our problems associated with Commissioners Court not having one attorney to speak for us.
Comm. Mitchell: I will second for discussion.
Comm. Jacobs: The Counsel for the Sheriff can still be housed where he is now but he answers to the head of the Civil Division.
Judge Armey: Ms. Breading, who is the position of Civil Attorney II equivalent to and who does that position report to?
Ms. Lee Ann Breading, First Assistant District Attorney: That position is equivalent to the positions of Thomas Keever, David Finney, etc. All these positions report to Ms. Rivera-Worley, including the one written for the new employee.
Judge Armey: I would amend your motion that along with the deletion of Counsel to Sheriff, the two new Civil Attorney positions have the job description as Ms. Breading has presented it to us here, that is they all report to the head of the Civil Division. Also, I would delete the Paralegal from the Sheriff's budget and recreate it in the Civil Division of the DA's office. Are those acceptable to you, Comm. Jacobs?
Comm. Jacobs: Yes, add the two Civil Attorney II's position, one office support specialist and transfer the paralegal to the Civil Division but I am not going to direct where the one Civil Attorney and the paralegal should be housed.
Judge Armey: Let me recap the motion: delete the position of Counsel to the Sheriff, recreating it as a Civil Attorney II position beginning October 1; create a Civil Attorney II position beginning April 1, 2002; delete the paralegal from the Sheriff's budget, recreating it in the Civil Division of the DA's office, and the creation of an Office Support Specialist II with all these positions to report to the head of the Civil Divison of the District Attorney's Office.
Comm. Jacobs: That is my motion. I would like input from the head of our Civil Division, Ms. Rivera-Worley.
Ms. Rivera-Worley: You are not asking me for legal advice?
Comm. Jacobs: No.Ms. Rivera-Worley: I would be happy to assume the responsibilities that my bosses in Commissioners Court deem appropriate. Additional manpower is most needed in the Civil Division and would be most welcome.
Ms. Breading: To summarize Mr. Isaack's points when he spoke to the court earlier, his office is not requesting that the Counsel to the Sheriff be restructured in any manner. The structuring of the District Attorney's office is his responsibility and his alone. I have not heard the Sheriff come to you and ask that Mr. Coleman be moved back to the Civil Division as it was prior to 1992. Also, Mr. Isaacks has no desire to move employees out of the Sheriff's budget and into his. Mr. Isaacks might consider this option but not in the middle of an elected official's term. While it is your belief that this restructuring will create efficiency, I do not believe it will make a difference.
Comm. Jacobs: I appreciate your candor but we are not trying to tell Mr. Isaacks how to do his business. When we had this conversation with the DA, I felt he was open to this restructuring. If there is blame to be laid it will be to this court, not to Mr. Isaacks. We were placed in an almost impossible position earlier this year concerning the Attorney General's request and the majority of the court does not want to be in that position again. We believe this restructuring would prevent that from happening again. We understand we cannot tell an elected official how to structure their department and this is not a mandate. We are trying to provide a mechanism that would allow you to make the appropriate changes.Ms. Breading: Not being argumentative, but by making a motion that moves a position currently reporting to myself and Mr. Isaacks and telling us that position must report to the Civil Division, is telling us how to restructure our department.
Judge Armey: Commissioners Court sets the staffing for all offices, this court approves salaries, job descriptions, etc. We are eliminating a position which has become counter productive and undermining this court and, in my belief, is undermining the District Attorney's office as well. Your contention that one elected official cannot tell another elected official how to run their office, in my opinion the Counsel to the Sheriff is making a habit of that. We have repeatedly tried to address this and ended up in the position where the only legal representation this court had was the Counsel to the Sheriff. We could not even ask our own attorney about the rights of this court. Eliminating the position was our last recourse.
Ms. Breading: I understand your concern but the bottom line is that Bruce Isaacks is your legal representative and whom he chooses to represent you is his business. Ms. Rivera-Worley is the attorney for this court and Mr. Coleman is the attorney for the Sheriff, reporting directly to Mr. Isaacks and myself. Mr. Isaack's duty is to give legal advice to all elected officials within this county. Regarding the Attorney General's opinion, Mr. Coleman followed Mr. Isaack's direction. It wasn't that Ms. Rivera-Worley was not allowed to speak, but Mr. Coleman was assigned that task. He wrote the opinion under Mr. Isaack's direction based on a fair assessment of the legal issues of both sides.
Ms. Mitchell: We did not get to present our side.
Judge Armey: It was drafted and presented to us without our being able to ask questions until we took action to send over comments.
Ms. Breading: The opinion was not totally favorable to the Sheriff either.
Judge Armey: What does that mean to us? All we know is that the opinion was drafted with the Sheriff's input and our input was denied.
Comm. Mitchell: I have never been so disappointed in my legal representation as I was at that time and I specifically asked Ms. Rivera-Worley if she could advise us. She told us that she had been advised to tell us to refer any of our questions to Mr. Coleman.
Ms. Breading: And that is correct. Based on history, this court has always wanted just one opinion.
Comm. Jacobs: Ms. Stewart, please figure the cost of my motion.
Ms. Stewart: $86,966.
Comm. Jacobs: $87,000 for adding a Civil Attorney and an office specialist. From what you are telling me, I am ready to place that amount in a line item to hire outside attorneys who will be receptive to this court on civil items. With all due respect to Mr. Isaacks, this is the final governing body for the county, and all we are requesting is fair and unbiased legal advice. I felt like my motion allowed us to discuss matters with the Sheriff in an open and fair manner. But, if Mr. Isaacks and you are totally opposed to this, then I am ready to take the $87,000 away from the Civil Department and look at using it in other ways.
Ms. Breading: Mr. Isaacks does not feel like this is the time to start shifting positions around. A lot of money has been saved by having Counsel to the Sheriff in the location he is in.
Comm. Jacobs: None of that would change by my motion.
Ms. Breading: Then why make the change?
Comm. Jacobs: This court will have one person head of the Civil Department to come before us to say this is the problem and these are your options. Perhaps Mr. Isaacks does not think that is important but to this court, it is. No other elected official has their own attorney. The only changes are that we would be hearing all opinions coming through one person to us and the additional staff for the Civil Department.
Judge Armey: Ms. Breading, do you and the District Attorney believe that the incident with the AG's opinion was conducted appropriately?
Ms. Breading: Things could have been done differently but I do not think this is the time and place to hash it out.
Comm. Carter: I support the addition of the two attorneys and support staff but I am not sure we have to change the organization because the Sheriff does not have his own attorney - Mr. Coleman reports to the District Attorney. I suggest that we separate these two actions in the motion.
Comm. Jacobs: Judge, I am rescinding my motion. It is apparent this decision will not be made tonight.
7.A-39) Move to place $86,966 as a Commissioners Court line item marked for Civil Attorney Services and determine later how it is to be allocated by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 3-2-0 (White & Armey nay)
Court Order 01-0560Judge Armey: I voted against the motion because I don't believe this court's concerns are being acknowledged, much less addressed. I am disappointed in the lack of communication and do not think this motion will resolve anything.
Comm. Jacobs: I would request that Ms. Breading review this with Mr. Isaacks and come forward with an option other than the status quo.
Judge Armey: Ms. Rivera-Worley, could you, for this court, research the statutes on the duties and responsibilities of the District Attorney to Commissioners Court and the court's recourse if the DA's responses are inadequate?
Ms. Rivera-Worley: Yes.
Judge Armey: Our running total now, Ms. Stewart?
Ms. Stewart: $326,278.
Judge Armey: County Criminal Court #5 to begin October 1, 2001 would impact the budget at $122,154 not including the Warrant Deputy and the Office Support Specialist.
7.A-40) Move to begin County Criminal Court #5 on October 1, 2001 for a budget impact of $122,164 by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 4-1-0 (Mitchell nay)
Court Order 01-0561Comm. Mitchell: I did not vote against the court but I think we should open it as it was in the Recommended Budget.
(End of Tape Recording 5 of 6)
Comm. Jacobs: If we stop here, we would be able to give back to our taxpayers about $200,000.
Ms. Stewart: $204,114 is our remaining balance.
Judge Armey: Members, any other items to be addressed?
Comm. Carter: Could we discuss the Roanoke center again? What will we do if we get evicted?
Comm. Jacobs: I think you need to talk to Operations and have them begin looking for rentals.
ITEM 17 RECESS
Comm. Jacobs: We did forget one area - the video conferencing for polycom stations in the JP courts and in the jail. As Mr. Wells informed Ms. Stewart, the JP courts would be raising about $80,000 from the $4 fee. The cost for these seven stations would be about $105,000. The difference between the revenue and the cost is about a $25,000 budgetary impact.
7.A-41) Move to approve the seven polycom stations at a cost of $105,000 for the six Justices of the Peace and one for the jail recognizing that the Auditor has assessed $80,000 worth of revenue for a total budgetary impact of $25,000 by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0562Ms. Stewart: With the action taken by the court today, the level of funding required for the FY2002 budget in tax revenue is $66,112,019. The proposed tax rate for 2001 tax year would be 0.25193. Court can hold a Public Hearing on September 4, 2001.
Judge Armey: The Proposed Tax Rate is how much above the Effective Rate?
Ms. Stewart: 14.84% or two cents above the current tax rate, 14.84% above the effective rate.
Comm. Jacobs: The entire tax increase is due to the raises and the affected salaries. We had decided in the beginning of the budget that if we had any increase it would be strictly to implement the Non-binding Referendum that was approved last November. After we hear from the general public and see the reactions from our elected officials, we can still change our position. A no-tax increase would mean a no-salary increase as well.
Judge Armey: Ms. Stewart, is 100% of the money above the Effective Rate dedicated to salary and benefit increases?
Ms. Stewart: Yes sir.
Judge Armey: And 100% of the non-salary increases is under that Effective Rate?
Ms. Stewart: Yes.
7.R) Approval of proposed 2001 tax rate, including the following:
1. determine the level of funding required for the FY2002 budget.
2. determine the proposed tax rate for tax year 2001.
3. take record vote on the proposed tax rate.
4. schedule a public hearing on the proposed rate.Move to (1) determine the level of funding required for the FY 2002 budget to be
$66,112,019 in property tax revenue; (2) determined the proposed tax rate for year 2001 to be $0.25193 per $100 valuation; (3) scheduled the Public Hearing for the proposed tax rate for Tuesday, September 11, 2001 at 7:30 pm at 110 West Hickory, Courthouse on the Square, in the Commissioners Courtroom, Denton, Texas by Comm. Carter, second by Comm. Mitchell.Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0565(Court Order #s 526, 563 and 564 not used)
Comm. White: I want to reiterate the comments of Comm. Jacobs that citizens do have input in this process and I would encourage them to come on September 4 to voice their opinions.
Judge Armey: It was a tough budget process - the first one for me sitting in this chair. I learned a lot and hopefully as we go forward we will be able to streamline some of the bumps and curves. I appreciate everyone's input and I have learned that we need to be discussing budget issues throughout the year. I believe we have a good budget that accomplishes our primary objectives, most importantly to address the salary issues of our employees. This budget is conservative and a beginning on things to phase in such as new technology.
Comm. Carter: Thank you Judge for keeping us on track and I compliment my fellow Commissioners for their diligence and hard decisions that were made. Thank you to all department heads and especially our budget staff and auditor for an excellent job.
7.A-42) Move to approve the recommendation of the Budget Officer to change the date for the Public Hearing for the adoption of the budget and the tax rate from September 4th to September 11, 2001 at 11:00 a.m. by Comm. Jacobs, second by Comm. Carter.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
Court Order 01-0566
ITEM 19 ADJOURNMENT (8:35 P.M.)
Move to adjourn by Comm. Mitchell, second by Comm. White.
Motion Carried 5-0-0
This set of minutes prepared by deputy clerk Kathleen Bransford and reviewed by County Clerk Cynthia Mitchell.