[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:01] Good morning, everybody. Today is September 1, 2026. The time is 10.02 a.m., now call this regular session of Commissioner's Court to order. Got pledges to the flags in a moment of silent prayer.
[0:34] one state under one minute is.
[0:49] Thank you.
[0:55] It's great to see everybody this morning with us. I hope
[0:57] everyone's doing well. We're going to move to item three on our agenda, which are citizens to be
[1:02] heard. I will keep a time and give an update of about a minute remaining for the speaker. If you'll
[1:08] please just come up to the podium and I call your name, please state your name and then begin your
[1:13] comments. The first is Michael. Is it Mayor? Mayor, I apologize. Come on up.
[1:23] Five minutes, sir. Good morning. Thank you, sir. Good morning, Judge
[1:29] Kutcher and commissioners. I appreciate the opportunity to speak. As a long
[1:34] time resident, homeowner and independent businessman in Guadalupe County, I
[1:38] care about this community's future. This is why I'm here to strongly oppose this
[1:43] five point six five percent tax rate hike. Do not tell us this is an unavoidable emergency.
[1:50] The fact show a series of choices. Sheriff Ray has publicly stated that budget constraints
[1:55] can force him to pull school resource officers out of Navarro and Mary and ISD schools. At the
[2:00] same time his department is requesting 1.28 million for 21 new vehicles this year after
[2:07] are already budgeting 1.11 million for vehicles last year plus another 600,000 to equip them.
[2:14] That is nearly 1.9 million for vehicles and outfitting.
[2:17] While school safety coverage is treated as secondary.
[2:22] Where has he been willing to tighten his own budget the way he expects taxpayers to tighten
[2:27] theirs?
[2:28] Last September this court raised property taxes 4% and used the money for substantial raises
[2:33] for elected officials.
[2:34] How far down the organization chart that those increases actually go.
[2:39] Telling county workers who are struggling under the same inflation as the rest of us.
[2:44] They you appreciate them rings hollow when their paychecks don't reflect it.
[2:48] Especially while several elected officials have filed salary grievances so
[2:52] you can even more of our money for themselves.
[2:55] For years the appraisal district has taxed us on inflated market values.
[3:00] Paper gains we never received.
[3:01] the state legislature then cut homeowners a break with homestead relief this
[3:06] court answered by raising the rate and clawing back those savings. You are
[3:10] sitting on 49.6 million and undersigned reserves more than 20 million above
[3:15] your own required cushion. Yet this budget still draws down 8.75 million from
[3:21] those reserves while asking taxpayers for another 5.65% increase. If this
[3:27] were truly a financial emergency these reserves would be used instead of raising
[3:31] taxes, these are choices, not inevitable abilities. The court has given massive 10-year property
[3:38] tax abatements and tech giants like Cloudverse and Palomino Alpha. At the same time Judge
[3:44] Kutcher and his family owned approximately 186 acres of land involved with the Palomino
[3:49] Alpha Data Center project. A lawsuit has been filed in District Court alleging a conflict
[3:54] of interest in how these deals were handled. We the tax fares are now forced to pay to defend
[3:59] in that case. This raises serious questions about whether private interests are being prioritized
[4:04] while everyday homeowners and rural landowners are asked to make up the difference.
[4:09] Raising taxes one more time as you prepare to leave office is not responsible stewardship.
[4:14] You get to walk away, we get the bill and live with higher taxes for years to come.
[4:19] I urge you to do the right thing and reject this tax increase vote no. Thank you.
[4:25] Thank you for your comments.
[4:27] Yes, sir.
[4:29] Next is Monty Parker.
[4:36] Good morning.
[4:37] Good morning.
[4:37] I was going to speak on the agenda item, but this is fine.
[4:40] And no matter.
[4:41] Any speaker that signed up, it's your choice.
[4:44] If you'd like to speak now, you're welcome to.
[4:46] If you'd like to wait until the item, you tell us.
[4:48] And we can do that also.
[4:49] Not that far into the item.
[4:50] I'll be fine.
[4:50] Yes, sir.
[4:51] Good morning, judge and commissioners.
[4:53] I'm part of Parker.
[4:54] I'm a resident of Portland County.
[4:57] I'm here today to ask you to make public safety.
[4:59] be a higher
[5:02] I want to be clear that I recognize that this court has funded the Sheriff's Office and added positions in the past. But the question before us now is whether the proposed budget provides a staffing our county needs today.
[5:16] According to information provided by the Sheriff's Office, we are approximately 90 sworn officers, deputies, I'm sorry, below safe operational staffing standards. Call for service or up by approximately 1100 per day over this time last year.
[5:31] here. Sorry about that. The Sheriff's Office submitted a request for additional personnel
[5:37] including additional deputies and supervisory staff. The county jail requested 25 additional
[5:43] detention officers get the proposed 27 budget contains zero new positions. At the same time,
[5:50] the proposed budget includes 3 million for future land and potential building purchases
[5:55] This is along with 8.75 million in new capital projects funded from the general fund.
[6:01] The proposed budget also projects a general fund balance for approximately 20.6 million
[6:07] above the county's own 20% reserve target.
[6:10] This is simply not a question of whether the county has money, it's a question of priorities.
[6:16] We are a growing county that demands a law enforcement are increasing.
[6:20] Our jail house is nearly the same number of inmates as neighbor in Chomale County, yet
[6:25] Glorlube County has dramatically fewer budgeted detention officers.
[6:29] We can buy new buildings, we can purchase land, we can buy patrol vehicles, radios and
[6:34] equipment, but equipment cannot answer a 9-1-1 call.
[6:38] A patrol vehicle cannot respond to an emergency without a deputy behind the wheel.
[6:43] I understand that you have to make difficult budget decisions, but those decisions reveal
[6:48] what we value most. I'm asking this court to reconsider the proposed budget to work with the sheriff to add
[6:55] sworn personnel and detention staff as the sheriff's office has determined. Before we prioritize
[7:01] future buildings and discretionary projects, we need to make sure we have enough people to protect the
[7:06] citizens who are here today. Public safety should not be what is left over after everything else is
[7:12] funded. It should be one of the county's first priorities. At the end of the day, will your vote reflect
[7:17] what your constituents want or what you want. Thank you. Thank you.
[7:23] Next is Noah Webster.
[7:28] Good
[7:29] morning. Good morning, Judge and Commissioners. My name is Noah Webster. I live in precinct
[7:33] too and I'm a proud and borrow ISD parent. I have read the 244 page proposed budget and I do
[7:39] genuinely understand the pressures that you have conveyed, lower taxable value, rising insurance,
[7:45] real growth costs. These are simple facts. Here's another fact. This budget asks taxpayers
[7:52] for more money before it has forced real cuts. Calling this budget restrained, because it adds
[8:01] no new positions, is not the same thing as cutting waste. From 2022 to now, the pattern established
[8:09] in your published budgets has been growth,
[8:14] unmitigated growth, not prioritization, not optimization,
[8:20] not lean, not efficiency growth.
[8:24] So let me be clear about what I am not saying.
[8:27] The Sheriff's Office faces real population-driven demand
[8:31] to get grown.
[8:33] More people, more calls, it's simple.
[8:35] The county fire department needs equipment,
[8:39] simple, schools require security.
[8:44] Public safety is not the place for casual cuts,
[8:47] but legitimacy does not mean that every dollar
[8:49] on every line is automatically justified.
[8:53] Fourteen positions in this budget pay over $100,000.
[8:58] Two of those salaries are set by state law,
[9:00] so I just count those.
[9:01] The remaining 12 are decided by this body.
[9:04] Since 2022, this body has enabled those salaries to increase or hold at over a hundred
[9:13] thousand dollars. None have been reduced. That should be examined before any
[9:18] tax rate is even discussed. Of the 4 JP offices, just as the peace offices, they
[9:25] carry the same duties and responsibilities before state law. One of them,
[9:28] Downstairs, JP2, runs 35 to 62 percent lower operating costs than the other three.
[9:37] And when you compare caseloads, it doesn't add up.
[9:42] So credit to Judge Shockley, but Downstairs, this is called a management success.
[9:46] But it's not equally applied or expected from the other JP's.
[9:52] This court should study on why one JP office can run such a lean and efficient operation
[9:58] and the others cannot.
[10:00] And then there's still discretionary expending on the table that has yet to be discussed. Automotive
[10:06] allowance is totally $82,400. I haven't had an allowance in 30 years, so forgive me. Vehicle
[10:13] purchase, training, memberships, non-urgent capital. A serious package of these items alone
[10:19] is $1.8 million, and they are the lowest risk cuts in your entire 244-page budget.
[10:29] If you
[10:30] I've rapidly approached, in my underwear at home, half of your $5 million request.
[10:39] There's another set of decisions this court has already made that also belongs in this discussion.
[10:45] Your chapter 312 agreements, also known as tax abatements, had not been approved.
[10:50] The Council would likely have more levy today.
[10:54] Some of those large projects might also not be here.
[10:57] However, this is the trade-off.
[10:59] Abatements can bring investment, they remove taxable value from the role and shift this pressure
[11:04] onto us, the taxpayers.
[11:06] Those prior choices are part of why this budget is so tight.
[11:11] That should be acknowledged and taken into consideration before asking the public for a taxing
[11:17] credit.
[11:18] Now accountability requires owning that trade-off, Judge.
[11:21] You cannot approve large, multi-year tax abatements and then treat the resulting revenue shortfall
[11:27] And the pressure created as an unavoidable reason to raise taxes on existing homeowners
[11:33] and businesses, without first exhausting internal cuts.
[11:39] So the question I have for you is very simple.
[11:42] Will this court raise taxes first and cut later or will it demand performance, efficiency,
[11:50] and accountability of the decisions already made and only then decide whether a tax rate
[11:56] is still necessary. When the county raises its rates, it is not doing it in a vacuum.
[12:03] It stacks more pressure onto every family across the county, already carrying
[12:10] school tax and growth costs in districts like Navarro. This is not an abstract.
[12:16] This is the cumulative tax burden of the people who live here. I am not asking you
[12:22] question. I am asking you to stop a rate increase until you have demonstrated due diligence
[12:28] on internal cuts and the fiscal consequences of the abatements approved by this court.
[12:34] Not after. Burst. I believe that we taxpayers will always fund what is necessary, but we should
[12:41] not be asked to fund what has not been challenged. Thank you for your time and God bless Texas.
[12:46] Thank you.
[12:50] Richard A. Coons.
[12:59] Good morning. How are you?
[13:00] All right, my
[13:11] name is Richard A. Coote's, a resident of Walloughby County, here to speak on
[13:18] pros next year's budget.
[13:20] I heard some disturbing information that concerns me, my family, my friends and fellow residents of
[13:27] this county. One of the most disturbing is the basic work that the sheriff has done
[13:35] and proposed to help expand protections for the citizens of this county.
[13:40] which was turned down. I understand these are not easy decisions made as commissioners in the
[13:46] court. There's a lot of different interests that you have to balance and I'm sure all of you are
[13:50] trying to make the best decision that you feel is in the best interest of the citizens of this county.
[13:57] But now not expanding and adding new deputies that are needed for the safety and protection of
[14:04] the citizens, businesses, and future growth of the county is the wrong decision.
[14:10] It's not an easy one.
[14:11] There's a lot of people that have to bear a burden.
[14:15] There are other areas as Ari had been mentioned that we may look at to try to cut, to help fund those.
[14:21] I encourage you strongly.
[14:24] Look heavily at that.
[14:25] It's not an easy decision to tell somebody, no, you can't have this program or
[14:29] we have to cut back because we have to look out for the safety of the system.
[14:32] is that that's top priority.
[14:38] It, it saddens me to see that we've made these decisions
[14:43] and we're heading down this road and it is concerning
[14:46] because to me it's a road that we keep heading down towards.
[14:51] I've seen that not just in this county
[14:52] but in other areas of this state.
[14:57] We live in a time with good safety.
[15:00] And sometimes we take that as granted and think everything's going to be okay. But when you are in a crisis, if you're in emergency and you need those resources and they're not available because you weren't willing to make those tough decisions ahead of time, you can't make that up.
[15:40] I'll do it as you all know my family owns more than a thousand feet of the waterfront
[15:48] is on dead men's creek and Lake Placid I bring more than 30 years of direct experience
[15:53] on activity on Lake Placid. From 2010 to 2017 our property served as a primary
[16:00] staging area for the Texas Game Wardens working Lake Placid. I also speak from a professional
[16:06] budget experience and my day job a work for an environmental services company
[16:11] with more than 60 million dollars in revenue I manage one of eight division
[16:16] serving throughout Texas our review P&L performance and budgets on a oversight
[16:21] daily I have nearly over 40 years of operational and budget experience for
[16:28] those reasons I support the public safety priority behind judge Ray proposal to
[16:33] reallocate the 3 million currently reserved for possible land and building
[16:37] purchase. Sound budgeting means matching limited resources to the most
[16:43] immediate, measurable, and operational need. I reserve for a credible, a reserved
[16:49] for a credible near-term property acquisition can be justified, but the court
[16:55] should compare the possible future need against the documented staffing and public
[16:58] safety needs that now exist. Lake Placid is not returning to the community at
[17:05] left. Since the dam construction began in 2023, the
[17:10] sensual official consensus estimates show Guadalupe County added 11,000
[17:16] residents, reaching 211,225 as far as Guadalupe County.
[17:21] again alone added little over 4,000 residents reaching 41,000. That is a 13.4%
[17:29] increase growth in early two years. Lake classes return to normal pool levels
[17:35] this year after years of restricted recreational use. The public is
[17:39] returning to a lake that worked largely was unavailable during extraordinary
[17:43] population growth. Suns Island reopened with 45 waterfront
[17:48] combatants and over a highway 90 they opened up with the 40 plus rental boat facilities.
[17:57] Our own active duty, military and veteran water service activities at my location with
[18:02] SS American Memorial coming back online.
[18:05] This is not just a request for boat.
[18:09] Renewed lake means use more vehicles, traders, more public pressure at public asset points,
[18:16] more traffic on surrounding roads, more calls involving accidents, disturbances,
[18:21] missing persons, swimmers, disabled boats, emergency response. The sheriff needs
[18:26] enough commission personnel to cover the lake and the surrounding area without
[18:30] weakening response elsewhere in the county. Texas game warns are the primary
[18:35] state water safety enforcement officers and I work closely with them for many
[18:40] years but game awards cannot replace local patrol traffic enforcement and
[18:46] shoreside response. The file fiscal year 27 budget contains no new positions or
[18:52] no identified marine patrol. Sheriff Ray proposed funding 14 positions across
[18:58] 11 county offices through the 3 million reallocation. That proposed proposed a
[19:04] reduce more than 100 requests to a priority list. However, the two sheriff
[19:08] position shown in the list are crime victim liaison and a record supervisor both are important
[19:14] but neither is a patrol deputy. I ask the court to support Sheriff Ray's real allocation
[19:20] effort and add commission patrol capacity for Lake Placid and the surrounding area. Those
[19:26] positions should be filled now before peak lake after you expose the staffing gap. I also
[19:34] So ask the court to finance the plan responsibly.
[19:37] Use suitable one-time funds for one-time needs such as a patrol boat,
[19:42] trainer, rescue, safety equipment, and marine training.
[19:46] Fund permanent deputies from a dependable reoccurring revenue source.
[19:50] If a prop-app position is genuinely near-term, preserve what it reasonably requires, but do
[19:59] not preserved.
[20:00] We're all 3 million for possible future use while demonstrated public safety needs to go unfunded. One minute remaining. Sheriff Ray has made visible progress with the Sheriff's System and today, but equipment and systems cannot patrol the road, answer a car, or perform a rescue without trained people. The road will not wait for the next budget cycle. Lake activity will not wait. Please give Sheriff Ray patrol staffing and one time equipment need to keep pace with the county services.
[20:29] Thank you. Thank you for your comments.
[20:39] Chrisie, sorry, I can't read the last name.
[20:42] Philla.
[20:42] Philla, I apologize. How are you?
[20:45] I'm good, thank you.
[20:46] Good morning, judge and commissioners.
[20:48] My name is Chrisie Philla.
[20:50] I'm here today on behalf of the Guadalupe County Sheriff's
[20:53] Citizen Academy alumni.
[20:55] Those of us who have gone through the citizens academy
[20:58] have had the opportunity most residents in the county
[21:00] haven't had.
[21:02] We've been inside the Sheriff's Office.
[21:03] We've toured the facilities, we've met the deputies, detention officers, dispatchers, and staff.
[21:10] We've seen firsthand what these men and women are responsible for every single day, and I can tell you it's a lot.
[21:18] What also became very clear to us is there's simply not enough people to do the job this county is asking them to do.
[21:25] These aren't numbers on a spreadsheet to us anymore. We've met these people.
[21:30] We've seen what happens behind the scenes when someone calls 911.
[21:35] We've seen what it takes to patrol a county road.
[21:38] We've seen the detention operation and the responsibilities that come with keeping
[21:42] that facility safe.
[21:44] We've seen the amount of work being carried by these men and women of this department.
[21:48] And there's another cost to being this understaff that we cannot ignore.
[21:54] It's overtime.
[21:54] time. When there aren't enough deputies and detention officers to cover the required
[21:59] shift, the work does not disappear, someone still has to do it. That means existing employees
[22:07] are working additional hours and the county is paying overtime at a higher hourly cost
[22:12] simply to maintain the necessary coverage. We should be looking very closely at how many
[22:19] overtime hours are currently being required because of these staffing shortages and what
[22:25] those hours are costing taxpayers. At some point, repeatedly paying overtime to compensate
[22:30] for a vacant or unfunded position stops being a savings. It becomes an expensive way of managing
[22:37] a staffing problem that still hasn't been resolved. And there's a human cost to that overtime
[22:44] to. These men and women are working long hours and jobs that already require constant attention
[22:50] and good judgment. But take and burn out matter in law enforcement and corrections. We cannot
[22:55] continue asking the same people to feel every gap indefinitely. You cannot continually
[23:01] to ask fewer people to do more and more and expect their eventually not to be consequences.
[23:07] And those consequences don't just affect the Sheriff's Office. They affect every one of
[23:12] us. When there aren't enough control deputies, response times and
[23:16] coverages are affected. When there aren't enough detention officers, the safety of the
[23:21] people working inside that jail is affected. And when staffing becomes so thin that
[23:26] deputies have to be moved from one critical responsibility to cover another,
[23:30] eventually something has to give. And that should concern everyone in this room.
[23:36] And I think it's important to remember why each of you sit on this court.
[23:39] You are elected to represent the people of Guadalupe County.
[23:43] The decisions made here should reflect the needs and priorities of the community you
[23:47] elected to serve.
[23:48] We are here telling you that the public safety is one of those priorities.
[23:53] This is not about politics, it's not about personalities and it shouldn't be about which
[23:59] elected official proposed which plan.
[24:02] This is about public safety.
[24:04] While Luke County is growing, calls for service are growing, the responsibilities of the sheriff's
[24:10] office is growing. The staffing has not kept up. We understand the Commissioner Court has a
[24:17] responsible responsibility to be good stewards of taxpayer money and we expect you to be. But there's
[24:25] money in this budget. So this is ultimately a question of priorities. If you have the resources available
[24:32] that adequately staffing the agency responsible for protecting the people of
[24:37] one of counties should be one of the highest priorities. A healthy reserve
[24:41] account will not answer a 911 call. It's not going to patrol a county road. It's
[24:47] not going to super-rather jail pod and it will not stay between a child and a
[24:52] threat at one of our schools. One minute remaining. People do those things.
[24:56] Japanese do those things. The attention officers
[25:00] Do those things? And right now, there's simply not enough of them. On behalf of the citizen of Cadmium alumni, I'm asking the court to listen to what the sheriff, the men and women doing this job, and the citizens you are elected to represent are telling you. The need is real. The money is available. Please fund the request. Thank you. Thank you for your comments.
[25:24] Next is patterns are ready.
[25:30] Yes, sir. Robin Villarreal.
[25:35] Yes, ma'am. Lane Ward.
[25:39] Yes sir. Stephen Fikes.
[25:50] Good morning. Good morning, gentlemen. Ma'am, voted for you, voted for you, voted for you.
[25:57] I don't think so. I don't think so. No, except maybe you owe me money. So, I don't do good with prepared notes.
[26:07] I like personally engaging. I was going to reserve to the item, but I'm going to say hello.
[26:17] I'm out of new Bronfels. Now I'm in the county and how y'all got to deal with me. I was part
[26:22] of the group that helped fundamentally change the New Bronfels City Council and the new mayor.
[26:30] I hope we don't have to do that here. I know three of you are on your way out. I don't think we will.
[26:35] So, I'm here to simply ask for just common sense.
[26:38] Remember the three of you that are leaving are about to be citizens.
[26:42] You're going to be an HEB, hopefully not one more, one more and it's us.
[26:46] Right?
[26:47] Right.
[26:47] We're going to see you out there.
[26:48] You're going to have to deal with us and interact with us as fellow citizens.
[26:51] You're going to need the services that we all need, not that you don't know.
[26:54] But on a more personal level, you're going to be in a position to be served instead of
[27:03] being the servants, right, and the representatives for us.
[27:06] So thank you for your service.
[27:07] Thank you for running.
[27:08] Thank you for dealing with all the misinformation out there.
[27:11] Truth which I'd like just to make sure that everybody here knows,
[27:16] state law says these school districts are responsible
[27:19] for establishing their own safety program.
[27:22] Our amazing sheriff has supplemented that
[27:25] where he's seen weaknesses out of his own shallow budget.
[27:29] I want to say shallow. I mean, it's just not conducive to operating a safe department right now.
[27:36] So what she said, everything. I can't wind up. So fire department.
[27:45] We have a volunteer fire department that tries, but just can't handle the growth.
[27:50] Frankly, they miss calls, don't answer calls. We have Guadalupe County Fire Department now.
[27:56] it's time to trick a little bit of that money into SO and FD and let the
[28:01] volunteer fire department supplement those calls. We've got a fire department
[28:06] they don't have a home, well they have a home but they can't staff it because we
[28:08] don't have money. Now all of us here are trying to take you guys how to do your job
[28:13] with our money. We don't see the things that you all see behind closed doors and you
[28:17] got to sit there and listen to us talk and yap and with the oftentimes out of
[28:22] context because we're ill-educated. Better educators, right? I mean, one way or the
[28:28] other, we're going to find out. Three of you ain't going to be here to have to do
[28:31] with the fallout if there's anything that you don't educate us on properly.
[28:35] But just remember that. You saw what happened into Bronfels and they say,
[28:38] seguins and next new Bronfels. No. Hopefully we're better prepared for the growth
[28:44] that's inevitable that the Bronfels was. So all this back and forth, guys,
[28:51] commissioners court with the sheriff and with the school district that like to
[28:56] speak out of turn sometimes my wife teaches there right I'm an employer I'm a
[29:01] Marine Corvette my tax payer and I observe and then I make decisions and I
[29:07] rabble rouse so and I'll use all of those to rabble rouse ask the teachers ask my
[29:13] brother marines and ask Ellie and FD. So, I'd like you all to keep your seats. The ones
[29:20] that are still here after the other three are gone. And I'd like you to be good citizens
[29:25] and friends once you're gone. Knowing that you make good decisions with our money, right.
[29:32] Think it through when you have your conversations outside of being in front of us, what we're
[29:37] asking for you, safety for the community, fund that so properly, fund FD, pull back that
[29:44] money you're going to give the volunteers, bless the hearts, let them get what FD doesn't
[29:48] need, right, over equipment or whatever, just whatever supplemental, and let FD step up and
[29:54] do what they're designed to do, please, fund them properly.
[29:58] If you see me need to be.
[30:00] I'll buy a barbecue, but I'd really rather show it. So thank you. Thank you for your comments.
[30:09] Karen Macias.
[30:14] Good morning. Good morning commissioners and judge and commissioners. I'm Karen Macias,
[30:20] a resident of Cibola since 1995. Mr. Wolverton is my commissioner. My message is twofold budget
[30:28] responsibilities and safety concerns for your citizens. Your decisions also affect not just
[30:34] the citizens but the future generations and our Sheriff's Department.
[30:40] Please take your judiciary duty seriously.
[30:44] Our citizens and future generations deserve a sound budget that also manages growth and
[30:50] safety.
[30:51] I appreciate Sheriff Ray's transparency about what is going on in this Commissioner's Court.
[30:57] Your citizens should not have to come here to tell you safety should be first for your residents
[31:02] that's in your deputies.
[31:04] Please support Sheriff Ray with his budget recommendations.
[31:10] And for his staff, I say thank you to all of them
[31:13] and the deputies here today.
[31:15] Thank you very much.
[31:16] Thank you for your comments.
[31:19] We don't have anybody else that signed up
[31:21] under Citizens to be heard.
[31:22] Is there anybody else in the courtroom
[31:24] that would like to speak under Citizens to be heard?
[31:31] Is there anybody online or on the call
[31:35] that would like to speak and address commissioners court at this time.
[31:39] I don't see a hand raised.
[31:41] Okay, I know we still have a few individuals that signed up to speak
[31:45] that are going to wait until the public hearing on the budget.
[31:49] If somebody would like to speak during the public hearing but
[31:53] has not signed up, please raise your hand. We'll try to identify you and invite you up to the podium.
[32:01] We're going to move to item 4 on our agenda, which is a presentation, and that's retirement
[32:05] recognition for Dr. Theresa Salzage for her years of service to Grubblypie County.
[32:11] I know we have a few gifts to present.
[32:15] I do want to invite up Dr. T. and staff from HR.
[32:21] We won't make her give a big speech today, but today is her last day.
[32:25] She is retiring, believe it's going to go spend some more time with family and all that.
[32:30] We just really, I'm sure others have comments, but we just want to take a moment and show
[32:35] you our appreciation and our thanks.
[32:38] You've been phenomenal in every way, so I just want to say thank you for everything.
[32:43] Court members?
[32:49] Of course, thank you, Dr. T. It's been an honor to work with you.
[32:56] You will be missed.
[32:58] your impact has been very positive and always honest and forthright and that's
[33:08] the way you are and I appreciate that your personality fit it to a T with
[33:13] this responsibility that you had. One of the tougher roles in the county being
[33:17] HR director for different departments and truly appreciate you and wish you
[33:23] the best. Thank you. Yes. Thank you very much. No. Thank you.
[33:29] I'll only go here. I was
[33:31] going to tell you about eight months now, but you're a fantastic person. I've
[33:36] learned so much from you and we will miss you dearly. So have a good life and
[33:41] enjoy it. Thank you so much. I'm just going to say let's tell the people online and
[33:48] in this audience. 95% of the time when you walk in that justice center and you hang
[33:57] a right and you go down that hall, that lady's office is open and that lady welcomes you
[34:04] into her office. And her expertise, you cannot match it. In what she does, the advice
[34:17] she gives, words can't describe it. But that friendly open door, that is so important.
[34:29] that is so important, we're going to seriously miss her, she will, it will be
[34:37] extremely difficult to replace her. She has absolutely been an asset to this
[34:44] county. Thank you. Thank you so much.
[34:52] Well you know I love you.
[34:58] It's so...
[35:00] Interesting and entertaining and educational every time I talk to you. You have an amazing ability
[35:08] to look at things from such an aerial view and you know all of the problems and you're
[35:12] still positive all the time. And when things have gotten out of control or stressful
[35:19] or even when they're really good you always have a very steady perspective and it's been amazing.
[35:24] I think you've truly been a blessing to this county. You've been a voice of reason and encouragement.
[35:28] You've been positive when people are feeling down, you've helped people come back to feeling the role that they're meant to feel, and I really couldn't appreciate you enough.
[35:38] I think that you are one of the people that truly has positively touched everyone's life you've come across, and I really can't thank you enough for everything.
[35:46] I hope that you have the best life you can have and wish you all the best going forward. We'll miss you so much.
[35:53] Thank you. Thank you so much.
[35:58] I want to tell each of you how much I appreciate the opportunity to have served as the HR director
[36:03] for Guelda Becounting for the last four years.
[36:06] This is a decision that was extremely hard for me, hard for me, even today, but I know
[36:11] it's the best one for my family.
[36:14] The blessing of being here and the support of the court that sits here today in the judge
[36:18] As well as the previous commissioners on burger cope, I there's not one day that I felt like I was not supported by the court and not many people can say that in their positions and I am so very thankful.
[36:32] I'm thankful for your servants heart what you do every day for your precinct members.
[36:37] Sometimes I know you feel like it's a long hard journey and people don't know what you do but I do know what you do and I am appreciative of that.
[36:46] I'm also appreciative of the HR team two members had one lady's on a vacation the other
[36:52] is at a conference, but I can't be more proud of the team, the HR team, what each one
[36:58] of them today, Tina, Julian and Nat, Emily and Lois are out of the office.
[37:03] I am very, very thankful and appreciative and proud of the work they do.
[37:09] If I can ever be assistance to you now or in the future, you all have my numbers as well
[37:13] as half of Guadalupe County.
[37:14] so if you need to call me do so but I know one thing you'll never have another
[37:19] person with this East Texas twang and I've heard three or four people say we're
[37:24] gonna miss talking to you and the way you talk and meet my twang and I'm gonna
[37:27] miss giving you my twang and here in yours too so thank you so much if you need
[37:32] anything from me please don't hesitate to call this has been truly a blessing to
[37:36] me and I thank you. We're
[38:04] gonna take a take a take a picture to you from me.
[38:06] All
[38:25] right,
[39:04] we'll move to item five on our agenda which is public hearings under public hearing item a the proposed
[39:09] Guadalupe County budget for fiscal year 2026, 2027 will open the public hearing at 10.41 a.m.
[39:19] We did have three individuals that had signed up under citizens to be heard that stated they prefer to speak under this item.
[39:27] Would you like to come up and speak now under the public hearing?
[39:30] First was Patton's a Roddy good
[39:39] morning Judge Kutcher and commissioners for those of you who don't know me
[39:43] My name is Patton saw that day. I am an assistant county attorney in the civil division of the county attorney's office
[39:48] I along with Stephen ties stepped into the very large shoes of the late great Robert Edlinger
[39:55] I'll be forthright with you today. I'm coming before
[40:00] I want you to ask you to take the opportunity to do the right thing when finalizing the budget for the upcoming fiscal year. In doing so, I'm asking you to remember who we serve, the good citizens of Wadalupe County. Every employee is a part of serving those citizens. I myself came to Wadalupe County in 2017. Before that, I practiced law here since 2006. Every day, I drive from San Antonio.
[40:29] Thank you. And back because I want to serve Wadalupe County because I like what's happening
[40:35] here and I like the work that we do. Other people that I work with work long hours
[40:40] to ensure that our county government gives the people the services they deserve and that
[40:45] they pay for. However, the current discussion about the upcoming budget has left many
[40:53] Many of those people uncertain and demoralized.
[40:56] A cost of living increase has been proposed, but it is a cost of living increase that
[41:04] falls behind the current rate of inflation by almost a full percentage point.
[41:09] The longevity base is being taken away as well.
[41:13] These proposals make it harder for county employees to put food on their tables and take
[41:17] care of their families.
[41:19] But that isn't the only consequence of these choices.
[41:21] As I've done my job, I've heard from many employees that think that Wattalupa County does not care about them.
[41:30] They are demoralized because the return they are getting for their hard efforts is effectively a cut in their pay.
[41:38] They ask themselves, why should I work as hard if I'm not appreciated?
[41:42] Why shouldn't I explore other options like Hays County,
[41:47] Kumau County, Bayer County, or the private sector?
[41:53] Obviously, we don't want that.
[41:56] Our employees are our greatest assets, as you yourselves have said.
[42:03] This is a real problem in one that has over a dozen elected officials.
[42:09] The majority of elected officials in this county
[42:11] represented by County Attorney Wilborn and Sheriff Ray came to you to try to solve.
[42:19] The proposed attacks increased that would have cost an extra $80 a year per household.
[42:24] They were willing to put their names on it along with yours to handle whatever pressure politically or otherwise that would ensue.
[42:33] We increased our revenue by raising the maximum tax rate but only by a little more than a third of what would have been sufficient to at least
[42:41] make do. As a result of that, the sheriff and the county attorney dug into the numbers
[42:46] again and came to you with a proposal that you've heard about today to use $3 million
[42:52] that is set aside for potential land purchases. These are purchases that haven't been agreed
[42:57] to yet. They haven't been done yet. Nothing's happened with them yet. They're just out there
[43:02] in the ether. That money, which would help greatly to address the shortfalls that you've heard
[43:09] about today is just there just in case we need to expand.
[43:16] Now normally having money set aside just in case would be nothing but a prudent way of
[43:21] doing things.
[43:22] But what I'm here to tell you today is that just in case is right now, right this second,
[43:32] it is sitting in the room with us as we speak, it is the proverbial elephant in the room.
[43:37] this is not a future concern. It is a part of the urgent now. Please adopt the
[43:46] proposal put forward by the majority of the elected officials in this
[43:49] county and supported by I believe a great number of citizens. Times may be tough
[43:56] but if you do the right thing you'll make us safer make us more successful and
[44:01] and you'll make us proud.
[44:04] Thank you for your time.
[44:05] Thank you for your comments.
[44:08] Next, Robin Villarreal.
[44:17] Good morning.
[44:18] Good morning, Judge.
[44:19] Good morning, commissioners.
[44:20] Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today on the half of the Admin employees
[44:24] of the Guadalupe County Attorney's Office.
[44:26] We work hard every day to serve the citizens of our county.
[44:29] This is a community that I live in and where I want to work to make a difference.
[44:33] My family and friends live here and I take pride in helping them to protect.
[44:37] For those who don't know me, my name is Robin Villarreal.
[44:40] I'm a paralegal for the Guadalupe County Attorney's Office, and in November, I will have 17 years with the county.
[44:46] I'm here today to share my disappointment with the discussions and
[44:49] the decisions made by this court for what I believe will be a finalized budget today.
[44:54] I understand that managing a budget is not easy.
[44:57] Their competing priorities, rising costs and
[44:59] difficult decisions.
[45:00] I also understand that not every request can be funded every year. I know the budget won't ever make everyone happy, but this year feels extra defeating. I believe we need to recognize that county employees are not simply a line item in a budget. We are the people to keep the county operating. We serve the public, we respond to problems, we maintain essential services, and we continue showing up every day despite increasing demands.
[45:25] I recently had someone tell me that a member of this court was treating us as
[45:31] human resources. For the county, instead of valuable members of this team. Some of
[45:37] you who may not know my job entails, I'll share this little part with you. Every law
[45:42] enforcement agency in this county, most surrounding counties, and many in the
[45:45] state of Texas, contact me for assistance. Every felony case and misdemeanor case
[45:50] that come through the county attorney's office, cross my desk, many multiple times. I
[45:55] I share an office with Missy Mergo who is also a paralegal.
[45:58] She has been with the county almost as long as me.
[46:00] She gets eight, 17 years in January.
[46:03] She is the first point of contact intake and prepares the cases for review and for grand jury.
[46:08] The number of cases we see has more than doubled and the number of staff remains the same.
[46:15] We are continually asked to take on additional duties and handle pressing immediate matters.
[46:21] There is no reward for their increasing responsibilities.
[46:23] In fact, this year we will be taking home less than last year.
[46:27] That stinks.
[46:28] There is no additional help approved in this budget.
[46:31] And I'm not sure how we can be expected to continue managing this overwhelming workload.
[46:36] We recently went to come out County District Attorney's Office for a meeting regarding
[46:39] AXON, which is electronic discovery and case submission.
[46:43] We were shocked to hear, so yeah, that's another project we have.
[46:46] We were shocked to hear they have double the admin staff
[46:51] And they have exact almost exactly the same number of cases coming in monthly
[46:56] Even more discouraging their paid more to
[46:59] With regard to the budget the caller proposed for employees equates to a wash with increase in expenses
[47:05] We are saddled with and then on top of that the cancellation of the additional longevity base creates additional financial
[47:10] and employee morale concerns, longevity pay is more than just an added bonus.
[47:15] It's a recognition for employees who have chosen to dedicate years of their lives to this county.
[47:20] It tells an employee we see your service, we appreciate your commitment, your experience matters.
[47:25] Taking away that benefit is signifying just the opposite.
[47:29] When that benefit is removed, employees understandably ask themselves, just staying here still matter.
[47:34] I will tell you for me personally, it doesn't feel like it.
[47:38] We should be encouraging experience employees to stay not giving them reasons to leave.
[47:43] Losing experience employees comes with a cost.
[47:45] When someone with 5, 10, 15, 17, or 20 years of institutional knowledge leaves, the county
[47:51] doesn't simply lose employees.
[47:52] We lose experience, knowledge, and training.
[47:55] I will tell you, I am tired of training people to start in our office that eventually leave.
[48:01] That is yet another duty that's added to us.
[48:04] Morales is another issue that I believe deserves serious attention.
[48:06] In my office, the Morales is at a critical stage regarding these issues.
[48:11] Employees notice when they are consistently asked to take on responsibilities and deny
[48:15] additional compensation or assistance.
[48:18] They notice when a benefit that recognizes years of service to this county is taken away.
[48:23] Isn't simply about wanting more money, it's about wanting employees to know their work matters,
[48:28] and their commitment to this county is appreciated.
[48:31] I would respectfully ask the court to consider looking at the compensation picture as a whole.
[48:36] I believe employees deserve transparency about the financial reason behind decisions and
[48:40] clear understanding of whether there's a plan to address compensation in the future.
[48:44] Every year, there are talks of substantial raises, making our salaries competitive,
[48:49] with surrounding counties and additional staff to help with overwhelming amount of work, and that never happens.
[48:55] Years ago, we were asked to fill out the survey and outline our job duties.
[48:58] The county should have saved that money paid for that and recognized the employees identified in that study because changes didn't come from it.
[49:06] The court should also consider the long-term cost of doing nothing. If employees leave because they can make significantly more money,
[49:13] the county will have to compete for those replacements, and in many cases replacing an experienced employee can cost more than the cost they have now.
[49:21] During my career, I've been offered many other job opportunities and for many years, I didn't consider them.
[49:27] I said I was flattered, but I loved my job and I was happy where I was.
[49:31] Now that isn't the story.
[49:33] With the disappointment I'm feeling in my job now, I may consider leaving for the private sector.
[49:38] I can make more money in my work ethic, my degree, and my contributions will be considered when salary is negotiated.
[49:45] Please know I am not the only employee in this county that is considering the same.
[49:49] Money isn't everything, but when we are continually underpaid,
[49:53] when compared to surrounding counties and underappreciated, leaving Guadalupe County will be the option chosen.
[50:00] So today I'm asking the Court to reconsider the decision regarding raises in the cancellation of the longevity base. I'm asking the Court to look for ways to provide meaningful compensation, increases, restore or replace the longevity incentive, and establish a clear path toward improving employee compensation. We are not asking for anything unreasonable, we're asking for fairness, and we're asking the Court to remember that investing in the people who serve this county is ultimately investment in this county. Thank you for your time.
[50:29] I'm considering the concerns of the employees of my office.
[50:33] Thank you.
[50:36] Next, Lane Ward.
[50:46] Good morning.
[50:48] Good morning, Judge.
[50:49] Good morning, y'all.
[50:51] My name is Lane Ward, and I'm a prosecutor
[50:53] of the Guadalupe County, and I have been for about a year now.
[50:57] And I'm also the newest prosecutor
[50:59] to the county, only having graduated law school last year.
[51:03] So I can tell you that the overwhelming message
[51:06] being sent to law students across this country every year is that prosecutors are on the wrong side of the law and
[51:13] If you don't believe me go sit in on any death penalty class or any criminal procedure class
[51:18] And you will hear all about how law enforcement are the bad guys and how if you want to fight your justice, you need to fight against them
[51:26] And you will hear all about everything the criminal justice system gets wrong and very little about what it gets right
[51:33] And why that should matter to everyone sitting in this room today is because that is the
[51:38] environment that this county is recruiting its future prosecutors from.
[51:44] And of the small number of law students that do choose to go to the prosecutors office,
[51:48] a large number of those prosecutors are only going to use the county, whatever county they're
[51:54] working in for one or two years before they go and accept a higher paying job in the private
[51:59] sector.
[52:02] And what this county says to its prosecutors every year through the longevity bonus is
[52:07] that we value, we appreciate you staying and working for this county, and even when everyone
[52:11] tells you that you're on the wrong side of justice, we are telling you that you are not.
[52:18] And if we are going to take that message away, I think it's really important that we think
[52:22] really hard what we're going to replace that message with.
[52:26] Because right now we're telling our prosecutors that work in this county and work for the people
[52:30] this community every single day that hey we know that you're accepting less pay to work in this
[52:36] county but hey also by the way that one thing that is designed that one thing that's put into place
[52:41] to reward you for staying we are going to take away. And what this county has said across years in
[52:48] the past is we want you to stay continue fighting for this community. We appreciate your experience
[52:54] and we appreciate the work that you do for our people and I'm up here today asking this county
[53:00] continue telling its prosecutors and its employees. Thank you. Thank you.
[53:08] Right, is there anybody else in the courtroom that would like to speak during the public hearing on the county budget?
[53:17] Please come on,
[53:20] Mr. Fikes.
[53:25] Just support with all four.
[53:31] I probably wouldn't share this because I'm going to lay myself out here for the public.
[53:39] It's been about three years ago, when I lived Indy Bromford, Vigwad-Lupy County.
[53:44] There was a bad arrest.
[53:46] I found myself in a situation where I had to protect my daughter and myself.
[53:49] And NBPD arrested me, brought me over to Sheriff Ray's find establishment where I got to
[53:57] spend an amazing 27 hours of a Sunfield vacation.
[54:05] Their office declined to pick the case up.
[54:08] But he said their side of law is often seen as the bad people, the bad side of law enforcement.
[54:18] I personally got to experience people of this caliber going above and beyond in their
[54:25] job.
[54:25] They didn't just pick a case up, you know, here's another schmuck that got himself in trouble
[54:30] that's prosecuted.
[54:31] No.
[54:32] And then to further expound upon that, I took a bucket list trip.
[54:37] I drove all the way to Virginia, went to Quantico. I'm a West Coast Marine, New East Coast
[54:42] guys are weirdos. But I wanted to go to Quantico to say I had been to this historic Marine
[54:46] Corps base. And when I tried to make entry, my own brothers denied me and said that Nitz picked
[54:52] me up as a felon. I called their office. Was that you? Yeah. Took her time. Could have just
[55:00] We don't have time for this. Spence, she literally told me, where are you at? And I said, I'm in the parking lot. I can't even get on to my own base. You know, they call me a felon. And she said, don't hang up. Put me on speaker and walk back in that building above and beyond. I walk back in after being in public and embarrassed in front of all the other people trying to gain access to the base. She tells them, give me a fax number.
[55:29] Where do you need it, sent?
[55:31] What do I gotta do to help this Marine get on his base?
[55:34] He's not a felon.
[55:35] We didn't pick the case up.
[55:36] It never saw a judge, it's not unfounded, right?
[55:40] Not prosecutable.
[55:42] Send the letter, I get on base, and of course I had some choice words after I gained access.
[55:47] For the jerk that called me a felon.
[55:52] They're right about, I'm an employer, right also.
[55:55] I own Apex Electrical AC and heating, a little plug.
[55:57] So we've recently hired a business coach and one of the biggest takeaways from that that
[56:05] we've, and we knew it, sometimes you know things you just got to be reminded that you
[56:09] know these things in business, but he reminded us that it costs less money to retain a tier
[56:16] one employee, tier one staff than it does to continuously train tier 3s and tier 2s or it
[56:25] cost less money to produce a tier two into a tier one employee than it does to
[56:33] continuously cycle through people that just aren't up to the to the standard.
[56:38] Now granted, they're all such young people, right? They're not going to retire
[56:44] within the next 15 years.
[56:48] But a lot of us with the skill are age-ish groups here.
[56:52] I'm not calling out anybody's age. People are skill that need to train the next
[56:57] generation of Tier 1 public servants. We're not getting any younger. So, granted, we have
[57:07] a little bit of money set aside. The same thing I grabbed about earlier. I'd
[57:11] not want to show you please. Before you vote on this day, maybe table the issue. Go back,
[57:15] have another talk. See if you restructure some things. Pick out the priorities that
[57:20] we're all clearly asking for here. I mean, the people that took time away from their
[57:24] businesses from their families, from their daily schedules to come drive this
[57:29] point home. Please reconsider. Table it. Talk about it again. See what you can
[57:35] do to restructure it and give us what we're asking for please. And take care
[57:39] of them. They took care of me on the other side of our continent. Thanks. Thank
[57:45] you. Anybody else would like to speak under the or during the public
[57:50] Not caring?
[57:53] Chief, how are you?
[57:54] Good.
[57:54] How are you?
[57:55] Doing well.
[57:56] Morning.
[57:58] Good morning, Judge.
[57:59] Commissioners.
[58:00] Gary Kerbert, City of Seguine, Fire Chief.
[58:03] There's a lot of discussion today about public safety within the county.
[58:06] A challenge that's been before all of us.
[58:08] I face it myself and I certainly understand the struggles of a budget and providing that ongoing
[58:13] public presence.
[58:14] One thing that I have not heard discussed is unfortunately going to add to your struggles
[58:19] not take away from it.
[58:20] There's a lot of representation in this room for fire.
[58:24] There's a lot of representation in this room for law enforcement.
[58:27] There is no representation in this room for emergency medical services.
[58:31] Currently, EMS is not provided by this county of Walupi.
[58:35] It is contracted out.
[58:36] I am one of those subcontractors.
[58:38] That is also seeing an escalation in costs and a huge escalation in need.
[58:44] The reality is when we respond to public emergencies,
[58:46] the vast majority of them are medically based.
[58:49] and I am the largest provider of that service in Saraguay-Lipi County.
[58:54] I cover 440 square miles and there's been no conversation about dramatically increasing
[59:00] the compensation or budget for EMS while that is not before you on this year's budget.
[59:07] I would just encourage each of you to consider the future of what that looks like because
[59:11] where we sit today along with most of my public safety partners I am in an unsustainable state.
[59:18] Thank you very much.
[59:19] Thank you for your comments.
[59:28] Good morning.
[59:31] Commissioners Judge, good morning. I know what you're all thinking. Oh boy, he's
[59:35] back at the podium. Here we go again. Unfortunately, yes, yes, I am. I'm here today
[59:41] with the parent statements because yet again, there is a need to advocate for our
[59:45] community. Commissioner Zott and German, I'd like to thank you for your service
[59:48] and support, not just for the fire department, but for all of the citizens of
[59:51] this county who you do to free represent. Unfortunately, there are counterparts in
[59:55] this governing body that I believe in service the same way as we do.
[59:59] Unfortunately, the...
[1:00:02] Today, some of what I had to say may seem harsh. Accountability is rarely comfortable. Over these past months, sitting in these chambers, I've heard talks of vital and essential services who may lose or see reduced funding, meals on wheels, the food bank, the library, public safety entities. The very services this community depends on. For years now, you've seen the news Guadalupe County is one of the fastest growing in the country. So where is the money? Tax abatement is given to multi-million dollars.
[1:00:29] our corporations, irresponsible government spending, and pay raises for government officials.
[1:00:35] While some of the most essential services in the most vulnerable in our community get
[1:00:39] picked clean and left out in the cold, I've seen the county throw millions at capital funding
[1:00:43] projects, only to scoff when asked for a fraction that for meaningful and essential services.
[1:00:48] Services that support those in our communities who need them most.
[1:00:53] We've been told to figure it out, I ask what would you have us cut?
[1:00:57] but not pair of bills, not train, not gain certification.
[1:01:02] I've heard repeatedly the ESDs are the answer,
[1:01:05] but with no hard facts to back up that opinion,
[1:01:07] the residents in the unincorporated area
[1:01:09] need to pay their fair share,
[1:01:11] and that non-stattutorily required organizations
[1:01:13] in the community are just coming with their hands out,
[1:01:16] like we are beggars on the corner.
[1:01:19] Commissioner Olverton, as a commissioner
[1:01:20] of over 20 plus years, why didn't you solve this problem
[1:01:23] in your prior terms?
[1:01:24] as a commissioner with 20 plus years, you should know that funding from an ESD is not an overnight solution.
[1:01:29] It can take years to receive that funding in a meaningful amount,
[1:01:32] enough to truly sustain an entire emergency service operation.
[1:01:36] You've been in a position for responsibility and power in this county for over two decades,
[1:01:40] but what does the county have to show for it?
[1:01:42] You've repeatedly made the statement that all the counties around us have ESDs,
[1:01:45] but I ask, if everyone around you jumped off a bridge, would you too?
[1:01:49] There is no one size fits all solution or answer to public safety.
[1:01:55] No two counties are the same.
[1:01:57] No one solution works for all.
[1:01:59] I've never claimed to have the answers, but I've asked this toward directly,
[1:02:03] what is the timeline, what is the plan, there doesn't seem to be one.
[1:02:07] Hoping things get better is not a plan.
[1:02:10] We've all heard the repeated disdain for the volunteers,
[1:02:13] and they believe the ESDs are the answer to the problems.
[1:02:15] But I have yet to hear from you a plan, our most vocal opponent.
[1:02:19] It begs the question, why do you hate the public servants in the community so much?
[1:02:24] Why such contempt for the citizens of the county you serve?
[1:02:27] When GCFR pays one firefighter a base salary of $67,000 a year, starting, but an entire
[1:02:35] fire department is expected to operate a fleet of trucks, purchase and maintain vital life-saving
[1:02:40] equipment, pay their operating expenses, and conduct annual training and certifications
[1:02:52] I keep hearing things like the volunteers can't provide the same level of service as a paid department, yet for years we have, well being neglected.
[1:03:01] Last time I checked the VFDs come when the paid departments in the city's call for help via mutual aid.
[1:03:06] We don't simply stop at the district lines and say that's not our problem, it's not our district.
[1:03:11] the dedicated volunteers who have faithfully served this county for decades
[1:03:15] show up because it's not a part of an issue and even undersfunded and
[1:03:20] understaffed we still put the priority where it matters truly serving our
[1:03:23] people the citizens of this county to protect lives and preserve property. The
[1:03:29] civil fire department builds the county whenever they respond to a call in the
[1:03:32] county. Yet volunteer departments don't build GCFR, SIGGIN, shirts or
[1:03:37] similar when they call for help. Maybe that's just what being a good neighbor means, doing
[1:03:42] what is right without trying to get something for yourself. Some of you may think I'm angry.
[1:03:47] I'm not. A shame is a better descriptor. And a shame to bearly this again to scratch the
[1:03:52] surface. Disappointed, dismayed, come closer. I've sat through week's accounting meetings
[1:03:58] and budget workshops and heard the same thing echoed in an over and over. Our people,
[1:04:05] our
[1:04:06] Well, they are.
[1:04:07] Today I'm here to remind you who your people truly are.
[1:04:10] It's the 70 year old widow, grandmother, alone
[1:04:12] on a fixed income.
[1:04:14] The young newly wed couple just starting out in life,
[1:04:17] the rancher, trying to get by.
[1:04:19] However, in fiscal year 2526, this governing body
[1:04:22] will allocated nearly 10% pay raise for themselves
[1:04:25] and other elected and precinct officials.
[1:04:27] Commissioner Wolberton, you earned just shy of $100,000
[1:04:30] coming in at $95,800, based on Google results
[1:04:34] With your auto stipend and your longevity pay only one volunteer fire partner in the county takes in more annually than you make as an
[1:04:40] Individual that one VFD runs hundreds of calls for service every year
[1:04:47] Commissioner Engelke you come in even higher 96,250 total with your adjustments yet. I was respectfully
[1:04:53] I've repeatedly heard from the constituents of your district can't get a phone call returned
[1:05:01] Do you want to change an adult diaper? Do you want to get up at 3am and run a cardiac arrest, run into a structure fire? I don't know that anyone does, but the firefighters of this county do it because it's what needs to be done. Judge, you receive $130,306 according to Google, more than any of the VFDs in the county. I'm not saying the hard work in county employees don't deserve money, a pay raise, a cola, inflation is through the roof,
[1:05:30] but fair as fair and cost for emergency service products and support services are outpacing
[1:05:36] national average of inflation yet no cola was given to county departments to protect
[1:05:41] our families as we sleep. We're told to make do and figure it out. I respect the judge's
[1:05:46] previous sentiment that we should all suffer together but that doesn't seem to be the case
[1:05:51] across the board. A few weeks ago I flatly asked Chief Board to GCFR that if from Queenie
[1:05:57] shut down at the beginning of the month if they could take over our service area tomorrow
[1:06:01] if we were forced to fold up shop. Is the answer? No. They do not have the staffing or
[1:06:06] apparatus to do so at this time. A few weeks ago I called for GCFR units on a major motor
[1:06:11] vehicle accident. At the same time we were also dispatched for a large brush fire on our
[1:06:15] side of the county. However no GCFR units showed up to either. Why you ask? Because they were
[1:06:21] all committed to another large brush fire on the other side of the river. Instead units
[1:06:25] from Marion, shirts, lake Dunlap, New Berlin, Sivolo, and New Bronfels responded to support
[1:06:30] McQueenie. In case you care, these fast-moving fire was nearly 40 acres, but we stopped without
[1:06:36] any loss of lives or homes. Why did these departments show up for a paycheck? No. They showed
[1:06:41] it because the citizens deserve to be safe, and we in the fire service respect human life.
[1:06:46] Just a few nights ago, we responded as a GCSO deputy was assaulted and injured in the line
[1:06:51] a duty protecting our community. And what did I see when I arrived? Nearly 20
[1:06:55] law enforcement units. However, over half of them were from New Braunfels. Because yet again,
[1:07:01] public safety is in a priority to some members of this court, and our Sheriff's Department is
[1:07:05] not adequately funded for safe and effective operational levels.
[1:07:12] I repeatedly heard county
[1:07:13] employees referred to as our people while losing sight of who pays the salary and elects them to
[1:07:18] office, expecting them to honor campaign promises to do the right thing. Not once have I heard the
[1:07:24] citizens referred to as our people. A few weeks ago Commissioner Wolverton
[1:07:29] implied that the GCFR station, the FM725 opens and CBLO has a station mile excuse me
[1:07:36] a few weeks ago Commissioner Wolverton implied that when the GCFR
[1:07:39] station at 725 opens and CBLO has a station eight miles away in Santa Clara
[1:07:43] that somehow those two stations can absorb the calls for service and the
[1:07:47] volunteers can be done away with. The volunteers are already bursting at the
[1:07:51] seems to keep up with the calls.
[1:07:52] Just yesterday, McQueenie had four calls,
[1:07:55] all at the same time.
[1:07:56] Dunlap had seven calls before 2 p.m.
[1:07:59] Requiring over half a shirt,
[1:08:01] CMS is fleet to respond simultaneously.
[1:08:03] Another thing that we have not heard anything about
[1:08:05] is where is the added funding for EMS in this contract?
[1:08:08] When will we see added medic units
[1:08:10] for this side of the county?
[1:08:11] Medic 4 and Marion is rarely in quarters.
[1:08:13] Response times have gotten longer this year
[1:08:15] as we wait for other stations to cover these calls.
[1:08:18] To be clear, I am not opposed to GCFR.
[1:08:21] We all know the VFDs will go away eventually.
[1:08:24] What I am opposed to is no clear plan.
[1:08:28] When a 40-acre fire takes 21 apparatus from eight departments, I fail to see how two
[1:08:32] or three stations with approximately six to nine personnel can adequately cover roughly
[1:08:37] 60 square miles that is already running a collective approximate 1,500 to 2,000 calls combined
[1:08:43] a year.
[1:08:43] With the amount of growth and construction currently occurring in that area,
[1:08:48] according to Google, an area of this size and geographical setting such as ours
[1:08:51] can see anywhere from 5,000 to 15,000 calls for service annually once populated.
[1:08:57] The path we are on with no defined plan is a recipe for disaster.
[1:09:01] It is not a question of if but when will our worst day be and how many of our
[1:09:06] residents will pay with their lives. We have seen in the past two years historic
[1:09:10] rainfall impact on our neighbors to the west. Just this July, we had a small
[1:09:14] cell dump massive rainfall in our area and calls for service were nonstop. All
[1:09:18] the departments worked together. In May of this year, violence formed produced a
[1:09:22] small EF-1 tornado in our county. What is preventing that next time from being a
[1:09:26] catastrophic EF-4? What happens when the next flood of 98 or 2002 occurs on the
[1:09:32] Guadalupe? What happens when we have a truly mass casualty incident? What
[1:09:36] happens when a fire like Paradise, California or Boulder, Colorado or
[1:09:40] spoke in Washington happens here. We are inadequately equipped and understaffed county wide to mitigate
[1:09:46] those realities. This is playing with people's lives. As I mentioned in a previous meeting, if the
[1:09:52] residents don't feel safe, they will leave. And then the budget shortfall will be far greater than
[1:09:59] This is a slippery.
[1:10:00] Very slow and a deadly gamble with our residents' lives. You may say, oh my lord, he's painting
[1:10:05] a target on his back. Oh well, so be it. I didn't join the fire department with lofty
[1:10:11] goals of public office and getting rich. I did join to protect the residents in my community
[1:10:15] and of Guadalupe County. Some folks in this county are afraid of you, of this court, and
[1:10:22] they don't dare to speak up for fear of reprisal. I am not one of those people. At least at
[1:10:27] But at the end of the day, I can look myself in the mirror with a clear conscience that I have made every effort to advocate for the residents who depend on our department and the citizens of this county that I swore to serve.
[1:10:36] It seems that some of you may have forgotten your oath. I have not. I imploring you to remember who does you swore an oath to serve and do the right thing and fund this county's emergency services.
[1:10:46] Fire, police, and EMS adequately and appropriately. Not for me, but for your constituents. Thank you for your time.
[1:10:54] Thank you.
[1:10:57] Is there anybody else who would like to speak?
[1:11:00] Come on up.
[1:11:05] Good morning.
[1:11:09] Good morning, Judge, commissioners.
[1:11:13] I want to share some concerns I have regarding the direction of fire protection in Guadalupe County, particularly as you work through the upcoming budget and can you plan for the future of Guadalupe County fire rescue?
[1:11:23] And I'd like to introduce, I am Jared Smith. I am here representing the Guadalupe County Professional Firefighters, which is the members of GCFR.
[1:11:30] I understand the county as a whole is facing difficult financial situations, decisions, and I recognize that every department is competing for limited resources.
[1:11:40] However, I believe we need to have a serious discussion about whether our current spending decisions regarding fire protection are consistent with the long term direction of the county.
[1:11:49] The question I keep coming back to is this, if we already know that the long term goal is to grow the county fire department,
[1:11:55] at what point do we begin directing more of our available resources toward building that department?
[1:12:01] My understanding is that the proposed 2027 budget includes approximately $1.2 million for volunteer fire departments,
[1:12:08] along with the discussion of potentially providing another 500,000 similar to what was approved last year.
[1:12:14] If that additional funding is approved, we could potentially be talking about approximately $1.7 million directed towards volunteer fire departments,
[1:12:21] While GCFR receives no new firefighter positions in the next budget year, I believe that deserves serious discussion.
[1:12:29] I want to be clear that this is not an argument against volunteer firefighters or the service that they provide at this county.
[1:12:36] Volunteer firefighters have served our community for decades, many have sacrificed nights, weekends, holidays, family time,
[1:12:43] and their own money to protect their neighbors, their service deserves recognition and respect.
[1:12:48] But recognizing that service in questioning the county's long term financial strategy are two different things.
[1:12:54] Our infrastructure is growing, but our staffing is not.
[1:12:57] One of my biggest concerns is that GCFR is already facing significant staffing needs.
[1:13:02] And receiving no additional positions in the next budget year is going to put us another year behind.
[1:13:07] Currently, we have approximately five personnel assigned to station 71 and two personnel at the Dronomo Station.
[1:13:15] At the top same time, the county is continuing to expand its fire station infrastructure.
[1:13:20] We have a brand new station expected to open by the end of this year.
[1:13:24] The FM-25, 725 station remodel is expected to be ready for occupancy next year.
[1:13:30] We also have two temporary portable stations intended to expand our coverage throughout
[1:13:34] the county.
[1:13:35] These are important investments, but they raise a very basic question.
[1:13:40] Where are the firefighters who are going to staff them?
[1:13:42] We cannot simply take firefighters from station 71, or another existing assignment, and move them into a new station.
[1:13:49] Doing that does not increase our overall emergency response capabilities.
[1:13:53] It simply creates a coverage gap somewhere else.
[1:13:57] We cannot improve coverage in one part of the county by taking coverage away from another.
[1:14:02] Moving the same limited number of firefighters into more buildings is not growth.
[1:14:06] It is spreading an already limited workforce even thinner.
[1:14:09] If we are building new stations specifically to improve response times and expand coverage those stations need additional personnel otherwise we are spending taxpayer dollars building the infrastructure of a larger fire department without funding the firefighters necessary to operate it
[1:14:25] If our station without firefighters is just a building taxpayers are paying for readiness I also believe we need to look at how we measure the value taxpayers receive from every dollar spent on fire protection
[1:14:36] There is a fundamental difference between purchasing equipment and purchasing guaranteed readiness.
[1:14:43] An engine sitting inside a station does not answer a 911 call.
[1:14:47] An ambulance does not provide care by itself.
[1:14:49] SCBAs sitting on an apparatus do not make an interior fire attack.
[1:14:54] People do.
[1:14:55] This becomes even more important when we look at the actual response capabilities of the department received.
[1:15:00] The meeting for county funding. The reality is that some volunteer departments do not consistently respond to calls they are dispatched to. And there are also responses where an adequate number of certified or qualified personnel may not be available. It department responding with an apparatus does not necessarily mean it has arrived with the personnel necessary to perform the functions required at that emergency. If an engine arrives at a structure fire, but does not have enough qualified firefighters to safely perform interior firefighting operations,
[1:15:29] Another department still has to provide those firefighters.
[1:15:32] If an EMS capable apparatus responds without appropriately certified medical personnel,
[1:15:38] another agency still has to provide that level of patient care.
[1:15:42] And if the department does not respond at all,
[1:15:44] another department ultimately has to cover that call.
[1:15:47] For both the county fire rescue, that means our already limited personnel can end up responding
[1:15:51] outside their primary areas to provide the staffing and capabilities that are still needed.
[1:15:56] That affects more than the original incident.
[1:15:58] Every time GCFR resources have to leave their normal coverage areas compensate for a lack of response or qualified personnel elsewhere,
[1:16:06] the taxpayers and the communities those GCFR units normally protect can be left with reduced coverage until those resources return.
[1:16:14] That is why I believe county funding should be tied not simply to the existence of a department station or apparatus,
[1:16:21] but to the actual level of service and operational capability being provided.
[1:16:25] simply having names on a department roster does not tell us what capability is
[1:16:31] available when a call occurs. For departments receiving county taxpayer funding I
[1:16:36] believe we should be measuring things such as percentage of dispatch calls
[1:16:39] actually responded to average response times number of personnel actually
[1:16:45] responding to the incidents number of certified and qualified firefighters and
[1:16:49] emergency medical providers number of EMTs and paramedics available training and
[1:16:55] certification compliance, apparatus availability, ability to perform the operational functions
[1:17:02] expected of that department.
[1:17:04] How frequently another department must provide the personnel or resources necessary to handle
[1:17:08] that incident.
[1:17:10] This should apply objectively to anyone receiving taxpayer funding.
[1:17:14] If a department is consistently responding, maintaining qualified personnel, training, and providing
[1:17:19] meaningful emergency response capability to its community, the numbers should demonstrate
[1:17:23] that. If a department is not consistently responding or cannot provide sufficient qualified
[1:17:28] personnel when it does respond, the county should know that as well before deciding how
[1:17:33] additional taxpayer dollars are allocated. When taxpayer fund, fire and EMS, they're ultimately
[1:17:39] paying for readiness. They're paying for trained and qualified firefighters, EMTs, and paramedics
[1:17:46] who are available in someone's house, someone's house catches fire at 2 in the morning. When someone
[1:17:50] one suffers a heart attack or a stroke when a child stops breathing or when a serious
[1:17:54] vehicle accident occurs. They are paying for equipment that is inspected, maintained,
[1:18:00] tested and ready, but most importantly they are paying for enough qualified people to be there
[1:18:05] when the call comes in. We need a transition plan. I'm not suggesting that the county shut down
[1:18:11] every volunteer fire department. A transition of this size cannot happen overnight. Volunteer
[1:18:16] Department can continue to serve an important role by providing supplemental manpower mutual aid and additional coverage as GCFR grows.
[1:18:24] But there needs to be an actual transition plan.
[1:18:27] If GCFR is the future of county fire protection,
[1:18:30] that every budget should move us a little closer toward that goal.
[1:18:34] Instead of continually increasing VFD funding without defined performance expectations,
[1:18:38] I believe the county should consider establishing a reasonable funding baseline
[1:18:42] and time-future funding to measure measurable response, staffing, certification, training, and operational standards.
[1:18:51] Departments receiving county taxpayer funding should be able to demonstrate what level of service that investment is producing.
[1:18:57] County funding should be based on capability and performance, not simply on maintaining the status quo.
[1:19:03] At the same time, we should begin directing additional available funding toward adding GCFR positions.
[1:19:08] Even if we cannot fund every position GCFR needs immediately, we need to fund something
[1:19:13] every year.
[1:19:15] Add positions gradually, increase staffing on existing apparatus, staff the new stations
[1:19:20] without removing coverage from existing stations, expanding our coverage, reduce areas that
[1:19:26] depend entirely on volunteer availability.
[1:19:29] Most importantly, develop a realistic five-year staffing and transition plan to commissioners
[1:19:34] court, department leadership, employees, volunteers and taxpayers know where we are going so that they
[1:19:40] know where we are going and what it is going to cost to get there.
[1:19:44] We also need to decide how we are going to fund it.
[1:19:47] The county assistant district, county assistance district, has also been discussed as a potential
[1:19:52] funding mechanism for approximately two years, but from my perspective we have not seen any meaningful
[1:19:57] movement toward determining whether we are actually going to pursue.
[1:20:00] Let's assume that. If a county assistance district and its associated sales tax could provide a sustainable funding source for fire and MS, that I believe we should seriously evaluate that. Determine what revenue it could realistically generate. Determine where it could be legally, where it could legally be collected. Determine how those funds can legally be used. Determine the impact on taxpayers. Put the numbers in front of the commission's court and the public and make that decision.
[1:20:26] If it makes financial and operational sense, move forward with it.
[1:20:30] If it does not, then take it off the table and identify another sustainable funding source.
[1:20:36] What concerns me is continuing to discuss possible solutions year after year while simultaneously
[1:20:41] saying there is not enough money to add firefighters.
[1:20:44] At some point, the discussion has to turn into action.
[1:20:47] Whether the solution involves a county assistance district, reallocating existing funds, establishing
[1:20:52] publishing performance requirements for VFD funding, identifying another dedicated revenue source,
[1:20:58] or some combination of these options we need a long term financial plan.
[1:21:02] At some point, the budget has to reflect the plan.
[1:21:05] The county is growing, development is continuing, call volume and service demands are increasing.
[1:21:11] New fire stations are being built, existing facilities are being improved, yet the personnel responsible for providing the actual service are not growing at the same pace.
[1:21:21] receiving no new GCFR positions in the next budget does not simply leave us
[1:21:26] where we are today. It puts us another year behind and every year we postpone
[1:21:30] addressing the staffing problem makes the eventual solution larger and more
[1:21:34] expensive. That is why I believe we need to seriously examine the approximately
[1:21:39] 1.27 million currently proposed for volunteer fire departments and any
[1:21:42] additional funding being considered and ask whether some portion of future
[1:21:47] increases could be better invested in building the county fire department we
[1:21:51] We know we are ultimately going to need, especially when some of the department's receiving
[1:21:55] county funding may not consistently answer their dispatch calls, or provide sufficient
[1:21:59] qualified personnel when they do respond.
[1:22:02] I believe we have an obligation to determine exactly what level of service taxpayers are
[1:22:06] purchasing with that funding.
[1:22:09] This is not about volunteers versus crew firefighters, it is about determining the level of service
[1:22:13] Guadalupe County needs and developing the most reliable, accountable, and financially sustainable
[1:22:18] system to provide it.
[1:22:19] We're already investing in the infrastructure of a larger county fire department.
[1:22:24] Now we need a plan to staff it.
[1:22:26] I respectfully ask that we begin having the discussion as part of the current budget process,
[1:22:31] and consider developing a formal multi-year staffing funding and transition plan for GCFR.
[1:22:36] We cannot continue to build stations without firefighters discussing funding solutions without
[1:22:41] acting on them, increasing funding without measuring the service being provided, and postponing
[1:22:47] GZFR staffing another year while expecting the problem to solve itself.
[1:22:51] At some point, the budget has to reflect the plan.
[1:22:54] If GZFR is the future of fire protection in Guadalupe County,
[1:22:57] I believe it is time we begin funding that future.
[1:23:01] Respectfully, Guadalupe County Professional Fire Fire Association.
[1:23:04] Thank you for your comments.
[1:23:05] Thank you, sir.
[1:23:07] Sir, anybody else in the courtroom?
[1:23:09] Yes, sir.
[1:23:10] I'll see you coming up.
[1:23:16] Good morning. How are you?
[1:23:17] I'm doing great, Judge. How are you all?
[1:23:19] Well thank you very much for having me. My name is John Amder. I'm a resident of Precinct 2.
[1:23:26] I am also an employee with the County Attorney's Office. I work as Dave's first assistant.
[1:23:34] You've heard a lot. You'll have a lot of tough decisions to make. I don't want to belabor the point.
[1:23:41] But when Mr. Fikes came back up here, he shared an anecdote that I hadn't heard before about Robin.
[1:23:49] I didn't know about that, but I'm not surprised to hear it because, quite frankly,
[1:23:55] that type of behavior is consistent with the actions of a lot that my office's employees.
[1:24:07] I see people going above and beyond on a regular basis.
[1:24:10] Dave and I both regularly get phone calls at 3 a.m.
[1:24:16] when there's an issue, we get phone calls on the weekends and a lot of times these phone
[1:24:23] calls are coming from employees of the county attorney's office who were contacted first,
[1:24:30] maybe because they're working, handling the on-call telephone, maybe because they're uniquely
[1:24:37] Robin Villareal and she's the person that law enforcement oftentimes is most comfortable
[1:24:43] contacting. These people I'm proud to work with because they go above and beyond
[1:24:49] consistently. And I will be honest if Robin leaves she will be replaced. Any of us
[1:24:58] can be replaced. The problem
[1:25:00] The problem is not finding somebody to fill that position. The problem is finding somebody of that caliber. That level of dedication. She is not a gun for hire. She is working here because she cares about the county because she cares about the position because she cares about the office. And I'm using Robin as an example because she volunteered herself by coming up here and speaking, but the truth of the matter is, I have three rows of people here.
[1:25:29] every single one of them with my office who feel the same way. I've got a
[1:25:33] prosecutor right there. He has gone above and beyond already. He is a phenomenal
[1:25:38] asset to our office. We only hired him recently within the last year and he's
[1:25:43] already shining. I have gotten compliments from judges, from lawyers, people who
[1:25:51] talked about the level our office is performing at and I'm not saying that to
[1:26:00] pat anybody on the back I'm saying that to illustrate a point what we do what
[1:26:08] the sheriff's office does is very interconnected with the daily lives of
[1:26:14] people who live in Guadalupe County.
[1:26:19] As counties grow population increase
[1:26:23] crisis, crime inevitably is going to increase as well.
[1:26:28] Sheriff Ray is already stretched incredibly thin.
[1:26:32] You know this, you've heard the statistics,
[1:26:34] you've heard this meeting after meeting,
[1:26:36] and I'm not going to belabor that point either.
[1:26:38] But he sends his people out to make calls
[1:26:41] as do the local police departments.
[1:26:43] They make calls, and they may get somebody off the streets temporarily.
[1:26:49] And that may alleviate some of the immediate danger
[1:26:52] but that's only the beginning. That is only the beginning, and when these people are brought through the justice system,
[1:27:01] whether the resolution is to try and rehabilitate them, or just keep them out of circulation for the safety of the public for some period of time,
[1:27:12] it is necessary to have law enforcement that feels like they are backed up by their leaders.
[1:27:18] It is necessary to have a caliber of prosecutors and their support staff who can handle the demands of the job and feel like they're supported.
[1:27:28] I've been here less than two years whether you grant or don't grant the longevity is not going to affect me.
[1:27:36] I can tell you it's going to mean a lot more to people in this office who are looking to their leaders to y'all for a sign that they're valued.
[1:27:47] Dave is running out of levers to pull within his office, so he'll share a fray if y'all
[1:27:54] don't give some indication to their rank and file that they matter, they will be replaced.
[1:28:02] 100% they will be replaced, whether they're going to be replaced with people who know what they're doing,
[1:28:08] who can manage to keep the citizens of this county as safe as these dedicated people do,
[1:28:15] I would not bet on that. I know you'll have a tough decision. I'm asking you, as a constituent,
[1:28:23] as somebody who is in the trenches daily and who sees what these people are going through and
[1:28:30] what they give time and time again, give them a nod. Let them know that they matter to you. Let them
[1:28:36] know that they are seen. I promise it's going to go a long way with them. Thank you very much.
[1:28:42] Thank you for your comments
[1:28:44] Is there anybody else in the courtroom that would like to speak during the public hearing?
[1:28:53] Sir good
[1:29:00] morning. Good morning. How are you sir doing? Well, we're in
[1:29:03] I just want to take a few months to speak as a career law enforcement officer and somebody it was a definitely an outsider to this county
[1:29:09] I was brought here to look at some of the processes of the Sheriff's Office and see where we could improve
[1:29:16] So being an outsider
[1:29:17] I certainly don't have all of the politics and inner workings of Guadalupe County,
[1:29:22] and perhaps that serves as a benefit today.
[1:29:26] I want to just share a few observations that the...
[1:29:29] When I got here, the sheriff's office was woefully behind in a number of ways
[1:29:32] between the equipment that was needed from safety equipment.
[1:29:36] When it involves the use of a taser, we had a very outdated JPX and unutilized system.
[1:29:43] We had training. Training is behind in a number of areas.
[1:29:47] We didn't have both of us for some folks and we had many that were expired.
[1:29:52] So I know there was comments about why those were purchased.
[1:29:57] We had ineffective in-car systems.
[1:30:00] For our cameras, most of them were no longer functional, couldn't get the evidence it was needed for those.
[1:30:08] More important than that, we had a personnel that was deflated. They were not in a position where they felt comfortable to speak out, speak up about things that they had seen or their experiences over the time prior to my arrival.
[1:30:21] They liked the voice. They have one now, through Sheriff Ray. We gave him what was needed. Sheriff Ray continued to advocate for their improvements and he still does.
[1:30:33] We show you a new sheriff's office, a mission and a public that's public focused, but they're overworked.
[1:30:40] What we're asking them to do, what we need them to do, to be a modern agency, to do what the public demands of us is causing them to be inferior forward.
[1:30:48] We've shared many of the stats involved with them.
[1:30:53] This also creates a flood downstream of those services with the county attorney's office, probation, every one of the departments as these individuals are adjudicated.
[1:31:02] I
[1:31:06] also observed a group of elected officials come together, which in my previous blue county
[1:31:11] I would have never seen that would have been next to impossible.
[1:31:15] In doing so, they came up with a different plan, I guess something that was a bit outside
[1:31:20] of what the court had provided.
[1:31:24] I found that amazing that that group of people would come together, I just never would have
[1:31:28] experienced that.
[1:31:30] So you have an elected group of law enforcement, emergency services, and professionals are
[1:31:36] all advocating for additional resources.
[1:31:40] I hope you've heard them and you choose to really listen to the cautions and not just
[1:31:44] to do so in quiet contemplation.
[1:31:48] Did you actually come here with an idea that you'd listen and determine whether or not any
[1:31:55] of that information is valid or whether you have a pre-determined decision?
[1:32:00] So I do hope that this has been valuable for all the people that have spoken.
[1:32:04] I do appreciate your time.
[1:32:05] Thank you.
[1:32:06] Thank you.
[1:32:09] Is there anybody else in the courtroom that would like to speak during the public hearing?
[1:32:17] Okay.
[1:32:18] Any commissioners?
[1:32:19] Would you like to make any comments?
[1:32:23] I just wanted to give a brief overview and make this very, very simple and fairly quick.
[1:32:30] We've talked about budget for months now and there's a tremendous amount of challenges
[1:32:35] is that we've had to face and address,
[1:32:38] and I want to go through some of those.
[1:32:39] But first, I want to say thank you to everybody
[1:32:40] that's in the courtroom today.
[1:32:42] Thank you for all the individuals that took time out
[1:32:45] to come up and speak.
[1:32:47] Listening and making notes of the individual concerns
[1:32:50] that were brought up, I was reflecting on everything
[1:32:53] that has to be considered.
[1:32:55] And what everybody got to witness from the speakers
[1:32:58] is a true representation of part of the things
[1:33:01] that have to be considered.
[1:33:03] but still really really important issues with the growing county what we're
[1:33:10] all experiencing or growing pains and at a time when there's more need in
[1:33:14] every single department we got really punched in the teeth with a budget that
[1:33:20] doesn't provide normal revenue stream that we've consistently seen year over
[1:33:24] year and we were on our heels from day one we went through a budget process
[1:33:30] we're reviewing $27 million of requests from all departments that shows an
[1:33:35] as a reflection of the need that is in within all 42 county departments
[1:33:40] thinking we could address a number of those with the budget that was coming up
[1:33:43] but then on July 23rd to the 25th and we got our appraisal role from the appraisal
[1:33:49] district found out we had almost $1.5 billion less for appraise value knowing
[1:33:55] that we didn't have the revenue to cover are already coming in expenses much less being
[1:34:01] able to address the need of the departments that have been talked about for the sheriff,
[1:34:04] for law enforcement, for fire, for EMS, for roads, for courts, for plating, environmental
[1:34:11] health-related issues, flood and drainage mitigation, the list goes on and on.
[1:34:18] So I know we have a lot to discuss today, there's going to be a number of decisions that
[1:34:23] that we're going to have to make.
[1:34:24] There's been a lot of conversation here online
[1:34:27] and in the public, but the only decision that has been made,
[1:34:30] and I'd like this to be very clear,
[1:34:32] the only decision that has been made so far
[1:34:35] in this budget process is to cap the amount of tax rate
[1:34:38] at a 5.65% increase.
[1:34:41] There's not a single other decision
[1:34:42] that has been made to this point.
[1:34:45] I think that's been misconstrued.
[1:34:46] I know there's a lot of misunderstanding
[1:34:47] about the process.
[1:34:49] We started in May meeting with departments
[1:34:51] have individual department head interaction, we went through, got the certified role, we
[1:34:57] Calculate taxes, we go through that whole thing.
[1:35:00] Then we come to budget workshops that happened to end of July and on August the 10th and 11th. And those were the actions that were taken by this Commissioner's Court is only to set that tax rate. And that tax rate can be set at anything today as long as it doesn't exceed the 3549 or what we've been referring to as the 5.65% tax increase. We could have a smaller tax increase. More money can be pulled out of reserve.
[1:35:30] amount of our savings account to fund request positions those reserves could be
[1:35:35] decided upon by this group or a majority to offset the amount of tax increase to
[1:35:39] citizens. But I just I wanted to run through just a quick few items and show the
[1:35:47] tax rate information. We have another public hearing right after this about the
[1:35:51] tax rate but go through and talk briefly about this says recommended budget but
[1:35:58] this was the start of the process.
[1:36:03] I don't want to bore you with too much but I
[1:36:05] show this slide to show that this is the biggest change in our budget, the
[1:36:10] taxable value in 2025 going from 21.976 billion to 2026 being right under
[1:36:18] $21 billion. This has not happened previously. Typically we have an increase in a
[1:36:24] price value. Looking at the chart above, you look at the historical tax rate from 2006,
[1:36:31] and you look at this drastic change that started in 2021 when a price value is increased
[1:36:36] drastically, it pushes the tax rate down. Some have said we should have left the tax rate
[1:36:42] the same. Going back and looking at 2021, 22 and 23 when this tax rate started to decrease,
[1:36:48] if we would have left the tax rate the same we would have had over 20% tax
[1:36:53] increases. Our required tax notice that would have sent went out to the
[1:36:57] public would have showed not the 6.7 and 10.9% increases we already had but
[1:37:03] would have showed high teens low and mid 20% tax increases. And that wasn't it
[1:37:08] wasn't palatable it wasn't something the court wanted to do or was willing to do
[1:37:12] to the citizens that we represent.
[1:37:16] Moving forward, this was the biggest challenge this year in our county, and it's still the
[1:37:21] biggest challenge we're going to have to face today to talk about risk mitigation, about
[1:37:26] our risk tolerance on our amount of funding we're willing to spend.
[1:37:31] The decisions we make today absolutely do affect not only the operation of the departments
[1:37:35] we're talking about, but also the citizens tax rate, their tax liability, the need to offset
[1:37:41] those future costs, how it affects employees, what it changes on our EMS contracts, on emergency
[1:37:48] medical services, about health care for county employees, about paid days off, and over time lines
[1:37:56] and all those things. So where did 1.08 billion dollars go? Well, I believe a mistake was made
[1:38:03] and a recalculation of over 65 tax ceilings was done that changed everything.
[1:38:10] In addition to that mistake and recalculation or a recapture, if you will, of multiple
[1:38:16] years of free ceiling accounts, we had additional state exemptions that came in that were approved
[1:38:21] by the voters last November that increased our total reduction of new property tax exemptions
[1:38:28] for personal property for businesses to almost $400 million.
[1:38:31] dollars. You add back in 864 million dollars and we have a lot less money today than we did last
[1:38:37] year. So I say that there was a great representation of all the things we have to consider during the
[1:38:43] speakers because it really was law enforcement needs, public safety things that I think when we
[1:38:49] talked to anybody it's the most talked about and wanted and needed service. When we talk to people
[1:38:56] and I want to speak for the court, when I have interaction with the public and ask a taxpayer what
[1:39:00] you want your money spent on. They usually say public safety, law enforcement, fire,
[1:39:06] EMS, and roads. Those are the things that people typically want a majority of their money
[1:39:12] spent on. I think everybody can agree on that, but the challenge is where does the money
[1:39:17] come from. And then if we do spend additional funds on those important priorities, how do
[1:39:23] you address those needs moving forward? And that's really what it gets down to. I wanted
[1:39:28] to show this chart because it really lays the groundwork and tells the story as to what
[1:39:34] our county is faced with today when we started out. We were working through a budget process
[1:39:40] that we anticipated. We were going to be able to add positions and do things and make changes
[1:39:45] and address issues and instead we were back on our heels going we don't even have the funds
[1:39:51] to address what we have already spent.
[1:39:55] Looking down at this chart right here,
[1:39:58] our current tax rate is
[1:40:00] Number 3304, and it shows our property tax collections. The important line to notice this bottom. The no-new revenue rate, which is supposed to bring in the same money as the previous year, would have made us $4 million short in maintenance and operation. Going to a 2.2% increase made us 2.4 million short. The 4% increase I recommended originally still without adding any positions, any coales cost of living, adjustments for employees or any major changes.
[1:40:28] has left us $1.15 million short without any of those needed resources being addressed
[1:40:37] within departments.
[1:40:39] The 5.65% tax increase simply gets us to a break even point to be able to provide
[1:40:45] the existing services that Grobbler County is providing today to the citizens.
[1:40:50] The chart up on top are some built-in expenses that were decided on before we ever started
[1:40:56] our budget process and before we ever considered a department request from the sheriff, from
[1:41:02] fire, from county attorney's office, from anybody.
[1:41:07] And that was restructure of debt services in preparation to build major projects, but
[1:41:12] also trying to build and prop up an INS rate to build a jail or adult detention facility
[1:41:18] in the future.
[1:41:20] Health insurance initially was a 15% increase for county employees.
[1:41:24] of almost 800 county employees we spend almost $15,000 per year on that county
[1:41:31] employee to be able to receive health insurance from our self-funded insurance.
[1:41:35] We reduce that to 8% knowing that we're going to have additional cost. We are
[1:41:42] going to probably have to pull from our health care fund which is a balance of
[1:41:46] about $6 million because when you're self-funded you don't only pay for the
[1:41:50] service that's provided to the county employee, you also have to pay for the claim on the
[1:41:55] other side. And if that claim goes above 125,000, that hits our stop loss insurance and
[1:42:01] administrative costs, which is an additional cost on top of that. Those are things that
[1:42:06] not everybody thinks about. They kind of take them for granted. But when you go get a prescription
[1:42:10] and you go to a doctor, we're paying about $11 million a year for our county employees
[1:42:15] to have a really, really good health insurance. And those costs continue to go up, and that's
[1:42:19] what that line represents was that built-in initial cost before you ever started.
[1:42:25] 365 labs for a computer-aided dispatch for law enforcement.
[1:42:29] We had to do a budget amendment in the current year.
[1:42:31] This is the built-in expense for fiscal year 27 and that is the software maintenance cost
[1:42:37] just for the CAD system for law enforcement that we haven't had in the budget before.
[1:42:42] It's $800,000.
[1:42:44] When you have an $800,000 hit in some of these lines with health insurance, staggered hiring positions for firefighters, built in EMS contracts, we had spent almost $5 million in needed items that had to be addressed in this budget before we ever started also at the same time with the value also being $4 million short before we ever started.
[1:43:06] I just want to put some of that in reference.
[1:43:09] All what I'm saying doesn't change the fact that we're going to have to have discussions
[1:43:13] later on this agenda to talk about reserves, fund balance.
[1:43:17] What risk appetite there is for the Commissioner's Court to spend funds on needed issues on employees
[1:43:24] on positions.
[1:43:26] Just wanted to give some of that information during the public hearing.
[1:43:30] So everybody kind of has an understanding of where we started out in this process because
[1:43:34] because there were no sunshine and no roses when we got these numbers.
[1:43:38] It was, it really was doom and gloom for us going, we've never been faced with this kind
[1:43:42] of short file.
[1:43:43] How are we going to address all the needs?
[1:43:48] Commissioners, any, any comments, any of you would like to make during the public hearing?
[1:43:55] Yeah, I would, you know, I was kind of attacked, but that's okay.
[1:44:00] For over 24 years, I tried to get ESDs in this county, but as everybody else county government
[1:44:06] It takes three votes.
[1:44:08] I was the only one who lived inside the corporate city.
[1:44:12] Everybody else is in the corporate area.
[1:44:14] So when they said, well, here comes another tax.
[1:44:16] They said, oh, no, no, we don't want that.
[1:44:18] So it failed every blessed time.
[1:44:21] And one other thing is I have always advocated
[1:44:24] for the employees.
[1:44:25] And I think now more than ever, we need to get them
[1:44:28] from the back of the bus to the front of the bus.
[1:44:30] We always fund everybody else.
[1:44:32] And then the two employees are the very last to get it.
[1:44:35] When you look at the nonprofits, the state of Texas asks them to come into us, we can't afford it anymore.
[1:44:42] And so, for that, they gave them no franchise taxes, no property taxes, no sales taxes.
[1:44:48] You know, you just go to the public private sector and then get your money.
[1:44:52] Well, they didn't. They came to the county.
[1:44:54] You know if you want to make some money that you need to tell them nonprofit
[1:45:00] We don't have any more money. And all those non-mandated services that we provide, we can't afford that either. We need to take care of our county first, our personnel, the backbone of Guadalupe County, or the personnel that we have. And, you know, I've had a cable every year, and it seems to fall on deaf ears. But this year, hopefully, they will take care of our employees first, give them the longevity, give them the IAS for a $4,000 month for everybody inside the way there. It was too much. It $3.7 million. And then the judge actually told me,
[1:45:29] you know how much we're in debt and we are in debt.
[1:45:33] Now can we pull from the reserve?
[1:45:36] Yes, how much do you want to pull from the reserve?
[1:45:39] Say $20,000 or $20 million fine,
[1:45:43] then we got the shortfall taken care of.
[1:45:44] But next year, your cost of government
[1:45:46] went from here to here.
[1:45:49] Next year with the income that we're having in
[1:45:51] is still down here, you have to borrow again
[1:45:54] and again and again in person, you have no reserve.
[1:45:57] And then right now the reason that we got a AAA plus rating is because we have a reserve.
[1:46:03] Chris, what was the actual bond percentage that we got?
[1:46:07] 2.8 for the $20 million.
[1:46:12] Come out the interest rate.
[1:46:13] Yeah, tax notes.
[1:46:15] 3% and then the last three.
[1:46:18] Yeah, 3%.
[1:46:19] We wouldn't have gotten that without a reserve, a healthy reserve.
[1:46:23] Now, we're trying to do our very best with limited funds.
[1:46:26] So, I know it's hard for you, but once again, I think the money should go to the employees
[1:46:32] to say thank you, to keep them here, and I've done it every year, and I'm sorry if the
[1:46:37] police chiefs have sat with me, but you know, volunteer fire partners are just that volunteers.
[1:46:42] We need paid professional firefighters if we're going to do this stuff right.
[1:46:47] And the Sheriff's Department, he needs people, but once again, where's the money going to
[1:46:51] come from?
[1:46:52] I can fund it for one year, maybe even two.
[1:46:54] But after that, the money's all gone, you know, we can raise your taxes. I think the very first day I said raise it to 40 cents
[1:47:01] Oh, no, no, we're not gonna do that, but that would cover our cost
[1:47:04] But then you have people the way they're saying no, well, I can't afford a 40 cents increase
[1:47:09] But I pay an extra $50 or $50 a hundred of the valuation inside the cities as does the city of civil love
[1:47:15] Seguine everybody else or around around the same cost but they're getting all the services that everybody in uncorporated area want
[1:47:22] But they don't want to pay for it.
[1:47:24] So they're going to have to step up to the plate and say, yes, we'll take the SDs, we'll
[1:47:28] take the special districts, because the sheriff can have a special district over there,
[1:47:31] which for all that money goes to law enforcement.
[1:47:34] But once again, it takes three votes to get this thing on the ballot.
[1:47:37] So that's all I got to say.
[1:47:39] What
[1:47:42] was said in the district, yeah, for less, but it's still, if we didn't have reserve
[1:47:47] and get the AAA plus rating, we wouldn't have gotten that, believe me, I'm working the banking
[1:47:51] business I sit on the board director's bank and trust and I know what it takes to get
[1:47:56] a low interest rate and it's yeah if we do away with all our reserve you know we're not going to
[1:48:01] get it. It's just it's just finance folks. Any other comments during the public hearing?
[1:48:09] I'm going to speak out for a while but Judge can you get back to that graph that you put up
[1:48:14] about the 1.04 billion this one yes I have those are you that know me know I'm
[1:48:26] not scared to take on issues and say what I feel if you look up there the key
[1:48:35] takeaway state required exemptions and corrections over 65 tax ceiling
[1:48:42] reduce the taxable value.
[1:48:46] I listen to everyone of you good people, and I agree with you, but we're
[1:48:55] sitting up here right now in a situation where we are taking the brunt of what the state has
[1:49:05] inflicted upon us. It's not the county employees, it's not the volunteer farm departments, it's what
[1:49:13] But the state has done to us, and I seriously agree with Commissioner Ott in that I think
[1:49:19] the appraisal district probably ought to be audited too.
[1:49:26] You know, I listen to all of y'all, and I agree with all of y'all, but no one brought up
[1:49:31] that point that we lost this value.
[1:49:35] We've got to figure out how to get out of this hole.
[1:49:38] and it's not Grodaloupe County because I sat in last week on a they called it the
[1:49:47] legislative conference. It was counties from all over the state and they're all
[1:49:54] talking about it and the cities around here are all talking about it. They're
[1:49:59] fighting and
[1:50:00] Fighting and fighting. Where's the money gonna come from? So we'll figure through this. We will figure through this and we will do what's right for the people. But think about it when you talk to your state legislators. Not this body up here. This body up here. Yes, there are things that can be done different. I'm not gonna argue that point. The other thing that
[1:50:29] that I'm going to say is, these people all talk about growth.
[1:50:34] And we've talked about it some in this body here.
[1:50:41] One of the things that has happened with the growth
[1:50:45] is, and I've heard it here in different ways,
[1:50:48] all the people coming in, all the people coming in.
[1:50:52] But the houses that are being built by these developers
[1:50:56] are not paying the taxes. They pay a little bit but they're not paying what we
[1:51:05] need to pay for a jail, for sheriff, for fire, the schools. We're not part of the
[1:51:13] schools. But they're not paying the bill. But the developers are making their
[1:51:20] money and they're leaving and they're leaving all of us right here with the
[1:51:25] problems. When I ran four years ago, I said this was going to happen. We're going to
[1:51:31] hit a wall. I didn't know the state would do this, but we're hitting a wall. And I'm
[1:51:38] very upset about what it's doing to our people that are here, our employees. I worked for
[1:51:44] a company where we were taught a quality program. I have told, I don't know how many people
[1:51:51] of this light about this lately. First thing you take care of your customers, that's our
[1:51:56] tax fares. The next is your employees. We can't do it without our employees and the third
[1:52:01] is management which is the elected officials and department heads. We're trying and we're going
[1:52:09] to try. I'm going to address one other thing that keeps coming up. Paying for fire protection
[1:52:15] with the SERP not ESDs. I'm willing to look into that but these taxing districts we look into
[1:52:22] we looked into that. In pre-sync 4, I'm not going to speak for the other pre-synx but in pre-sync 4,
[1:52:29] I had three businesses that I could tax with sales tax 3. I'm not going to do that to three businesses.
[1:52:39] is, that's insane. So I'm just saying we'll get in a little more discussion after a while,
[1:52:48] but we have been given, we have been dealt a hand that is not good. And I just hope people will
[1:52:58] understand what we're trying to get through and we're trying to listen to everybody, but it is
[1:53:06] extremely difficult. So that's all I'll speak after a while. I've spoke long and
[1:53:12] out. Commissioner's and the other comments.
[1:53:18] We'll go after me. Okay. What's usually ladies first. So we have discussed this many times.
[1:53:33] have had a lot of budget workshops and I think all of y'all are aware of the revenue shortfall
[1:53:40] of what we're faced with. I do want to recognize former commissioner sideburner sitting in the
[1:53:46] audience who's probably very happy he's not sitting up here right now doing this today.
[1:53:53] But I get it. You know I've been serving this county in this city and my community for over 40 years
[1:54:02] and I do care. That's why I'm here. And I have a passion to help people. That's just a
[1:54:10] burden or a benefit. It depends on how you look at that. And as some of you have alluded
[1:54:17] to today, you know, there are some of us who are not running again and this is the end of our term.
[1:54:22] There are some comments that we don't care, but that is not the case of my part.
[1:54:26] I'm here and I care and I listen and I hear what y'all are saying. The judge did a fantastic job of explaining the finance part of it.
[1:54:38] We are faced with a tax rate that we have a ceiling on now. We are faced with 101 requests for positions for fiscal year 27.
[1:54:50] 171 position requests.
[1:54:56] Appreciate the fact that Elections gathered together
[1:54:59] heard.
[1:55:00] To try to come up and formulate a plan and it's appreciated, but the five of us have to make the decision. And I've stated my apprehensions about the reserve fund, savings account, whatever you want to refer to it as, as, as Commissioner Walerton said, it, it, it stacks on for the next year. So the three million keeps being thrown around with the building purchase, the land purchase.
[1:55:29] that's historically been in our budgets just because the just in case patent
[1:55:36] comment then I totally respect you Patten always. We've discussed this
[1:55:41] before there are preliminary discussions about what may happen with that for
[1:55:47] the future growth of the county but in relation to what we're faced with going
[1:55:55] forward. It's tough decisions, tougher than I've ever faced out of this will be going on my
[1:56:01] eighth year. So I respect everyone and everybody has said in relation to people who may say things
[1:56:10] on social media and bash me. I don't pay attention to social media. I know what I know. People come up to
[1:56:17] me who know me and say, how am I doing? I'm doing fine. I take care of my family and that's what I do.
[1:56:23] I do the best I can sitting in this seat, but I also look at the long-term future and
[1:56:29] I've always said that.
[1:56:31] So we set the 5.65 increase, we've set that ceiling.
[1:56:37] My initial take for employees, I think in the initial discussions, we all agreed helping
[1:56:43] our employees was a 4% COLA.
[1:56:46] It went to three, which I think we've all agreed to, and it's a definite benefit.
[1:56:51] that I had proposed also 3%, plus $1,000 base longevity,
[1:56:56] which we typically have.
[1:56:58] That's still up for discussion, as the judge said.
[1:57:01] The only thing we've said is the tax rate.
[1:57:04] So, going forward in our agenda item coming up,
[1:57:08] we'll have more discussion, I'm sure.
[1:57:10] But I just wanted to state those things
[1:57:13] and clear up some of the money here around me personally,
[1:57:17] because it's, I'm human and it's frustrating.
[1:57:20] but I don't take it to heart because I know what I do and I care for this
[1:57:25] community. My family, I'm generations of family in Guadalupe County over 150
[1:57:30] years. So I am here, my boys are here, my family is here. So I care about the
[1:57:36] future and I'm not going anywhere. I'm already thinking of things what I'm going
[1:57:40] to do after this to help with the community. So we'll figure it out because we have
[1:57:45] to. And we're going to move forward. Not everybody is going to be happy, but we're going
[1:57:51] to do what we need to do.
[1:58:00] So I'm going to talk in a little bit of bullet points since
[1:58:02] a lot of things were said today. I think a lot of valuable things have been said. And I
[1:58:06] think, first of all, when I extend some thanks to the citizens that took their time to come
[1:58:11] here today and talk to us, I appreciate you because everyone's time is really your
[1:58:16] and more important resource your time in your health.
[1:58:19] We also want to thank the Court because this has been quite a ride, we've had quite a
[1:58:24] ride.
[1:58:25] We have a lot of years of experience in this court, I personally have really benefited
[1:58:29] from that, from learning from everyone here.
[1:58:31] And it is true that it is, you know, the last last round, last dance for a few of us, last
[1:58:37] term for a couple more few of us might just be me in a few years and I really will miss
[1:58:44] the experience.
[1:58:45] I want you all to know that there has been a lot of negative rhetoric about members
[1:58:48] of this court and whether or not you agree with certain things they say and certainly
[1:58:53] we've had some split votes on this court as we all know but I have to tell you this
[1:58:57] group works really, really hard I mean they really do I have really gotten to know them
[1:59:04] in the last year and a half it has been an honor to do that they are unique each one
[1:59:09] of them in their belief set but I can tell you that they each have a very strong belief
[1:59:13] you said, and they really truly are all doing their best and putting in a lot of heart
[1:59:18] and a lot of work.
[1:59:19] And so I truly want to thank each one of you for all of the work you've done.
[1:59:22] I think a lot of it goes unrecognized.
[1:59:24] I think that when there are problems that everyone directs it toward Commissioner's Court,
[1:59:30] if you're angry about something, it comes toward Commissioner's Court.
[1:59:33] In the last month, all of us together, I mean, it's probably countless, how much contact
[1:59:39] of negativity we have gotten in every direction from almost every department,
[1:59:44] citizens, et cetera. And you have to understand that all five of us are here
[1:59:48] because we want to be here. We're not forced to be here. You have to learn so
[1:59:52] many different things, so many different areas of expertise. And each one of
[1:59:55] those areas runs deep, right? I mean, all people here that represent your various
[1:59:59] This is apartment-
[2:00:01] We have to do the best we can with a combination of resources and needs that are available to us.
[2:00:08] I really want to emphasize that because I think these last few weeks have really been difficult for all of us with a lot of the commentary, a lot of the pressure, a lot of the hate that's been directed toward us before a lot of decisions have been made.
[2:00:23] I think that sometimes it's very hard also as a governing body because you don't want to alarm
[2:00:29] the public but you want to inform the public and having outlets to send information to the
[2:00:35] public so everyone understands sometimes it's very difficult to do in a streamlined fashion so I want
[2:00:40] to talk a little bit about my perspective. I like to do that let you know kind of where I'm coming
[2:00:45] from in the decisions that I make and talk about some of the issues. I speak sometimes a little more
[2:00:51] family and some members of the court. Some of them speak very eloquently, and I admire
[2:00:54] them for that. I like to do a little bit more short strokes.
[2:01:01] I've said it a couple
[2:01:02] times, so I'll say it again. We had a very unexpected, large differential in what we expected
[2:01:07] in taxable value, that being what we know so far, a total of exemptions in 65 and over households
[2:01:13] over the cumulative effect of the year since 2022 onward. We were informed that those have
[2:01:18] not been all accounted for, suddenly they were found.
[2:01:22] I believe the verbiage used was swept up into the technology.
[2:01:26] And because of that being swept up,
[2:01:28] the difference between the number that we received
[2:01:30] from our tax assessor and the number we received
[2:01:32] from our appraisal district was 1.5 billion.
[2:01:35] We received a 2.4 billion in total
[2:01:37] from the tax assessor and a $3.9 billion factor
[2:01:41] from the appraisal district, giving us a difference
[2:01:43] which became a negative in our ability
[2:01:45] to use those funds of 1.5 billion.
[2:01:49] What's unfortunate is that even that we've heard from both entities, we still don't truly
[2:01:53] understand the mistake, not because of a lack of comprehension on our part but because
[2:01:57] of the information that's not available to us at this time.
[2:02:00] We initially discovered that on July 27th, there's been a lot of rhetoric that we've been holding
[2:02:05] back information, that's not true.
[2:02:07] We learned about it on July 27th and because of how that factored into the calculus of what
[2:02:11] money we had, we started this at a deficit.
[2:02:14] It was unexpected.
[2:02:14] it. It's not because anyone doesn't want to give money. It's not because people are holding
[2:02:18] back. It's because we are faced with an unexpected issue. I've said several times I think that we
[2:02:24] do need to engage the services of an outside auditor because I think that we are in a risky situation
[2:02:30] that we do not understand exactly what this problem is. We don't understand exactly how it happened
[2:02:35] and it happened outside of any department that's within the purview of commissioners court.
[2:02:39] So we don't have the ability to fully understand which means that our ability to understand
[2:02:44] and if it will happen again, the likelihood of reoccurrence
[2:02:46] into which extent isn't unknown to us.
[2:02:49] It's a problem.
[2:02:51] Well, I would like for us to do in the next fiscal year
[2:02:53] is engage the services in an outside order
[2:02:55] so that they can go through with the numbers
[2:02:57] that the appraisal district has given us,
[2:02:59] work together with our tax assessor
[2:03:00] and see what we can come up with
[2:03:02] so that we can make decisions going forward.
[2:03:04] Now, the benefit of that is that we will be able
[2:03:07] to look at those numbers and those figures
[2:03:09] and get that information throughout the next fiscal year,
[2:03:11] plan accordingly and speak and communicate with our departments and the public as it goes so that this is not an unexpected surprise this time.
[2:03:20] However, the element of surprise is not commissioners court's fault and it is very unfortunate.
[2:03:28] I think what this comes down to is who is more risk averse than others because we have, as you've seen in the charts,
[2:03:37] it would require an increase in the tax rate to even balance the budget to what it was last year.
[2:03:41] Okay, so that has to happen if we're even going to get what we have last year.
[2:03:46] That's without a caller, that's without longevity, that's without new positions, that's without
[2:03:49] re-grades, that's without equipment, trucks, things that people need by itself.
[2:03:56] And then on top of that, we come down to, are we willing to take money out of the fund
[2:04:02] balance or not?
[2:04:02] Are we willing to move several line items that are set aside for capital projects, building,
[2:04:07] land, etc. and use that money for things that are one-time factors in part but also largely
[2:04:14] reoccurring.
[2:04:15] A lot of the things that we've heard today and the feedback that we've heard throughout
[2:04:19] the last few weeks have been people saying, hey, we need essential services, we need more
[2:04:23] bodies, we need people, we want our employees to get a raise as well, but we need people.
[2:04:29] And of course, as you know, those are reoccurring costs because you can pull it out of the savings
[2:04:32] account this year, but if we don't have that fund generation next year, like we've enjoyed
[2:04:39] prior years, then we would have to pull it back out again and again and again and again,
[2:04:43] unless we have a better year. No, we don't know, right? So the risk, it comes back to the
[2:04:47] risk of our city factor. And I think that, you know, myself, I am inclined, as I've said
[2:04:55] before to use some of that money that we have set aside for M.
[2:05:08] No, no, not to the extent that it has, at the very least. But I think that we do need to spend the money and the time to really understand what caused this. And if it's something that we see coming in the future that we communicate to the department's early, hey, if we have a problem coming, it might not be a cola next year. But I think if, in my opinion, and through the people we've spoken to, my constituents, the employees, I speak to, they'd
[2:05:29] department has an elected I speak to, I think if the choice was, hey, do we spend some
[2:05:34] of this money now to make holes, some of the tenured people we have and to move forward
[2:05:38] the best we can in the situation we're in, knowing that maybe next year for our deficit
[2:05:42] there may not be a co-order, may not be longevity. If we have a repeat problem and they know that
[2:05:46] ahead of time, I think it's better to be a little riskier with it now. Now, I have to tell
[2:05:56] you what I think is not productive is fighting between the department's
[2:06:01] department heads fire departments in different people competing interests
[2:06:06] between the precincts different entities different offices no matter what
[2:06:11] you are I look at this room some of you are my friends some of you I don't know
[2:06:16] well some of you don't like me at all and that's okay because what I truly
[2:06:20] care about is the people and you know growing around talking to people as a
[2:06:26] prosecutor as a person in private practice as a person that was campaigning now as a person
[2:06:31] that holds office I think that what really resounds what's really the most important
[2:06:34] what all of you can probably agree to is the people the citizens right it's not us in
[2:06:38] this room typically with the exception of you that are citizens of course but us in the room
[2:06:41] the ones that are making the decisions the ones that are boots on the ground it's not
[2:06:45] about us it's about them don't we need to be as employees here as good as we can be for
[2:06:52] the people, and that's really what this is about. I have to tell you, fire departments publicly
[2:07:02] shaming other fire departments. It's not good. It's not productive. It doesn't cause anything
[2:07:09] going to happen.
[2:07:11] Law enforcement against law enforcement. It's not good. You're all important.
[2:07:15] You do different jobs. You have different tasks. It's true. Absolutely. Right? Different levels of
[2:07:19] things. But at the same time, the competition, we have to find a way to work together. We're
[2:07:23] not doing it. We are very divisive among ourselves. I wish it wasn't that way. I think that
[2:07:28] it can be better. I think it will be better, but you have to understand that we have been
[2:07:31] faced with some serious challenges this year. The court has been put in some very precarious
[2:07:38] situations. There have been different things said and different future actions spoken
[2:07:42] about to the court that of course puts us in an odd position because each of us are trying
[2:07:47] to do what we think is truly best and so when your back is against the wall with a situation
[2:07:52] like that and you're doing what you think is your best among threats, among division,
[2:07:56] it is difficult but I want you to know that certainly we are all aware of those things.
[2:08:03] I want to speak briefly to the volunteer fire department, I'm sure that's a that's a
[2:08:06] trigger warning for half of you up here but here we go.
[2:08:10] In precincts 1 and 4 we do not have the GCFR staffing in personnel present as precinct
[2:08:16] does and enjoys and is precinct three enjoys from the City Fire Department.
[2:08:20] It is certainly an essential service, while I agree absolutely that not all the volunteer
[2:08:26] fire departments are operating at equal capacity, and they're not.
[2:08:29] I am telling you that precinct one and precinct four specifically, the volunteer fire departments
[2:08:35] that are Marion, New Berlin, McQueenie, like Dunlap, St. Hills, and Kingsbury, we need them.
[2:08:43] And I know the Commissioner of Government and I feel extremely strongly about the fact
[2:08:46] that we really cannot for the safety of our people go forward with a budget that does not
[2:08:51] include additional funding for them.
[2:08:53] Now I understand that GCFR feels that if we give to one we take away from the other, but
[2:09:00] we have to figure out a way for that not to be the rhetoric.
[2:09:03] You're very important to and rely on you, you really have both of you.
[2:09:06] But precincts one and four, and for those of you that are citizens, I want you all to hear
[2:09:10] of this precinct one, I have the most rural area
[2:09:13] out of any one, 52% of the total county.
[2:09:15] We have almost doubled the county road mileage
[2:09:16] of any of the precinct.
[2:09:18] Precinct three is 90 something percent city limits.
[2:09:21] Precinct four, similarly situated to myself.
[2:09:23] We have volunteer fire departments,
[2:09:25] I think at this point in time in the fiscal year,
[2:09:27] they have responded to upwards of 3,500 calls.
[2:09:29] There are some that are very qualified.
[2:09:32] There are some, there are citizens
[2:09:32] that are doing the best they can.
[2:09:34] Of course, we were not ignorant to that fact.
[2:09:37] I want the court to know,
[2:09:38] and I know there's been some severe opposition to that,
[2:09:40] But I know that click and speak for Commissioner Garmin and I having recently talked to him about this that the two of us feel
[2:09:45] Very strongly about it and feel that we are putting the public at at a very dangerous situation if we do not have that in a rural the rural area
[2:09:52] I also support the growth of GCFR. I think that we should be forward facing in that one of the conversations
[2:09:58] I think the court will be having right now and I
[2:10:00] I have a feeling I know where it will go is whether or not we are going to entertain the idea of any new positions in this budget. And I don't know that that's something that we can do certainly for everyone. Maybe no one is going forward with this conversation.
[2:10:15] But I will say that I think that it needs to be recognized that the people that are the volunteers in R2 precincts have done a tremendous amount of work. It's been very valuable. I know that over the last two weekends I've been made aware of many phone calls that the volunteer fire departments have received for dispatch.
[2:10:31] and they have gone and covered multiple fires to the two double digits each day
[2:10:35] of the last two weekends. GCFR has also been covering fires the whole time.
[2:10:40] They're busy. They are all at capacity. They are all covering things
[2:10:43] constantly. GCFR needs more people. The volunteer fire department is doing more
[2:10:47] money to be able to operate. GCFR is going to grow. All of these things are facts.
[2:10:53] But right now today, similar to last year, you're right. We don't have a plan.
[2:10:57] I agree with you, Mr. Smith, you're correct, we need one.
[2:11:02] Right now, today, in precincts one and four, if we don't have them, we do not have people
[2:11:06] that are covering buyers in the rural area.
[2:11:08] That's the bottom line.
[2:11:09] I mean, we have to have it.
[2:11:11] We
[2:11:15] want to let somebody else top for a little bit, if you want to.
[2:11:21] Anybody else want to make any comments?
[2:11:25] I have more to say in some specific thing that I don't want the court wants to reserve.
[2:11:29] More of the conversation for the actual action item if we want to try to cover a lot of
[2:11:32] this just up top.
[2:11:33] That's your preference.
[2:11:34] Do we want to cover more of the conversation right now at front or during the action item?
[2:11:44] I'm just going to get to know what she says about fire.
[2:11:48] Two weekends ago, GCFR was up at North of Sagan at a big fire.
[2:11:56] There's close to 40 acres outside of Marion on fire.
[2:12:03] and who put it out? The volunteers. So to this rhetoric about, are they qualified or not?
[2:12:14] If my pastor is on fire, I want a wet hose there. I want that truck there. I don't care if it says
[2:12:22] was McQueenie, or New Berlin, or GCFR, and my constituents are the same way.
[2:12:30] And until we figure out how to make GCFR move forward, these volunteers are our firefighters.
[2:12:39] They're all we got.
[2:12:42] We got to make it work.
[2:12:44] And to some of the points that were made, and I'm going to dedo that anybody by diesel lately,
[2:12:52] And when that gets to that far, you've got that big old trucks in there wrong, think it's
[2:12:58] running on air?
[2:12:59] No, it's running on $5 a gallon.
[2:13:03] So we got to fund these people.
[2:13:06] I mean, there can be all the argument in the world about in GCFR, we keep up more money
[2:13:14] into that thing.
[2:13:16] But the bottom line is when I look at the run numbers the volunteers are the ones that are making it work.
[2:13:24] Marion ran 637 calls last year.
[2:13:29] Gee, I like to sit in my living room at night.
[2:13:33] I don't want to go out to a fire or emergency call.
[2:13:37] God bless them.
[2:13:38] Marion ran over 450.
[2:13:42] This year, most of them are right now at what they ran last year, so we need to fund them.
[2:13:49] In Commissioner Aud has a few other things that I'm in agreement with, but I will stand by those volunteer
[2:13:59] fire departments to the end of time until there's an alternative. And right now, if my
[2:14:09] house is on fire in precinct 4, my volunteer fire department through the ones that are
[2:14:16] going to come put it out. And I have witnessed it personally in my own family when we almost
[2:14:25] lawless to house and that McQueenie chief came up there by himself and started ripping
[2:14:32] boards off the house to keep the part from going under the house that we need to support
[2:14:40] them and we will support them. That's all I have to say for now again.
[2:14:47] I wanted to briefly discuss one of the propositions I had within the Environmental Health Department.
[2:14:52] Mr. Worms, can you see this file that is available? I think she just stepped outside.
[2:14:58] Thank you, Mr. Ritter.
[2:15:14] While he's doing that, I wanted to bring up one of the issues that we receive some correspondence
[2:15:18] from the sheriff in regard to the chaplain position. This court did discuss the availability
[2:15:24] of a chaplain position for the sheriff's office. It's my understanding, and if I'm unclear
[2:15:30] on that, then sheriff, I would like for you to clarify this for me. We did bring this up,
[2:15:35] and I understand that that position is paid for entirely and annually from the commissary
[2:15:40] funding however our county attorney informed us that it does need to be
[2:15:43] something that comes before commissioners court due to some of the
[2:15:46] different expenses that come into to play retirement being one of them is
[2:15:51] that am I most understanding that this is from our last conversation from our
[2:15:54] previous court
[2:15:57] yeah okay
[2:16:00] doesn't necessarily have to go in front of the
[2:16:02] court of the position to be created I don't know if anybody's requested a written
[2:16:05] opinion from my office if one's created I will have to one but there is no
[2:16:08] specific guidance has to this is for the chaplain and I don't know I don't think
[2:16:13] So I don't think anyone's requesting it unless somebody feels differently than I do, so I don't want to speak for the rest of the court members, but I wanted just to give my impression because I know we had received correspondence from the sheriff in regard to the creation of a chaplain position asking us to do that.
[2:16:28] So the court has an obligation to create that chaplain position for it to ever make it into there.
[2:16:33] Right.
[2:16:33] The question is whether or not that's going to be the duty of the court, just as a
[2:16:39] pro forma requirement or those actual, there's any authority for you to deny that request.
[2:16:45] I've not done the research on that.
[2:16:46] If this was going to be out of asset, for future money, you'll have the authority to say no, you cannot.
[2:16:50] Right.
[2:16:50] Out of that, there is no guidance from either the legislature or the Attorney General's office.
[2:16:55] So it would be the opinion of my office that it would be controlling at that point.
[2:16:59] I haven't done any research.
[2:17:00] I know that you all, for it to make it into the budget, you all have to create that position, whether you have the ability to deny it or not, has not been asked of me yet.
[2:17:09] I'll let you know if you all ask me to prepare a-
[2:17:11] Well, no, I'm not asking you to deny it.
[2:17:13] I was my understanding in the last conversation that we had before this court that the retirement, perhaps the benefits were the reasons that we needed to, maybe to talk about it as a court and vote on it, other than just the simple creation of it.
[2:17:25] And again, if that were massive forfeiture, do you have the authority to deny or approve it?
[2:17:31] I don't know if this is just-
[2:17:32] Simply commentary.
[2:17:34] Since this is from commentary, no specific guidance on that.
[2:17:37] My point was, you may have to rely on an opinion from my office to make that determination,
[2:17:43] but no opinion has been requested yet.
[2:17:45] Okay, so I think there must be some sort of misunderstanding here, because we received
[2:17:50] correspondence from the sheriff and sheriff, you know any input you have is totally welcome
[2:17:55] but in our correspondence from the sheriff we have received that if we don't do this then
[2:18:00] we will, there's a potential that he is going to mandamus us to do this and as a court
[2:18:07] member I'm surprised and a little confused about that because I don't feel like there was
[2:18:10] any negative conversation about it.
[2:18:11] I think we brought it up.
[2:18:12] We talked about whether or not we needed those ancillary funds for retirement perhaps benefits
[2:18:17] But I don't feel that there was any negativity from the court in regard to that position.
[2:18:21] Just to agree with you on that, I believe there's been resistance by the courts to allow any additional funding from any other sources that the departments have available to us.
[2:18:28] The discretionary funds say the hot check, the prosecutors fund, the asset for the funds that both the sheriff and I carry.
[2:18:35] There has been resistance from the court, specifically from the judge saying that if nobody can get.
[2:18:40] If the courts not going to authorize to come out of general fund, then those of us that have other funds available to us should also be denied.
[2:18:47] the ability to do that. So that, I think, I'm not going to speak for the sheriff, because I don't know what the motivation behind that was, but the question would then be whether the court has the ability to deny it. That's not been presented to my office for a written opinion. I can prepare one in a day or so.
[2:19:02] But prior to a man day mistaking place, I think the court would need that law from me.
[2:19:09] What I want to know is, can we talk about that right now?
[2:19:13] As I stated before in the paracord, I have no issue with it.
[2:19:16] I think that it would be fine and beneficial if we did have a chaplain that is paid for
[2:19:20] at a commissary fund on an annual recurring basis.
[2:19:23] I don't have an issue with that person's benefits in a retirement.
[2:19:26] I think that it would be a benefit to the county.
[2:19:28] I think that that person would be made available to our law enforcement.
[2:19:31] I think that it's a positive thing.
[2:19:32] I wanted to see if the court would entertain that conversation right now.
[2:19:36] Any concerns about having the conversation now?
[2:19:39] No, no.
[2:19:40] There's no legal concerns.
[2:19:41] We're presenting the budget.
[2:19:42] There are no legal concerns about having the court potentially.
[2:19:45] And to your point, I did voice concern early ongoing.
[2:19:48] But we also then consider other special revenue funds,
[2:19:50] because you do have records management for the county clerk,
[2:19:54] the fire code for the fire marshal asset forfeiture for yourself.
[2:19:58] But if you remember at the end,
[2:20:00] For those conversations, it was also my understanding is that the sheriff has complete control over the commissary and could do that without our approval. That's when the conversation, the commissioner's referencing came up going, hold on, I'm not sure. So that wasn't my opposition to the creation of position. I thought the sheriff could do that without our permission. I think that there's no guidance on it. And so if he were to make the request and you all denied it, then guidance would be necessary. If he makes the request and you all don't give any pushback on it, then it doesn't matter.
[2:20:30] But if we don't make a decision on, I guess that's the question, can you still do it if we don't say yes or no?
[2:20:36] There's no way for it to go into a budget if you don't put it into there.
[2:20:40] So the point being, the Commissioner's Court has to create a position for the auditor to then have a budget
[2:20:44] position for to come out of that money.
[2:20:46] So is it just an act that just requires your signature, one that you're going to be bound to do,
[2:20:52] that he could then mandamus you to do or not, and I don't have the answer to that?
[2:20:55] I leaned towards, he can probably, man, Damace, you should have get to that, but not, but no request of my office has been made to make that ultimate legal decision.
[2:21:04] But he can say I'm hiring you, but until there's a position available through the budget, there's no way to make that happen.
[2:21:12] The point is, whether it's just an act you have to just sign your name to, or if you're all getting a right to vote on it, that's not that.
[2:21:21] But I guess we don't have that question in front of us just yet.
[2:21:24] If you all decide, yes, he's going to be able to use those funds to be able to do that without any question from the commissioner's court, then it's a moot point.
[2:21:30] If the court is to say no, we're not going to put that in the budget, then is when the mandamus question comes up.
[2:21:35] That's when my opinion becomes necessary as to whether or not it can be done without y'all's authority and whether y'all could be mandamus into doing it.
[2:21:42] I think for me, some of the confusion came from me, I attended one of the meetings with the department heads and some of the electives.
[2:21:47] We were presented, we were given a proposition, there were 14 new positions in this proposition,
[2:21:53] there wasn't conversation about the chaplain, we had the conversation in court, I did
[2:21:58] not feel that we were necessarily opposed to it, certainly not a majority was opposed
[2:22:03] to it and so I was surprised to receive that correspondence, it was not my impression
[2:22:09] of how we left the conversation, I wanted to address it now with the court, if we can
[2:22:14] talk about that, if it's something that we want to have included now and I think that
[2:22:17] That would end the conversation in one aspect or another, and if we need further guidance
[2:22:21] or further opinion, then we're all here in the same room moving forward with it since
[2:22:25] we are on a timeline for a response.
[2:22:27] Sure.
[2:22:30] Any other comments or thoughts on the chaplain position being funded out of a commissary?
[2:22:36] It doesn't matter to me.
[2:22:43] I think we need to have some opinions from court members.
[2:22:45] As I said, I'm for it.
[2:22:46] Could any of the rest of you let us know so that we can try to include or not include that
[2:22:50] in the decisions we have today?
[2:22:53] I am not opposed to it individually. My only question for the sheriff is there's been continued
[2:22:59] comments about deficiencies in having the number of detention officers. Online I think
[2:23:06] it's said 25 short is the chaplain more of a preference or priority at this point using
[2:23:12] those commissary funds as opposed to attention additional detention officer. Because in the
[2:23:19] request that we receive from the sheriff. I think and share if you might have to
[2:23:25] correct me if I'm wrong. I don't remember the number of detention officers
[2:23:28] for the jail that were requested in your submission. According to our latest
[2:23:33] staffing analysis, we're 25 short. It really is 24 and a half. I'll just round it
[2:23:37] off to 25 because we can't pay for half of the detention officer.
[2:23:43] In statute, we
[2:23:44] cannot use or the court cannot use
[2:23:47] commissary funds for operational cost.
[2:23:50] So I think there would be a discussion
[2:23:52] that we would probably maybe even need a legal opinion
[2:23:56] on whether or not that could be used
[2:23:57] for detention officers because I would argue
[2:24:01] that that's part of the operational cost
[2:24:03] to running the jail.
[2:24:05] So it's apples and oranges to me
[2:24:07] because it's commissary fund versus county funds.
[2:24:10] You just see it as two different things.
[2:24:12] Yes, sir.
[2:24:13] How many detention officers were in your budget request this year? I think it was 25
[2:24:18] Actually, no, it was not because we sectioned it off into a four-year plan. I think 25 was the total over the four-year plan
[2:24:26] I believe we asked for two this year two detention officers. Correct. Yes, sir. Sorry. I didn't have that list
[2:24:35] Okay
[2:24:36] Okay.
[2:24:37] Thank you.
[2:24:38] Any other questions for the chair from the chaplain position?
[2:24:42] So the funding, other commissary fund for the chaplain is still a chair requested rate
[2:24:47] of, is it, 2201, what is the, what is the funding, the pay rate?
[2:24:53] The pay rate.
[2:24:54] I don't remember the pay rate off the top of my head.
[2:24:56] I'd have to look at it.
[2:24:57] It gets 22 hours.
[2:25:02] That's the same.
[2:25:06] This has come to the court before as far as funding someone out of a special fund.
[2:25:13] And it lasts for two, three years, and then all of a sudden they come up and say, oh, we run out of money. We need to put him back in a regular budget.
[2:25:19] So for two years, I'll be here. I understand you want it. You feel it's really, really needed.
[2:25:26] But as long as it continues to come out of the
[2:25:28] Commissary Fund, I have no problem with it.
[2:25:30] But when you try to move it into the general fund, then, you know, you have my
[2:25:33] Permission to get rid of the position if it does not come out.
[2:25:35] No, I won't be here when that happens.
[2:25:38] It's, uh, the Commissary Fund is very healthy.
[2:25:40] Yeah.
[2:25:40] It brings in more than it puts out by a long shot.
[2:25:43] So I have absolutely no qualms about the fact that the
[2:25:46] Commissary Fund is going to be able to write for it.
[2:25:48] I know you've done the research on how effective a
[2:25:51] a Reverend or a priest or wherever you want to call him can work inside the way
[2:25:56] there maybe you can reach these people and put him on right path and that's sure
[2:26:00] would be nice. Thank you. It'd be nice if they didn't come back, right?
[2:26:04] Absolutely.
[2:26:07] Any other comments? Questions? No, I think we have a consensus.
[2:26:11] I'm going to give you the floor with that. Thank you. I did want to talk about
[2:26:16] environmental health briefly and miss Valdez if you wouldn't mind coming to the
[2:26:20] Ms. Feldes and I had the opportunity to have a conversation yesterday and she did have
[2:26:24] a proposition for the court within this budget cycle that I do support and wanted to bring
[2:26:29] in front of you.
[2:26:30] So Ms. Feldes, if I start to say this incorrectly or lack some detail, please feel free to jump
[2:26:35] in.
[2:26:36] There is a court to position that is currently and recently vacant within environmental
[2:26:41] health.
[2:26:42] The pay is roughly $20 an hour.
[2:26:46] Ms. Valdez is suggesting that we use that money if we are able to abolish that position
[2:26:53] because of some necessary grade and step adjustments for the planer, assistant planer, and flood
[2:26:58] pain manager.
[2:27:00] One of the concerns that I know that Ms. Valdez has related to me and that I certainly agree
[2:27:04] with is that all three of these individuals are doing more complicated work than the person
[2:27:13] in the position of clerk two is really able to do
[2:27:16] from the job description, and that work is being covered
[2:27:20] by other individuals within the development center.
[2:27:22] The three individuals are slammed very much.
[2:27:25] So, and I know Miss Valvez has made a request
[2:27:27] for a development coordinator, but at the very least,
[2:27:29] if these three individuals who are very slammed in,
[2:27:33] as I understand, excelling in their performance,
[2:27:35] were able to benefit from the grading step adjustment.
[2:27:38] That would be two steps for the planner,
[2:27:41] There are two steps for the Assistant Planner in one step for the floodplain manager and
[2:27:45] the money that we're currently going to the court to will cover all of that adjustment.
[2:27:49] It will be no extra cost to the court.
[2:27:51] These are three full-time positions that are already filled as well as if there's anything
[2:27:55] you'd like to add.
[2:27:56] No, ma'am.
[2:27:57] That is it.
[2:27:58] Basically, at this point, you know, I don't feel responsible asking for another position.
[2:28:03] When we have the situation we have and the departments that are also requesting items.
[2:28:09] However, I was trying to think outside the box as I did ask for relief for those three
[2:28:15] individuals in a great and step.
[2:28:17] And so due to this position recently becoming vacant, those three individuals are already
[2:28:26] taken on additional tasks in the office.
[2:28:27] As you all know, we are a small department.
[2:28:29] I don't have an assistant admin.
[2:28:31] I don't have an assistant director.
[2:28:33] So anything extra really falls on other employees or myself.
[2:28:37] I'm not asking for anything for myself.
[2:28:39] I will continue to do what I need to do to make the department operate.
[2:28:42] It's just the three individuals that I have.
[2:28:44] I have to think of a way to try to keep them and also help with the burden that they
[2:28:50] are taking on by taking on those additional duties.
[2:28:52] And so that is why I propose this idea to do away with the clerk and it's not that I want
[2:28:58] to lose a position.
[2:28:59] Obviously, people are probably thinking, okay, you're asking for position but then you're
[2:29:03] wanting to lose a position.
[2:29:04] It's just, I have to think of a way to handle the situation with what's going on right now in the office.
[2:29:10] And so that is, that would be my proposal.
[2:29:13] And I do want to signify that the position that Ms. Fathers did request was a position,
[2:29:17] a development coordinator, a person that would need a specific skill set and experience to fulfill,
[2:29:24] and they would be able to do a certain caliber and level of work.
[2:29:27] So the position she's asking for, that she's certainly acknowledging that we're perhaps not in a
[2:29:32] financial position to fund at this point, that sort of work was not able to be covered
[2:29:37] by the person previously in the clerk role, and it wasn't the same job description by
[2:29:41] any means or anywhere near it.
[2:29:43] So I do support this change, and I would hope that the rest of the court will as well.
[2:29:47] The
[2:29:52] other questions from Miss Valdeaux as well, she's at the podium.
[2:29:57] I know Danielle, we had originally talked about that.
[2:30:00] We talked about moving the position from the engineer because the engineer position is vacant. And then if there were a potential vacancy of moving that position around, but if we didn't do that, and you had the opportunity of keeping that engineering employee that moves over longer and restructuring job duties, do you think this clerk adjustment is a better fit for right now to address those problems with existing employees?
[2:30:26] I think for right now that that position as I've told the court even if I do and I'll use the word inherit that position that position moves to my department.
[2:30:36] Right.
[2:30:37] There already is some conflict there because they are the pay is higher than the current assistant planner who is doing a majority of the duties for planning as well as the planner.
[2:30:48] So that already creates a conflict.
[2:30:51] So even when that position, if it were to move over to my department, yes, I would ask
[2:30:56] to increase additional duties onto that because of what the pay rate is for that position.
[2:31:02] I believe that they should have additional duties.
[2:31:05] If that position is kept now, if that position is vacant, then if there would be a further
[2:31:09] adjustment or we would need to realign everything, I would have to do that at that time.
[2:31:14] Okay.
[2:31:14] And I just wanted to have that conversation because I know there's a lot of things moving
[2:31:18] around in your department and at the development center because of that vacancy, the pass-through
[2:31:24] program for reviewing all the plots that are coming in workload has gone up 10th old
[2:31:29] over a short period of time where it's busy in a lot of other departments, but I think
[2:31:34] your area has increased probably quite a bit faster than what was originally anticipated.
[2:31:39] Yes, sir.
[2:31:40] I mean, just in approved law, recorded lots alone, I think we've had 5,800 lots from January
[2:31:45] to July, so a matter of seven months.
[2:31:47] that's not subdivisions that are pending, development, that's pending, it's not septic, floodplain, code enforcement, that's all in my department.
[2:31:55] So again, employees already have a majority of additional duties, and I know there's other departments, and a lot of these departments support our department or work with our department.
[2:32:04] But my biggest thing is, again, I don't feel comfortable sitting up here asking for a position when I do have maybe an alternative solution.
[2:32:11] and really, you know, what I'm hearing from citizens is, you know, law enforcement, and that's my thing, it should be law enforcement first responders first, and that would be fair to the other departments, if maybe, you know, I'm not going to ask for something that other departments are not getting it's not, it's not a fair.
[2:32:29] And I don't want our services to decline and affect the service that we provide to the citizens because I do really take that to heart, and I expect the employees and myself to provide the best service we can.
[2:32:39] and I just don't want to see a downfall in that
[2:32:41] because I'm overworking people.
[2:32:44] And I'll be honest with you, a real eye opener to me
[2:32:46] was the other day when I had an employee tell me
[2:32:50] that they did not want to take off
[2:32:51] for a medical appointment because they didn't want
[2:32:53] to fall behind, that's problematic to me.
[2:32:56] And that's when I said I got to start thinking
[2:32:57] of a solution.
[2:32:58] If I don't get anything position wise,
[2:33:02] then I need to be able to figure out something
[2:33:03] to keep the people here so they don't have that fear
[2:33:07] if I take off I'm going to come back to you know 100 more emails and that's not an exaggeration
[2:33:12] or more workload or fall behind and so that that's why I'm approaching the court with this just
[2:33:17] to try to come up with some way to think outside the box. Any other questions, comments?
[2:33:24] Sure. Daniel, thank you. Commissioner, I have it. I was going to ask real quick. Could you go
[2:33:29] through those the positions and the regrade requests? You were talking about environmental health.
[2:33:35] Yes, I'm just trying to keep a note of what we're talking about. Yes. No problem. Let me pull some of that the first the first position is the planar position
[2:33:44] Okay, and
[2:33:49] Okay
[2:33:50] Planner. Yes assistant planner
[2:33:53] No, no, the the three positions are a planner assistant planner and floodplain manager
[2:33:59] The current stepping grade is an 11-5 Danielle is that correct? Yes, okay. I've got the sheet here. Okay great
[2:34:08] And a two-step increase, of course, be a 13-5.
[2:34:11] The current for the assistant planner is a 9-3,
[2:34:16] but the two-step increase being an 11-4.
[2:34:19] Current for the floodplain manager is an 8-3,
[2:34:22] with a one-step increase being a 9-3.
[2:34:26] Total cost on the high set of that is 24k.
[2:34:30] If you're giving the two-step increase
[2:34:32] to both the planner and assistant planner,
[2:34:34] if you're doing the one-step for each of those three positions,
[2:34:37] the approximately 14K, both which fall within the monies that have been set aside for that clerk
[2:34:44] to position that is unfilled.
[2:34:46] Just slide.
[2:34:47] Thank you for going today.
[2:34:48] No, I have the detail at least wrote down so we can revisit that.
[2:34:53] Yes, sir.
[2:34:54] Just one more thing to this environmental health.
[2:34:56] So I do the environmental health hearings and her employees
[2:35:00] They come out there are doing way above and beyond. They bring a case and they've got pictures. They go back out to the location, take more pictures, everything else. So whatever she's saying for her employees is the truth there.
[2:35:19] Commissioner Garmin, I'm going to cut you a phone call. You're good. Todd Judge, could you come back up again? I have a different topic and he's not aware that I'm bringing this up.
[2:35:33] So we have the Marion Project. We've spent $2.7 million on it. It's going to be a, well it is a beautiful building.
[2:35:49] And Judge Fries and Hans sent all of us recently an email about his staffing needs.
[2:35:57] there
[2:36:02] is there is concern that we're going to open this beautiful building and
[2:36:09] we're going to put a sign up there while we're only open Monday, Tuesday, and
[2:36:14] Wednesday because we've got to work the rest of the time. So and and and we want to
[2:36:22] try to put a tax clerk there but the tax assessor says he doesn't exactly know
[2:36:29] how he can get it done. And I know things are tight. And I have not said anything to judge
[2:36:35] reason on about this. But I'm proposing that if any kind of way, we could get a part-time clerk
[2:36:44] for the JP and a part-time clerk for the tax office. And they are there, maybe they could help each,
[2:36:54] It could be one in the same people, but anyhow, so we can keep the doors open on a brand new facility that we built and served the public.
[2:37:09] I'm just sort of judge, what do you think of that idea?
[2:37:12] I'm open to any kind of discussions.
[2:37:16] I'm sure everybody's got my letter here and we're not going to go into my letter if you really want to.
[2:37:20] I understand the situation, but at the end of the day, I've got to take care of my office
[2:37:28] the best way I can.
[2:37:31] Like I said, I'm not going to get into the merits of my letter.
[2:37:35] I mean, that's how I want to.
[2:37:37] But I'm open to any suggestions for any kind of help.
[2:37:41] And so, and if it's not now, maybe a few months down the road as we get going,
[2:37:47] There's other avenues, I kind of came to a few different commissioners and said that, okay,
[2:37:54] how can we just change some things up that were so far behind?
[2:37:58] If you really want to, my office hasn't put in full time on since 2012.
[2:38:03] Last year, he'll give the part time at the very last minute.
[2:38:08] But there's other avenues that we can discuss at a different time in the future.
[2:38:15] and maybe in the future at least, but I'm open to anything.
[2:38:18] Making the part-time full-time would help tremendously.
[2:38:23] A part-time or part-time to full-time?
[2:38:25] Part-time to full-time.
[2:38:26] I've got two part-time to now.
[2:38:27] If you get that part-time to full-time, oh, she is wonderful.
[2:38:32] I mean, they're eager to learn, do more, but I know that's the situation, so but that's
[2:38:39] up to you all.
[2:38:39] When you look at the workload and the amount of money to bring in from your second only to precinct one
[2:38:45] And if you had a a way station, you'd be far ahead of precinct one. Oh, yeah
[2:38:51] Well, what I've always looked for is productivity and actually people don't say but how much money you bring into the county
[2:38:57] You're bringing in quite a bit of money to the county and then taking care of that. So it's yeah, it's I see where it's needed
[2:39:03] You just look at the numbers. It's one, four, two, and three.
[2:39:09] And if anybody wants to sit down with me and go over the OCA numbers,
[2:39:14] if there's any, you know, or even in the citizens want to go over it with me,
[2:39:18] contact my office. I'll sit down with them. I'll show them the numbers.
[2:39:21] I did Hayes County, Kamala County, and World County.
[2:39:24] And so I can just show them the numbers.
[2:39:26] So if you have a part time, you could back full time.
[2:39:30] I got two part times.
[2:39:35] It's not the total answer, but it certainly helps him at the present time, because everybody
[2:39:42] keeps comparing us to coalmountain haze.
[2:39:46] Well, they don't fund tax exempt people, they don't do fire EMS, they have ESDs, and so
[2:39:58] all the money goes towards
[2:40:00] It's really needed in the county employees to get the job done. Once again, we need to take care of our employees first, and if there's anybody left over, then you don't let out. But this year, there's not a couple of you left over. And that's why I understand the situation. And so, and that's why I'm not screaming on hollering the top of my lungs, I understand tight budgets. And I'm just looking for the future going okay. Maybe we can just keep going here.
[2:40:29] I'm trying to tell the clerk says I don't want to lie to tell him something hopefully they'll stay
[2:40:36] To move both his part times of full-time. What was that cost Chris?
[2:40:42] Run that's it run the force
[2:40:45] Even if it's not even I would love both part time to it just one of them at least it would help anything would help kind of deal
[2:40:53] Look at one if you'll run the numbers for one.
[2:40:59] I'm not sure what they're being paid now
[2:41:06] We have three and a three and a three and two halves three and two halves and so it's yeah
[2:41:15] And there's 44,000 a part time does that sound correct?
[2:41:20] What would that cost difference?
[2:41:27] $20,000
[2:41:30] We found out that the city's shirts is not
[2:41:33] controlling any unincorporated area in the fire department that's $25,000
[2:41:36] out there. Judge, would that help us keep the doors open?
[2:41:41] Absolutely. I mean, you know, and like I said, the numbers there, if you really want
[2:41:44] to go look at the numbers, I mean, let's just compare us to Christmas one. And I ran
[2:41:52] the numbers from March of 25 to March of 26. And we were 200 cases more and Odyssey. Then
[2:42:00] if you're going to go into OCA, OCA comes into as far as warrants. Judge Hunter does a
[2:42:07] lot more warrants. And then that's more of the judges part there kind of do not just cases
[2:42:12] that the clerks are entering. And at the end of the day, yes, court gets busier and
[2:42:19] the judge gets a little bit busier, but it's not that. It's not the judges that are so burdened
[2:42:25] with this. It's the clerks because the clerks are behind their doing all the paperwork.
[2:42:29] Once again, there's a backbone of this county. There. There.
[2:42:34] I will echo to you that the Justice of the Peace precinct one is also requesting that one
[2:42:39] of his part time clerks be moved to a full time as well and I would ask that if we are inclined
[2:42:45] to do this for precinct four that we would do it for precinct one as well.
[2:42:47] I agree.
[2:42:48] I'm going to add to that the new Justice of the Peace coming into precinct four, Captain
[2:42:54] Torrance we are and I talk and we're talking about different ways to new programs for the
[2:43:01] That way station because that office has just clerks just putting in tickets, which it's revenue for the county.
[2:43:09] But ways that we can streamline that somehow, with different programs I talked to the constable,
[2:43:14] did not go into the sheriff's office to that, I think it's 3.65,
[2:43:20] 3.65, you know, to streamline that.
[2:43:22] They went on it, that's where, you know, alleviated a lot of data entry from these clerks kind of deal.
[2:43:28] And so there's avenues that we're starting to look at trying to figure it out hopefully down the room. We'll go figure it out
[2:43:34] But so when Katherine worked for you originally for she went to end the VA. So she's
[2:43:39] Rising star that woman is extremely intelligent and I was exactly what to do on computers and how to scream my things
[2:43:46] My back. It's going to be MBAs lost when she goes out of that way
[2:43:50] But she'll do a great job for the county and as she has always for you and that she's like having two people absolutely
[2:43:58] Commissioner JP one has $24,000 part time and then for the conversation later we
[2:44:06] would have to determine if it was a clerk one or a clerk to clerk one 62
[2:44:11] thousand three thirty two clerk to 65 thousand six thirty so those would be
[2:44:16] different so Judge when you said earlier on I was I got two part times so is
[2:44:22] 44,000. You have a single part time line for 44,000. I guess they're taking two part times out of it. Right.
[2:44:30] So any any department that has one, two, three part times either just a single part time line.
[2:44:35] Okay. We put a note in there if we know how many positions the number of hours worked in the pay rate.
[2:44:40] So we just have the cumulative. Okay. Yeah. But to your point it then it gets to a discussion for you if the
[2:44:47] of course willing to do that. Are you taking one of the part times which is probably half
[2:44:52] of that money or you want to be thinking about what the schedule is to leave a part time
[2:44:57] and do that? Are you taking two part timers making it one?
[2:45:00] Full time and telling somebody, I don't have a spot for you anymore. That's going to be that hard decision. If you know, whatever you'll come up with there. Thank you. Yes, sir. When you look at his numbers, he, he definitely is the extra staff. Once again, it's, it's revenue coming in and he's more than making up for it. Yeah. It's, it's a wash. I have a couple other individual items to bring up if we are ready to move forward.
[2:45:31] I have been contacted by Judge Kailer, he is our magistrate, as you all know, he is doing
[2:45:39] a great job, he is our full-time magistrate, Miss Senni Middleton, she is an attorney,
[2:45:45] she is our part-time magistrate, and they do have a lot of fear, I think, going forward
[2:45:50] due to the, I'm sorry, let me interrupt myself a quick judge, the current clerk for the Justice
[2:45:56] this is a piece precinct one is a clerk one.
[2:45:58] That is a clerk one.
[2:45:59] Yes, sir.
[2:46:00] Okay.
[2:46:00] Back to the match rate.
[2:46:01] So, Ms. Middleton is covering every single night and every single weekend and every
[2:46:07] single holiday.
[2:46:08] There are some times of course that you would imagine that a person might need some time
[2:46:12] off of that is their schedule.
[2:46:16] And Judge Kailer is, I think, worried that there might be some burnout in the near future.
[2:46:22] they are looking for a part-time magistrate reason I'm bringing this up again as the court
[2:46:29] knows I am for using some of our money that we have set aside for building purchases.
[2:46:34] I'm trying to look at some things that are not huge expenses.
[2:46:38] If we can, a part-time magistrate is $35,000, that would be somebody to assist with the
[2:46:43] night's weekends in covering for Judge Cailer.
[2:46:45] I know Judge Cailer intends to be able to help us with the other courts if and when needed.
[2:46:51] However, we don't have enough coverage for that.
[2:46:54] I wanted to bring that to the court's attention and see if the court had an appetite for
[2:46:56] that at this time.
[2:46:58] His concern is that if Miss Middleton does become burned out, then it would be difficult
[2:47:02] to find another person.
[2:47:03] If we don't have another person to cover those hours, that would be an immediate need and
[2:47:07] a problem as we are trying to put people through that system at the speediest rate possible.
[2:47:13] I just like to get the court's thoughts on that.
[2:47:26] The court doesn't have a current appetite for it.
[2:47:27] I'll move on.
[2:47:28] I just wanted to bring it up.
[2:47:30] Do you have any comments or questions?
[2:47:37] Okay. I appreciate the feedback. We move on to the next one.
[2:47:42] So the next thing I wanted to talk about, and again, this is something I've brought up several times, was our
[2:47:48] admin commissioner's court admin. Again, as we've discussed with the court, I don't think that her
[2:47:54] celebrate the way that she's graded as appropriate at all.
[2:47:57] Multiple counties that are within our similar numeric comparison have an administrative
[2:48:05] assistant for each commissioner.
[2:48:06] We have one administrative assistant total for all four commissioners.
[2:48:12] I again want to reiterate my hesitation and apprehension toward losing a lot of the tenure, especially
[2:48:21] in this building, and I think it would be quite a hardship on the Commissioner's Court.
[2:48:29] If we lost our admin, I am asking that she is regraded from a grade seven to a grade
[2:48:34] nine.
[2:48:35] The total cost difference in that is $8,000 in change.
[2:48:40] I wanted to discuss the Court's appetite on that.
[2:48:42] As an alternative to that, I would ask that the Court take half of my conference budget
[2:48:48] it and give that to her, and I believe that Commissioner Garment want to speak for you,
[2:48:53] but prior a conversation yesterday, he would be willing to make a similar contribution.
[2:48:57] But I wish that the court initially would change that grade from a 7 to a 9.
[2:49:07] The numbers again, like the set, increase in the $8,000 in change.
[2:49:14] I'm not sure about the full number, but it is less than $9,000.
[2:49:18] position is a 7-2 right now that would be paid this is with the 3% coal on the
[2:49:26] grading step at 24, 27 per hour and the request would be going to a 9-2 would be a
[2:49:35] A rate of 2778 per hour.
[2:49:38] This
[2:49:49] is a 3% consideration.
[2:49:51] Yes,
[2:49:55] I believe that is with the 3%.
[2:50:07] Commissioners, you know, comments? Our admin is just like any other department, but we're
[2:50:20] seeing more and more work.
[2:50:24] And she is getting the job done, facilitating things. I mean, there's
[2:50:33] things that people don't see like she keeps having to deal with families that someone passes
[2:50:42] on and they don't want to accept the body and she has to find a place with dignity to
[2:50:50] go with that and she spends a lot of time on that.
[2:50:55] she definitely is getting the job done and I think I could support a pay
[2:51:03] increase for it takes a long time to train someone too and she's moved into
[2:51:10] that very well we don't want to lose her
[2:51:25] so the challenge I see and people are
[2:51:28] given say here he goes again is what we're doing is a leapfrog effect care is we're
[2:51:34] now going individually, departmentally, and we're nitpicking and not saying that people
[2:51:42] aren't deserving of it, but then we're going to have another department head come up
[2:51:46] and another one, Mr. Douglas is shaking her head, it's going to turn into something that
[2:51:52] we've discussed and the challenges we faced. So again, I can't justify that leapfrog
[2:52:03] effect because it's going to turn into what we're doing. It's it's a process but I
[2:52:15] understand
[2:52:15] everybody's burden as we've heard all morning from from different departments so that's just my
[2:52:21] initial reaction as y'all would expect.
[2:52:33] Any other thoughts on that individual item?
[2:52:59] I want to urge the Court. I don't want to comment too heavily on the change that this
[2:53:09] is going to experience, but going forward in the future, I am the only person that intends
[2:53:17] to run again, and I want people that are experienced and are doing a good job to stay and give
[2:53:23] the best service possible to the county. I really want to urge this court to look at our
[2:53:28] administrative assistant in the unique situation that she's in. This is the only administrative
[2:53:32] of assistant in the county that serves four different elected officials and other counties
[2:53:38] of similar size have four of them.
[2:53:41] I mean, similar budgets, similar size, I mean, it's not a difference of one person, it
[2:53:44] is a difference of three people.
[2:53:47] And I do not want to be in a position in the near future where I am having to train brand
[2:53:52] new people.
[2:53:53] I am the baby commissioner up here and I really would like to keep as much tenure as we
[2:53:58] possibly have.
[2:53:59] We have a lot of people that have been here for a long time and retirement is on the
[2:54:02] horizon. I'm really happy for them. I'm slightly nervous for myself with that coming up and I would
[2:54:08] really urge this court to either please vote to take some of this money out of my conference
[2:54:13] budget and I know Commissioner Garmin's I don't want to speak for you but with our conversation I
[2:54:17] knew you agree to make this whole or I give her a re-gray. It is not that it is not the same as everyone
[2:54:22] else but I have to say I don't think there's any issue with certain departments advocating for
[2:54:27] themselves or advocating for their people or keeping someone that is that is very quality. I may not
[2:54:31] agree with all of the people, necessarily, and the things that they do and how they handle
[2:54:36] their business.
[2:54:36] But the fact remains that people that really do a good job, we need to keep them.
[2:54:43] I mean, it's a fact across the board.
[2:54:44] I don't, I don't discredit any department from coming up and advocating for themselves.
[2:54:48] That's what I'm doing for myself.
[2:54:50] That is our one and only admin and I'm, I'm going to do that the same as I wouldn't hold
[2:54:54] that against any other person that's going to advocate for their employees.
[2:54:57] People need to feel supported.
[2:54:58] They need to feel supported by the people they've been doing.
[2:55:00] We work for, I want to support our admin, and truly, and really, I would ask this court to reconsider not giving that raise. And if you won't do it, then I would like some feedback on taking the money out of our conference budget. We did just take money out of Commissioner Wolverton's conference budget. We all agreed on that budget amendment to provide some of the employees in this building with panic buttons, so that they are safer in this building. Certainly, we all supported that, so I know that we can make changes to people's conference budgets.
[2:55:27] So I'm asking that if we won't give her a raise, we did the same with mine.
[2:55:31] One of the differences is mine was a non-occurring transfer.
[2:55:36] It's a one-time deal where yours may not be.
[2:55:40] I understand.
[2:55:41] I've given Mr. Bosch his money out of my line also to take care of problems that we had he was
[2:55:46] short on.
[2:55:47] I've done every bit of my education and I think I had something like $3,000 left over which
[2:55:53] was far more than what I actually needed.
[2:55:55] and so some of the, I guess, the conference lines are
[2:56:01] grossly, you know, it's got too much money in it.
[2:56:04] All you need is 18 hours, anyway, but it just, you know,
[2:56:09] my money went as a one-time thing to help the safety of this county.
[2:56:14] I understand. I do. And if that needs to be something that continues for as long
[2:56:19] as I'm here, I don't have a problem with that, but again, I really want to
[2:56:22] She rears the necessity of keeping her here.
[2:56:26] Is there somewhere we can meet in the middle on that?
[2:56:35] She was hired to take over the commission's court agenda and
[2:56:39] everything else and help Steven out.
[2:56:41] Is that worked out?
[2:56:43] She's now doing the agenda by herself.
[2:56:45] She's doing the agenda by herself.
[2:56:48] So it's been able to take some stuff off of Mr. Hive's invite.
[2:57:04] I'm just going to say it again.
[2:57:05] I don't have a problem with what Commissioner Alt is saying.
[2:57:10] I will say this, I do my job differently, probably than the other commissioners.
[2:57:20] She absolutely knows where I am every day, she'll say I call in anything going on,
[2:57:30] Taylor.
[2:57:31] No.
[2:57:32] Yes, you got to check her this.
[2:57:35] I keep her extremely busy and that's just me.
[2:57:44] I'm not speaking for the other three commissioners.
[2:57:47] I believe that she deserves some compensation.
[2:57:53] She is the face of this court when we are having court because she's there on the computer with people interacting and so forth.
[2:58:04] So I have no problem with what Commissioner Aud is proposing.
[2:58:13] Commissioners, I did.
[2:58:14] Miss State, the straight grade increase was the 2427 to 2778.
[2:58:22] When you go up to step or grade, excuse me, eight or nine,
[2:58:26] that entry level step that's highlighted is one more over.
[2:58:29] So it actually could be a 2427 per hour
[2:58:36] to $28.46.
[2:58:39] On my calculations, we're not based on $28, it was based on $27.
[2:58:42] Okay, it was the $27.
[2:58:43] And that is the discretion of the losses managers,
[2:58:47] the people in there so you can absolutely use that $27.10 or $27.78.
[2:58:54] Well, if we don't have three votes for it then I don't know that that's even a relevant conversation
[2:58:58] but I will urge this Court again to look at what she's expected to do
[2:59:02] and I wouldn't say this out loud without her permission and having talked to her about
[2:59:06] this, but she's expected to work for all four of us for $49,000 a year before tax.
[2:59:13] That is, I can't imagine somebody in that position doing one job for all four people that
[2:59:19] is making that.
[2:59:21] I mean, that's an expectation to do a whole lot of things.
[2:59:24] And again, our surrounding counties have four people doing that job.
[2:59:27] I mean, we it's not it's not good. It's not it's not a good mindset. The expectations of the task of this person has to do and the complications are are such that I believe that she is deserving of a higher compensation.
[2:59:43] Yes, sir.
[2:59:45] I believe that there's some people who want to comment from during the public because we're still under the public carrying of the right.
[2:59:52] That's right, it's from Zoom.
[2:59:54] Okay, is somebody raised their hand or made a note on there
[2:59:57] that they'd like to speak?
[2:59:58] Yes, sir.
[3:00:00] Okay. Will you unmute them, please? Okay. Can you hear us? Yes. Can you hear me? Yes, ma'am. Okay. I just wanted to say that I appreciate where
[3:00:13] Kusura on is coming from because I would like my staff to make more money as well. They work very,
[3:00:19] very hard. And she mentioned when she brought this up that people cannot live on the mount that
[3:00:26] her employee is making.
[3:00:28] There are 138 people that make less than what her employee is making.
[3:00:34] And she wants to raise them to a higher grade, which would make 240 people that are making
[3:00:39] less than her employee is making.
[3:00:42] There are 12 people in the County Courts Office that have been here for years that don't
[3:00:46] make that much money.
[3:00:48] So she said we need to look at all the positions if we have people making less than
[3:00:55] that 49,000 a year.
[3:00:57] So I think it's imperative that we look at all the positions.
[3:01:01] We have nine people in the clerk's office that make less than 2312.
[3:01:06] Four people in JP one, one in JP two, two in JP three, and one in JP four.
[3:01:16] Four in the elections office, three in purchasing, 16 in the tax assessment office.
[3:01:26] 11 in building maintenance, 11 in fire department,
[3:01:30] six of the county sheriff's office,
[3:01:32] two of the fire marshal's office,
[3:01:34] constable's office, none in adult detention,
[3:01:36] 21 road and bridge, three in environmental health.
[3:01:41] I mean, there's a lot of people in the county
[3:01:43] that need more money.
[3:01:46] I was telling you that we are having trouble
[3:01:51] completing our job in the county parks office
[3:01:54] with regard to the minutes
[3:01:55] that's because we can't get all the paperwork
[3:01:58] and by Friday to get the minutes done.
[3:02:01] Is
[3:02:12] there anybody else online that would like to make comment
[3:02:15] during the public hearing?
[3:02:23] Okay, not hearing anybody else, commissioners?
[3:02:26] Any other comment on those items or that item?
[3:02:29] No, sorry.
[3:02:29] Yes, Ms. Keele, I
[3:02:34] think taking a jab at our employee
[3:02:35] is absolutely and completely inappropriate.
[3:02:37] There are plenty of people in this courtroom
[3:02:38] I could take jobs at and I won't do that
[3:02:40] because it's not professional.
[3:02:42] There are plenty of people in your office
[3:02:43] I could do the same thing with.
[3:02:45] You're taking these low blows, you're telling the court good luck, publicly, you're turning
[3:02:50] around and looking at another elected official and making smart comments toward her during
[3:02:55] this court is inappropriate to court.
[3:02:57] I'd ask that you refrain from that.
[3:02:59] We are not here to tear anybody else down.
[3:03:01] You may have your opinions, but I do not think that it's productive for you to tear somebody
[3:03:05] down when they're not able to look at you and defend themselves.
[3:03:09] The things that you have said in front of this court yesterday in your hearing for your
[3:03:12] salary agreements in this last court session have been completely inappropriate and critical
[3:03:17] of people that are trying to do their jobs well, I'd ask that you rethink that behavior
[3:03:20] and cease from it.
[3:03:21] Thank you.
[3:03:29] Dr. T.
[3:03:33] Let you wish you retirement.
[3:03:36] Yesterday, yeah.
[3:03:38] Yes, ma'am.
[3:03:39] It's my last day.
[3:03:41] Always there to give us some guidance and redirects.
[3:03:44] I don't want anybody to get their feelings hurt or anything because I understand the importance
[3:03:51] of this topic.
[3:03:54] Maybe these discussions should happen in executive session if you need to because I don't
[3:04:01] want, it's one thing if you know the person and they're okay, but if you start calling out people by name, there's so many HR
[3:04:10] avenues that somebody could go down and I don't want the court to be held in the future responsible for something that you're only trying to do.
[3:04:18] really your intent is to help somebody. That's just my HR two cents. I don't know
[3:04:25] where we'll go from here. I'm just kind of worried because I don't want somebody
[3:04:30] to come back and start saying something about. It's okay. It's one thing you
[3:04:34] know the person and they're okay with it but sometimes when you get started then
[3:04:38] we start saying other people and they get upset and I'm just giving a
[3:04:43] Yeah, you're just you're just voicing your professional opinion my professional opinion even though I
[3:04:51] Knowledge the very difficult situation you're in
[3:04:54] Thank you for the the recommendation. I think it's well
[3:05:00] Well, I think it's good for us to always remember when we're talking about positions remembered to our best to use titles as opposed to individual names. So individual employees aren't single doubt. I think it's very difficult. If we were talking about a single employment action and or issue outside of budget, absolutely. I think that's appropriate places to do that in closed session when we're talking about a budget in pay ranges and grades that could affect other positions and other departments.
[3:05:29] I think it's very difficult for us to go into a closed session on that part of it unless
[3:05:35] we get down to that very specific single related action, but I appreciate the recommendation
[3:05:41] and the guidance, I think if we can just do our best to keep things moving forward, but
[3:05:47] when we talk about positions do just that, talk about the position and not the person in it.
[3:05:53] I want to say that that is something that I have discussed with Taylor and it's something
[3:05:56] that she is fine with, I definitely appreciate Dr. T's recommendation toward the others.
[3:06:02] But not being able to speak about anything that occurs in the executive session, certainly
[3:06:06] I'm aware of that and everyone sitting up here knows what was discussed during an executive
[3:06:11] session or what wasn't.
[3:06:12] So we'll leave it at that.
[3:06:16] I am.
[3:06:16] Did you have something else?
[3:06:19] This is Keal who would like to respond.
[3:06:22] I will allow one more minute.
[3:06:24] I don't want to cut anybody off.
[3:06:25] it's just also want us to be productive and efficient this afternoon already and we have
[3:06:30] a lot to go through. Miss Keele. Yes, sir. I just wanted to say that I didn't direct
[3:06:36] that toward anyone, but we are talking about one position and one employee. So it was obvious
[3:06:42] who it would be. I have no problem with Taylor. Taylor is doing a fine job. She's just not
[3:06:47] doing what we need. We need to work together longer for her to be able to get a raise.
[3:06:52] The importance of the comment was that you mentioned four weeks ago, or five weeks ago,
[3:06:59] that if people are making less than $49,000 a year, we need to look at that.
[3:07:03] And I think you really need to take the time to look at who all is making less.
[3:07:08] We have to start our people at 1876 an hour.
[3:07:13] There are other positions in the county that don't have to do that.
[3:07:17] So please take that into consideration.
[3:07:25] Any other discussion on that topic?
[3:07:28] Yes.
[3:07:29] I did want to talk a little bit about there are several regrades and I do, you know,
[3:07:35] I understand the court is in the position there are, but there are, if we would be open
[3:07:43] to talking about this, there are several reclassifications and or regrades for several folks that
[3:07:48] I do want the court to consider there are some requests in this proposition with several
[3:07:53] of our departments and there are several department heads here if they want to talk about those
[3:07:58] specifically. I certainly would be open to some of those changes. I know Ms. Balk was
[3:08:03] unable to be here today. We did speak last night. She has several clerk ones that are currently
[3:08:09] making 1876 an hour. She is requesting that there be three reclases to 207 an hour. I do
[3:08:15] want to make that known. In there are several other regrails or reclassification requests
[3:08:21] as well. I see several of the department heads here that have made those if they want
[3:08:25] to contribute to this conversation, of course, I ask that they do that. At the very end
[3:08:31] of all the things that I've spoken about, and I want to thank the Court for the time
[3:08:34] that you've given me for this, I do want to talk about fire briefly. It is my understanding
[3:08:40] that from GCSO, if we do have an additional position of the Court has an appetite for
[3:08:44] that, that it be the fire captain, I think that that would be something very effective in
[3:08:49] their leadership that they have wanted to reissue their request for in talk about how
[3:08:56] it is necessary.
[3:08:57] I do think that forward looking with them and helping them continue to grow each time
[3:09:01] is important.
[3:09:02] I understand the situation that we're in very much so, but I do think that it is unlikely
[3:09:07] that we will have a problem of this magnitude next year.
[3:09:10] And again, if we do, we will know about it certainly much more in advance at this time.
[3:09:17] I also wanted to say that there are three position requests in this proposition from the
[3:09:22] county attorney's office having spoken to Mr. Bilbo and I understand that if there were
[3:09:26] to be one it would be the legal administrative assistant for felony.
[3:09:29] I do want to issue my support for that request for him having worked in that office and looking
[3:09:35] at the volume that I once knew in knowing how much the population has increased.
[3:09:40] I do think it is imperative that that office have more staff here to come up and talk about it.
[3:09:46] I just want to issue my support for that. I think that the folks that are doing the prosecution there,
[3:09:51] it's just an incredibly important job having done that myself.
[3:09:55] It's so important.
[3:09:56] And I think there's so much that goes on said, you know, it's interesting, so there's always
[3:10:00] You know, different, like, firefighters, you know, have everybody knows, and law enforcement, everybody knows, and then there's prosecutors, and I feel like we're kind of like the warehouse, gosh, y'all, you guys are not meeting more, but in this category where, you know, people are like, oh yeah, someone takes care of that at the end, but no one really gives it the recognition it deserves, and I do want to issue that support for them, and that administrative assistance, and understand that it would be of tremendous help to this office. Thank you, Commissioner, and I won't speak for a long time. I am still making that request.
[3:10:28] that we've made a clear way, we think that that could happen financially.
[3:10:32] If the court is not inclined to give that additional position to me, and if the court's not inclined to give me the two position regrails, I would ask that y'all authorize my office to create that position and fund it for at least the next year through asset for future funds.
[3:10:49] And to include those position regrails on paralegal positions, there are two paralegal positions that are requested that for as well.
[3:10:56] So, I know the stance that has been taken thus far, I would prefer those be taken out of
[3:11:05] general funds and not from asset forfeiture.
[3:11:07] I have enough money to fund that position for two years out of asset forfeiture with the money that currently exists.
[3:11:12] I don't want to deplete those funds in that manner, but I would rather deplete those funds than
[3:11:18] lose the people that are going to want to believe in because they're being overworked so handily.
[3:11:22] So, that's going to be my request that the court put those into the budget, either through
[3:11:29] the General Fund or in case an arrow through asset for a picture.
[3:11:33] But Dave, I was going to just point out, I know you probably looked at this, but there's
[3:11:37] been a lot going on this budget season.
[3:11:39] But if you look at within your department, please notice that within the grade and step, in
[3:11:44] addition to the coales, number of employees also had a grade or a step increase because
[3:11:49] because it's every other year, which equates to a 5.6% increase, and there are a couple
[3:11:54] of employees that were fixed, if you will, because they weren't placed on the grading
[3:11:59] step correctly that resulted in a larger housing.
[3:12:02] I haven't seen where those were, so yeah, thank you for that, I just wanted to ask you to
[3:12:05] get it.
[3:12:05] Thank you.
[3:12:06] Thank you.
[3:12:10] And again, I don't want to speak for several other department heads that are in here,
[3:12:13] but please know that I would welcome you to come up here if any of you want to talk.
[3:12:17] and that being said, I want to shift to the last topic that I had other than that, which is law enforcement.
[3:12:26] First, when I tell you that there, when the proposed budget was a court position for the Constable Precinct 1,
[3:12:32] I have spoken with the Constables Office and Precinct 1 does have a part time unfilled deputy position currently.
[3:12:39] That deputy position is funded either I believe it's $33,000 or $5,000 and the Constable's office would ask that this court instead of continuing to dedicate funds to that unfilled part time position.
[3:12:55] The Constable's office is having a hard time and has had a hard time filling that position because they cannot find someone that wants to work only part time.
[3:13:03] They are requesting that that position be shifted to a full time deputy.
[3:13:07] I do support that.
[3:13:09] The difference in cost in salary for that is $38,000.
[3:13:13] I understand their additional costs are associated with benefits and retirement, so
[3:13:17] I do want to acknowledge that to the court.
[3:13:19] But again, I would ask that Constable Precinct 1 be considered for having that part-time
[3:13:24] deputy moved to a full-time deputy and remove the request for a clerk from that.
[3:13:31] Again, I would like to say that precinct 1 is increasing as we all are in population.
[3:13:36] we have 52% of the county, we do have the way station and as was previously acknowledged
[3:13:41] it is the precinct one is the busiest court-wise, they are doing a lot of work, they are covering
[3:13:46] Judge Hunters, Dr. Judge Hunters has Dr. Judge three to four days a week, now to appreciate
[3:13:51] the court's consideration on that.
[3:13:54] Do we want to talk about that for a second or law enforcement as a whole because I do
[3:13:57] want to talk about the sheriff's office next?
[3:13:59] Court
[3:14:02] goes preference, constable individually or just continue with the law enforcement
[3:14:06] conversation.
[3:14:11] I'm going to talk about the elephant in the room.
[3:14:16] I am not a fan of how the commissioner's court has been painted in social media.
[3:14:23] I think that was very difficult for all of us to stomach.
[3:14:28] I think that all of us up here are trying to do a job.
[3:14:31] It is very difficult for all of us.
[3:14:33] we receive phone calls in emails from people that are angry at us from all of the things
[3:14:39] on social media that we've received. I will only speak for myself in saying that it is
[3:14:44] very frustrating to have to tell people that my position is that I support law enforcement
[3:14:49] when I continue to get feedback that I must not because of things that they see on social media.
[3:14:55] I think that what's important for all of us that work for the county, this is our dedication, right?
[3:14:58] And so we call it
[3:15:00] But my dad, now we used to work both of us in the Harris County Court House, we used to call out the county mental bubble, right? Because those of us that work in the county, it becomes a world that it becomes the echo chamber of what you think, but what's way more impopulous than us is the public. And the perception of the public is not the same as all of ours because we live and breathe this every day. So I think that what's important is to think about how the public perceives certain things. So at least for myself, despite not liking
[3:15:29] the light that I have been painted in, it does not change the fact that I do continue
[3:15:35] to support law enforcement and I do think that we need more boots on the ground.
[3:15:39] I think that we are not able to fulfill the request anywhere near what we thought or
[3:15:45] hoped we could and certainly not to the extent of the request.
[3:15:49] I know that this court has been really discouraged by a lot of the things that have been going
[3:15:54] on in the media. And I want you all to know that I feel for all of you. And I very much
[3:16:00] appreciate all of the work that all of you have done. I think that you have done an incredible
[3:16:03] job, each one of you, for your time, and for your dedication. I don't think that it's fair
[3:16:09] the way that we've been perceived. But I do ask that we try to look past that and do what's
[3:16:16] right. And in my opinion, I know we're all doing what we think is right. So I don't mean
[3:16:24] that we do need some boots on the ground and I don't mean to disagree with the recommendation
[3:16:29] presented here by the elected officials. I appreciate that the elected officials in
[3:16:33] department heads got together and made a recommendation. I would be more comfortable with boots
[3:16:39] on the ground deputies than I would be with several more people in the office because I think that the
[3:16:44] concern is more people to respond to calls. That would be my number one thought. So I would ask that
[3:16:53] at this court at least consider several positions
[3:16:56] for the sheriff's office in the form of patrol deputies.
[3:16:59] If the sheriff wants to talk about preferring
[3:17:02] one of these office positions over that,
[3:17:04] certainly I'm open to that.
[3:17:06] My thought is boots on the ground.
[3:17:08] I know that we can't do a lot,
[3:17:09] but I think that we should try to do at least some.
[3:17:12] So I do wanna issue my support for that.
[3:17:16] That includes constable precinct one,
[3:17:19] moving the deputy part time to full time.
[3:17:20] I think that we should look at doing
[3:17:21] three more deputies for the Sheriff's Office,
[3:17:25] patrol deputies.
[3:17:26] I think that also I wanna acknowledge
[3:17:28] some of the conversation that's happened in the public
[3:17:30] about being worried about some of these folks
[3:17:33] being able to cover some of the schools.
[3:17:35] I know that's a more complicated conversation
[3:17:36] for this court to have perhaps at a later date.
[3:17:39] I will say that I am close to several people
[3:17:42] who do school safety resourcing and auditing
[3:17:44] for the state on a personal level.
[3:17:46] So I have been engaging in conversations with them
[3:17:48] about different options that we can discuss.
[3:17:49] I know that might be a bigger piece than we can bite off at this moment, but I would
[3:17:54] ask the court to consider some of those and see if we can really do our best at looking
[3:18:00] at that, maybe despite some of the feelings, and again, I'm not indicating that anybody
[3:18:04] in the court makes decisions based off of that, but I do want to acknowledge that that has
[3:18:08] gone on, and I want to acknowledge that nevertheless, I think that everyone is doing what they perceive
[3:18:14] is right and what they believe in in the best way they know how we may not always like it,
[3:18:19] I certainly don't, but I am asking that we do help and we do further a few more positions
[3:18:25] for the sheriff's office.
[3:18:32] Commissioner, is any thoughts or comments on those items?
[3:18:37] You don't want to take that out of reserve? Yes, again, I'm going to reissue the request I made
[3:18:43] originally when we first talked about this, that we do have the three million set aside for land
[3:18:47] in building purchases.
[3:18:49] Part of the conversation today did surround us having a building
[3:18:52] in precinct 4 that were worried about staffing a fire station
[3:18:55] that we don't have enough fire fighters for.
[3:18:57] The building in precinct 4, we're looking to try to put some folks
[3:19:00] in there, but from the tax assessor's office,
[3:19:02] we have some space that's unfilled
[3:19:04] in several of the JP's offices, things like that.
[3:19:07] So we are, and I know that we have to do this to anticipate growth.
[3:19:12] I absolutely, I no doubt about it.
[3:19:14] But this is a weird year.
[3:19:17] I don't want to repeat myself with some of the things that I've said about anticipating
[3:19:21] the changes, but I do think that we cannot look away from the fact that the population
[3:19:25] is exploding.
[3:19:27] And I do not think no matter what, that we can say, same amount of firefighters, same amount
[3:19:33] of law enforcement, way more people in the county that that's safe.
[3:19:38] And even if it's just a little bit, I think it is better than nothing, I think we need
[3:19:42] to try.
[3:19:43] So yes, I understand that it is coming out of the reserve.
[3:19:45] I understand that that is a fund that is not ever changing and it is not, we can't rely
[3:19:51] on that to continue to be supported year after year, but I think that everybody in this
[3:19:56] room has heard enough about what we've talked about that, don't anticipate the same thing.
[3:20:00] Any problem to be reoccurring in that, you know, next year if we are in some sort of extreme dire straits, there may not be a cola. We understand. But I think that people right now would rather be supported, have a few more boots on the ground, have the extra felony paralegal, move apart time to a full time, have an extra firefighter, things like that right now, to the best that we can. And next year if we can't, if we don't see that sort of abundance, we don't see that sort of abundance. I understand we can't pull continually from a general fund.
[3:20:29] But I do think that right now it's more important to me to have those extra personnel than to buy land and I acknowledge that it is a recurring cost, yes.
[3:20:41] We also need help in every department we have here.
[3:20:44] I understand. I do.
[3:20:48] Everybody is a valuable cog in this machine.
[3:20:53] I understand.
[3:20:56] I'm not trying to prioritize anybody over anybody else, it is simply that law enforcement
[3:21:04] is law enforcement and when any of us need help, that is who we're calling, if we have
[3:21:08] a fire, I mean, those two things are the life or death things, I mean, everyone here
[3:21:15] is important jobs, I have an important job, but their job is more important than my job.
[3:21:18] I understand that we have JP's that need extra people we have the county attorney over that way it needs extra people
[3:21:25] Actually, he needs more space and extra people. So there's a lot of things we're going to look into but
[3:21:31] It's a tough one if you spin all this money this year
[3:21:36] Where's he going to come from next year?
[3:21:38] That's that's the only question. I understand and like I don't have a crystal ball
[3:21:41] I wish I'd save the governor would get his head. I was back side and get things right
[3:21:45] Right.
[3:21:45] It's going to be very, very difficult.
[3:21:47] I understand that.
[3:21:48] And like I said, you know, we're spending, I can't, sorry, I can't remember this figure,
[3:21:53] but I know our COLO is 1.8 or 2.4 for the 3%, I know it's one of those, and that's obviously
[3:21:59] a big difference.
[3:21:59] But a lot of numbers that are in front of me right now, but if we come to a situation
[3:22:03] where we can't do that next year, and that might be something that offsets it, that might
[3:22:07] be something that we have to do, I acknowledge that and understand that, but I think if you
[3:22:10] ask anyone in this room and you ask people in the public as well, would you rather look at
[3:22:14] that for next year, would you rather at least have several more boots on the ground?
[3:22:18] I think their answer is going to be boots on the ground, fire fighters, I think that's
[3:22:22] going to be their answer.
[3:22:22] It's what I believe.
[3:22:23] It's my opinion.
[3:22:24] So, I just want to make sure that I get that off my chest and make that clear.
[3:22:30] I'm saying completely, but we need to also understand that next year, I got two guys that
[3:22:34] will be here.
[3:22:35] We have to sum up tax rate because you're creating more cost, more overhead, and the only way
[3:22:42] We're going to be able to pay for is the tax increase and we already heard the people
[3:22:46] complain about that.
[3:22:48] I understand that.
[3:22:49] I do.
[3:22:50] Because I do believe you voted no when I said 40 cents because that would have covered
[3:22:54] everything.
[3:22:54] I voted no to a double digit tax increase.
[3:22:56] That's correct.
[3:22:57] Because I think a double digit is more than the then the populist can stomach.
[3:23:01] I don't think people want a double digit tax increase.
[3:23:03] How would a fund all these programs?
[3:23:06] I don't know what you're going to be able to fund these programs is to do that.
[3:23:10] I don't think that we need a double-digit tax increase.
[3:23:13] I think you can do it without that.
[3:23:15] Well, I think that the total, if we look at some of these things, it's not just a few
[3:23:20] of them, but just everybody, everyone who actually needs extra people and every office needs
[3:23:24] it.
[3:23:25] I understand that every office needs it, and I think that that's not feasible right now
[3:23:29] for us to be able to do these things for every office.
[3:23:32] I wish it was.
[3:23:33] I don't think it is.
[3:23:34] I know that there are some that feel that all or nothing is the approach.
[3:23:39] I'm not one of those.
[3:23:41] I think that sometimes we have to look at certain things and make decisions.
[3:23:43] I know it's hard and I respect your decision and if your decision is not the same as mine,
[3:23:47] I respect it.
[3:23:48] I do.
[3:23:52] I think so.
[3:23:57] Commissioner, is there any other comments?
[3:24:03] I'm so sorry.
[3:24:04] One more that I didn't bring up.
[3:24:06] It was a request by several of the retirees and retired law enforcement.
[3:24:09] They asked that the court also think about the retiree cola because they are not feeling
[3:24:14] that the cola this year is adequate.
[3:24:18] I did inform them that I would pass that concern along to the court.
[3:24:23] So I am doing that.
[3:24:24] Chris Klein, could you give us just a quick summary without, I mean, details of just how the
[3:24:31] retiree cola works, how it affects our retirees, what that looks like, and what we've historically
[3:24:38] done.
[3:24:38] You
[3:24:42] can reach a microphone.
[3:24:44] Thank you.
[3:24:45] I didn't want you all to hear my crunching over here.
[3:24:50] Yes.
[3:24:51] Historically, the county has done retiree pay raises every three years.
[3:24:55] The problem for the county with retiree pay increases.
[3:25:00] Is that if we're doing it every year, they increase our mandated contribution, right, which affects the entire payroll. The last COLA cost limit for retirees was done in 2025. So we'd be scheduled to do them again in 2028. And right now, we're looking at a funded ratio of 91.6, which is incredibly important for unfunded actual reliability for pension plan, right? And that's, that's what changes. What that means, right?
[3:25:29] that the simple version is for TCDRF,
[3:25:32] Texas County and District Retirement System.
[3:25:34] We take a look at all of our retirees,
[3:25:37] what that pension costs and liability is on the county side,
[3:25:40] right?
[3:25:41] How much money we're funding out of our budget
[3:25:43] that's paid for with tax rate to say,
[3:25:46] if all these people are retiring because they're this age,
[3:25:48] this is what we owe, how much of that is funded
[3:25:50] and how much is still a liability
[3:25:52] or a potential cost hanging out there.
[3:25:55] So one, we want to see the retirees get a bump
[3:25:57] because their cost of living is going up but we want to watch that ratio because if we never
[3:26:02] address it the county could have a huge bill hanging out there that's a bigger check that has
[3:26:08] to be written at some point as your work age and population of county employees goes up over time and
[3:26:16] people start to retire at a higher rate. That's a real cost and it can be millions of dollars. So it's just one of those things
[3:26:23] you have to continue to kind of be diligent about but also be incremental and change and just keep
[3:26:32] chipping away so that that future bill doesn't get so large and it's a weird dynamic when people go
[3:26:39] and retirees get a cost of living well it's yes but like I said historically we've done it every
[3:26:45] three years doesn't mean to your point commissioners that it couldn't be addressed every year it couldn't
[3:26:51] be done on a different timeline, a different amount, all those things, it's another cost
[3:26:56] to a county budget.
[3:26:58] We appreciate the information.
[3:26:59] Thank you so much.
[3:27:06] Any other thoughts, comments during the public hearing?
[3:27:09] Just get the reserve.
[3:27:13] I mean, we've had a lot of this discussion this year.
[3:27:15] We've talked about the unprecedented value loss at the same time, the unprecedented amount
[3:27:21] of need that departments are feeling.
[3:27:24] I have mixed emotions about it because I've tried to remove myself from having a number of budgets under the belt and how things have happened before because this is different.
[3:27:37] We've never had to address our issues like this before.
[3:27:41] I too have felt frustration about the way things have been handled and communicated because I don't think it's been as productive at times that it could have been.
[3:27:51] I think there's been some things that were intentionally stirred up that haven't been as
[3:27:58] helpful and assistive in these conversations, but I also understand that there's people
[3:28:03] feel like they're at dire straits to try to address the needs that aren't being looked
[3:28:06] at the same way.
[3:28:08] I'm extremely conservative, I don't just say that.
[3:28:11] For all the departments coming up saying they don't have what they need, maybe that's proof
[3:28:15] from a little too conservative, sometimes, but at the same point, I am truly concerned
[3:28:23] about the future of our county and level of spending while also trying to address the
[3:28:29] needs that are in all these departments. I won't be here next year. That's been referenced
[3:28:34] multiple times, but like Commissioner, I still care. I don't have to be here. I could not
[3:28:38] show up tomorrow and say, good luck. I hope it works out for you all. I could have done that
[3:28:42] months ago, but I'm still here. I plan on staying until my last day, December 31st, and
[3:28:48] doing my best to try to do my job. I won't be around to have these conversations next
[3:28:56] year going, how do you address a budget shortfall? What's a tax rate have to look like to support
[3:29:03] budget decisions that were made last year, which are today? How does a depressed real estate
[3:29:08] state market plan to that. What about the state legislature right now about to consider
[3:29:14] changing the over 65 exemptions to 55 to have a lower level of freeze. School tax exemptions
[3:29:21] going up to 140,000 when we have brand new homes being built in Guadalupe County that are
[3:29:27] 140 to 170,000 dollars. So it's all those things. I mean, anybody that has talked about spending
[3:29:34] money out of fund balance as a backup plan. They're not wrong. There's no right or wrong
[3:29:39] answer. It's, again, it gets down to a discussion about risk and what is the court willing
[3:29:45] to risk and anticipate is going to happen. Again, my very careful nature is concerned about
[3:29:55] spending $3 million out of fund balance on reoccurring whether it's
[3:30:00] There may be equipment or operational positions because if what I've been told and what I've looked at from a county budget standpoint on revenue, is that all of this tax, taxable value issue and the freeze recalculation was not completely taken care of this year. We don't know that for sure, but we expect and anticipate there may be some residual value loss next year. Now, could that be half a billion? Could it be a hundred million?
[3:30:29] not sure, but there's going to be some of that. The other thing is real estate market that we're
[3:30:36] watching right now in our county is the foundation of what the tax base is going to be for next year.
[3:30:42] It's going to be very similar to what it was last year because there's not much has changed.
[3:30:47] You have higher interest rates, you have costs going up, you got these geopolitical events that are
[3:30:51] almost war that are driving things. Cattle are being led in from Mexico, cattle markets off for the
[3:30:58] last few weeks, fuels up, but oil is stable.
[3:31:01] I mean, there's all these different things that are going on.
[3:31:04] When I think about a budget, all these people are right.
[3:31:07] The county employees are not just a line in a spreadsheet,
[3:31:12] but also on this side, if those numbers aren't in that spreadsheet,
[3:31:16] the positions don't exist.
[3:31:18] So there's got to be a balance in consideration
[3:31:20] to what that economy looks like for the county,
[3:31:24] what the tax rate implications of the decisions
[3:31:26] we make today are, maybe there is some middle ground, maybe there is some flexibility to do that,
[3:31:34] and not spend as much out of the fund balance, because I can't hear all the need more so now
[3:31:41] today than ever before, but I don't know if I can get to an item on the agenda later and say,
[3:31:45] let's spend $3 million, because I think that $3 million turns into another three next year before
[3:31:51] you start still with increased EMS still with a change in debt service still with extra extra
[3:32:00] colas and adjustments for county employees that turns into five or six before you've made any
[3:32:05] decision again and still going to have the need for law enforcement still going to have the need for
[3:32:09] fire for more road construction for EMS contracts for expansion of all the services and I think that's
[3:32:17] the biggest concern for me it almost feels like to me watching this is my 16th
[3:32:23] county budget right watching history repeat itself going what happens and
[3:32:30] what today and what money is spent today is absolutely going to be the first
[3:32:35] amount of money that's spent next year if things aren't completely different and
[3:32:40] everything that's shaping up through September 1st today is not completely
[3:32:43] different than last year. It's almost identical versus the free recalculation.
[3:32:51] Everything else is looking very, very similar which makes me believe with my
[3:32:55] history and experience at the county and doing budgets that we're going to have
[3:32:58] similar revenue issues next year. And while spending money on that fund
[3:33:03] balance addresses some of these issues now, you're almost as a court and a county
[3:33:08] committing to a certain amount of tax increase before you start next year. And if
[3:33:12] If everybody's okay with that, let's be okay with it, but let's have that conversation.
[3:33:17] Because if it were another automatic 5, 6, or 8% tax increase next year because of
[3:33:24] what we're deciding today, while still having to find other money to expand law enforcement
[3:33:29] fire, EMS, other departments, pay for employees, insurance, road construction, and flood mitigation,
[3:33:37] is everybody okay with that because I think that's really what we're talking about today.
[3:33:42] And again, I will be watching from a field feed and cows not thinking about county budgets,
[3:33:47] but somebody's going to be sitting here and going to have to address those things going.
[3:33:53] I really wish they wouldn't have spent that money the way they did,
[3:33:57] or maybe they did the right thing, but it was on a measure amount to try to fix some of the problems,
[3:34:02] but not too big, too deep of a hole because I think in the sense that we can spend too much money
[3:34:09] we can also be too careful and shut everything off and just create bigger problems in the future.
[3:34:14] So I mean just once the court's thoughts on spending some fun balance on some of these needed
[3:34:21] things now but being okay with that built-in tax increase if that's where it works out.
[3:34:35] It's not going to be something to set well with the people, but if they want the services,
[3:34:40] it's the only way we're going to be able to get to them.
[3:34:43] Once again, if we continue to dip out of our reserve, like I said, $3 million this year,
[3:34:48] well next year's going to be $6 million because you already take the $3 million out and so
[3:34:51] you want the same thing, it just keeps adding and adding that in pretty soon, your reserve
[3:34:56] is gone.
[3:34:57] if we don't get some large corporation size.
[3:35:00] I hear this guy, you know, a lot of taxable value to it. Right now, rooftops don't pay the bills.
[3:35:08] I know we criticize for the data centers. But if it comes to fruition, you've already run the numbers on it. That will almost double our income or our what we get on taxes. And then we won't have any trouble. But right now, people don't want data centers. But we have to have some sort of large corporations come inside the way.
[3:35:30] because rooftops don't make it.
[3:35:34] Well, not just talking about those projects,
[3:35:36] but just economic development in general,
[3:35:38] there's a lot of conversation that goes on
[3:35:40] and I completely understand any citizen being concerned
[3:35:44] and not supporting the idea of abatements
[3:35:47] or incentives for projects.
[3:35:49] But also with the history I have the county,
[3:35:51] I've also watched projects be built
[3:35:54] that otherwise would not have been built in Guadalupe County.
[3:35:58] And this region or in the state of Texas,
[3:36:00] is unless you had cities and a county coming together with Chamber of Commerce and EDCs saying
[3:36:06] we want this type of activity here, we want these businesses here, we want these jobs here,
[3:36:12] and we're willing to prove that by supporting you. So I know it's very easy, and again, I respect
[3:36:17] the people that oppose them to look at an abatement, say we're giving up this much value, but I would
[3:36:22] argue in every one of those situations on the opposite side count the other value we have received
[3:36:27] because we wouldn't have otherwise received it.
[3:36:30] There would be thousands of jobs not located here.
[3:36:33] We wouldn't have an Amazon in shirts.
[3:36:35] You wouldn't have a caterpillar.
[3:36:37] You wouldn't have Niagara, Marichi, Steele.
[3:36:40] You wouldn't have retail coming in.
[3:36:42] The Academy facility.
[3:36:44] The list goes on and on.
[3:36:45] Not only in Central Globally County,
[3:36:48] but on the West End and smaller areas.
[3:36:52] Tinker and razors over by the New Brown Falls Airport.
[3:36:55] It's a holiday monitoring,
[3:36:55] like a pipeline lead detector manufacturer of the components that do that and they're in the county
[3:37:03] that's not in the city and they wouldn't have relocated here. You have all of those things and
[3:37:08] I understand it you people say make them pay their fair share and we understand that and respect
[3:37:14] that line of thinking I know I do but I also know there will be a lot less jobs a lot less industry
[3:37:20] commercial and industrial projects that would have been built in around Guadalupe County if we
[3:37:25] would be participated in some of those so I mean you just talk through all those
[3:37:31] things and it's there's a lot going on in our county it's an exciting time to
[3:37:35] be in county government believe it or not even as I've joked with my family being
[3:37:40] the largest human piñata in Guadalupe County I still enjoy the job still
[3:37:46] respect the people even if we don't agree and we're all experiencing just
[3:37:52] extreme growth, a lot of growing pains, and we're also in a constant transition and constant
[3:38:03] shift of what needs are and what's going on, what the public wants, how we communicate
[3:38:08] with everybody, so it's a different time, but it's also until all the elected officials,
[3:38:14] all the employees at the county, we are the lucky ones, not everybody gets to do what we
[3:38:21] conversations go today, everybody remembers that.
[3:38:25] You know, Judge, when you talk about the, uh,
[3:38:27] the abitements we've given, it's just on brick and mortar.
[3:38:30] Winter fixtures and equipment is not abated.
[3:38:32] Latter roads are not abated.
[3:38:34] So we're giving up a very small amount to be able to get more in the future.
[3:38:38] And that's what some people just can't see.
[3:38:40] It, uh, yeah, we're going to yell that.
[3:38:42] Well, why'd you give this guy a, you know, nine-year abatement?
[3:38:45] Well, it's actually nine-year on brick and mortar only.
[3:38:47] And it goes down to five years.
[3:38:49] So at that point plus the rollback tax that we're going to get will be a huge shot in the arm.
[3:38:54] There's a lot of things we have to look at to make sure this county continues to run properly.
[3:39:00] I don't know if everybody understands it until they sit in this air and look at the numbers.
[3:39:06] How do you stress that dollar? It's not easy.
[3:39:13] That's what we're being asked to do.
[3:39:16] In our next public hearing, we'll talk about the tax rate.
[3:39:19] but currently we have that to go with, right?
[3:39:24] So bottom line to me, it comes down to what I've said before.
[3:39:29] 101 positions, we have to decide if we're going to fund
[3:39:33] out-of-reserve additional, 3% COLA.
[3:39:38] I'm still in favor of that, or even a 4%.
[3:39:42] Possibly bringing back the baseline of 1,000 in addition to.
[3:39:47] But scenario let's just say okay one million dollar land purchase thing comes into play
[3:39:57] Where do you go with it who?
[3:40:00] It gets what? What positions get funded? How does that work? Those are the decisions we're going to have to make, and it's 140 and we're in our first public hearing.
[3:40:12] But to me, that's the bottom line, because we can't do 101 positions, law enforcement, fire and rescue, EMS, everybody has a need. We talk about the growth. It's really exponential growth. I think that's what we've faced. We have growth, but it's like
[3:40:34] We have been conservative, that's what this court has been, physically responsible and put us in the position that we're in, where we have that option to go into reserve, if the court decides to do that, but to me it's a matter of choice on where that money goes, three million or one million, you start to decide if that is going to come up.
[3:40:59] So, I'm still being physically responsible, as y'all know I am, it's tough, but boots
[3:41:08] on the ground for sure, support law enforcement, that was my first love, career, what I wanted
[3:41:15] to do, and maybe I'll do that on my next career, I don't know yet.
[3:41:22] But it's challenging.
[3:41:23] And you all have sat here being patient and it's been very respectable conversation, but I think we need to move on because we're going to come right back to it in an agenda item.
[3:41:39] So,
[3:41:44] everybody, I'm ready to close this portion of the public hearing.
[3:41:48] Yes, sir. All right, we have been on the proposed
[3:41:53] Graudlew County budget for fiscal year 2627 public hearing.
[3:41:57] We will close that public hearing at 1.43 p.m.
[3:42:01] We'll move to item B under public hearing.
[3:42:04] That's the proposed Graudlew County tax rate for 2026.
[3:42:08] We will open that public hearing at 1.44 p.m.
[3:42:16] Give me just a second.
[3:42:23] I know we talked a lot about the budget this morning and early afternoon, as stated,
[3:42:30] the court previously took action to vote on a proposed tax rate of 3549, the current
[3:42:37] tax rate is 3304, no new revenue rate, or the rate in which it's calculated to bring
[3:42:43] in the same money as the prior year, excluding new property, came in at 3359, with that
[3:42:50] prior vote on the tax rate of 5.65% increase. Again, that proposes rates 3549, and that is
[3:43:00] broke down if maintenance and operation at 2808. INS are interested in syncing at 2.0212
[3:43:08] or 2.12 cents and lateral road at 0.529. Is there anybody in the audience that would like
[3:43:17] to make a comment during the public hearing on the tax rate portion.
[3:43:21] Taylor,
[3:43:28] anybody online?
[3:43:33] No sir.
[3:43:34] Okay.
[3:43:35] Thank you.
[3:43:36] Commissioners, any comments during the public hearing portion on the tax rate?
[3:43:41] Oh, sure.
[3:43:49] Yeah, no, we had a lot of discussion on tax rates early on in the budget process.
[3:43:54] We looked at multiple options, recommended was 4%, the change came in once we voted on
[3:44:00] proposed at a 5.65. No, the commissioners court absolutely did not want to have to consider
[3:44:07] the tax rate increase. As we talked about in detail, the value loss in additional needs
[3:44:13] on a substantial level. This was the tax rate of 3549 is that tax rate that basically got
[3:44:22] us back to even with the value loss that we've been talking about all morning. That was
[3:44:27] was just a fun current operations prior to considering any additional future expenses
[3:44:34] or additions. With nobody wishing to make comment during the public hearing on the tax
[3:44:41] rate, we'll close that public hearing at 146 p.m. We'll move to item 6 on our agenda, which
[3:44:49] are consent items. The following may be acted upon in one motion, a commissioner, the county
[3:44:55] judge or a citizen may request items to be pulled for separate discussion and or action.
[3:45:00] An under-consent items, item A, the bill list, item B, the EVA list, item C, the PCA bill list,
[3:45:08] item D, departmental monthly and revenue reports for July 2026, item E and accordance with
[3:45:15] globally county travel policy, authorization for Judge Squires to travel out of state
[3:45:20] for the following educational training. National Judicial College, designing and presenting
[3:45:24] and courses effectively, faculty, development workshops
[3:45:27] September 28th through October 1, 2026 in Reno, Nevada.
[3:45:32] Item F, the Texas Veterans Commission Notice
[3:45:35] of Grant Award R, national 2025-201800,
[3:45:42] 6653 in the amount of $110,000
[3:45:45] for the fiscal year 2027 Veterans Treatment Court.
[3:45:49] Item G, the contract renewal with Granicus
[3:45:51] for Swagget, Election, Suite, and Cloud Camera Support, Item H, TAC, County Information
[3:45:58] Resources Agency, or CIRA, Interlocal Agreement Renewal, Item I ratify the Non-Renewal
[3:46:05] Letter for the Global Tell link agreement for the inmate phone services located at 2617
[3:46:11] North Guadalupe Street, Sigeen, Texas, Item J, the official Bond, Oath, and Writer for
[3:46:17] John Edwards, number 890-181-2-0, part-time deputy council, Precinct 3-Gwatt-Lupy County,
[3:46:24] item K, the civil process fee schedules for sheriff and councilors, item L, the naming
[3:46:31] of the following private lanes, Precinct 1, red lane, located off FM 1044, and Charo
[3:46:37] lane, located off Woodrow Center Road, and item M, the excavation permit applications
[3:46:42] for a while road located in Precinct 4.
[3:46:47] Judge, I would like to item E pulled for discussion.
[3:46:51] All right, we will remove item E, the travel to discuss separately.
[3:46:57] Any other items, commissioners, you'd like removed from consent?
[3:47:01] No, sir.
[3:47:03] Hearing no other items to be removed, is there a motion to approve the remaining items?
[3:47:08] I'll make the motion.
[3:47:09] Second.
[3:47:10] Second.
[3:47:11] Do you have a motion in a second to approve consent items as listed except item E in any
[3:47:19] other discussion?
[3:47:22] All right.
[3:47:22] Hearing no other discussion.
[3:47:23] All those in favor say aye.
[3:47:25] Aye.
[3:47:26] Opposed?
[3:47:26] Same sign.
[3:47:28] Hearing no opposition.
[3:47:29] That motion passes.
[3:47:30] We'll move back to item E and that was in accordance with Robert County travel policy authorization
[3:47:36] for Judd Squires to travel out of state in September 28th through October 1,
[3:47:41] re-known about a Commissioner Wharton.
[3:47:42] Judge, it seems that he has sufficient hours this year,
[3:47:45] and once again, it looks as though he's using taxpayer money
[3:47:48] to get his doctorate and jurisprudence.
[3:47:51] I don't think he should be getting that doctorate on the backs of county taxpayers.
[3:47:56] So I would like a motion that we do not approve his out of county,
[3:48:01] or actually his out of state travel.
[3:48:02] Well, there's plenty of courses and taxes that he can go to, so that would take this care of this is just.
[3:48:12] I would ask Judge Wires did ask if this was pulled, that he had the opportunity to step out of court and come speak to the court in regard to this item.
[3:48:22] Would the court be inclined to continue with the agenda until his arrival?
[3:48:26] And I just let him know not today.
[3:48:28] They have, like, some other time if you want to come aside here, but he has, you know,
[3:48:33] just how many hours does he need?
[3:48:36] I don't know anything about his hours.
[3:48:39] I can't say that.
[3:48:40] I just, I want, he gave me a little blip to talk about it for court when it detail.
[3:48:43] And also asked that he could come and dress the court if it became an issue.
[3:48:48] Well, I've just asked to pull it if somebody wants to make a motion to approve it.
[3:48:52] They can do that.
[3:48:52] Okay.
[3:48:53] Well, then let me give the court, excuse me.
[3:48:55] No, I was going to say there was a motion to deny.
[3:48:57] Hi, yes, is there a second on that motion? I just don't want to leave a motion.
[3:49:01] I'm sorry. It was
[3:49:08] a motion to deny the out-of-state travel for judge
[3:49:11] squires. Is there a second?
[3:49:16] Okay, that motion fails for a second. Is there any other
[3:49:19] motion that would like to be considered? I'm new to approve item E.
[3:49:27] I have a
[3:49:28] motion to approve the out-of-state travel. Is there a second?
[3:49:35] I just want more
[3:49:36] information. So yeah, I'm on board with that idea. He is walking over currently. I can give you
[3:49:43] what I know for now. He says this is judicial training. This is part of what he needs to be on the
[3:49:49] teaching faculty for the National Judicial College. There are less than five judges in Texas that are
[3:49:54] on this faculty. He has received a full scholarship for this conference for tuition and fees.
[3:50:00] He would be asking for reimbursement for food and travel and has attached the agenda in scholarship letter to the item and is on the way. So that's what I have at this time.
[3:50:15] There is a motion to approve the out of state travel. Is there a second?
[3:50:33] That motion does fail for lack of a second. Do we want to?
[3:50:41] Do you all mind if we take like a five minute recess to fill up water?
[3:50:47] use a bathroom if the judges coming over it kind of coincides with what we
[3:50:53] need to address when keeping moving on is everybody okay with that yes let's
[3:50:57] let's do ten nine minutes it's one fifty one right now we'll recess we'll
[3:51:02] come back at two o'clock all right
[3:51:49] coming back from our break we will reconvene
[3:51:56] During this regular session of Commissioner's Court at 2 p.m., we were on item E under consent
[3:52:04] which was pulled for separate discussion and that item is in accordance with Guadalued
[3:52:09] County travel policy authorization for judge squires and travel out of state for the following
[3:52:14] educational training, national judicial colleges designing and presenting courses effectively
[3:52:19] the faculty development workshops September 28th through October 1, 2026 in Reno, Nevada.
[3:52:26] No, Judge, I know you came over as we were talking. Do you want to come up and give any additional information?
[3:52:37] Court member, go ahead. No, no, no, no.
[3:52:39] No, I was just going to ask if there were any questions, comments for the Judge Royce here?
[3:52:44] I just want to know how does going to this conference help Guadalupe County when it's become a teaching facility
[3:52:50] for the National and Judicial College?
[3:52:52] How does it help to go out with the county?
[3:52:54] And do you even get any CLEs
[3:52:57] or continue an education question for them?
[3:52:59] Well, I'll answer both those questions in order.
[3:53:01] So I think continuing legal education for us lawyers
[3:53:07] and judges that require that.
[3:53:09] Number one is statutorily required by law
[3:53:12] being a licensed attorney and a member
[3:53:15] of the Texas Bar College.
[3:53:17] I'm required to have 15 hours.
[3:53:19] and then as a member of the Texas Bar College
[3:53:22] I'm required to have 30 hours.
[3:53:24] So continuing legal education I think speaks for itself.
[3:53:28] Any education I think speaks for itself
[3:53:30] and it helps me serve the mic constituents
[3:53:35] by being a better judge, by learning the techniques
[3:53:37] that other judges across the country and the world
[3:53:40] are using to effectively manage their dockets,
[3:53:43] make sure cases are heard in a timely manner.
[3:53:47] The list goes on.
[3:53:48] So the second question was, do I receive it in continuing legal education credits more
[3:53:54] of this?
[3:53:55] Every class I've taken with National Judicial College, which, by the way, is the largest
[3:53:59] judicial training organization in the world comes with CLE.
[3:54:06] And I do receive CLE credit for the classes I take with the National Judicial College.
[3:54:11] This course specifically is designed for people who have been invited to the National Judicial
[3:54:17] college to become members of their faculty.
[3:54:21] I did an informal search for how many judges in Texas are currently serving as faculty
[3:54:27] members at the NJC, and I think they're less than five in the entire state.
[3:54:32] So I think it not only is wonderful opportunity for me, professionally, to grow as a judge,
[3:54:40] but it would also be a feather in the cap for Guadalupe County to have one of less than five
[3:54:45] in the entire state of Texas, be a faculty member on the National Judicial College faculty
[3:54:49] staff. Not only that, I received a full scholarship to attend, full tuition scholarship, all
[3:54:57] the fees are paid for, the hotel is paid for.
[3:55:00] All of my meals except for one meal a day is paid for. That's right. And so the only cost I'm asking to be covered is my flight in one meal a day. Question me, how many CLEs do you get by taking this course? I couldn't find any other way there because it was all about teaching and getting a degree to be on this thing. Once again, how does that actually help? Guadalupe County. Well, I've already answered that question and you've asked two questions there. So the first one.
[3:55:29] I've already answered. The second one is, I don't know until they actually finish the
[3:55:34] class. So every hour that you spend in the class, and I think they're four days, I don't
[3:55:42] know exactly how many. It's in the PDF. You get about an hour of CLE credit for each one
[3:55:49] hour that you take there. So maybe 40, 30? And how many hours do you need per year to
[3:55:58] continue your license? My license 15 to be a member of the State Bar College I need
[3:56:05] 30. So once again to be part of the State Bar College once again how does it help a
[3:56:19] do a better job. And as a former educator, as a professor at St. Mary's Law School, coming
[3:56:27] from a family of teachers and professors, my father was a professor at Texas Lutheran University
[3:56:32] for 40 years. I have two brothers that are teachers. One is a professor, a full professor,
[3:56:38] a tenure professor, a Texas A&M. Education is part of my blood. And I think education is important
[3:56:44] for everyone to have, whether that is technical training, whether it's a college degree, whether
[3:56:51] it's practical on the job experience, apparently good.
[3:56:56] So this course, if you retire, you could just move right into the teaching degree with
[3:57:01] this.
[3:57:01] Well, I could potentially teach in a non-compensated role right now, if you chose to.
[3:57:11] That's my question.
[3:57:12] So I just don't see how it benefits Guadalupe County other than, you know, which have one
[3:57:15] on the board.
[3:57:16] What part of my answer did you not understand that you said that it benefit you go out with the county could be one of five people on this
[3:57:25] prestigious, I guess, faculty?
[3:57:28] Well, I just like our deputies and law enforcement
[3:57:32] officers get master peace officer certifications. How does that help them?
[3:57:39] They just get more money.
[3:57:41] Well, I don't get any more money for it. I'm doing it because I love learning.
[3:57:46] I just think if someone wants to do that much for their own benefit that they should pay for it.
[3:57:50] Why can't you do that for just my benefit? That's just what I'm thinking.
[3:57:53] It's my opinion. It can come to the vote so you can ask the other questions.
[3:57:58] I see a lot of money going out of this place. We're going to have your CLEs in place.
[3:58:03] And this will give you more.
[3:58:05] This is a full tuition scholarship. All I'm asking for is a plane ticket and one meal a day.
[3:58:11] That's it.
[3:58:11] But I know that you didn't use all of your training budget last year and you donated
[3:58:16] that for emergency buttons, and I don't buy education like I do, and that's your decision.
[3:58:22] That's right.
[3:58:23] For me, it's important.
[3:58:24] And I think from the voters, it's important, and the voters voted me back in knowing that
[3:58:30] I am very qualified for my position, and I am so because I take continuing legal education
[3:58:36] and I try to improve daily.
[3:58:39] And so learning is a lifetime experience for me.
[3:58:43] You heading for a doctorate degree in the PhD program.
[3:58:48] And this would help you tremendously.
[3:58:50] This course does not count towards the doctoral program.
[3:58:54] It does not.
[3:58:55] It does not.
[3:58:56] OK, I know.
[3:58:56] That's what I heard you.
[3:58:58] Anyway, I'm sorry.
[3:59:00] I said, I heard you when you said did not go towards it.
[3:59:03] OK.
[3:59:05] Any other questions?
[3:59:06] Any other questions, comments?
[3:59:13] I'm sure there's differing, you know, mindsets on training and all these things.
[3:59:17] I think what we're used to as a group is probably saying more training that is tied specific
[3:59:22] like Commissioner's Court training is going to be South Texas Judges and Commissioner's Conference
[3:59:27] specific to roads, budgeting, you know, disaster recovery and response or whatever it is.
[3:59:33] So even with some of these items, I don't know who's concerned about this and who isn't on the court, right?
[3:59:39] Thank you probably had the interaction with the most concerned on the court about the training, but I think just at first glance it was kind of like, okay, is this
[3:59:48] Is this a normal judge is training or it sounds like it's something a little bit?
[3:59:52] It is absolutely admirable. Yeah, it's just not something maybe everybody's used to singing that's probably the initial knee jerk was kind of
[4:00:00] I like it. How does this fit the same way? So I think that's probably where some of this initiated today, but I appreciate you soft pedaling back is just trying here. I want to tell the court just a little bit. And with my experience as a lawyer, there are certain trainings and certain things that you can't get into until you have some sort of qualification. It's certainly more
[4:00:29] applicable for judges. I do think the more qualified that we can have our attorneys and judges
[4:00:35] be the better. This is something I would support if any of our attorneys wanted to do it, or if
[4:00:40] any of our judges wanted to do it, if they could get into it. I also think that accolades received
[4:00:45] by our leaders are a positive thing for the county. I think it makes the county more attractive. I
[4:00:51] think that if all of our judges could do something like this, if they wanted to do it, I'm sure they
[4:00:56] could if they wanted to. I would support all of them for doing this. I think you know, Chris
[4:01:00] Klein won an award recently. I think that's awesome. I mean, different ones of our elected officials
[4:01:04] that are acknowledged for doing a great job in their own fields. I think is a good thing for
[4:01:09] the county. It's a great look for the county and I think it attracts quality people. I think it's
[4:01:14] a good thing. I think that any of us that are winning awards or doing things to better ourselves
[4:01:19] in our respective fields is a good thing. Who handles your load while you're gone? Who handles
[4:01:25] your load while you're going your cases my cases yeah so I still maintain my all
[4:01:31] of my the filings I handle while I'm gone I I'm able to do that for my laptop
[4:01:36] and I schedule my doc at around around being at the CLE right so no cases
[4:01:42] will be missed nothing will be dropped any
[4:01:48] other questions from Judge
[4:01:49] as well as the podium. Motion to approve item E in the consent list.
[4:01:56] Second. Do you have a motion and a second?
[4:02:01] Let me just a second.
[4:02:05] Motion and a second to approve item E that was previously removed from consent items. Any other comments or questions?
[4:02:16] All right, hearing no other discussion. All those in favor say aye.
[4:02:19] Thank you.
[4:02:20] All right.
[4:02:20] Opposed?
[4:02:21] Aye.
[4:02:22] Motion does pass.
[4:02:23] 40A is one day.
[4:02:24] Thank you.
[4:02:25] Thank you for your consideration.
[4:02:26] May I be excused?
[4:02:27] Yes, sir.
[4:02:27] Have a good day.
[4:02:28] Thank you.
[4:02:29] We'll move to item 7, which are action items, discussion, possible, motion relative to item
[4:02:34] A, request to fund the Kingsbury Volunteer Fire Department for its supplemental funding for
[4:02:39] fiscal year 26.
[4:02:41] Mr. Pender.
[4:02:42] Judge commissioners, this is a fundamental fundering request to follow up with the money that
[4:02:46] It was allocated in the budget this year for the Kingsbury Fire Department.
[4:02:51] They're utilizing their funds to purchase radios, they've already purchased those radios.
[4:02:55] This is just the agreement put forth to you guys so you can authorize them to receive
[4:02:59] those payments and later on we have a budget amendment to move the money to their line.
[4:03:06] And the supplemental or additional budget amendment is on the agenda later to move the funds.
[4:03:11] So the funds allocated for this is $6,685.
[4:03:14] dollars. They actually spent more on the radios. They spent $8,000. So they're out of
[4:03:20] pocket a little bit, but this is just what the court had allocated for them.
[4:03:28] Moving up to the perub. Do you have a motion? Is there a second? Second. Do you have a second
[4:03:33] and the other discussion? I was just going to say just I have the paperwork
[4:03:37] send the orders office with the clear check and everything. So we'll get it all cleared
[4:03:40] up this one. Okay. There do have a motion and a second. Any other comments or
[4:03:44] questions, court members?
[4:03:48] Hearing no other discussion, all those in favor say aye.
[4:03:51] Aye. Opposed, same sign? Aye. Motion does pass four yeas, one nay.
[4:03:58] Item B, order prohibiting outdoor burning, Mr. Pinter. Judge commissioners, as you can see, and as you have heard,
[4:04:06] fire departments are busy and so what this is is just to implement the burn
[4:04:10] effective tomorrow morning at 6 a.m. for 90 days. Currently in Guadalupe County
[4:04:14] where at 6.29 on the KBDI. Bear County is at 5.50. Come out County is at 5.85.
[4:04:20] Gonzales is 6.46. Hayes County is 5.80 and Wilson is 6.26. Several counties around us
[4:04:26] have started to implement those burn bands and it's my recommendation to do so
[4:04:29] also.
[4:04:33] You can approve the order of outdoor burning, band outdoor burning. Second, we have a motion
[4:04:40] and a second to approve the order prohibiting outdoor burning in the other discussion. Isn't it
[4:04:45] true, Patrick, that most of the time when we do this, you make it rain. So you can call it all.
[4:04:52] It started raining last week when I put this on. I filed it on Monday. We got about three days of
[4:04:57] rain last week and there's a tropical storm coming into the...
[4:05:00] All right. Hopefully we'll get a little bit of rain this week. Okay. Then you have everybody asking, why didn't you do it sooner? All right.
[4:05:09] We do have a motion and a commissioner. So Patrick, I've been asked in the past about those numbers that you that you keep giving out KVDI numbers. What's the threshold? What does that mean? My 500 is the threshold. So basically, the most your content in the ground to a certain level. So when I say 500, that's five inches under the ground, 606 inches. So the moisture content in the ground. It's
[4:05:29] It's about that deep.
[4:05:34] Any other comments, questions?
[4:05:37] Right, we do have a motion and a second to approve the order for the burn ban and item
[4:05:42] B, hearing no other comments or questions, all those in favor say aye.
[4:05:46] Aye.
[4:05:47] Opposed, same sign?
[4:05:49] Hearing no opposition, that motion passes.
[4:05:51] Action, item C, approve the change order with UES for additional construction material,
[4:05:56] testing services for the emergency operation center project in the amount of $7,120.
[4:06:02] Mr. Pinder. Judge, commissioners, UES is the fund we have hired to complete our third
[4:06:06] party inspections and testing on the facilities.
[4:06:10] This change order is to include some of the items that were not listed in the original scope
[4:06:14] of work. The funds coming out of this is for the lines that we have set aside currently.
[4:06:23] So we have the funds in a separate line that's in a contingency fund.
[4:06:27] So I did we do have some other information that was just they'll be coming back with another proposal.
[4:06:32] We have to have a third party inspection for the installation on the exterior of the buildings and the interior of the buildings.
[4:06:39] And so this is this was just made aware this week actually yesterday of that.
[4:06:44] So don't be in another proposal from this firm or different firm to for that.
[4:06:47] So how did all this fall through the cracks what's that how did it all fall through the cracks not knowing that this was coming?
[4:06:55] It couldn't have been in the original quote so the original quote covered all of the building the site work
[4:07:01] This I don't know. This is just different additional man hours. We've been back and forth with this firm and also with the contractor in this firm was
[4:07:10] This is you yes you yes, and they were
[4:07:14] We hired them.
[4:07:15] We picked them.
[4:07:16] We hired this formula.
[4:07:17] So we picked them.
[4:07:18] We gave them all the information they needed.
[4:07:19] Now they're coming back to them.
[4:07:20] Well, you didn't have this there.
[4:07:22] The scope of work seems to have changed.
[4:07:24] There's additional added items that the contractor did not have.
[4:07:27] The general contractor or general conditions.
[4:07:30] There's been some additional changes.
[4:07:31] So whatever the architect threw up was incorrect.
[4:07:36] Or lacking, I should say.
[4:07:38] I don't know if it's an architectural issue or it's actually a construction issue.
[4:07:42] I was just advised we needed to do some additional testing just like the city has requirements on their third party
[4:07:46] This could be a city requirement for a third party inspection test. You know, they're gonna test the asphalt
[4:07:51] They're gonna test the concrete. They're in test compactions. They're gonna test steel
[4:07:54] They're gonna test all that different things. This is just how we hard to do that
[4:07:57] It's not like a portion of the building was missed in the scope of work and we're having to test the ground
[4:08:02] We're an expansion of the buildings going right. This is yeah additional required testing on the existing plan that was
[4:08:09] in progress. Yes, correct. Like this one has caught some concussion, construction issues,
[4:08:16] like concrete compaction testing, 23 days after the concrete was poured, the concrete didn't
[4:08:20] pass the test, so we had to go back and revise the foundation, things like that. So, for like
[4:08:24] a dumpster pad, things like that. This is all planned. Yes, it's all on the budget. How much
[4:08:29] is the plan? I mean plan, like construction wise, because to me, change order indicates
[4:08:34] on planned. This is a change order based on the inspection testing. So this is what they think
[4:08:40] will take it to get to the remainder of the project. So you know, like when we had that soil
[4:08:44] testing issue and we had to retest and there was a change order with that to these, these were the
[4:08:49] people that ultimately were doing that testing, right? Correct. Except that the change order came
[4:08:53] through someone else's name. No, it was this firm. There was somebody else's name on that change order
[4:08:57] remember that was it was about five minutes ago.
[4:09:00] So BSW is the dark attack firm.
[4:09:03] They're the ones that, and if we don't construct
[4:09:05] that's the way BSW who is the architect,
[4:09:07] I think we do is the contractor.
[4:09:08] So now, this is the firm that actually did the testing.
[4:09:11] So if we don't actually order the testing through UES
[4:09:15] because that's the firm we were using.
[4:09:16] So we do initially paid for the change order
[4:09:20] the first time.
[4:09:22] And this is kind of the fear and the concern
[4:09:24] that we had going into this is that,
[4:09:25] you know, we have this deadline and then they're even the change order started coming in.
[4:09:29] I didn't really think that the first version of the, excuse me, gosh, now I'm turning.
[4:09:36] The dirt testing was, I didn't really agree with it.
[4:09:41] I didn't like it.
[4:09:42] I think it was a foreseeable thing that they should have not had to come back and ask for more
[4:09:46] money for it.
[4:09:48] But, I mean, are we in a situation where we're on such a tight deadline with this funding
[4:09:52] that we really just have to move forward?
[4:09:54] I mean, how many more of these are they able to do?
[4:09:56] Well, I think that's the other question.
[4:09:58] And maybe y'all...
[4:09:59] I mean...
[4:10:00] Commissioner, you know, or Patrick, you know, but it, it really is, we don't want to, we don't want to be in a position where we feel like we're forced to make a decision and they keep just having these change orders over and over and over and over and over. I think we're there. So it could give us. We do have another agenda item. I don't want to talk about a construction management company to help us look at those things like Mr. Enkouki speak on, on this from his perspective. Right. That's all right. I mean, I can talk about it now or then. But. If this is something that we have to do.
[4:10:29] to move forward with this thing or when ultimately lose money because of the federal
[4:10:33] funding involved and I guess we have to do it.
[4:10:36] Correct.
[4:10:37] It's part of the, you know, we had an original agreement with UES.
[4:10:41] This is third-party inspections.
[4:10:45] This was something that came up with the EOC project and it's adding $7,100 and $7,122
[4:10:54] their original requirement by the city as the permitting entity to do
[4:10:59] this testing? Or are we testing this to make sure what we're building meets a certain
[4:11:06] specification materials testing to make sure it's meeting the specifications like they
[4:11:10] tested the concrete to make sure it met the PSI. They're testing the steel to make sure that's
[4:11:14] going to hold up. They're testing the sheet metal. They're testing the the default back-to-wire
[4:11:19] building. The dictates the need for the testing. There are owners rep. So if this if this this
[4:11:25] This firm doesn't do the testing, then there's nobody at the county that can watch and oversee the testing.
[4:11:31] So they're having an engineer sign off on this saying that it will not fail, if it does fail.
[4:11:36] The warranties could go back to, it's basically coming back to you.
[4:11:39] If we didn't do the testing, we're not covering the investment, probably to make sure that it was done right to begin with.
[4:11:46] And then if we don't do that, and we run into a problem, we don't have anything that we can lean on to say, see,
[4:11:53] We didn't do that, so we're not sure who's fault is it and it becomes a back and forth by it.
[4:11:58] That's right.
[4:12:00] So, like I said, there was a foundation issue.
[4:12:02] Later on, we can go back and pull all the engineering reports, all their testing reports,
[4:12:05] because they send me reports every day.
[4:12:07] And so, at the end of the week, they compile them.
[4:12:09] So, we can see all the reports every week.
[4:12:11] They're out there every day, pulling test samples.
[4:12:16] Is this part of the grant that we got or is this out of our budget?
[4:12:19] This is out of our budget.
[4:12:20] that it's not.
[4:12:28] Gallauds.
[4:12:31] If there's no further discussion,
[4:12:33] I'll move to approve a change order with UES
[4:12:35] for additional construction, material testing services
[4:12:38] for the emergency operations center project
[4:12:40] in the amount of $7,120.
[4:12:45] Second.
[4:12:46] You have the motion in the second commissioner?
[4:12:49] One other question, just...
[4:12:50] We're already testing the concrete, correct?
[4:12:53] Yes, sir.
[4:12:54] What else are they going to test?
[4:12:55] The center block, the...
[4:12:57] Grout, there's a mortar.
[4:12:59] I'll send you the actual full report, but they're testing everything on the project.
[4:13:04] There are third-part tests.
[4:13:05] They're actually going in and doing the steel test.
[4:13:07] I mean, the pressure bar in the slab, they're testing.
[4:13:10] Yes, they tested the gravel, they tested the concrete, they tested all the dirt compaction
[4:13:15] tests, all those different things.
[4:13:19] Can we pay all those bills?
[4:13:22] Not Orpo?
[4:13:23] Yes, sir.
[4:13:24] There was the original scope was, so the total for everything is $72,000 at the end of $71,750.
[4:13:34] Why was that not part of the architectural bid?
[4:13:37] It's not part, it's the soft cost.
[4:13:39] Right, it's the owner's responsibility, the owner's rep.
[4:13:42] Because they can't hire an inspection firm, it's not ethical.
[4:13:46] We have to.
[4:13:48] If they hire their own inspector to tell us all the work they did is okay, then how are you supposed to?
[4:13:55] It's like a lot of times where you have professional services, engineering, geotech, some of that
[4:14:01] where it's the owner's responsibility to do those initial services, just like on road construction
[4:14:07] where you may be required to do initial design, look at cost of utility relocation, all those things
[4:14:12] and right-of-way acquisition before you actually get somebody else.
[4:14:16] It's kind of similar, right?
[4:14:18] You're going to need on the Marion?
[4:14:20] You're going to need this on Marion?
[4:14:22] No, I've already paid all the bills on Marion.
[4:14:26] All the additional testing?
[4:14:27] Yeah.
[4:14:29] We did it.
[4:14:31] Coming up after the fact is what bothers me the most.
[4:14:35] If she'd all be brought up front,
[4:14:36] so we know exactly what's going to cost.
[4:14:38] This thing is just,
[4:14:40] what's the cost overrun on this project right now?
[4:14:43] I have to, I can't quote that off.
[4:14:44] Tough man, sir. I'd have to get you.
[4:14:46] but it's too late now, but, you know, I'm just curious as to how we're still within budget.
[4:14:51] We're still within budget?
[4:14:52] Yes.
[4:14:53] Yeah, there's some contingency.
[4:14:54] We're still within budget.
[4:14:55] We have, I think there's last meeting we talked about, there was...
[4:15:00] There was over 200,000 in contingency that was still available. So we're within the budget, within the fees, within everything that we've anticipated. So.
[4:15:16] This is something we have to do. Yes. Correct. That's our contractor. Right. We do have a motion and a second. Any other comments or questions?
[4:15:28] All right. Hearing no other discussion. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed. Hearing no opposition. That motion passes.
[4:15:36] We'll move to Action Item D, award the contract for RFP 26-16 drug testing services to DSI Medical, the sole responsive foreposer, Mr. Kennedy-Hamm.
[4:15:48] This is tied to consent item F, which is the Texas Veterans Commission Grant Award.
[4:15:54] On July 21st, Commissioners Court approved the order to advertise and the specifications for this RFP for drug testing services.
[4:16:01] When it closed on August 10th, we received three submissions, but only one of those was responsive.
[4:16:08] That response was reviewed by various departments, and DSI still meets the needs for this contract.
[4:16:21] Commissioners, DSI is the group that I believe is currently being used for veterans treatment courts.
[4:16:28] So when we have veterans come into that program, they all have a device either a self-checked device or an ignition interlock if it's tied to a DWI.
[4:16:39] They also as part of the treatment program for 14 to 16 or 18 months, however long that individual is involved, they have random drug tests that happens once if not multiple times during the month.
[4:16:55] and then they're also going to probation to have testing done.
[4:16:59] I do want to take just a brief moment to say a big shout-out to Doreen in my office who
[4:17:03] does all of the work, all of the background paperwork, everything.
[4:17:08] Not only for veterans' treatment court, but also for this $110,000 grant, which covers
[4:17:14] 100% of the costs for the veterans in the program on their devices, some additional treatment
[4:17:19] and things that go into that.
[4:17:21] So without her time spent on that, these veterans would be paying hundreds and hundreds of dollars each every month to be involved in the program.
[4:17:31] So I know we only got one. Things have been working out well. She keeps them walking the straight and narrow, confident we can keep things going.
[4:17:39] I just wanted to say thank you to her for all her hard work while we were talking about that.
[4:17:46] I'll make a motion that we approve item E in order to contract for RFP 26616 drug testing
[4:17:51] services, the DSI Medical, the sole response proposal.
[4:17:55] So I have to.
[4:17:56] Do you have a motion in a second on agenda item D in a further discussion?
[4:18:03] Hearing no other comments for questions, all those in favor say aye.
[4:18:06] Aye.
[4:18:07] Opposed same time?
[4:18:09] Hearing no opposition, that motion passes.
[4:18:11] And we'll move to item E, task orders 1 and 2 with brought us in associates for owners
[4:18:18] representative services for the emergency operations center slash warehouse project and
[4:18:23] the emergency response center project.
[4:18:26] Mr. Cuttingham.
[4:18:27] Brought us in associates was awarded the primary contract for the owners representative services.
[4:18:34] The first project that was requested that they be brought upon was the emergency operations
[4:18:39] action center and the emergency response center.
[4:18:43] Mr. Tinder and purchasing met with broader syn Associates to discuss a potential scope of work and they came back to us with these two proposals with not to exceed amounts.
[4:18:54] It's up to Commissioner's Court to formally activate them for these projects.
[4:18:59] All
[4:19:05] right, so these proposals are for the two projects with the ARPA funding if the court wishes to bring this owners rep on to help manage and go through some of these processes possibly save us some money, look at cost savings streamline the process.
[4:19:23] So,
[4:19:26] again, this was a proposal not to exceed.
[4:19:29] They did a proposal on each project.
[4:19:34] And Mr. Pinder may have some more specific details,
[4:19:37] but it's just for the consideration,
[4:19:39] if we want to get them in five months,
[4:19:42] I want them five months to feel to finish this out.
[4:19:46] And another maybe mixed emotions about having somebody come in
[4:19:49] to help oversee construction projects,
[4:19:51] but feel like this is extremely unique
[4:19:54] because it is tied to ARPA or America Rescue Plan Act funds, which are federal dollars that have been...
[4:20:00] A hard deadline of December 31, 26 to be spent. The other thing is, Mr. Pender, I want to say thank you on behalf of the Court for taking on additional duties. Patrick's also not a construction manager. He's done his very, very level best to be involved in a number of different things. Try to help out, oversee this and medial in mess with north global loopy street and go through all these things. But having somebody come in that knows construction that can help facilitate
[4:20:29] some of these things and even if we don't save money but promote efficiency and get to the
[4:20:34] end of the project and they've done be done correctly or we know ahead of time if something's going
[4:20:39] to pop up like some of the inspection stuff we just talked about I think it could be a benefit.
[4:20:44] This might not be a good fit for every county project but I also feel like once we get to a jail
[4:20:50] conversation a government center a large bomb call that we're going to absolutely have to have
[4:20:57] construction oversight involved and this may be a good way to dip our toes into
[4:21:01] that to see what we like what we didn't like if the company is good if we'd
[4:21:04] like to change scope of work when we go out and bid services and go okay look the
[4:21:10] main thing is get us done the correct way in budget by the end of the year but I
[4:21:14] feel like there may be some other benefits to it. Any any other questions or
[4:21:20] thoughts concerns.
[4:21:27] I will move to approve for task orders one and two with
[4:21:33] broadest and associates to be the owner's representative services for the
[4:21:38] emergency operations center warehouse project and the emergency response
[4:21:44] center project. Second. New have a motion and a second on action item E and the
[4:21:52] other discussion.
[4:21:57] Hearing no other comments or questions all those in favor say
[4:22:00] aye. Aye. Opposed same time? Hearing no opposition that motion passes. Thank you
[4:22:06] Don. Moved to item F approval of the additional services request number one with
[4:22:11] paid Dawson consulting engineers LLC the amount of $4,500 for revisions to
[4:22:17] extend the sanitary sewer line as part of the North Royal Lupy Street public
[4:22:21] look, water and cemetery sewer extension projects.
[4:22:24] We are hitting on all the fun topics today, aren't we?
[4:22:27] Right on the top today, like most of these are mine,
[4:22:29] and I should have rethought that.
[4:22:34] So judge commissioners, I spoke with commissioner Engelke
[4:22:37] about this.
[4:22:38] So to give you an update on the water and sewer line
[4:22:40] on North Waterloo District, they have tied everything in.
[4:22:43] Water is tied in from in front of the front of animal control
[4:22:47] all the way down to the 12-inch or 16-inch line
[4:22:50] that is in the corner down there about the triple, the sewer line is tied in in front
[4:22:55] of the sheriff's office and it extends it all the way in.
[4:22:57] The current facility that is the ESC building has the water and sewer tied in.
[4:23:01] So the line is in, they're currently backfilling pavement, things like that, down by the sheriff's
[4:23:06] office.
[4:23:07] Commissioner Engelke and I spoke about potentially extending from the current, or where
[4:23:14] the manhole is in front of the new filled facility, a water sewer line to where animal
[4:23:18] control is located.
[4:23:20] What animals control currently is, I believe, on a septic tank.
[4:23:23] So the plan is to, for this, for paid off to do the design and engineering to extend
[4:23:30] it from there to this location, and then we're just going to cap it off, stub it up, just
[4:23:34] leave it there.
[4:23:35] If the animal control facility is upgraded later, the septic tank fails later.
[4:23:40] We have ability to come in and tie that in at that point.
[4:23:44] This is just for the engineering costs.
[4:23:46] I did speak with the contractor, once he has the actual plan, he can give me a better
[4:23:51] hard number on the actual installation.
[4:23:53] He's not anticipating the construction cost to exceed more than $10,000 or $11,000 at
[4:23:58] that point.
[4:23:59] We do have the money in our construction line for that, but it's just to get the sewer line
[4:24:03] across the street, and then they can finish the project as far as road surfaces and things
[4:24:09] like that.
[4:24:09] They're currently on site, and they can do the work.
[4:24:12] They're still going to stick there until we can get this part taken care of.
[4:24:15] they're anticipating another week or two and they'll be done.
[4:24:18] Okay. Good afternoon.
[4:24:22] I do believe the animal shelters on sewer already.
[4:24:25] Yeah, this would just be to run them.
[4:24:27] Okay, to hook it up to the city sewer system.
[4:24:30] Is it animal control on sewer or is it on sewer?
[4:24:33] It's on sewer because there is one of the parts,
[4:24:36] ports that we wanted to get fixed was the,
[4:24:39] as Commissioner Engelke knows,
[4:24:40] there's that port right there by that window that kind of
[4:24:44] Right. Yes, smells. Yes, smells. Yes. So there's conflicting.
[4:24:49] I need to verify that. Well, you can may know the historians of it. And now Danielle is up here.
[4:24:56] So the general idea in the beginning was
[4:25:00] While we're doing this, let's do this now for future. So I did try to confirm with the city to figure out if it was on septic or sewer. They have no records of either. They actually said that the last record there was that they had was an oh nine, but it did not state if it was on sewer or septic. And I think that building was built five. Is that correct? So we don't know without going out there. I mean, we can go out there and probe if y'all need to to see.
[4:25:29] and look around, but City could not provide any permitting or any idea what it's on.
[4:25:36] I mean it's it's fitting for animal control, right? I mean the discussion check on the animal control.
[4:25:42] The architect on animal control. That was when you were here commissioning.
[4:25:47] Sorry.
[4:25:50] No idea. I don't recall putting a septic tank in there.
[4:25:57] So the Pike Dawson came in we had to sit survey companies come out that is why we extended the sewer line all the way to in front of the sheriffs
[4:26:04] I'll correct the city had no sewer lines over there
[4:26:08] So that's the whole reason we spent the 400,000 that's what I was going to say when we did the law enforcement
[4:26:13] Edition where dispatches upstairs and I mean the new portion of the building
[4:26:18] We built into that parking lot from the back of the the jail or adult detention facility forward
[4:26:24] I feel like we had to go a fairly long way from the parking lot in that back corner to relocate to get out to the street
[4:26:31] But that that line ended before the metal building on the record management. I don't know that that line extended that
[4:26:38] But I also don't remember that being a focus of ours because we weren't talking about an extension
[4:26:43] We were just doing a connection. So how do we I mean, I think it's smart to consider this now
[4:26:50] But how do we find out if it's really can do we have them go do line locates?
[4:26:55] I mean snake a camera do anything else to go. Hey prove to us how it's connected so we can make a good decision
[4:27:02] We can work with environmental health for showing you key and I we can we can try to track this down
[4:27:07] But the survey companies are out there engineering like they did the entire Guadalupe street from
[4:27:12] Strupple all the way to I-10 so there was no
[4:27:15] So, sewer line and Jennifer from the city did not show any indication of new or existing
[4:27:21] sewer lines in that area for the 50 water line ins right there by the hydrant, but we took
[4:27:26] it all the way to turn it off.
[4:27:28] I know Zach's coming back, but Chris, do we have a bill that would show different from
[4:27:33] the city for animal control like other buildings, like do we have something, do we have a different
[4:27:39] water usage amount in that?
[4:27:40] like have its own line as well. Right because I mean if it's just it's just bathrooms and that it may
[4:27:47] not be the same. I talked with Doug Piet who's the current supervisor at the animal animal shelter
[4:27:52] and he was there when it was built and he's telling me it's on sewer. It's on sewer. I do not recall ever
[4:27:58] putting in a septic tank. Yeah and Mike actually brought up a good point if it was on septic it hasn't
[4:28:04] been cleaned out in the last 15 years since it's been there so we would have problems by then with all
[4:28:09] animals in the waste. But the best way to find out is to have Ricky get a camera down to find out.
[4:28:17] All right. A mystery to be solved at another time. This is what's the right thing. This is really a
[4:28:22] thrill. This is interesting. Yeah. There we go. Next one. All right. Is it any other discussion
[4:28:29] on item F? No sir. So we'll take if everybody's okay, we'll take no action on item F and we'll wait
[4:28:36] to get some additional information.
[4:28:38] We'll move to item G, Budget Amendment 26-93,
[4:28:42] to transfer funds from the Long-to-Fired Department
[4:28:44] allocation budget to Kingsbury Volunteer Fire Department
[4:28:47] and contingent upon approval
[4:28:48] the funding request by Commissioner's Court,
[4:28:51] which was earlier on this agenda board.
[4:28:55] So Chris can write the check.
[4:28:56] Motion to approve item G.
[4:29:00] Second, second.
[4:29:01] Do we have a motion and a second to approve action item G?
[4:29:05] Any other discussion?
[4:29:09] Hearing no other discussion, all those in favor say aye.
[4:29:12] Aye.
[4:29:13] Opposed?
[4:29:14] Aye.
[4:29:14] Motion does pass four yeas, one nay.
[4:29:20] And we'll move to item H, Budget Amendment 26-94, to transfer funds from the Emergency Response Center or Fire Station Budget
[4:29:27] to the Emergency Operations Center slash warehouse for additional professional services and appliance expenses.
[4:29:35] We're starting to buy the equipment, things for the building.
[4:29:39] We notice that there's more money in the line and not as much in other lines.
[4:29:43] So we're just moving the funds around.
[4:29:45] So we're moving the money from the fire station into the warehouse.
[4:29:47] That's all this is so that we can align with the purchases.
[4:29:51] So we had to spend some money out of that one line for the $120,000 permit for the city.
[4:29:56] We just have to move some money so we can keep ordering the equipment so it'll be here.
[4:30:00] By the time the bill we try to open.
[4:30:05] And we do have some additional funds that are basically carry over in
[4:30:10] capital project funds, 700 for, or if our owner furnished items, or FF&E furniture fixers equipment,
[4:30:17] because we won't be finished by the end of September, the end of this month, it's going to go into
[4:30:21] the first few months of fiscal year 27. Do you need a conference table? I got a brand new 144-inch
[4:30:29] Walnut, London, the Box, the furniture, and two big
[4:30:34] conference rooms.
[4:30:34] Whose conference table is still in the box?
[4:30:38] Well, it was ordered for precinct three, the elbow building,
[4:30:44] along with the two workstations.
[4:30:46] Be surprised what I find over there.
[4:30:48] And I got a big screen TV.
[4:30:49] I'm still looking for the cord for it, see if it works.
[4:30:55] Shoot me a text of the size as commissionary.
[4:30:56] But yes, we definitely include that in our furniture purchases.
[4:31:00] I see you can certainly come get it reallocate it like I said still in the box. I was talking with the
[4:31:11] Questions on that budget amendment no sir. Move to approve budget amendment 26-94 transfer funds from the emergency response center fire station budget
[4:31:24] To the emergency operations center warehouse for additional professional services and appliance expenses
[4:31:30] We
[4:31:36] do have a motion and a second to
[4:31:41] To approve that budget amendment, any other comments or questions?
[4:31:44] Yeah, I have a question.
[4:31:45] Yes, ma'am.
[4:31:45] Some of the things that Commissioner Wolverton is talking about, what could they be used
[4:31:49] in lieu of some of these furnitures or fixtures?
[4:31:54] I've got pictures of, I'm happy to show them.
[4:31:57] So
[4:32:00] we have not ordered the furniture for the building.
[4:32:03] This is for like, for jurators, those other items, shelving, wire shelving for the warehouse,
[4:32:09] things like that that are also additional costs.
[4:32:11] We haven't Dawn's office is bidding the package out for all of the furniture, so if we have the
[4:32:17] Like the conference table or the two destations in the office. Yes, we can definitely
[4:32:25] So we can we can definitely do that we can
[4:32:31] We allocate county resources to the different building. Yes
[4:32:36] Makes me think you really want to get rid of that box
[4:32:41] Seven boxes, okay
[4:32:43] We do have a motion and a second. Any other comments or questions?
[4:32:49] All right. Hearing no other discussion. All those in favor? Say aye.
[4:32:56] Opposed?
[4:32:58] Hearing no opposition. That motion passes.
[4:33:03] We will move to item I. Budget amendment 26-95 to transfer funds from the jail.
[4:33:09] Sign on recruitment bonus. Budget to overtime. Budget for additional cost.
[4:33:14] Any questions on this item?
[4:33:21] I know, originally, with Mr. Hernandez, Sheriff, and Preview Sheriff, we had a real challenge
[4:33:28] trying to hire detention officers and trying to find unique ways in any kind of tool to
[4:33:34] attract anybody, became a conversation to have a sign on bonus because the jail and the
[4:33:42] the SLR and dire straits, right?
[4:33:44] But with the activity that's going on now,
[4:33:46] it seems like need to shift some of those resources
[4:33:48] over time to be able to compensate current staff
[4:33:52] and kind of refocus instead of trying to attract.
[4:33:55] It's, let's pay the people we have
[4:33:56] because they need to work more hours, correct?
[4:33:59] Okay.
[4:34:01] Any questions or comments on that?
[4:34:06] Is there a motion?
[4:34:10] I still have a little.
[4:34:12] Second.
[4:34:12] Do you have a motion and a second to approve?
[4:34:16] Budget amendment 26-95, action item I, any other discussion?
[4:34:25] All right, having no other discussion, all those in favor say aye.
[4:34:28] Aye.
[4:34:29] Any opposed?
[4:34:31] Hearing no opposition, that motion passes.
[4:34:34] And we'll move to item J, budget amendment 26-96 to transfer funds from elections, hourly
[4:34:40] the employees and election equipment for additional early voting clerks, temporary part time and election judges and clerk expenses.
[4:34:50] Is Miss Kio online still?
[4:34:53] Yes sir, just unmuted.
[4:34:56] Okay, can you hear us?
[4:35:08] Ms.
[4:35:13] Kiel, can you hear us? Ms. Kiel, can you hear us? Hello?
[4:35:24] Maybe on the phone or something,
[4:35:29] I will talk briefly for just a second.
[4:35:34] Let me if somebody wouldn't mind texting her please.
[4:35:38] I know what currently there's a vacancy within the elections administrator position.
[4:35:42] We had a new EA that came in that was operating off of a prior director's budget.
[4:35:48] Historically the elections budget will see saw a little bit because one year you'll have a presidential election
[4:35:55] which is very, very busy with a lot of expense for not only ballots and over time,
[4:36:00] but also election and early voting clerks and equipment and all those things.
[4:36:04] Then when you typically go to more primary or local races,
[4:36:07] it's still very busy, but it's much different than that presidential.
[4:36:11] So the budget goes up and down.
[4:36:13] I think with Ms. Keele being more involved in the elections now with a big election coming up,
[4:36:19] Trying to get staff ready. This is trying to re-allocate some of the funds that are within the budget towards needed just to be able to handle the upcoming elections.
[4:36:32] I think that's a fair description of what's going on.
[4:36:40] Okay. Can you unmute Ms.
[4:36:46] Kiel? Can you hear us?
[4:36:48] Hang on a second. Sorry.
[4:36:54] I can hear you. Can you hear me?
[4:36:56] Yes, ma'am. We can hear you.
[4:36:57] Okay. We're on the budget amendment for elections moving from the hourly
[4:37:02] employees election equipment to the early voting clerks temporary part time
[4:37:06] and election judges. Yes sir. We are out of money and we have to have people come
[4:37:13] in and test machines prior to October 1 because the ballots have to go out I
[4:37:18] believe on September 15th and we need money to pay people to do that or
[4:37:27] we
[4:37:27] you won't have an election.
[4:37:32] And you're confident in moving it from those lines
[4:37:34] and you feel like even if it's moved, it'll,
[4:37:37] it's not gonna affect anything else negatively.
[4:37:40] I am not confident.
[4:37:42] I requested Roxanne and Chris to look
[4:37:46] and that was the suggestion given to me.
[4:37:51] Okay, so no, I'm not confident about anything out there.
[4:37:54] We're trying to, trying to become more confident.
[4:37:58] I did contact Missy and had her come out today and that's who I was just
[4:38:02] visiting with and we might look at some help out here.
[4:38:08] And I should have reached here.
[4:38:11] Three sets.
[4:38:12] We're doing everything we can to make it happen.
[4:38:15] Three sets, I should have thought a little further ahead when I asked that question.
[4:38:19] I apologize, but on the hourly employees because of the vacancies I know the
[4:38:24] money's good there on the election equipment.
[4:38:26] You and I previously talked about the potential desertification of only a few curbside units but there wasn't clear direction on that we had left election equipment in with the new elections administrator coming in not knowing if we were going to need those funds.
[4:38:43] So I think we're safe in that and I think everybody hears you that we need their early voting clerks temporary part time in the judges to come in test equipment and be able to run the upcoming elections.
[4:38:53] So all right, the equipment that was going to be decommissioned has been extended to be used
[4:39:01] to November. So it will be needed next year. And I don't know if you and Chris discuss that
[4:39:09] in budget. I have no idea but they will have something we'll have to be done for next year.
[4:39:15] We did talk about that but I think we were also uncertain on what was going to be decommissioned
[4:39:22] and when, what that looked like,
[4:39:24] there were also talks and interests by certain people
[4:39:27] wanting to switch all election equipment altogether
[4:39:30] at one time, which is a couple of few million dollars
[4:39:33] that we didn't have in those conversations.
[4:39:36] So I believe there's additional funds
[4:39:38] in a smaller amount for some election equipment,
[4:39:40] but not to replace the whole system.
[4:39:43] Right, I totally agree with you.
[4:39:44] Okay.
[4:39:47] That would be a long-term thing.
[4:39:49] Right.
[4:39:53] Any other questions?
[4:39:57] Is there a motion?
[4:39:58] Yes, move to approve.
[4:40:14] Second, we do have a motion and a second on action item j, budget amendment 26-96, any other comments or questions? One question, when will we get an idea of how much it's going to cost us for this new equipment?
[4:40:28] Talk about the entirety of replacing all election equipment, ones that are out there do
[4:40:33] we have to.
[4:40:34] Tracy, do you have any quotes or estimates on the curbside or polling unit?
[4:40:42] I do not at this time and I was just thankful that they extended the time through November
[4:40:47] to allow us to have that, because we were looking at purchasing.
[4:40:52] This is what we were looking at purchasing.
[4:40:54] So, instead of purchasing new equipment, we were looking at taking the voting, the express
[4:41:02] vote machines that we have and being able to run those out to curbside, but we needed
[4:41:08] what we needed was carts to transport them.
[4:41:13] And so, we were looking at purchasing carts to carry those very large machines that we
[4:41:20] all vote on out to occur. And I did not feel like it was in our best interest to purchase
[4:41:30] carts and spend money for something that if the company is decommissioning these machines,
[4:41:36] are they coming out with new machines? And I don't have an answer to that question yet.
[4:41:41] that I still got questions out to that company.
[4:41:47] I'm hearing that they need to and they want to,
[4:41:52] they just don't have them right yet.
[4:41:53] Which is why I guess that it was left,
[4:41:57] they're extended to go through November.
[4:42:00] Maybe they're still trying together new equipment
[4:42:04] to get through until it's done, right?
[4:42:08] And so that makes sense, I'm sorry.
[4:42:09] After the 26th election, November, our next major one will be in 28, correct?
[4:42:19] I don't know. I can't answer that question.
[4:42:22] Because you have entities that have... I mean, we may have a runoff in November,
[4:42:27] so then that's going to run into January.
[4:42:30] We have special elections, other entities call special elections all the time.
[4:42:36] We had nine elections from December to June of last year, and from December of 25 to June 26, there were nine elections that were held.
[4:42:51] So I just not knowledgeable enough to tell you the answer.
[4:42:56] No, that's a good point, though. I was explaining a little bit before you got on about historically with elections.
[4:43:01] budget had ceased out a little bit based on presidential and gubernatorial
[4:43:05] races and elections but you are correct. One thing we have seen also over the last
[4:43:10] couple years is more additional activity for city elections, for
[4:43:15] primaries, for small local elections, for bonds, for schools. So like she said
[4:43:21] instead of having one big election, one smaller it has been active across the board
[4:43:25] also. We may have a big one on the Justice Center.
[4:43:34] Any other comments, questions?
[4:43:39] I would do have a motion and a second on agenda item J, the budget amendment number 26-96.
[4:43:46] Hearing no other discussion, all those in favor say aye.
[4:43:49] Aye.
[4:43:50] Opposed, same time?
[4:43:52] Hearing no opposition, that motion passes.
[4:43:55] Move to action item K, the capital project fund bill list.
[4:43:59] Move
[4:44:02] to approve capital project fund bill list.
[4:44:05] second. Second. Do you have a motion and a second to approve agenda item K? Any
[4:44:11] other discussion? No, sir. Hearing no other comments or questions, all those in
[4:44:18] favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions?
[4:44:22] Yes, sir. Motion does pass four yays, zero nays, and one abstinence in
[4:44:27] commission around it.
[4:44:35] All right, we'll move to agenda item L, the outcome of the
[4:44:38] salary grievance committee public hearing on the recommendation to the
[4:44:41] Commissioner's Court regarding this year, 2027 salary and personal expenses for the following elected county and
[4:44:47] precinct officers, one, John Terry, Justice of the Peace precinct, three, two, Teresa Keele, county clerk, and three, James
[4:44:55] Sprinter Constable Precinct 1.
[4:44:58] I believe you have
[4:45:00] We have the orders and recommendations in front of you, commissioners on the individual outcomes of the grievance hearing. We did hold the salary grievance committee meeting in this room yesterday at nine o'clock. If you remember, we chose originally to create, create the salary grievance committee from the list of grand jurors. We selected nine members in a raffle and additional four alternates in that same raffle.
[4:45:29] to round out that board or that committee.
[4:45:33] There were a few conflicts, one in school,
[4:45:36] so we had individuals that could not show up yesterday,
[4:45:39] did not respond to the summons.
[4:45:42] I said that wrong, they were unable to come.
[4:45:46] They did respond to the summons by stating
[4:45:48] that they were unable to show up for valid reasons.
[4:45:52] So we had eight members that showed up
[4:45:54] for the salary grievance committee
[4:45:56] and went through the individual items.
[4:45:58] Why that number is important is in the local government code that lays out the structure
[4:46:04] and the authority of the salary grievance committee is if all nine members of that grievance
[4:46:10] committee approve a change then commissioner's court shall make that change in the budget.
[4:46:16] In that section local government code if six to eight members of that grievance committee
[4:46:21] approve a recommendation to change then commissioner's court shall reconsider that
[4:46:28] recommendation in this setting. If you look at the votes in favor and against on each
[4:46:36] of these items, the three items respectively had a 6-to-2 vote, 7-to-1 vote, and an 8-0
[4:46:42] vote. So by statute, we really need to look at each one of these individually and reconsider
[4:46:49] the recommendation of the salary grievance, the pay for these individuals, and then make
[4:46:53] a determination if we're going to go with that recommendation that change keep things the same
[4:47:00] but again based on local government code we do have to reconsider these.
[4:47:06] Which is I put in front of everybody. The disease transport and autopsies called for
[4:47:13] for the entire year from 25 to 26.
[4:47:17] JP1 had 12, JP2, 14, JP3, 11, JP4, 18,
[4:47:24] and autopsy is called four, with JP1, 8,
[4:47:27] JP2, 7, JP3, 4, and JP4, 7.
[4:47:32] And it's been brought to my attention
[4:47:33] that they don't have grunt under the autopsy.
[4:47:36] And more importantly, Sasha, if you now call
[4:47:37] and just ask them over the phone.
[4:47:40] Yeah, autopsy is in question.
[4:47:42] In question.
[4:47:42] We
[4:47:47] want to take these I mean one at a time. I know you started on the JP, but yes, first on list was John Terry justice to the piece precinct three.
[4:48:00] His current pay is based out of $88,400. He requested a 3% cost of living which equates to $2,652 for a request of $91,052.
[4:48:13] dollars, but when you add in the longevity auto allowance cell phone, the current pay
[4:48:20] is $96,260, and the recommended change was to make that total $97,972. Basically equating
[4:48:32] to the 3% increase in the base pay.
[4:48:39] Are the other 3JPs getting the same?
[4:48:42] Because we're getting a phone call right after this.
[4:48:45] So that is a good point about this process where there's a time requirement for a Commissioner's
[4:48:52] Court to post public notice to individual and citizens in the county of what elected officials
[4:48:58] are going to be compensated and pay, allowances, and any compensation.
[4:49:04] For these individuals that filed agreements, they've gone through a process to be reconsidered
[4:49:08] for any other elected officials that did not file agreements.
[4:49:12] We are unable to consider a change because the posting and publication has already taken place
[4:49:17] and we're about to consider adopting a tax rate and setting them and adopting a budget here in just a little bit.
[4:49:24] So to your point that is part of the challenge with even a recommendation from the salary grievance committee is with one JP, one constable in the county clerk there.
[4:49:36] We create a situation there where you're going to have elected officials compensated differently based on the events that have taken place if you will.
[4:49:44] Right
[4:49:52] and then going forward if they if this is approved and they're always ahead of the game
[4:49:56] based on historical
[4:50:04] And there was a unique conversation and dynamic that went on also at the initial budget, right? Everybody's reeling and trying to find a solution, additional funding, all of those things. And in that conversation on the day, we talked about elected official salary and compensation. Some elected officials are trying to make it a priority to get, or get county employees a color or cost of living.
[4:50:31] And with that, that went on, there was a decision that was made to not focus on the elected officials.
[4:50:38] Because I think everybody was trying to get the focus addressed on getting the employees a cost of living.
[4:50:46] Right, wrong and different, I don't know if others have reflected on that decision, thought if they would do the same thing if we went back and revisited that.
[4:50:54] but again because of timing it's a challenge today. Now the discussion in
[4:50:59] front of us is do we accept the recommendation of salary agreements or do we
[4:51:03] not change it leaving these three elected officials more consistent with
[4:51:08] what the rest of the elected official pool is receiving which is no
[4:51:12] cola and no additional longevity.
[4:51:16] Two things really quick. One, Judge Terry wanted
[4:51:20] the audience in the court to know that he was unable to be here due to a
[4:51:24] Dr. Appointment to please correct me if I'm wrong but I believe Constable
[4:51:32] Springer indicated to this committee he did not want an additional raise and
[4:51:38] they did not give him anything additional. I think he's where he are. He thought
[4:51:44] it would be best if we gave he just threw a number out everybody 60,000 and
[4:51:49] lower gave them the increase. No, I'm talking about this grievance committee
[4:51:53] that's what he said during the grievance committee.
[4:51:56] Well, to your point, Commissioner, technically they voted,
[4:51:59] but his salary did not change.
[4:52:02] Right, they did, they voted to not make a change.
[4:52:04] Right, right, right.
[4:52:05] They did, I'm sorry to interrupt.
[4:52:06] Yeah.
[4:52:07] He said that his indication was that it was not necessary,
[4:52:11] he had other concerns.
[4:52:13] Nonetheless, they made a motion to increase his salary to 89.340.
[4:52:25] So the motion and the action still was to increase his pay even though he said that wasn't the most important to him.
[4:52:32] So this
[4:52:37] was based on 3% longevity or cola and what mainly the salary portion which were told was and they weren't all exactly considered the same.
[4:52:49] There were different decisions made for the three that are in front of us.
[4:52:54] It makes you an iteration.
[4:53:04] Any thoughts, commissioners on how you would like to handle this?
[4:53:19] I know it's a difficult conversation, like a lot of the discussion and decisions we have to make today.
[4:53:27] I know I voted a certain way and voiced my concern just to try to keep consistent pay increase for elected officials.
[4:53:35] just like county employees but again it's been a challenging and unique year but I
[4:53:42] think we really just need to get down to what we're not talking about the
[4:53:45] individual person's ability to do their job now what's going on I think we have
[4:53:51] a tremendous amount of really really good people that care deeply in our county I
[4:53:55] think it really gets down to a discussion of do we change these based on the
[4:54:00] recommendation of the grievance committee or do we keep them consistent in the way
[4:54:04] that other elected officials in the county are being compensated this year.
[4:54:08] After a conversation, both with Judge Terry and Constable Springer, after the grievance
[4:54:15] committee meetings, they both did indicate to me that it was more of the process that they
[4:54:23] disagreed with and not that either one of them wanted more money for themselves.
[4:54:27] They both wanted me to indicate to the court that they do not need this court to vote
[4:54:32] either one of them in for more money, but that they did not like that the elected officials
[4:54:37] overall did not want the excuse me did not receive the call as same as everyone else.
[4:54:44] So I think that it is both of their desires as indicated to me within the last 24 hours
[4:54:50] that they do not care for the court to vote in the additional increase for themselves.
[4:54:55] they just didn't find it to be fair the way the process continued.
[4:55:04] So do you want to do a cola for everybody and reinstall the longevity is normal and then a thousand dollars to the hourly people? I'm just I'm just relaying the message that I'm just serious. We don't do anything or we do something. Well, I don't. I don't think I understand a question. Can you? Well, you said they didn't want the raise, but yet the committee voted on a raise. Right. Yes, I understand. So we have to either say we go along with it.
[4:55:34] the committee, or we don't go with committee, or we go ahead and do everybody just to fix their way.
[4:55:41] 3% cola, the reinstalled longevity way is supposed to be.
[4:55:45] Is that what you're looking for? No, no. I it's my understanding that we can't make any adjustments to any elected officials
[4:55:53] outside of those that file these grievances. Is that correct? I mean, Mr. Ties,
[4:55:59] because Miss Klein, when I make the statement about not having enough time to repost salaries
[4:56:05] for elected officials, followed the required process to then consider all the other
[4:56:11] electeds that didn't go through the grievance process.
[4:56:13] Correct.
[4:56:14] As we stand right now, you're sealing on all of the elected officials except for these
[4:56:21] three, what's on that spreadsheet that was passed.
[4:56:24] The recommendation by the committee has become your new ceiling on or has become the new option for these however you must consider this recommendation at this court hearing, however, it is still within the discretion of the court because it was not a nine, no we're not nine members who voted unanimously on any one item.
[4:56:50] My
[4:56:58] question about this is I'm inclined to agree with the committee because as I said yesterday to them this is a process and the process was followed but my question is okay you give this increase to a certain elected official and I did question that my
[4:57:27] my mind right away what do you do with the rest but the other thing is let's take the
[4:57:33] justice of the peace free sink three if we if we grant this and he's no longer in
[4:57:42] that office does it go back to what everybody else is getting or does it set it for that
[4:57:50] office am I am I making sense what I'm saying my understanding of the statute reading it
[4:57:56] is that it applies to the office and not the person,
[4:57:59] so I think that the budget line would remain consistent,
[4:58:01] depending on regardless of who the person is in the chair.
[4:58:05] Well, the number show that precinct three is, I guess,
[4:58:10] so when it comes to workload, they're at the bottom of it.
[4:58:14] Everybody else has more going through
[4:58:16] their office than precinct three,
[4:58:18] simply because it's been compressed so much,
[4:58:22] it's just a city of shirts and an unfortunate sub-block.
[4:58:24] Well, they don't have, I guess, the issues that the one, two, and four have.
[4:58:35] And to your point, Commissioner German, Commissioner's Court has to set the salaries for elected officials every year.
[4:58:42] It's going to be a process that has to be revisited no matter what's going on.
[4:58:45] So, if pretty thing three wasn't there next year, you could put it back to what all others are getting.
[4:58:52] We can put it back any year to anything.
[4:58:55] this is just for the remainder, this is for this one going forward for this fiscal year.
[4:59:02] I'm inclined to not support any of these.
[4:59:06] I think that it would be, let me say this way, the intent of the commissioners court and
[4:59:12] making the decision to not give the elected officials the extra-cola was so that we could
[4:59:17] have more to either make the tax rate better for the public or to support the employees.
[4:59:26] and I think in that spirit, I will continue with that.
[4:59:28] I think it helps that at least two of the three
[4:59:30] have said that they do not want the raise,
[4:59:32] that they just disagree with the process.
[4:59:35] I hear them. I hear what they've said.
[4:59:37] I understand that they, you know,
[4:59:40] made a stand for accountability.
[4:59:41] I appreciate them doing that.
[4:59:43] I also appreciate the Grievance Committee.
[4:59:45] I
[4:59:48] appreciate the Grievance Committee for being present.
[4:59:51] However, I think that this was a very complicated budget year
[4:59:54] and we were really unable, you know, within one session or even one day to.
[5:00:00] Explain it in the complexities of what we are having to go through for this. So I'm inclined not to support any of it, although I really appreciate them, but we didn't have enough show up to make it mandatory. I'm a court. My thought is that we don't approve these.
[5:00:16] What was your question? My question is if we just do longevity that doesn't affect the salaries, correct?
[5:00:25] There's longevity is something they have earned over the years.
[5:00:30] It would not affect the salary, it affects the compensation, but not actually their salary.
[5:00:35] All right, the salary stays the same.
[5:00:37] The longevity that we're looking at on these pages is reflective of their years of service at $5 per month.
[5:00:43] There's no additional longevity in for these elected officials, just like the other elected officials,
[5:00:49] and the county employees at the moment.
[5:00:53] I was just looking for the hourly employees.
[5:00:58] I guess we'll go try to figure it out.
[5:01:07] I am going to move to deny the outcome of the salary agreements committee public hearing in the recommendation of the commissioners court regarding fiscal year 2027 salary and personal expenses for the following elected county and precinct officers.
[5:01:18] One, John Terry, just as the piece precinct three, two, three, secure, county clerk and three, James Bringer, Constable, precinct one.
[5:01:24] Second.
[5:01:25] Do have a motion and a second to deny the outcome and or recommendations of the salary
[5:01:30] cleavants committee on the listed elected officials.
[5:01:35] Any other comments or questions?
[5:01:41] Hearing no other discussion, all those in favor say aye.
[5:01:44] Aye.
[5:01:45] Opposed?
[5:01:46] Opposed.
[5:01:46] Motion does pass four yeas one nay.
[5:01:54] All right.
[5:01:54] We'll move to item in, set salaries, expenses and allowances of elected county and precinct
[5:01:59] officers for fiscal year 2026, 2027 budget.
[5:02:05] As we've discussed and just because of the
[5:02:08] action that was just taken, the salaries would be set at the published amounts that were
[5:02:15] already in the newspaper and what we have seen previously.
[5:02:25] Okay, move to approve action item in, setting the salaries, expenses and allowances of elected
[5:02:29] the county in precinct officers at the fiscal year 2026, 2027 budget.
[5:02:34] Sorry.
[5:02:36] Do you have a motion and a second on action item M to set the salaries, expenses, and
[5:02:41] allowances of elected county in precinct officers at the fiscal year 2026, 2027 budget?
[5:02:47] Any other comments or questions?
[5:02:53] Right, hearing no other discussion?
[5:02:54] All those in favor say aye.
[5:02:56] Aye.
[5:02:57] Opposed?
[5:02:58] Hearing no opposition, that motion passes.
[5:03:04] and we will move to item in, adopt the Glowloop County budget for fiscal year 2026, 2027, or FY27.
[5:03:15] I know we had a long public hearing this morning, heard a lot of feedback and comments from citizens, had some really good discussion.
[5:03:24] Thank you everybody for that.
[5:03:26] I know we went through a number of individual items that we probably are going to be revisiting
[5:03:33] through part of this discussion, but just wanted to ask the court where would you like to start?
[5:03:39] Like to talk about reserves, spending, or not spending funds out of there. I think a big part of
[5:03:47] that conversation ends up being determined and or dictated by the court's willingness to spend
[5:03:56] spending those funds. Unless we want to go into the budget to look at reducing or moving money around
[5:04:01] that's already there if it's not the reserves.
[5:04:08] It's been a long day, right?
[5:04:10] So lots of discussion.
[5:04:13] And this is totally meant to be funny,
[5:04:15] because we need to laugh right now.
[5:04:17] When Commissioner Obstetta, I'm like, OK,
[5:04:19] let's get this done before she gets back.
[5:04:22] Totally trying to be funny, because we need to laugh today.
[5:04:28] So again, going back to the discussions this morning
[5:04:31] over the last, what seems like a decade now.
[5:04:36] I get it. We have emergent needs. We have
[5:04:41] population growth, demands, law enforcement, fire and rescue. Every department we have,
[5:04:50] right? 42 departments. But the emergent need is always man with us employees. I had mentioned
[5:04:58] and a 4% initial
[5:05:01] I think we all agreed on that. Secondly, going past that with the current tax rate ceiling, we have, what are we going to do with what we need to do extra? I don't like going into reserves. Everybody knows that. But I'm willing to throw around the idea of that $1 million land purchase. What can we get out of it? Essential needs.
[5:05:27] I know typically and Judge Kirkman from wrong misclined a deputy total cost per deputy is around a quarter of a million dollars.
[5:05:37] We didn't run the details last year. The number was right at $218,000 for salary, for equipment, for benefits, for vehicle, for everything.
[5:05:49] It was right under 218,000, I think with the COLA and stuff, you probably in the $225,000 of range.
[5:05:59] So, just get an ID from 900,000 for four.
[5:06:05] I know a lot of agencies that are neighboring when you talk to them on their numbers.
[5:06:10] The round number you use is a million for four.
[5:06:13] Correct.
[5:06:14] That's right.
[5:06:15] So I'm not saying that's what the main is for, but I'm just trying to throw our number
[5:06:18] of what we have to deal with realistically, it's not just the salary, it's the benefits,
[5:06:24] the equipment in this case, everything involved.
[5:06:28] That's why I always asked about space and computers and you know you get MIS involved, that's
[5:06:33] a whole other budgetary process.
[5:06:35] So that's the challenge we face, hopefully we can settle this in short order, but I'm
[5:06:41] willing to go that little bit to see where we are.
[5:06:44] But again, it's a matter of deciding who gets what, like I've always said, whether you go one million or ten million.
[5:06:50] How is that allocated? So, if we do, you know, two firemen, two deputies to, you know, again, I'm willing to open up that discussion if you all want to do that, but
[5:07:09] cricket's any thoughts?
[5:07:14] to the discussion that we were having at length that Commissioner ought was discussing
[5:07:24] like some of the positions who had Dan Yella.
[5:07:30] We did mention but we didn't put a figure on I'd like to put a figure on the BFD's of
[5:07:39] 350,000 last year was 500,000.
[5:07:47] I don't have the exact math, but the, but what
[5:07:51] Commissioner ought was talking about, and the BFDs all that lumped together, you
[5:07:59] could probably do that for, I'm gonna say six to 700,000. I'm not inclined to use
[5:08:08] reserves for a large number reserves for to Commissioner Woolberg's point next year
[5:08:20] you got to do it again. But I think we could go support Commissioner Angle Key. I think
[5:08:27] we could go somewhere a million and a half something like that and be comfortable not
[5:08:34] set us up for a problem next year and and and we could proceed forward. It
[5:08:41] would be a good compromise for all the stuff that's been going on and we could
[5:08:48] proceed forward. You've seen funds some people in different departments like the
[5:08:56] JT's, the clips off. Let's let fire. Okay. You were just trying to listen, right?
[5:09:02] Yeah, I just couldn't hear. Just trying to fund one or two people in every department because
[5:09:08] The county attorney needs people the sheriff needs people
[5:09:12] Fire said they need people
[5:09:14] Everybody the clerks need people right?
[5:09:18] Slaughter is flying
[5:09:21] You need people always
[5:09:24] She didn't have a position or a class. Yeah, she's like don't throw me in there. Yeah
[5:09:30] I will still back to this, I'm sorry to interrupt.
[5:09:33] I will go back to this and it's not a great deal of money.
[5:09:38] But in the Marion building, we really need,
[5:09:46] we're going to open the building and we can't put a sign
[5:09:49] up that says, well, we couldn't fund the position.
[5:09:53] So it's closed for a day or two out of the week.
[5:09:56] You know we can't do that and we're not talking about
[5:10:00] We've got a great deal of money here. So I'd be in support of that. So you're in support of giving Judge Hunter a full-time person. From part time. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
[5:10:18] Because their workload has increased.
[5:10:31] So you'll correct me if I'm wrong. It seems like there may be a consensus or at least the start of a direction to spend some additional funds.
[5:10:41] Either out of, I mean really what it comes down to remember we talked about budgeting
[5:10:46] and those of tax rate options where if there was a shortfall, there was a certain amount
[5:10:50] of money that goes unspent within departments that would kind of cover some of those funds.
[5:10:55] I think that's still true but you're trying to anticipate what those unspent funds look
[5:11:01] like based on past years and just want to make everybody think for a sec that it may be
[5:11:06] a little bit different and tighter moving forward because we've tried to shift some expenses
[5:11:10] and maybe push the limits a little more than normal if you will because it's so tight.
[5:11:15] That means trying to push revenue projections a little bit, trying to utilize those funds
[5:11:23] in a more efficient or effective way.
[5:11:27] I still believe that there will be some unspent funds because it's almost impossible for every
[5:11:32] department spend 100% of their dollars. What does that number? I think Chris and I could probably
[5:11:37] talk for a long time and look at a number of different things. Think of million is very, very safe
[5:11:43] to say. A million and a half is probably closer to what is an accurate number and you start getting
[5:11:50] into a $2 million conversation. I think you're spending money you don't have is what it gets down to.
[5:11:56] you, but also some of those normal expenses that would typically be in a department supported
[5:12:03] by the tax rate have already been pulled out and moved to reserves. So I'm just saying
[5:12:09] all this everybody knows all the details.
[5:12:14] We're spending more than what we're putting
[5:12:17] in to reserves and that wasn't always the case. We grew reserves over time because we had
[5:12:22] a number of beneficial funding things that happen, and I won't go through all of them,
[5:12:28] but it took a long time to get to that point.
[5:12:31] I'm not saying that we can't spend funds out of reserves.
[5:12:35] I just want everybody to be aware moving forward.
[5:12:38] Your spending is ramping up in the amount of money moving into fund balance.
[5:12:41] It's going to be a reducing year over year, unless, like Commissioner Wolfton said,
[5:12:45] a very, very big tax changing event occurs.
[5:12:49] first.
[5:12:52] Judge, I'm sorry to interrupt. No, you're fine. Good. You did the budget. You're
[5:13:00] the budget officer. So like I'm looking at one of our worksheets from the budget workshop.
[5:13:07] Yes. If you look at, you know, we're trying not to dictate next year's budget with what
[5:13:14] we do now. Is this what you were looking at? I'm looking at this one. Okay, but the bottom.
[5:13:20] Okay, that's looking at what part of what you projected like I'm looking at
[5:13:30] 365 labs okay that's a maintenance and licensing licensing so we'll have to
[5:13:38] pay that again when you made the budget what part of like this stuff right here
[5:13:45] these big items, would we not do again? Do you know of any item? Let me get to the
[5:13:52] worksheet you're looking at and I can...
[5:13:59] There was some for security, there was some
[5:14:04] items of security of the building, so I'm trying to keep us from backing ourselves in a corner
[5:14:13] by looking at what we may not have to spend next year again. Am I making sense what
[5:14:21] So the debt service is restructured and you'll have that cost built in now supported by the INS rate health insurance.
[5:14:29] We had a long workshop on that in the presentation.
[5:14:33] Those costs are going to be there.
[5:14:34] We backed off the 15% projected increase and put 8% knowing that if cost go over that 8% increase.
[5:14:42] We have about $6 million on our health fund reserves, which are separate.
[5:14:47] it's a completely separate account to cover our health insurance costs for county employees,
[5:14:51] but I think we're going to continue to see increases year-over-year of more than 5 and 10%.
[5:14:58] It's going to be in that 10 to 12.
[5:15:00] 15% increase range. That's at least what the market keeps telling us. 365 labs will be ongoing and
[5:15:06] should be an MIS under software maintenance, not under capital projects. The firefighter
[5:15:12] staggered positions will be fully funded and supported by the tax rate. A appraisal district
[5:15:19] is a budget that changes based on the decision that board makes. A big part of the increase
[5:15:25] this year was because the additional debt service when they brought Mary B.
[5:15:29] Erskine to renovate that for a new facility but also the raises they gave
[5:15:34] appraisal district employees and then we had a built in 15% contract that
[5:15:39] increase for our EMS as chief talked about this morning. That increase will be
[5:15:46] there again and again and even bigger conversations need to be had for
[5:15:51] or widespread county expansion of EMS services
[5:15:54] to cover a growing population.
[5:15:56] So that numbers likely to,
[5:15:58] that's county you're starting conversation right now
[5:16:01] for next year is another 15%
[5:16:03] and probably have to have a lot bigger
[5:16:05] and more expensive conversations
[5:16:07] to effectively have EMS coverage for the county.
[5:16:11] Vehicles are always one of those things,
[5:16:13] I don't know if it's still here,
[5:16:16] but I know the sheriff spent a lot of time with him.
[5:16:19] He was extremely helpful to sit with him
[5:16:21] for a couple hours to talk through options that's still something the county should look at
[5:16:27] and try to weigh against purchase, but as I mentioned in the previous workshop we put
[5:16:32] that money in for vehicles because you know you're going to have a vehicle, a portion of
[5:16:36] a fleet that has to be replaced no matter what every year whether you purchase or lease.
[5:16:41] And even at the very worst scenario if you have the funds in there for purchase and decide
[5:16:47] the lease and there's a savings, then you have some additional available funds.
[5:16:52] I just couldn't add to your point, Judge, because of the sake of this conversation.
[5:16:57] We don't plan on spending that money on the vehicles.
[5:16:59] We're going to hold it off until the court in January and rediscover the leasing
[5:17:03] program. Captain Spragals telling me
[5:17:04] that we'll spend about a fifth of what we budgeted for.
[5:17:08] So we just don't plan on buying the vehicles.
[5:17:11] But, Sheriff, what if you run into an issue? Because it has to be bid
[5:17:14] and it has to be procured correctly, right?
[5:17:17] And I know there's strong opinions
[5:17:19] of how that looks and what that should,
[5:17:21] but what if things don't work out as planned
[5:17:23] based on the conversations today next year?
[5:17:27] You run into an issue where you could be
[5:17:30] in a vulnerable situation of having to extend
[5:17:33] vehicle use past what the plan is.
[5:17:37] I don't think so.
[5:17:38] I think we'll be able to maintain.
[5:17:40] I think we can save that money later.
[5:17:44] I didn't have to tell you that.
[5:17:47] I'm just telling you for the sake of this conversation,
[5:17:49] you're trying to find places to pinch money.
[5:17:52] So I was just going to hold on to that,
[5:17:55] but if you're trying to see where you can help our employees.
[5:17:58] So I don't know how you can use that money,
[5:18:00] but I'm hoping that we're not going to have to even spend all that.
[5:18:04] Now, that don't mean over a period of next five years,
[5:18:06] or whatever the contract is,
[5:18:07] that we're not going to spend some of that money in a leasing contract.
[5:18:11] But in that first year his exact words to me where we will spend a fifth of what we budgeted for this
[5:18:17] Right, it's not the initial and what I've learned from him is the the the overall
[5:18:22] Benefit of the leasing through his experience is
[5:18:26] Being able to sell a vehicle with more usable life to a
[5:18:31] Captured or a interested market right and be able to get a higher value for that vehicle versus just selling it as a a beat up
[5:18:38] Use Tahoe in a county auction
[5:18:41] The only concern I have, and again won't be around to see it, is the initial cost is one fifth,
[5:18:46] but by the time you get to the fifth year of leasing, you're spending more on leasing than you are
[5:18:50] purchasing. And if you don't have that captured audience who's interested the same way, like the
[5:18:55] historically have, and you don't get that return, you're financing through an enterprise or
[5:19:01] a leasing company, the money that you already had to purchase on. And then if you run into an issue
[5:19:07] where you want to get out of a leasing program, it's 10 years, basically five years to get
[5:19:11] into the leasing, and five years to get out if you have a program that does it once every
[5:19:16] five years. So that was kind of a conversation we had going. It's very attractive initially,
[5:19:22] but if you run into a longer term program that doesn't work out quite that way, does it become
[5:19:26] more expensive, and the answer is it could be. So it's always just curious if y'all have
[5:19:32] talked about that talk through those things. Yeah, we'll talk about it when
[5:19:39] somebody else is here. Yeah, no problem. I just offering that. So we're not
[5:19:44] planning on spending that money. Thank you.
[5:19:55] Commissioner, is anything else you
[5:19:56] want to talk about on the on the list here?
[5:20:00] This is the very department's longevity $2,000 base. That was from the initial budget recommendation. It's back in size. This is good. No, this is not an update for now. This is revisiting the word shop we had. That's just the amount of what it cost in to include that. The vehicle equipment, again, if don't need the vehicles, don't need the equipment.
[5:20:29] and Joe Kitchenforming was just a project that was needed to re-recover.
[5:20:36] I looked at everybody's budget and I'm estimating, you know,
[5:20:40] not knowing what's going to happen the next 30 days.
[5:20:42] We should get some 1.5, 1.6 back.
[5:20:45] I could be wrong.
[5:20:47] I'll sit down with Chris, but at that point you can take care of a longevity of 1.3.
[5:20:53] Never even touch the reserve.
[5:20:55] what
[5:21:02] if we did a thousand each for longevity that cuts it in half right 700 right
[5:21:13] is that palatable and then we have 700 for other things is that in close to
[5:21:18] over the 30% or it's an addition to right correct okay client have you run
[5:21:26] numbers this what approximately what we're going to be getting back from the the
[5:21:30] budget.
[5:21:33] I was
[5:21:40] looking at it. Yeah, we may still be here tomorrow, you know. That's true.
[5:21:48] Trying
[5:21:54] to make it fun.
[5:22:04] So I think all you can see we're trying. Okay, so but the challenge
[5:22:08] again is what positions, if we do positions, what positions? I'm liking the conversation
[5:22:15] of where I was 3% plus the 1000 base. I think that helps everyone.
[5:22:23] We had some part-time discussions
[5:22:25] all ago with the like associate magistrate, Commissioner Trump brought up. We had some other part-time
[5:22:32] deputies the full time with those kind of discussions. But again, what do you want to do?
[5:22:49] I really wanted 2000, but you know if I don't think I'm going to get that vote so I'll at least go with 1000 to get to the people here.
[5:22:56] Yeah, 3% plus a thousand, I really like to go 2000.
[5:23:00] I think it's not, it's just $700,000 more and if we're going to get in, we're dipping in.
[5:23:06] I'm not ready to put my title in, but maybe all up to my ankle.
[5:23:10] Let me understand what you're saying.
[5:23:11] You're saying a 3% cola and a 1000 won.
[5:23:15] I'm saying 2,000 longevity. He's saying one with a three percent
[5:23:21] We are his possibility of losing people. You heard them today
[5:23:30] It's just a way of saying thank you very much for sticking with us because it's it's been a rough year and we weren't able to do as much
[5:23:38] We'd like
[5:23:40] maybe
[5:23:40] If you know the crystal ball gets a little clearer and we'll be able to figure out what's going to happen
[5:23:47] Yeah, yeah, I'm just one boat. So
[5:23:52] Hey, bye-bye. I
[5:23:54] Suggestion I would like to see the precinct for the part time going to full time to help him out and
[5:24:03] Do we have any other part time people?
[5:24:06] Yes, I'm precinct one
[5:24:09] has a clerk that is part time that they want to move to full time as well that's
[5:24:13] the JP. Yeah I'm in support of that. Constable one has a part time deputy
[5:24:19] funded that they want to move into full time. How many deaf is he have now? He has one full time
[5:24:26] one part time. So he'd have two full time. Okay that might be wrong. Two full time one part time.
[5:24:41] There's one part time that is filled, there's one part time that is not filled and they're
[5:24:46] having trouble filling it.
[5:24:47] They want to move that into a full time.
[5:24:51] Okay, so sorry, I had to read it in my head.
[5:24:54] They have two full time, one part time, another part time open, I believe.
[5:25:00] And someone correct me on that if I'm wrong. And I see, I see Nick about to text me, he's going to tell me.
[5:25:13] I got to a certain point hours today where my brain stopped working. I was going to say constable precinct one has two deputy constables and $60,000 of part time in a single line. Yes, so one of those part time is filled and funded at 30 and there's that extra 30 that is not.
[5:25:42] So would the plan be to take the one part timer and the entire 60,000 out, just adding
[5:25:50] a few thousand or leaving half of that for part time?
[5:25:53] No, so they have a person that is working part time that wants to stay part time, but
[5:25:57] they've been unable to fill the second part time, so there's been that $30,000 sitting
[5:26:01] here for this entire fiscal year, they can't get someone to accept a part time job, they've
[5:26:05] only been able to speak to people that want to work full time.
[5:26:08] But the person that is in the part that wants to stay part time, that's the part I didn't understand.
[5:26:13] Yes, I'm asking that we changed that line so you move 30,000 out and allocate that
[5:26:22] toward a full time and then fund the rest toward a full time so they can use that money to have another person.
[5:26:33] Just waiting.
[5:26:34] Any other comments on Constable Precinct 1?
[5:26:39] So what was the final thing on it?
[5:26:41] They have taking $30,000 a part-time converting it to a full-time, full-time part-time to full-time.
[5:27:01] I got a call on Harvey now.
[5:27:09] Well, that deputy constable, that we're talking about Commissioner, sorry.
[5:27:14] Yes.
[5:27:15] I know we were talking about JP1 with the clerk and JP4 but for the constable.
[5:27:18] JP4 and JP1 both have part-time clerks that they would like to make into a full-time clerk.
[5:27:24] those two part-time positions are filled and they want to convert those positions into full-time
[5:27:29] for those people. And then Constable One has an unfilled part-time, they'd like to convert into a
[5:27:36] full-time, it's not filled and that's the reason why. Okay well pretty think fours got the same
[5:27:42] same issue, they had two full two full-time and one one part-time.
[5:27:49] They'd like to make the part-time
[5:27:50] full-time also. That would be because between one and four, you're most
[5:27:56] two active customers.
[5:28:08] Mr. Pender, sorry.
[5:28:10] When I'll start talking about part-times in full-times. So currently I've got two
[5:28:14] positions in my office that are part-time. I've got a deputy fire marshal who is part-time
[5:28:18] who's funded out of the fire code. As I've heard other departments ask for additional
[5:28:23] staffing. I would like to have that part-time person full-time. Inside of my current
[5:28:28] I have proposed, I have worked the numbers where the budget does not have to increase at all.
[5:28:33] We can lose money in certain lines out of the 408 fire coat line, take the current part time line that I have, which is funded at $37,400, which is not a whole lot, but it's a good chunk of what's needed to fund that position.
[5:28:47] Judge, if you could go to the deputy farm, our position on your spreadsheet, the same is a deputy position, it's 105,964.
[5:28:55] So we have found those funds inside of our current budget.
[5:28:59] So if the court would allow it, we could fund a deputy fire marshal position out of fire
[5:29:05] code funds completely and or use the current line that's been proposed in the judges proposed
[5:29:11] budget by just taking and losing some things, you know, lose drop some radios, drop some equipment,
[5:29:17] lose some training line, and just reallocate those into those lines to make it fun for that
[5:29:22] position.
[5:29:23] In addition, I have a temporary clerks position.
[5:29:26] I'm not a temporary clerks position.
[5:29:27] I have a clerks position as part time.
[5:29:29] It's funded at whatever the part time position is
[5:29:31] for a clerk judge is at like 29,000 something like that.
[5:29:35] I did request for that position.
[5:29:35] That was a $27,900.
[5:29:38] Is that something?
[5:29:39] Correct, yes.
[5:29:40] I did ask for that position to go full time
[5:29:42] because as the emergency operations center
[5:29:43] where our house comes online,
[5:29:45] I need somebody to sit in the desk at the front
[5:29:47] for most of the time.
[5:29:48] We don't have a whole lot of staff
[5:29:49] and I asked for that position
[5:29:50] to transfer into a clerk's time full-time position. Those are the two part-time positions
[5:29:54] that I did would like to transfer over to full-time positions as the court's considering
[5:29:59] this.
[5:30:00] On their side, if they would just also consider those positions, if the court decides not to, then I completely understand, but those are something that I wanted to bring to the attention that we do need, we have to, part time staff, transition them to full time, fire code position, we can pay for that out of fire code funds, similar to what the sheriff's doing up his other lines, or we can take the money that's already been put in the proposed budget, move the money around. I can deal with Chris's office, and bottom line, the number says the same.
[5:30:29] and it's just what lines it goes into.
[5:30:32] If the court considers any additional staff
[5:30:34] with the extra money that you guys have stated before,
[5:30:37] if you look at fire department,
[5:30:39] we have to have a minimum of three people.
[5:30:41] Those positions that you pick three
[5:30:43] is gonna be up to the court,
[5:30:45] but we have three different shifts.
[5:30:46] We can't put two people on it and one shift be short.
[5:30:49] So if the court decides to do a fire position,
[5:30:51] if they decide to add those different staffing,
[5:30:53] we need three, a minimum of three.
[5:30:56] What that looks like, how this court decides that,
[5:30:58] you know, the highest paid positions will be the new captains positions.
[5:31:02] I have a proposal that if we hired a captain or lieutenant and a firefighter,
[5:31:05] that's three, it was up to about 220, $227,000.
[5:31:10] So that would be three.
[5:31:11] They don't all have to be captains.
[5:31:13] They don't all have to be lieutenants.
[5:31:14] They don't all have to be firefighters.
[5:31:16] But we need three to make it work.
[5:31:19] We can-
[5:31:19] Could there be mayor?
[5:31:22] They could.
[5:31:22] However, then we're going to fall into the same situation we did this year,
[5:31:26] We have to fund them the second year so when the judge proposed the 300,000 we have to catch it up
[5:31:32] That's an unallocated that he had stated before and that's all. Thank you
[5:31:37] Thank you
[5:31:43] One quick question. How long will that fund last? Is it the occurring regenerating every year?
[5:31:51] Believe there's over a million dollars in that fund at every commercial business that comes and pays to that fund
[5:31:56] So every development every inspection. It's it's funded currently. It's funding for positions right now
[5:32:01] And isn't it true also that you inspect and inspect and inspect?
[5:32:06] So it's not like that's a new business and you did one inspection.
[5:32:10] You're you're you're getting fees in all the time.
[5:32:14] Right.
[5:32:14] So if we have to go to a state health, like a state inspection, anything like that.
[5:32:17] There's a fee of charge.
[5:32:19] Yeah.
[5:32:19] And the inspector comes out.
[5:32:20] The fee is built into the permits on the initial building inspections.
[5:32:24] Like if I go to a gas station, we can charge them a fee for that.
[5:32:27] So I'm just curious, it's not a fee that's going to go away.
[5:32:29] You can continue funding this.
[5:32:33] Commissioner's Court gets rid of the fire code, it will always be there.
[5:32:37] I can't do that.
[5:32:39] $1
[5:32:56] million.
[5:33:14] Mr. Duggies, you've been sitting out there awfully quiet.
[5:33:22] I was trying to get the popcorn concession.
[5:33:24] Make a little bit of money.
[5:33:25] That's not going to work.
[5:33:38] Some of the taking notes is what we have come to.
[5:33:41] Some sort of consensus on.
[5:33:42] A little bit. Are we environmental health changes? Are we okay with that?
[5:33:52] I didn't know extra money changed in the-
[5:33:54] Yeah, just relocating. Okay, I've got no problem with that.
[5:33:56] I'm abolishing a position leaving money. Okay, so we have- there's one.
[5:34:02] Okay,
[5:34:03] Okay. Um, 30% cola. Right. There's two and
[5:34:14] $2,000 longevity.
[5:34:18] Um, I think we're,
[5:34:19] I mean, sneak it by grip. Possibly at one, I think we're possibly at $1,000 longevity.
[5:34:25] I just trying to sneak it by Drew.
[5:34:29] 1000.
[5:34:36] And then the part-timers, we just got straight.
[5:34:38] So there was a discussion what J.P. 4, Mary and part time to full time, is that correct?
[5:34:46] Yes.
[5:34:47] Yes.
[5:34:47] And then what about tax assessor?
[5:34:49] Was that also?
[5:34:50] J.P. 1.
[5:34:50] J.P. 4 and J.P. 1.
[5:34:52] Right.
[5:34:52] J.P. 4 and J.P. 1.
[5:34:54] Was there a tax assessor discussion like sometime yesterday, and we talked about this with
[5:34:59] part time clerk.
[5:35:00] It was the conversation that Commissioner Garman brought up about sharing the clerk between the tax assessor and JP four, but then I think we shifted into the part time to full time. And then the part time associate judge for magistrate. Yes, we did talk about that. I don't know where we I'm not sure I leaned to consensus. Yeah, we just talked about it, trying to go back through the notes myself. Are we at consensus with the JP one and JP four part time to full time though?
[5:35:29] I believe so.
[5:35:31] Constable or staff?
[5:35:34] That's JP4, part time, full time, both, just staff, yeah, then constable 1, part time
[5:35:40] or full time is a separate thing, but are we out of consensus with that?
[5:35:45] Okay, so constable 4 and 1 also part time or full time.
[5:35:52] JP4 is 2 part time to 2 full time.
[5:35:57] I don't
[5:36:14] mean to throw a wrench in the mix, but just for the magistrate position when you make that motion, if you'll title the associate judge, the court went back in January of this year and re-titled those magistrate to associate so they have the authority to magistrate felons.
[5:36:34] Are we at a consensus on that?
[5:36:36] I
[5:36:41] believe so 35,000 yes are we at a consensus on the associate judge they would
[5:36:47] magistrate an additional part time okay how about the chaplain well that was
[5:36:56] at a commissary funds right so yes the other commissary funds it's not right
[5:37:01] it's that's the sheriff's field but we still need to take action to create the
[5:37:05] position yeah I don't know okay so we have the chaplain we are at seven okay um
[5:37:25] County attorney's office fell any paralegal. I'm sorry, there's just been so many facts today, but did Mr.
[5:37:32] Wilborn say that was a
[5:37:34] four-feature fund
[5:37:36] He said he could handle it for a while for one year for one year
[5:37:40] Is
[5:37:44] that out of is that out of his
[5:37:48] Future fund. Yeah, yeah, okay. That's the one year for one. Yeah, that's fine
[5:37:57] Okay
[5:37:57] Do we want to talk about that
[5:38:00] that is something I would support but I think if we want to move toward that
[5:38:06] one direction or another it said they were fine with it really okay with that
[5:38:09] the full picture yeah the county attorney knowing that it's going to look at next
[5:38:13] year because you know he runs out of money and he needs the person so okay so what
[5:38:18] is the actual cost of it right now
[5:38:21] we have a great date is that the one you're talking about commissioner on I believe so
[5:38:29] Yes, so $25.84 an hour.
[5:38:37] Yes, that's what I'm referring to.
[5:38:40] $80,000, what a fool.
[5:38:43] Okay.
[5:38:46] And that's his forfeiture.
[5:38:49] Mm-hmm.
[5:39:02] And I hate to hurt you next year if you didn't have the money.
[5:39:08] He needs the person, so we'll just go ahead and give it to him now.
[5:39:12] And then you save his forfeiture fund.
[5:39:20] Depends on the final tally, I guess.
[5:39:22] I'm fine with that.
[5:39:50] So, Coswell Reyes couldn't be here, but he had just sent me a message relating to
[5:39:55] same situation, part-time deputy.
[5:40:00] Position.
[5:40:06] Morning to do the same consideration. Full time. So, here we go, that leap frog effect that I talked about, but it's precinct to, of course, I'm going to support that.
[5:40:19] I know the judges sitting back here thinking, here we go. One, two, and four. Part time full time, right? Correct.
[5:40:40] Okay, then we get to.
[5:40:46] I was just thinking, are we going to go through all this to get to a volunteer fire department?
[5:40:50] discussion. We can do it now. Well, I'm just trying to anticipate a way to get to three votes on
[5:40:56] a budget. Okay. I'm happy to sit with y'all for a long time and I actually think this has been
[5:41:01] really productive to just talk through all the challenges and all those things and kind of set the
[5:41:06] stage for the future. But if there's a few big hinge points that are going to divide thought
[5:41:13] processes and or votes at the end, maybe we should maybe we should have some of those discussions
[5:41:18] and then, I don't know, y'all tell me if you want to keep working through.
[5:41:21] No, I'm happy to rip that mandate right now.
[5:41:23] I don't feel comfortable voting on an increased budget unless it includes fire protection
[5:41:27] for my precinct, Commissioner Garmin, I think made it an initiative to meet in the middle
[5:41:33] at 350,000 extra if we can get a third vote to support that.
[5:41:38] I would also stand with that, is there a third vote that would foresee a budget where we
[5:41:43] can include that?
[5:41:44] And I'm going to I'm going to interject this with that 350 last year we did 500 so this would be less
[5:41:52] But but we kind of didn't have a good formula for the way we did it and so my suggestion is you take the run numbers and
[5:42:06] Let's say that that one part apartment does 20% of the runs
[5:42:12] then they get 20% of the 350,000 likewise if you have a fire department that
[5:42:19] doesn't seem to get to fires, they get nothing. Commissioner, there was a
[5:42:27] formula that funded volunteer fire departments that the volunteers helped
[5:42:31] create themselves that we augmented and adjusted based on changes over the years
[5:42:37] and then the volunteer fire departments themselves not only advocated but
[5:42:42] fought to get away from that funding and it was number of parcels, geographic
[5:42:48] area, runs, it was all a pro-rated amount, they would have benefited them as
[5:42:53] increased contracts moved on and have changed to their benefit now would have
[5:42:59] rewarded those that were more busy and would have penalized those who were less
[5:43:04] busy but separation of individual contract negotiations took place chiefs and
[5:43:11] boards argued to get away from the formula and now we're talking about going
[5:43:16] back to it and the whole thing is messy there's no good answer that addresses
[5:43:20] everything I just want to give some of that backstory that we were there and we're
[5:43:25] not doing the same thing because that's exactly what they asked for was to go away
[5:43:29] from it then I'd be on board with we allocate 350 in the budget and then we move
[5:43:34] on at another point and figure out how that allocation is going to work. Aside from their regular
[5:43:43] contracts, I can't support that because you're just doing money at a problem and you're not solving it.
[5:43:49] Commissioner, we don't have anybody else that primarily covers our areas. There has been so many
[5:43:57] fires in the last month where GCFR is tied up and that is who there's putting out people's
[5:44:02] fires and their homes and their pastures like that that isn't who precinct 24 has right now.
[5:44:07] I don't have fire protection. I have some of civilo but other than that I don't have fire
[5:44:15] protection in precinct 4. I have to have the volunteers. Did you have Mary and New Berlin
[5:44:23] and you have civilo? I know but I have to pay Mary and in New Berlin something they can't operate
[5:44:30] on nothing. So has there been a discussion commissioner about Marion or they at a point where they can
[5:44:37] do their own city funding of a fire like that. Not a fire of water and so what you're saying.
[5:44:45] So the city of Marion, do they not have the capacity with their growth to support their own fire
[5:44:53] part of the city of Maryland, just a general question.
[5:44:57] The city of the city of Maryland.
[5:45:13] It's not a huge city. And the Marian Fire Department is covering many,
[5:45:26] many, a large area.
[5:45:28] And now
[5:45:35] I'm not going to argue, I think the city's ought to be putting more into their
[5:45:39] fire departments, but the bulk of their runs are not in the city.
[5:45:45] The bulk of their runs are out in the rural areas.
[5:45:48] Just a general question.
[5:45:49] So we did the 500 last year and I had apprehensions on that just because of the management of it.
[5:45:57] So, Ms. Klein, what if we, like, what's the balance?
[5:46:02] What do we have left on that account?
[5:46:05] Because basically it's set aside as part of the general reserve fund that you're using
[5:46:10] as needed.
[5:46:10] Correct?
[5:46:11] Is that how that's set up?
[5:46:15] So my take on that is, let's not set an amount that they come to court like the normal
[5:46:21] protocol is they need funding because this is above and beyond the contracted price.
[5:46:26] What we're paying them already.
[5:46:29] So, if they need additional funding as they've done with this 500,000
[5:46:34] allotment, then they come before court and they get that approval and just any
[5:46:40] department would love a little Christmas package on the side to say, hey, I've got
[5:46:44] a half a million dollars over here that I can use but and it's misleading in my
[5:46:50] opinion. They still have to come to court to get the approval.
[5:46:53] So how much have we spent? I know a lot of it was with New Berlin and the fire truck with the grant, if I remember correctly.
[5:47:02] So can you use your microphone? That's fine. Sorry. I would like to hear you.
[5:47:08] Of the $500,000 so far you've spent $463, $13 plus the amount that you approved in today.
[5:47:17] so much. Okay. But again, it all had to come back to court. I guess my take is if there's
[5:47:25] a desperate need for it, then yes, that's up to the commission's court still. Even with even if
[5:47:30] you set aside 350, you still have to come to court to get approval. So above and beyond the
[5:47:36] contract, I don't know if I could support a separate fund for that, but going forward, of course,
[5:47:43] as needed case-by-case just like with any department I mean we went through
[5:47:48] how many budget amendments today so that's kind of how I envision not working
[5:47:56] again I'm not not wanting to not fund volunteer fire departments I don't
[5:48:02] want to do anything to take away from any kind of public safety but to try to
[5:48:08] manage that money, that's just the way I see it. Because to me,
[5:48:13] Crick and Frongjoy, that's that's how to general reserve that that money or is
[5:48:18] it part of the tax? In current year, it's actually in, so it's in 43. It's it's in
[5:48:26] there, but not for the next year's budget. Correct. It would have to be funded.
[5:48:30] Not deserves. Right. So that's my point. It's if you put it under the tax revenue,
[5:48:36] And that 350 takes away from what we're trying to do, I guess, with public safety, with
[5:48:42] positions and what we're trying to do up here.
[5:48:45] That's just-
[5:48:49] I think it court is much less likely to grant individual requests, but that's what
[5:48:59] they're doing though.
[5:49:00] But this is a set aside fund for this.
[5:49:02] I think just by very title that it's good they're going to have much more difficulty.
[5:49:08] We allotted specific amounts for the six that responded to us last year and those six
[5:49:14] used those allotted amounts.
[5:49:17] Now granted we put some cushion on it and that cushion allowed us to give some money
[5:49:22] to Geronimo VFD.
[5:49:25] I still am a little confused on why we did that because we know that those items were going
[5:49:30] to be used by GCFR.
[5:49:31] I don't know why we didn't just give it to GCFR.
[5:49:35] whatever, it's being used to fight fires, that's great, but we put it up, they used it.
[5:49:43] We held them to a strict standard on it, and they followed through, I mean, they used
[5:49:48] almost all of it, and I think the amount that's unused was the cushion that we gave them,
[5:49:52] because we gave them, I think it was 414,000 in change that we added up, that between the
[5:49:57] request of the 6VFDs that were in preceding.
[5:50:09] All right, then all started with that grant, if I remember correctly. New Berlin needed the money. Correct me if I'm wrong. It was over $200,000, if I remember correctly.
[5:50:23] I believe the highest request for an individual department was $129,000. But I think that's how it started. Again, like you said, it's been a long day.
[5:50:31] My brain is mush. I'm going to dream about numbers tonight probably the way the way it was.
[5:50:38] This is Curse Drive. I speak real quick and dress that. Yes, sir. Yes, chief.
[5:50:44] So New Berlin requested $105,000, which we did use. The amount that was well, or the reasoning
[5:50:58] was partly yes because we had received a grant and of course the item that we had to buy
[5:51:06] was much higher amount than the grant award and however what I will say is that I don't
[5:51:16] know that it necessarily started with us it mainly was the idea that there was a number
[5:51:21] of departments that had deficiencies and we simply used that allotment for that and
[5:51:32] used other funds to take care of the other deficiencies if that makes sense.
[5:51:37] Correct,
[5:51:40] thank you, sir.
[5:51:41] Yes, sir.
[5:51:44] You've heard about a truck, Marion about a truck,
[5:51:54] and I have bought equipment.
[5:51:58] They each had to come up individually, and we each had it.
[5:52:01] We had to approve every time that their items that they asked for, qualified for what we
[5:52:05] set this aside for, and they did it.
[5:52:08] There's a lot of hesitation that they wouldn't cooperate with the parameters we set, but
[5:52:12] they did.
[5:52:13] I think that Commissioner Guerrero and I are both at a point where we're going to have a hard time voting for something that does not include this money, so I think that the judge is right.
[5:52:25] I think we should get down to that part. If we can have a third person support that, then I think we can move forward with it.
[5:52:32] If not, I think it might just be something that we just need to say and move forward one way or the other.
[5:52:37] I don't like the idea of it just being money that we just need to pull from the general fund if they need it.
[5:52:44] We need to have that line set aside for them.
[5:52:49] I don't have a problem at all with the way we did it either where they came back.
[5:52:54] They had an invoice or whatever and they showed it to the court and we voted on it.
[5:53:01] That's fine and I don't think they have a problem with that either.
[5:53:05] Commissioner Wolverton, I don't mean to put you on the spot
[5:53:07] But is there any lesser amount you could get behind if it were tied to volunteer fire department funding?
[5:53:15] No, sir. It's just so you keep doing money at it and things aren't getting any better, but they are they're getting they are responding to way more calls
[5:53:23] What you need is people that they have a time that people that they have a ton of people their volunteer is and there's a lot of volunteers
[5:53:31] Here's a half to pull down two jobs at times.
[5:53:33] If you really want to help these people, you need to get a full-time fire department
[5:53:37] over there through ESD's or special tax conditions or continue to expand the Guadalupe
[5:53:43] counties.
[5:53:44] I have no problem exploring all of those options.
[5:53:47] I have no problem setting money aside for a fire study to explore the ESD's.
[5:53:51] I have no problem with adding fire fighters for GCFR right now.
[5:53:55] But we cannot add enough fire fighters.
[5:53:58] We cannot create an ESD tomorrow.
[5:53:59] we won't get the money the next day to have sufficient fire protection for
[5:54:03] precincts one and four right now it's it's something we can't do we can we can
[5:54:07] we can again we can beat this dead horse that we're putting our people at risk
[5:54:14] today right now if we don't have more money for these VFDs and I want to say
[5:54:18] that being said I am also in support of adding personnel to GCFR I just wanted
[5:54:25] to get to this point though. I know we could talk a lot about the details of that conversation,
[5:54:31] but this is what I've been thinking about leading up to today is how we get three people to vote
[5:54:37] on a budget, because everybody has differing opinions and perspectives and priorities, and that's
[5:54:42] natural on any multi-member board, right? If Commissioner Wolken can't support a budget that has any
[5:54:47] supplemental or additional funding for volunteers, Commissioner Ott and German will not vote for a budget
[5:54:52] it doesn't include it. There's a line there, right? It's just now how do we move forward
[5:55:00] If there's a split like that in a very specific way, where funding is out, then two are gone, if funding is in, then one's gone no matter what. So,
[5:55:14] what would y'all like to do from this point moving forward?
[5:55:18] I'm going to make this, what we're paying them now on record is fine for now, but to keep
[5:55:26] throwing money, I don't see it solving the problem.
[5:55:32] Let me answer that a little bit, if I could.
[5:55:39] When I took office before,
[5:55:45] I said to myself and I said to a number of people, there's going
[5:55:49] a point when fire protection is going to cost the county more than it ought to cost the county
[5:55:56] because when you transition from volunteers which the volunteers know that eventually they won't
[5:56:07] be able to service everything when you transition from volunteers to like GCFR or more with
[5:56:15] to municipal. You're going to have a point where you're having a crossing over, not
[5:56:22] a crossing over of service, but you're going to have to spend money like with GCFR to
[5:56:29] build the program. But at the same time, you've got to have fire protection. And so you've
[5:56:34] got to pay the volunteers to pay for that fire protection until you build that fire department.
[5:56:41] But we're at that point right now.
[5:56:43] We're having to almost double fund it in order to work through this scenario.
[5:56:54] And I just don't think 350,000 is supplemental for those volunteers is too much to ask.
[5:57:12] No, I said what I needed to, but you're correct.
[5:57:14] Again, we're in a tight spot back to the volunteer fire department discussion.
[5:57:19] Been involved with this for quite a while.
[5:57:24] So, when we created GCFR, the idea was to help supplement the time that was missed
[5:57:31] for calls Monday through Friday to Friday, right, when everybody works.
[5:57:35] Had that program establish its working, we're building GCFR.
[5:57:40] And the idea at the time was the balance was supposed to shift more funding to our county
[5:57:46] department, less funding to the volunteers, not that you're not important, but that shift
[5:57:52] hasn't happened yet.
[5:57:54] So I'm still going back to historical conversations of the way, after six years, this is where
[5:58:00] we're supposed to be.
[5:58:01] but we're going still even or doing more for volunteers, again, don't interpret that wrong,
[5:58:11] but when it comes to our own public safety, again, Sheriff, County Attorney, law enforcement,
[5:58:21] fire and rescue, you name it, all departments are involved in some form or fashion with that,
[5:58:25] environmental health and so my challenge like I said if we if they if you'll
[5:58:32] need it you come to court and you just like you're doing now I just had that
[5:58:37] little issue with it set aside that's all because why can't sheriff's office
[5:58:44] have that set aside or the fire department or Linda Douglas or Teresa
[5:58:49] cute it's just a little gift box over here again there's nothing wrong with that
[5:58:54] but it's setting aside that funding I get it public safety I get it but for me
[5:59:04] supporting that 350 is very I'm not there right now it's it's difficult when
[5:59:11] I can take that 350 to GCFR or the Sheriff's Department because all day we've
[5:59:17] been talking about public safety well we have our own departments right our own
[5:59:23] So, again, chief, we're just in a tough position trying to go through this.
[5:59:29] I understand what the judge is saying, and I'm glad he fast-forwarded it, because this
[5:59:34] is going to be the crux of it.
[5:59:35] I think we're in agreement with a lot of what we've talked about already.
[5:59:39] The only position I had brought up revolver on 4-H, and I had brought that up in like
[5:59:46] day one.
[5:59:47] So there are plenty of needs, but we have to prioritize.
[5:59:50] and I think we've kind of agreed to go into some of the general fund reserve utilizing what we have coming
[6:00:00] And out of fiscal year 26 into 27, which may be a million or a million and a half, which is average.
[6:00:09] So I think we're doing that. The problem is don't want to go much further than that on my end because of the future, right? You don't want to overspend and take a world trip and go to Disney World every year because of your own personal finances. So I look at it in that sense too, okay? So don't get misconstrued. Anybody out there listening that I don't
[6:00:29] support volunteer fire departments. I mean I donate to auctions all the time and I do what I
[6:00:34] can on a personal level. But the funding at some point has to balance out and then we need to start
[6:00:43] like right now I think we're having that conversation so. No I 100% agree with you and I'll say
[6:00:49] I don't envy the position that you guys are in like tight spot I get it. I think that we've got
[6:00:55] one big issue that's kind of fighting back against the process that stair step
[6:01:00] of us stepping down, which we all in the volunteer service know that in the next three to five
[6:01:04] years, five to eight years, whatever that timeline might look like, the volunteers in the
[6:01:08] county are eventually going to go away as the growth continues to progress.
[6:01:12] Inflation is taking our butts.
[6:01:14] Fire equipment nationally, engines, apparatus, commissioner Woolworthens point a few weeks ago,
[6:01:19] ISO, new trucks every Senate ten years, cost of apparatus is almost tripled in some cases.
[6:01:26] We have ISO ratings for the volunteer side as well, which reflect for our homeowners and their insurance policies in order to keep their budgets down and their cost expenditures down.
[6:01:35] We're trying to keep pace as well, like Commissioner Durham mentioned, diesel is $5 a gallon now.
[6:01:39] So, where five years ago, those budgets may have been sustainable and we were able to make things work with pancake suppers or sausage fundraisers or things like that.
[6:01:48] But the gap isn't being closed anymore.
[6:01:52] I went back and whittled down our budget and I'm still coming up with almost $35,000 short
[6:01:56] fall and that's eliminating outside training.
[6:01:58] That's to gotten cost of replacement equipment down to nearly nothing and just focusing on
[6:02:03] paying our essential required bills annually, lights, insurance, I mean our insurance bill
[6:02:07] is almost $30,000 a year to maintain the fleet that we have.
[6:02:10] And we have one of the smaller fleets in the county because our district is smaller than
[6:02:13] say new Berlin or San Jose, which is a much larger area and they arguably need more trucks
[6:02:17] because they downtime and maintenance, they increase volume of calls, all those things.
[6:02:21] The Commissioner Wilbertons point, we do need people.
[6:02:26] Part of the problem, though, is that PPE, personal protective equipment, the turnout gear,
[6:02:30] is $5,000 for more plus now, where five, eight years ago, it was maybe $2,500, $3,000 to fully equip a firefighter.
[6:02:38] If I don't have in-date gear, I can't recruit members, I can't send them to academies,
[6:02:42] I can't get them certified, and I can't put them on the street to respond to calls,
[6:02:46] and serve the public. So, I think that the 350 is a generous offering. I have
[6:02:52] the answer for that. I'm sure, again, I'm going to paint a tarry on my back with
[6:02:55] some of the other chiefs in the county, but I think we all established. I'm not
[6:02:59] scared of that. Yeah, no, let's just fall. And I'll come jump on the grid and give you
[6:03:03] guys an opportunity to fire back and do my best to answer your questions.
[6:03:06] Just so when you buy gear to get all eight volunteer fire partners together and
[6:03:12] do it one lump sum you to get a better price or you just individually do it so
[6:03:18] historically each department's done what they need I think that a part of the
[6:03:21] problem is that the age life expectancy from one department to the next our
[6:03:26] timelines aren't lined up because such you know one department is not
[6:03:29] purchased when another department has some years purchased for members
[6:03:32] specifically due to slightly smaller females we've got larger build guys things
[6:03:37] of that nature I know us personally I'm working on a grant I believe Maryans
[6:03:41] working on the same grant with an equipment vendor. That would uniform the PPE
[6:03:45] between those and that will come at a zero dollar cost the departments if we
[6:03:48] are awarded those grants but that's not a guarantee. I know that we right now
[6:03:52] have 19 members active in status and I've got I believe 13-14 coming in within
[6:03:59] the next two weeks at our next business meeting. I don't have enough PPE. I've
[6:04:03] got nine sets a year. I've got a fire academy starting in October. I don't know
[6:04:08] what to do. I've got to figure it out. Well, what I'm getting at it, if you got what
[6:04:11] Guadalupe Fire Department, and all the other ones put together, even the cities, you know,
[6:04:15] take, are you guys going in for any particular equipment right now? Piggy back. I know the
[6:04:21] sheriff allows the hospitals to piggyback on everything he does. It saves us a tremendous
[6:04:25] amount of money. When you can buy a train loan versus a car load, you're going to save
[6:04:29] money. Absolutely. And so, yeah, I'm just asking you to look into something like that because
[6:04:33] This one's in two's, it's tough.
[6:04:36] 100%, I'm not distributing with you in a bit, the only problem there is that we have
[6:04:39] to have the funding available to us in order to then spend that money and get in with
[6:04:44] those purchasing.
[6:04:44] We do not have the city of Sigeam, the city of Sibleau, GCFR, shirts his budget.
[6:04:48] So if we want to say, hey, we want to get in on this package with you guys and buy five,
[6:04:52] eight, whatever sets a year, we have to have those capital funds available to spend.
[6:04:55] That's right.
[6:04:57] The English is saying that, yeah.
[6:05:00] Let's come back for a budget amendment. Instead of having this lump sum city right there, once you get the contract going, then you come back and say, this is what we're going to need to fulfill what we need today. At that point, instead of just sitting there and you're buying by ones and two, you can buy by the gross. You're setting them up to fail with these budget amendments. With all the respect, GCFR has two locations in precinct two. Precinct two has a lot of the city of Seguin. Precinct three is 97% city of shirts.
[6:05:29] They all have paid fire departments city shirts the city of shirts or city of civil
[6:05:35] low city limits. I'm sorry, but city limits. I have paid fire departments
[6:05:38] The majority of the land in precincts one in four are unincorporated areas. We are we are just not situated the same
[6:05:48] We're just not situated the same. I understand why you guys are advocating
[6:05:50] Would you have to have a base because everybody in city shirts simple again. They pay taxes
[6:05:56] that go to that Fire, EMS, Alameda, Library, Systems, all that.
[6:06:02] I understand that, too.
[6:06:03] So, you know, I've tried for 24 years to get something going on on ESDs, but once again,
[6:06:10] like everything else, it takes three votes.
[6:06:12] I can't help the past, you can't help the past, but I doubt very serious if we did today
[6:06:17] I get three votes.
[6:06:20] Just a quick question. Are you all active in participating in the association?
[6:06:26] In the Cali Fire Association, so we are.
[6:06:28] And just, I mean, because you're standing here, right, with us, I mean, is everybody active
[6:06:33] in the association?
[6:06:34] No, sir, there are departments that are not participating, and there are some departments
[6:06:38] we see sometimes, other departments that we see very, very rarely.
[6:06:42] I was just trying to think of some common ground.
[6:06:44] I have concerns with everything that's being talked about.
[6:06:46] But, I mean, in a perfect world, if we had a magic wand and everybody participated in
[6:06:51] the association that included G-C-F-R and municipal partners, and everybody came together
[6:06:58] if there was a, let's call it an emergency fund, because in my opinion that's what it really
[6:07:03] should be.
[6:07:03] Like a turbo goes out on one of your fire trucks and you can't fix it, right, a transmission,
[6:07:08] grinds, and chunks of gear, piston goes through the side wall of a motor, like I think those
[6:07:14] those are kind of going, okay, what happens now?
[6:07:17] I mean, do you think there's a scenario that would work
[6:07:19] if there was a small pot of emergency funds
[6:07:24] that went to the association that Yolk had worked together
[6:07:26] to find out what those priorities and needs are,
[6:07:29] and agree as a group?
[6:07:31] I can only speak for myself in our department.
[6:07:32] I know that, you know, that was one of the line items
[6:07:35] that I had to access of our budget
[6:07:36] to try to bring our number closer to the annual income
[6:07:38] that we receive.
[6:07:42] I'd be all for us just to be able to know
[6:07:44] that if something did happen, we'd have that to be able to fall back on to keep us in service.
[6:07:48] I can't speak for everybody. That's your other question. I do know, well, I have been told.
[6:07:54] I have not seen any hard copy documentation. If Chief Stry is still listening in,
[6:07:58] he's on the Association Board. He could probably comment better than this that I had.
[6:08:02] I could. To my understanding, there is even one county department that has removed
[6:08:06] themselves from the Association is not participating at all. So I can't speak to that. I don't know
[6:08:11] of chiefs still there, but that's my understanding
[6:08:14] is that one of the precinct two departments
[6:08:16] has removed themselves from the association altogether.
[6:08:22] Yes, that's correct.
[6:08:23] There is one department that removed himself
[6:08:26] from the association.
[6:08:28] And Judge, I guess the answer to your question,
[6:08:31] we've had that discussion before.
[6:08:35] The issue becomes a matter of what the association
[6:08:42] can do what it can't via by-laws. I don't know that we can fit that into those by-laws.
[6:08:50] And I'm not saying that they couldn't be changed in the future, but that would require
[6:08:56] some additional discussion from the board before we could accept or even consider
[6:09:02] that kind of arrangement.
[6:09:05] Chief Strauss is just trying to think outside the box to go if there's concerns on
[6:09:10] commissioners core with that funding and revisiting each individual conversation, either having
[6:09:15] a line item identified or having budget amendments, you know could that group be you know position
[6:09:24] to talk together and I mean you all know each other's needs and what's going on issues you
[6:09:28] advocate for and against talk through all those things and then as a group and their fire
[6:09:34] community if you will the leaders within it could have some of those conversations and maybe
[6:09:39] decide what's best for everybody because all of you, whether it's municipal contracts,
[6:09:43] DCFR volunteers, they're all doing the same thing just in different ways but you're all
[6:09:48] responding to the same citizens, right? So just trying to find a way to go, yeah,
[6:09:55] Yes, we have a way to stream live.
[6:09:57] Yeah, exactly.
[6:09:58] And I understand.
[6:09:58] And so,
[6:10:00] Well, I will definitely not rule out the idea that the association could be used to bring together those discussions. I think that would probably be the best way to put it at this point. Bring those discussions together with a more unified front. I think that's doable. The bigger issue here is, and I'm just, while I got the floor, if you don't mind, I'm going to be
[6:10:29] somewhat blunt about, I think, what the real issue here is. And that is, it's quite simply,
[6:10:36] the original intent theory, whatever you want to call it, a GCFR was to supplement the volunteer
[6:10:44] fire departments. And while that is still occurring to some degree, it's become evident that the idea
[6:10:55] that the GCFR has their own area and must take care of that on top of everything else
[6:11:02] is was probably a mistake when it happened, okay?
[6:11:07] In fact, I'm confident it was a mistake when it happened.
[6:11:10] I think we've got too far off the original rails too fast.
[6:11:14] That being said, I'm definitely still a proponent of GCFR.
[6:11:18] I believe that that is the future, but keep in mind something that was discussed
[6:11:24] that where we're staying right now is that when we developed GCFR the idea was
[6:11:32] that the or the understanding was that the county must sufficiently fund
[6:11:43] the volunteer fire departments until GCFR is ready to take over and the
[6:11:49] The problem that we're at right now is we're not at either one of those.
[6:11:54] We're not sufficiently funding those volunteer fire permits and the DCFR is not ready yet
[6:11:59] to take over the entire county.
[6:12:02] So unfortunately, yes, right now it seems like a lot of money and it is, but this is investment
[6:12:08] in a plan that will over time get better, but right now we've got to take care of the
[6:12:17] So the issues that we have at this moment,
[6:12:23] he's saying what I was trying to say a minute ago.
[6:12:27] We have to take care of both right now to make it work.
[6:12:31] And to my understanding, and sorry, Patrick, I'm going to put you on the spot.
[6:12:36] To my understanding, Mr. Pinder would know, Fire Marshal Pinder would know better.
[6:12:39] I believe there has been some conversation about trying to bring an outside entity to do consulting
[6:12:44] to talk with all the volunteer departments to talk with all the career departments that
[6:12:47] that respond to the county and formulate a plan
[6:12:50] with an actual defined timeline,
[6:12:51] whether that be two years, five years, 10 years,
[6:12:54] but a way to stair step the volunteers down
[6:12:56] and step GCFR incrementally,
[6:12:59] well, managing that budget and what that looks like
[6:13:01] and in some taxing funding and I apologize,
[6:13:04] there was the ESD conversation,
[6:13:08] there was an additional funding source and I apologize,
[6:13:10] forget that taxable.
[6:13:12] Oh, can the assistance district?
[6:13:14] Yes, or that's the one.
[6:13:14] So again, I'm not an expert in that realm correct so yeah, I don't think any of us are yet
[6:13:23] Yeah, as Eric had stated I had mentioned that last time I was here in court
[6:13:26] I did send the court some of the proposals that were sent to me
[6:13:29] Basically it would just be a firm to come in and meet with the volunteer fire departments me with our fire department
[6:13:34] Me with the city fire department said
[6:13:36] Fund us are feed into the county and support our operations and just kind of come up with a general idea and give us some guidance
[6:13:44] You've heard it a couple of times today about a plan of the vault.
[6:13:47] Eric had said it.
[6:13:49] Ronald Jarrett Smith had said it.
[6:13:50] I think Commissioner Otto had mentioned something earlier today about, you know, she would
[6:13:54] support a plan.
[6:13:56] What that plan looks like and how it works out, you know, we've decided that through the
[6:14:00] court.
[6:14:01] How those funds, if we're looking at supporting and putting funds towards this, I think putting
[6:14:05] some funds and allocating that, I did send that to the judge when the budget proposal was
[6:14:10] already submitted.
[6:14:11] I didn't get it those back in time those those aren't cheap and even Commissioner
[6:14:15] Overton and talked about ESD's those those firms do ESD studies also however, you know
[6:14:21] You have to hire those firms and they're not cheap. They're anywhere from 100,000 to 160,000
[6:14:25] Depending on what you want and you can go you can do you know faces and things like that
[6:14:30] But some of those firms if you package it all together it cuts down on trip charges and city meetings and group meetings and public comments and things like that
[6:14:38] So I did send those to the court. I know we have to vote on the budget today, but just in that ballpark if you're not to exceed
[6:14:45] A amount roughly about 150 to 160,000 dollars, you can get a good study for the county the entire unincorporated area, which they would also meet with all the volunteer
[6:14:54] of Ronald Provinces individually and put out public surveys that send a community
[6:14:58] survey. They do all of that.
[6:15:00] That is nothing on our office. That is nothing on the commissioner's court. They then provide all that data and information back to the court. They host the public meetings. So I think that would be a beneficial towards the community in the county. So it could give some sort of guidance and it's unbiased. It's not them versus them. It's just a neutral party to come in and do the assessment. So thank you. I just wanted to say real quick. And one thing we're both a you gentlemen. I think we'll agree with this. So we're talking about volunteers and we're talking about GC.
[6:15:29] and we're talking about this balance.
[6:15:33] But in the meantime, the developers are building thousands of houses.
[6:15:39] So we can sit here and talk about how to balance it.
[6:15:43] Let's just say that it all remained stable today,
[6:15:47] and there was not another house built.
[6:15:49] Oh, well, yeah, we can go fund GCFR
[6:15:53] and when the volunteers can't do it.
[6:15:57] That's the balance.
[6:15:57] but in the meantime, there's thousands of houses being built.
[6:16:02] So the two of them are probably going to have to be used
[6:16:05] at the same time for a while.
[6:16:08] Do you all agree with what I'm saying?
[6:16:10] Oh, yeah.
[6:16:11] We can't lose one and not continue to support the other.
[6:16:14] It's definitely a partnership.
[6:16:16] And like Eric has stated, and Kurt has right,
[6:16:21] the 35 square miles of GCF R-curring that covers that.
[6:16:23] That was a big leap.
[6:16:24] And we're dedicated to that right now.
[6:16:26] So we can't support like we're not on the east or the west side of the county
[6:16:31] But we're gonna get there how we get there and how fast is determined on how the court allows it, right?
[6:16:35] So in the meantime, we've got like dial up a Queenie new Berlin on that side supporting that effort
[6:16:40] And so it is a partnership, you know, it's not one versus the other and is it we need to maintain that partnership and
[6:16:46] How the support besides the fund the volunteers or the county it's up to you
[6:16:50] But we just need all we're on the same all doing the same thing. We're all here to support together
[6:16:55] Yeah, we're all moving in the same direction.
[6:17:00] Last thing I'd say, I mean, I think that it'd be ideal if we could get all of the association,
[6:17:05] all of the chiefs, or representative from each department together, and have a formal
[6:17:08] meeting with you guys.
[6:17:09] I know I'd be in favor of that.
[6:17:10] I think chiefs try.
[6:17:11] I think the other chiefs in the room would be in favor of that, but we've got to come up
[6:17:15] with a plan.
[6:17:15] But in the interim, to Commissioner Dermann, on his point, something's got to be supplementary.
[6:17:20] Something's got to help us to stay afloat.
[6:17:22] We're just not able internally with the budgets that we're given right now to make
[6:17:26] against me?
[6:17:27] Well, it's nice to hear that idea coming around again because we used to have those meetings
[6:17:32] and some of them got pretty heated back in the day just because that's just the nature
[6:17:38] of humans and the way they are in that setting at times.
[6:17:43] But it's nice to hear that again, you know, partnerships that's what we do.
[6:17:49] Chief, back there, I mean, you know, we've got to work together.
[6:17:53] and I think we're headed in the right direction it's just been unfortunately
[6:17:59] baby steps and the explosion of the population has put us even further behind
[6:18:05] right. I would say like 75 to 80% are medical calls I would think.
[6:18:11] It depends on the district nationally that's roughly the average is about 70-30.
[6:18:17] So you know that's important going forward having that certification and
[6:18:22] What we need to do to help with that so I can justify that as far as the training goes if that's cost
[6:18:29] to help with as
[6:18:31] Gary chief had mentioned you know
[6:18:34] EMS for them for the city of Sagan and their coverage that
[6:18:38] Services being inundated and they're overwhelmed so and we're seeing that in the county through any help with that definitely
[6:18:46] Is appreciated and and look forward to that partnership but
[6:18:53] moving forward we have to make a decision today as by statute and you can see
[6:19:02] what we're doing here so my main hesitation with even with the 500,000 last
[6:19:07] year was there wasn't a plan it was just there so that's been my whole point
[6:19:12] you know cart before the horse now we're talking about meeting everybody as a
[6:19:17] plan to meet so that's a great thing. Chief Stry knows the history as well as I do and we always
[6:19:27] come back together and work it out and the important thing is the safety of the citizens of
[6:19:32] the county and I do understand that and so we just have to make the hard calls right now and move on.
[6:19:42] I do apologize for having to step out. We had another county issue that needed to be addressed
[6:19:47] Yes, right now, so I apologize, no disrespect.
[6:19:50] I'll take it, sir.
[6:19:53] I think that long-term we'll get to a point where that supplementary funding or some auxiliary backup funding isn't needed, but I think we're-
[6:20:00] We're at right now today, especially because of the cost of, you know, with inflation being where it is. And obviously that's no fault of anyone in this room. But somewhere, somehow 911 calls to a lot to get answered. The citizens still need service. There's nothing stopping it from anyone in this room's house being the next call that we run. So, unfortunately, we're just out where we're at. Thank you for your comment. Thank you, guys. Thank you, sir.
[6:20:26] Is there any a lesser amount that could be supported? Well, I'm just trying to thank
[6:20:33] I mean, I know, Commissioner said, you know, kind of splitting the difference was half a million. She said 350. I mean, if it was
[6:20:41] 250, I'm just trying to again, and if it goes above and beyond that, you'd come back and you would more than likely get it
[6:20:50] 250, okay
[6:20:58] Three three. This is like a negotiation in front of everybody, right? It is. It's fun, but it's tax dollar
[6:21:05] so
[6:21:10] What about the other positions that we haven't discussed?
[6:21:24] I don't know if you're kind of tallying this as we talk or not, like how this would work financially.
[6:21:33] As soon as you give me what you decided on, I will calculate and I will run with it.
[6:21:39] Okay. So I think what Commissioner, what we have discussed already in Commissioner
[6:21:44] Offs running a list here and I don't know what additional that would be with three
[6:21:50] firemen, three deputies, the paralegal you discussed,
[6:21:58] and then everything else we
[6:21:59] talked about. If we can swing a program assistant for 4-H, that's just me
[6:22:04] personally because they are also inundated, but they do the youth leadership
[6:22:09] programs that Mr. Miranda is working at all of them are just like everybody else.
[6:22:17] But I had mentioned that early on in my budget workshops, developing the youth leadership
[6:22:22] of programs they have, which in turn would then affect them in future non-criminal activity
[6:22:28] I hope.
[6:22:29] And then we wouldn't have our burden with that, right?
[6:22:32] I feel like I tied that in together.
[6:22:34] I think non-criminal activity is a positive thing.
[6:22:37] Yeah, okay, so
[6:22:41] So we at three four forty-one all right
[6:22:52] So that two fifty or three hundred. I think we're three. I haven't said but she's still negotiating with me
[6:22:58] I'm not even gonna come back at two seventy-five. I haven't heard anything from the other side yet. Yeah, thank you
[6:23:05] Two seventy-five
[6:23:12] Commissioner if it's gonna get you there. It's then you know, we're gonna do what we have to do
[6:23:15] you. And again, more again, according to the court, if I'm not here, starting next
[6:23:25] year, during the fiscal year, those decisions are made without the judge and I, of course,
[6:23:31] but setting up a baseline, I'm not in disagreement with it. So,
[6:23:43] where did we land?
[6:23:57] Where did
[6:24:00] We're currently at two seventy five.
[6:24:06] Two seventy five instead of three hundred and fifty thousand additional funding for emergency volunteer fire department.
[6:24:16] Give me a second.
[6:24:20] Yeah, it's just it's hard. It's hard for us because our ours used ours used all of it.
[6:24:29] We've made how much more we need to fill positions.
[6:24:39] You did state, you know, the the department's usage. Think about the amount to because last year three departments on the west side got a hundred thousand today.
[6:24:47] Only one department got six thousand that department today that only was allocated the six. That's what they were allocated.
[6:24:53] That department has to buy a fire truck also. They have a grant truck also.
[6:24:57] So so
[6:25:00] Today, I ask that if you do set the, just set the dollar amount, don't set the amounts per the departments and come back, we can have that conversation another time because two departments on this side need fire trucks, Eric needs a fire truck, eating $100,000. So that's a whole conversation that take a whole half a court or another day, but just set the dollar amount today if the court decides. That's all I recommend. Thank you.
[6:25:31] I can do 300.
[6:25:36] Now we're playing poker. I can do 300.
[6:25:39] about it.
[6:25:45] For the safety of the public, of course.
[6:25:52] And then the other positions we've
[6:25:54] discussed,
[6:25:56] are we able to add three firemen, three deputies? I don't know what that costs.
[6:26:03] I know we said it's about 220 of a deputy, but trying
[6:26:09] to go the employee route, public safety
[6:26:12] route. And that's like I said in the beginning, we have to decide what we can do with what
[6:26:20] but we're allotting extra out of reserve.
[6:26:23] I don't want to go much more out of that.
[6:26:25] And I know there's other needs.
[6:26:27] Like I said, 101 requested positions,
[6:26:29] but we're trying to go through this.
[6:26:39] So do you have any, like a list there,
[6:26:41] that Ms. Klein can go through?
[6:26:42] I do, but I wanted to make sure we finished it
[6:26:44] because one of the things I mentioned earlier
[6:26:46] were three reclassifications for the district clerk
[6:26:49] from clerk one to clerk two.
[6:26:50] The difference in that hourly is 1876 to 2007.
[6:26:54] for each one, I wanted to see how the court felt about that.
[6:27:04] I'm asking you how the court feels about it.
[6:27:07] Can you repeat that position one more time?
[6:27:09] There are several positions from the district clerk
[6:27:12] that she has asked me to discuss to the court from reclass.
[6:27:17] One clerk, one clerk, two hourlies 1876 to 2007.
[6:27:22] I'm sure Ms. Douglas, I know she's had some similar requests as well.
[6:27:25] I wanted to just get the courts appetite again.
[6:27:26] And I wanted to discuss that because that's been a concern, I think, for several people with the individuals that they feel have earned clerk to payment.
[6:27:39] So Ms. Douglas, I'm sure you also wanted to discuss that, but again, I just wanted to talk to the court about their appetite for it.
[6:27:55] Commissioner, is there any thoughts on the regrails just on that district clerk or all the regrails?
[6:28:03] The district clerk has buttered up, but Ms. Douglas is bringing it up currently as well.
[6:28:08] I know she has some requests for the same, so I'm just curious if we're wanting to do that.
[6:28:12] I'm not trying to make a prolonged argument.
[6:28:14] I am just making sure that individuals have spoken to or that are indicating the preferences that we're considering those as well.
[6:28:39] Any other thoughts on the re-grade request for departments?
[6:28:48] Yes, sir.
[6:28:48] I was asked to pass along from Mr. Roborn, he had asked for those two regrails for two of the employees, and he sent me a message saying asking if the court would allow him to fund the portion above in the regraile out of the asset for for sure.
[6:29:06] So whatever the cost to regrade those two positions, the additional cost, if he could fund that out of the asset for for sure, if that would, if the court would consider that.
[6:29:20] Does he anticipate being able to continuously fund that on an annual basis out of asset forefetcher?
[6:29:26] If the paralegal position you spoke about earlier is out of the general fund, then the change in the difference will not be nearly the cost of a position.
[6:30:05] Can we go back to the constables? I think we, do we want to talk about the re-rate really quick? Do we want to talk about the re-grades if the courts don't comment? If the court doesn't have an appetite for, of course, I'm willing to move on. I just wanted to bring it up and see if that was something the court wanted to discuss. In the event that it's known, yes. I'm willing to move to the constables.
[6:30:33] Any other comments on re-grades?
[6:30:35] So you're good with all of them?
[6:30:42] It's a three grade in the, who's the clerk's office, everything else?
[6:30:47] The other thing I've said, you know, I can't support the extra money for the long-term fire departments.
[6:30:52] They get enough ends of so.
[6:30:54] But I do, I would like to add, precinct three, the JP, not JP, the consul just called.
[6:31:02] So if you'd like to also move one of those part times the full time.
[6:31:04] There
[6:31:09] we go. I'm waiting for.
[6:31:10] Any other
[6:31:32] comments on the proposal to change
[6:31:34] consumable precinct three part time to full time?
[6:31:37] I don't have an issue with that.
[6:31:39] Oh, a problem with that.
[6:31:48] Before we get to the two big ones,
[6:31:52] in regard to the commissioners court administrative assistant,
[6:31:54] if the court is not willing to re-grade hours
[6:31:58] with the court being minimal to taking half
[6:32:01] with my conference budget.
[6:32:02] But
[6:32:07] the action still would be to change the grade just using those funds, right?
[6:32:13] I don't care how it's done.
[6:32:16] I don't care if it's some sort of money that can come through a different way.
[6:32:21] I don't know if that means that it's necessary to change a grade and that's where the money comes from.
[6:32:26] I'm not sure what the possibilities are with that.
[6:32:35] Is that a misclined question?
[6:32:41] Yeah, I mean, it's a tough answer.
[6:32:43] No, well, so the, so talking about the commissioner's court admin assistant position, the question was if the court wasn't wanting to regrade that still using half of salary or training in conference from precinct one commissioner, but that was knowing no matter where the money comes from to have it on great and step it needs to be tied to where it's placed in the system, right, to generate the hourly rate and then generate the
[6:33:12] the salary or the compensation, right?
[6:33:16] Right.
[6:33:16] And I don't know if it's an option of instead of going up
[6:33:20] two steps, go up one step or, I mean,
[6:33:22] not steps, steps are length of service.
[6:33:25] Grades are how the position is with responsibility.
[6:33:31] Or more.
[6:33:33] It would be very difficult with our grade and step
[6:33:35] unless you re-graded the position.
[6:33:41] So if you said if you wanted to just had $2,000
[6:33:44] $1,000 to the position with our current grading step system that doesn't fall in window
[6:33:50] Douglas.
[6:33:52] I can't see how that would work.
[6:33:56] If you wanted to take one position and pay it in additional flat $2,000 a year, thank
[6:34:05] you.
[6:34:06] I'm not crazy.
[6:34:11] So really, back to your initial question, what's the court's opinion or thought on the
[6:34:16] re-grade of that position, right? I mean, that's—
[6:34:20] I mean, my take from the responses as far as that we are at a deadlock, and if not,
[6:34:30] then I was asking you if there was some way to give her some of mine.
[6:34:51] Any thoughts?
[6:34:55] No, but Judge Hines would just text over, so if we're considering re-grade.
[6:35:00] She would like to consider her administrator because they have taken on the entire court workload after one judge has moved over to go back out.
[6:35:13] I want to finish talking about the commissioners position before we move on.
[6:35:23] What would you like to do, regrade or no, regrade?
[6:35:28] I want to regrade.
[6:35:51] Just opens up a can of leap forward, like I said. I think the can of worms is open a long time ago. Well, we're going down this list.
[6:36:00] just like, yeah, that's why I need a tally of where we are.
[6:36:09] The difference is $8,000 on this.
[6:36:11] It's the only person that serves multiple county officials, it's unique in comparison
[6:36:18] to anybody else.
[6:36:28] Yeah, that 8,000, the good one.
[6:36:30] No, I don't have 8,000 in my conference budget.
[6:36:33] I would give her half of my conference budget, I believe Commissioner German has indicated
[6:36:37] he would give her some of his as well, if it's possible.
[6:36:39] But I'm the leading that the feedback we're receiving from this client and Ms. Douglas is that that's not a possibility
[6:36:44] To do the the numbers that way we can't just shift that without doing a re-grade
[6:36:49] So that's why I think we're back to that conversation
[6:36:51] Right if there was a way to do it. Yes, you can have it
[6:37:26] So it's like two something dollars more an hour
[6:37:29] I believe it's three and a few cents
[6:37:46] Three dollars 51 cents from 24 27 to 27 78
[6:37:53] Yes. That's from a 7-2-9-2, right? Yes.
[6:38:18] It's a tough decision because she's under the court and it's not a perception-wise for the rest of the employees.
[6:38:28] It's just, and I get it, I get the argument. I wish everyone could get everything.
[6:38:33] So is that 24-27 with the 3% charge? Yes, sir.
[6:39:24] If you figure the 3% what's the total compensation for a year,
[6:39:32] 3% on the current pay?
[6:39:35] Yeah.
[6:39:45] $50,000, $470,000, $50,000, $470,000, $412,000.
[6:39:49] That's $49,004 plus $1470,000 in $12,000.
[6:39:55] 5676, I'm just looking at the payroll spreadsheet, Rynus.
[6:40:00] 49, 93. Current parades 23, 56, 49, 193. Fiscal year 27, parades 24, 27, or 50, 6, 76. It's a difference of $1,483.
[6:40:20] $2?
[6:40:25] No.
[6:40:26] You have to be here three years to get the-
[6:40:28] 70.
[6:40:42] What is two grades?
[6:40:43] Two grades changes $3.51 an hour.
[6:41:11] On giving up your education hours, we still have enough to get 18 hours.
[6:41:20] Is it 18 or 16?
[6:41:23] Pretty sure.
[6:41:24] 16 hours.
[6:41:26] Either way, I mean, if it means commuting, or making a sacrifice,
[6:41:29] I guess I'll make it but I don't just say great.
[6:41:31] Based on these responses, I don't know that there's a way to do it.
[6:41:37] I haven't used a thousand, a thousand dollars.
[6:41:41] Great.
[6:41:41] The most uptown.
[6:41:43] I'd be willing to get inside of the house.
[6:41:45] I'd be willing to see the grade.
[6:41:46] And I'll go on the right step to see because they both move to the level next year.
[6:41:54] Yes, about you, ma'am.
[6:42:35] Any other discussion on the chief?
[6:42:39] Did you have something you wanted to add before I know you said you had to leave.
[6:42:48] Yes sir. I do have to go to council. This has been a fun day but I have to continue this
[6:42:55] evening within the city. Good luck. Thank you for the opportunity. Just come back when
[6:42:59] you serve will probably still be here. I'm hoping not. You know, you all have been talking
[6:43:05] a lot about volunteer money and it seems to be a sticking point for this group and I can
[6:43:10] We definitely appreciate both sides of the conversation having had volunteers as well
[6:43:14] as doing away with the volunteer program.
[6:43:16] I understand the struggles that exist with trying to provide adequate coverage.
[6:43:20] I can also speak to the varied landscape across Guadalopeia County.
[6:43:26] What I protect in downtown versus what we see on the outskirts of the county.
[6:43:31] And it's impossible to wrap that up into a single package and throw it out there and expect
[6:43:35] success.
[6:43:36] I would ask that you might consider since the money is a sticking point for everyone rather than labeling it just for volunteers the three or five hundred thousand or wherever you're sitting.
[6:43:47] If you were to allow that to be opened up to anyone that is supporting the volunteer operation.
[6:43:53] For instance, if GCFR was allowed to bring before you a request in the same manner, ultimately you all make the decision as to whether or not you choose to grant that.
[6:44:02] but that is in support of the volunteer mission.
[6:44:06] And if that would help any of you to be more comfortable
[6:44:10] with your decision making, I believe all of us are, as we spoke earlier,
[6:44:14] trying to work in partnership to provide that service.
[6:44:17] And if we viewed it from that landscape, because not only do
[6:44:22] I support volunteers, but there are days that they support me as well.
[6:44:26] So just making sure that we're all real clear about that.
[6:44:28] So thank you very much. I say I got to go to council. Thanks Chief take care
[6:44:49] Back to the regrade. Yeah, I can go for the administrative assistant for commissioner's court
[6:45:07] By taking it out of people's lines, you just create a problem.
[6:45:46] Are there not three people willing to regrade that position? We're at a deadlock. Do you want to continue that or move on to something else? Judge, can you give us your vote on that? I'm concerned about the future financial position of the county. I think we have talked about adding a lot of things today that I know are important,
[6:46:11] but I cannot support.
[6:46:13] I think I'm going to cast my vote based on my future concerns about where the financial
[6:46:20] position of the county is going to be.
[6:46:22] There's a tremendous amount of very important topics that have been discussed today.
[6:46:27] A lot of needs.
[6:46:28] I think people have validated and justified those the best they possibly can.
[6:46:34] And it's not that I don't want to support all those things that are being talked about.
[6:46:37] But I just think it's going to put the county in a very, very tough financial position
[6:46:41] next year, spending more additional funds that is going to have an automatic tax increase
[6:46:46] built in at the same time when trying to talk about some very big, expensive projects
[6:46:52] and also these needs that we're talking about for law enforcement fire, AMS, don't go away
[6:46:57] but get bigger.
[6:46:59] So that's where I remain today.
[6:47:01] I can
[6:47:06] believe it will put this commissioners court in a very tough position if Ms. Doreen
[6:47:14] retires and we also don't have an admin.
[6:47:18] I think that will be quite difficult for us.
[6:47:25] Is there any way we can move that money or is that a definite no, ladies?
[6:47:30] No.
[6:47:30] Okay.
[6:47:31] Let's move to the next thing.
[6:47:41] Okay.
[6:47:42] Judge Heather Hines has asked if we're doing reclassification.
[6:47:45] she would like her
[6:47:54] admin administrator for the district courts to be moved up to two scales.
[6:48:19] Everyone, what do you think about that?
[6:48:21] The district judge's admin is going up two pay scales.
[6:48:26] Going up two pay scales, Judge Heather Hines has just requested it.
[6:48:30] If we're looking at regraings, a
[6:48:39] problem with it.
[6:48:43] If we're not regrating our admin, then we're not doing any regraings.
[6:48:47] If we cannot find $8,000 for our admin for a re-grade, I don't see where we are going to be able to do that.
[6:48:57] If that's the reasoning for other folks here not wanting to do it for hours, then I would imagine that reasoning would apply to the others as well.
[6:49:04] I
[6:49:13] think I'm on board with what Commissioner Autis saying if we've juggled around physicians
[6:49:22] here and made part-times full-times and I'm not saying we were finished doing it but
[6:49:31] we're doing it.
[6:49:33] had
[6:49:37] men has a completely different job than a lot of the employees in the
[6:49:44] county she has four bosses has to run the court basically and I'm on board
[6:49:57] with giving them all.
[6:50:00] We're in an additional, colon while, we are going to, one of theальная missionaries, is an extremely important position when people call,
[6:50:08] they're either going to call law enforcement for, you know, something that's going on, or they're going to call one of the commissioners.
[6:50:21] And that person is a face of the county.
[6:50:25] so that position is extremely important.
[6:50:34] Not discounting carmen, dear carmen's back there.
[6:51:00] So much client, can we get a kind of a guest moment
[6:51:03] of where we are based on, I believe, Commissioner Altkip,
[6:51:06] some really good notes on where we are current?
[6:51:09] Yes.
[6:51:10] If she's able to either give you that list or read it off,
[6:51:15] can we kind of...
[6:51:16] I mean, can I just don't think it's that?
[6:51:19] because we keep talking and like I said before we've got to we've got to come to a point
[6:51:26] or I wonder we're going to spend. I knew we would get to this point if changes were made.
[6:51:30] I just want everybody to manage your expectations. That's not a two-minute calculation.
[6:51:35] Well, I think the two things that we haven't hit on that between everything everyone said,
[6:51:39] which I have been writing down are GCFR and GCSO. So I don't know if we want to chat about that first
[6:51:46] and then the list or I can give you this list or I can't give you a list list but I can
[6:51:51] read it to you. Whatever you guys want to do. If we want to talk about this,
[6:51:58] I understand
[6:51:59] that Mr. Pender, and you said 227, I'm seeing three individuals being more expensive than
[6:52:08] And that I believe, three deputies with everything, you're looking at 750K, if that's, if someone correct me if I'm wrong with any of this, but I think that's what we're looking at, Mr. Pinder, I think you're more like 400K for three.
[6:52:24] If we hired the captains it'd be $409,000 and $346 for three.
[6:52:31] If we did a different combination of captain's lieutenants and firefighters I have a proposal
[6:52:37] that would add six and keep it cap it at $455 for all those positions, but the lieutenants
[6:52:44] would be at $367, 115 if for three engineers.
[6:52:49] We would prefer the captains, the captains of the highest paid positions, but in the fire
[6:52:53] department with the growth we need that rank and structure and we need to establish that so if
[6:52:59] we're going to get three and they will be the same would prefer the captain so total and that
[6:53:02] would be the 409-346.
[6:53:09] Okay.
[6:53:15] Do we need to read off these notes and we talk about this or
[6:53:18] not and that's fine. Are there additional things to still consider to add to the list?
[6:53:24] If we are not doing regrails, which it looks like we are not, and we are not doing any additional
[6:53:31] full time positions that are not fire and long forcement related, I'm looping in the
[6:53:37] prosecutors' paralegal into that then I don't think so.
[6:53:44] For law enforcement is deputies, I know we didn't have the SRO conversation, but is that
[6:53:51] a priority over the deputies or deputies over SROs?
[6:53:54] So
[6:54:02] I think the numbers is quite a bit different.
[6:54:07] It's really the same thing, right?
[6:54:09] Deputies are what I was, when we did our calculation on staffing analysis and we came in that
[6:54:14] we were 90 short, right?
[6:54:15] I had already put together a request for 70 over the next projected years, right?
[6:54:22] So, and then when I broke that down, I think ultimately I submitted 30 sworn positions
[6:54:27] within for the first year in that phased plan over the next several years.
[6:54:31] I need 10 to fill the current SRO duties for Mary and ISD and Navarro ISD.
[6:54:38] So what I was going to do is take those from those numbers because that's our staffing
[6:54:43] analysis.
[6:54:43] That says what we need, right?
[6:54:46] And that's based on call volume.
[6:54:48] That's based on call volume, calls for service, how long they're on the scene, all the activities
[6:54:53] that go on.
[6:54:54] But I knew I wasn't going to be able to add 10 deputies to that 90 number.
[6:55:00] That we needed. So, I was hoping we were before we knew how the budget was going to shake out, you know, with the revenue coming in. I was hoping that the first 10 that I got in the proposal, if I got that, I was going to dedicate those to the SRO because by doing that, it frees up deputies for patrol. Because right now what's happening is there's plenty of days. So traditionally it has been paid for with off-duty deputies being paid by the
[6:55:29] schools. That has happened for many years, right? But slowly, it's been more difficult
[6:55:37] to fill gaps. And then the state came down with the mandates after the evalid shooting.
[6:55:43] And they have to have somebody armed on every single campus. Now, I don't want to debate
[6:55:49] whose responsibility that is. All right. But that's their state mandate. Some school that
[6:55:55] you have several options to fill that mandate. There's the Guardian program, school, Marshall
[6:55:58] Social program, police officers on campuses, security, however the school decides they
[6:56:04] want to do it.
[6:56:05] Marion does two of those.
[6:56:08] They have the Guardian program and they have deputies on duty.
[6:56:14] So they want the deputies there, but it supplements them fulfilling that requirement.
[6:56:20] Navarro has selected to only have peace officers on campus.
[6:56:24] So what has happened for me is over the last couple years to fill that void I've had to pull from patrol to send them there and that's that's continually gotten worse and worse and worse and worse and worse.
[6:56:37] And there are days there have been days.
[6:56:40] It's not every day but it's pretty much weekly that we're having to supplement that.
[6:56:46] But there are days when we've had to provide every single deputy for every campus.
[6:56:52] And the decision for me, and I'm not putting that on y'allness,
[6:56:55] really the decision for me is what's going to happen if there's a shooting,
[6:56:59] if there is a give-outy top incident.
[6:57:02] So I waited out and I sent the deputies there to do that job,
[6:57:06] because I think I'm going to be held responsible no matter how it shakes out,
[6:57:11] if that happens.
[6:57:12] So my hope was that we could hold that down
[6:57:15] for as long as possible until we could get additional staffing
[6:57:19] to change that dynamic.
[6:57:22] Now, at the same time, what I hear from my personnel,
[6:57:24] my patrol captain and lieutenants and deputies
[6:57:27] is that, Sheriff, we can't keep this up
[6:57:30] because of the increased call volume that's going on.
[6:57:35] We're averaging now 1100 more calls per month.
[6:57:39] A lot of people have said, well, why is that?
[6:57:41] Is crime gone up? Well, we just got more people.
[6:57:43] There's more calls for service that are coming in.
[6:57:45] It's no different than any other department.
[6:57:47] So I know I gave you more, but it's really complex.
[6:57:51] There's a lot to chew on to do that, but I would need ten to do it.
[6:57:56] Now, I'm not asking you for that.
[6:57:57] There's a reason I haven't come up to the podium because it's been a challenging discussion.
[6:58:03] So the school districts come to you and say we need this because it has to go through
[6:58:08] the school board from where I don't understand from Senate Bill 3, and that correct that the
[6:58:14] school board is the one who have to contract used to a near local agreement or contract?
[6:58:18] Yes, we would once that happened yet.
[6:58:21] No, we've had preliminary discussions but there hasn't been through my informal discussions
[6:58:27] or hasn't been a willingness from the court to be able to do that.
[6:58:32] I have had informal discussions with the superintendents but yes, if we agreed on something
[6:58:37] like that, there would both bodies would have to agree.
[6:58:40] the court would have to agree on the on the Pacific as I can't you know I can't
[6:58:44] enter into a contract the court would have to approve that and then the
[6:58:47] school boards would have to do it as well and it's a budgeting decision for
[6:58:51] them as well but from what I understand the school board has to initiate all this
[6:58:55] is the way I read it I could be wrong but the ultimate responsibility according
[6:59:00] to sent bill three is the school district the superintendent of the school board
[6:59:04] itself has to come to us and say you know this is what we want to do
[6:59:09] That's what I thought, you know, I could be reading it wrong, but since it's their responsibility,
[6:59:15] they need to come to us and say, hey, we would like this.
[6:59:18] Well, I think they have through their intermediaries, so the superintendents and I, it's really no
[6:59:22] different than me having a discussion with you about what the needs of the sheriff's office
[6:59:25] are.
[6:59:26] So I think they rely on their department heads, which are the superintendents, to put together
[6:59:31] those proposals and put them in front of them and they decide how the budget's going to shake
[6:59:34] out.
[6:59:34] So, we can put that in front of them, but I don't know that the school board necessarily
[6:59:39] needs to come in here and ask the committee to do it.
[6:59:41] Oh, they don't have to.
[6:59:42] They just have to be the ones asking for it.
[6:59:44] I could be wrong if I'm reading the statute incorrectly, but it originates for them because
[6:59:49] they're responsible for security on campus, the school board is.
[6:59:54] That's where I read it.
[6:59:55] Now, they can contract out with whomever they want, but from what I understand, I don't
[7:00:00] It has to initiate from the school board. You know, check into that, you know, if it's what they want, fine, but once again, I think they need to ask us to come over the way they're more than happy to say yes, but once again. Commissioner, I'm asking you, because they go through me. So I don't, I, I don't know where you're really going with this point. I mean, it needs to be done. We've got to have school security, right? Whether the schools pay for it or we pay for it.
[7:00:29] pay for it or how it's done with lots of options out there right but I've been
[7:00:33] filling the gap in the meantime and I think I'm going to be the one that's
[7:00:38] standing at the podium explaining what happens when it happens I know it's
[7:00:41] in precinct three our hospitals over there all the time they patrol the campus
[7:00:45] that they're in now they're you know they're doing what they can but once again
[7:00:49] it's a SCUC has I think I think they have resource officers on the city of
[7:00:55] I'm not certain, but they do. It's a similar top contract as we're on proposing.
[7:01:00] But once again, it's contracted and initiated from the school board.
[7:01:04] And that's all I'm getting at. They need to initiate it.
[7:01:07] We just can't go over that. We say, this is what we're going to do for you.
[7:01:10] Ask them what they want us to do. That's all I'm asking for.
[7:01:17] I'm unclear on what you're asking.
[7:01:19] The way I read the statute, the school board is responsible.
[7:01:23] So school board is the one who has to initiate any any dialogue with us or the county or you?
[7:01:29] Is that not correct? But the sheriff is saying he's had those conversations, right?
[7:01:34] Some of them, right. Yeah
[7:01:36] So we're just talking about two districts, correct?
[7:01:39] Primarily, yes. Primarily. Yeah, they still some of my deputies do work for a new Bronfell's ISD
[7:01:44] comellist at times. Yeah, not nothing like nothing like what we provide for Navarro Mary.
[7:01:51] I'm not understanding, though, because I had a discussion with Marion, and Marion said
[7:01:58] that what they were doing was using off-duty deputies and paying them, you know, whatever,
[7:02:05] the fee per hour, that they had really in that the sheriff's, I'm quoting what I was told,
[7:02:13] and that the sheriff's office coordinated, yes, so-and-so is going to be off, you
[7:02:20] know, and that they would, that it was working fine for them and that they were
[7:02:26] paying these off-duty deputies to be their SROs. So the only thing that we were
[7:02:32] really out of as a county, which I don't have a problem with, is if the Tahoe
[7:02:37] sitting there idling, it's burning fuel or whatever, which that's okay because a lot of it
[7:02:44] they're working traffic and stuff like that. So I'm not understanding why there's even a
[7:02:51] discussion when the schools are saying that what they're doing is working. So the schools have been
[7:02:57] unaware that we've been staffing it with full-time employees when we've had to fill the gaps. That's the
[7:03:03] conversations that have come up recently. They didn't know. They thought they
[7:03:06] were paying deputies. They were. They didn't realize that we were having a
[7:03:10] supplement. But what changed? Because if we were doing it before with paid
[7:03:15] people, I hear what you're saying, but what changed? Why was what they were
[7:03:21] doing before not working now where you're having to pick up the slack more and
[7:03:27] I can't control deputies signing up for jobs in an off duty capacity.
[7:03:34] I have absolutely no control over that. The previous sheriff would enter into a contract with the school districts.
[7:03:39] I don't know how he did that because I can't, I told the school districts, I can't contract with you
[7:03:44] and promise you personnel when they're in an off duty capacity.
[7:03:49] I can't tell them what to do when they're off, right?
[7:03:51] I can't contract with you through the court with your permission to provide an SRO program
[7:03:58] where we enter into a sharing of the cost to provide those deputies.
[7:04:04] But I can't promise you that deputies are going to sign up to work it on their days off.
[7:04:10] And slowly over time, that's to windowed out.
[7:04:12] And we've had to fill the void for school security purposes.
[7:04:15] Now, Commissioner, I will tell you that Marion has not been as big of a problem and really
[7:04:20] honestly rarely is a problem. It is generally working what we're doing and then the deputies
[7:04:26] are supplementing what is the state requirement with the because they fulfill it with the
[7:04:32] guardian program. Navarro is really where we've come up short most of the time.
[7:04:36] Yeah, okay. Any other questions, comments?
[7:04:41] I don't understand why Sheriff you are under the impression that we are against the SROs.
[7:04:48] That's mostly been through budget discussions with me and the judge.
[7:04:54] Okay.
[7:04:55] The budget meeting we had downstairs?
[7:04:58] Yeah, we've had...
[7:05:00] We've talked about the contracts, and as far as doing school resource, but we've talked, heck, that goes back from prior to me even being the sheriff. I mean, we've had those discussions. And then Commissioner, you brought up in this budget that you think that the parents should raise money to pay for these officers. No, that's not what I said. What I said in our budget meeting, I asked if you could go back and see if you could negotiate a better deal for us, because I became aware that other school districts were contributing more, whether it be through a PTO,
[7:05:29] because I had seen that several times occur,
[7:05:32] or it had been through the school district
[7:05:33] that were helping supplement the cost.
[7:05:35] I wasn't saying parents should pay for it.
[7:05:37] I wasn't saying I was against it.
[7:05:38] I was simply asking back in May,
[7:05:41] if you would be willing to see
[7:05:43] if they could come back with a better offer
[7:05:44] because I was seeing around the state
[7:05:46] where other districts were contributing more,
[7:05:48] and I was hoping that that could help us out.
[7:05:50] It wasn't a negative thing.
[7:05:51] It was simply saying that I think maybe we could
[7:05:53] see if we could negotiate a little further.
[7:05:55] That is all.
[7:05:56] Yeah, I disagree with you.
[7:05:57] If is there something I need to answer about this particular budget process, how many positions, how much money's left over?
[7:06:04] Because I think we're just trying to have a conversation to understand where it's coming from because I personally am not against it at all
[7:06:12] I think I think it's a great thing that we have them in schools that wasn't it
[7:06:15] I was trying to see if they could give us a better deal so that we could do more that that's all I mean
[7:06:21] I there's there's no reason or motivation that I would possibly have for not doing that
[7:06:26] Well, Commissioner, that's not how me or my chief deputy remember that conversation and I think it's unfortunate if that was a miscommunication that we did not understand each other at that moment, but I think that what we have to do is move forward in the best way that we can. It's really our only choice.
[7:06:40] So I agree with that.
[7:06:42] Okay.
[7:06:42] Right.
[7:06:44] And the reason I brought up this, or just because if we're talking about adding positions
[7:06:49] and deputies versus a 25% cost to SROs, it's a different number.
[7:06:56] So I mean, I voice my concern about future finances, all that stuff.
[7:07:00] I know you said, hey, we'll address it differently in the future.
[7:07:02] I was just trying to get majority of the court heading in the direction going, or we're talking
[7:07:07] about three deputies at 2.25 a piece, or we're talking about four SROs that are $100,000
[7:07:12] because it's only 25% so that's what I was talking about and I want to tell you when we talked about
[7:07:18] it downstairs I don't think I have voiced as much concern as maybe commissioner I did just
[7:07:23] trying to get to the numbers and stuff but when I looked at those position requests 10 SROs were the
[7:07:29] cheaper version of something you communicated was really important to school safety and the public
[7:07:34] wasn't against it I was actually sitting there going that might be the priority that gets funded
[7:07:39] because it's as you stated one of the most important things for for child and
[7:07:45] public safety but also it was one of the cheaper options because instead of paying
[7:07:48] for all 10 it was really a number to pay for 2.5 because it was only 25%
[7:07:54] so if we were going to do that that conversation should have happened months ago
[7:07:57] like there's no way in the money that you're trying to deliberate right now
[7:08:01] that I'm going to be able to tell you what the school contract is going to be
[7:08:04] because we've had no formal contract negotiations with school districts and and
[7:08:09] And I'm sorry, but I don't remember the conversation that way in any form of fashion.
[7:08:13] And I was going to say that that I know that's what Commissioner Ott asked was the additional
[7:08:18] feedback from there, but she was asking if the school districts would pay not only for
[7:08:22] the salary, but for also some of the additional equipment.
[7:08:25] You said that that's not how it usually works.
[7:08:27] She said, can you can you just ask and check on it?
[7:08:30] And I think that was kind of the end of the conversation.
[7:08:32] But in all fairness, right after that, we found out not too long that we didn't have the
[7:08:38] money, right?
[7:08:39] So I think that kind of stopped all conversations about positions and all those things we had our we had our budget discussion
[7:08:45] What back in May?
[7:08:47] Yes, that's correct. There were two months between May is two and a half months between this conversation
[7:08:51] I believe our conversation was in the May teens and we found out that bad information on July 27
[7:08:56] I think regardless we can get mad at each other over what I think is in this understanding because I think it is your
[7:09:01] Intention to help the schools. It was also our intention to help the schools truly.
[7:09:08] I
[7:09:08] So what exactly are you asking of me now?
[7:09:12] So the whole reason I brought up SROs was if the courts
[7:09:16] willing to reallocate some of the reserves
[7:09:18] for additional positions for the Sheriff's Department,
[7:09:21] it's a completely different number.
[7:09:22] Let's say four deputies fully funded with equipment
[7:09:25] is $900,000 for SRO positions with equipment
[7:09:29] is only going to be 25% of that plus equipment.
[7:09:32] So I was just trying to say if we got down to numbers
[7:09:35] and there's a shortfall like what's the preference
[7:09:37] to just get the full amount of deputies or is it those SROs that are funded?
[7:09:43] Let's guess 25% of the SROs would absolutely be a priority.
[7:09:47] So I don't know that we're going to be able to get that done in the timeframe
[7:09:50] that you are under right now with the time crunch on getting the budget passed.
[7:09:54] It was more than happy to do it. Got me on how you want to do that.
[7:09:58] that now. I mean, we need this.
[7:10:00] And I've been adamant about that that we have to do it. It's a future solution to a growing county and growing schools and everything. And it's important to me that we protect those kids at those school campuses. And what we are doing now is starting to fail. And it's been it's been failing for years. I communicated that to the former sheriff when I work for him. No, I just I saw a majority of the court kind of three people working in the direction going, hey, if money's tight,
[7:10:28] If instead of 100,000 salary each, if you're at 100,000 for four SROs on the salary side,
[7:10:35] you already gave input and direction on some of the equipment and stuff.
[7:10:40] It's like, maybe there's a scenario where that works, right?
[7:10:43] You get maybe at least a handful of them or something.
[7:10:46] So the contract that I utilized when I had the initial discussions was the one that the
[7:10:50] Komel County Sheriff's Office has with Komel ISD.
[7:10:53] They have a full-time SRO program.
[7:10:54] They roughly pay about, the county pays about 70% to 80% of the salary, I forgive me,
[7:11:01] I don't know the number off top of my head, but they pay about that much of the total salary
[7:11:05] of the employee, but the county still bears the cost of the equipment, because the county
[7:11:11] still benefits from having those deputies.
[7:11:13] You're virtually getting four deputies as you stated for the price of one.
[7:11:17] When those deputies are not in the school districts, they're going to be supplementing patrol
[7:11:21] districts.
[7:11:21] They're going to be driving back and forth from school campuses to their residents.
[7:11:25] They're going to be going to training. That's more visibility within the county, right?
[7:11:29] So you're providing more presence.
[7:11:31] It's scientifically proven that more law enforcement presence deters crime.
[7:11:35] So it's a good thing all the way around. It's really a win-win for both of them.
[7:11:40] And I would have loved to have gone down this route a couple of months ago.
[7:11:43] I think now it's going to be challenging.
[7:11:46] It's got a call from the SCUC, and they pay for all the SROs out of the school district,
[7:11:53] which is wonderful, but they're probably a whole lot richer than the Verow.
[7:11:59] Because the Verow is tapped out from what I remember talking to Superintendent.
[7:12:03] They are maxed out on the INS and everything, so.
[7:12:07] So I was just trying to think of how they're labeled, because if they're labeled as deputies,
[7:12:11] but they're only funded as SROs and you can't get something done with the school.
[7:12:15] You may still be in the same situation where those aren't fully funded as deputies.
[7:12:20] So just in one people thinking one thing and then doing another with the money that's being talked about.
[7:12:25] Yeah, so my initial plan was is if we had the staffing because we as a state of were 90 short.
[7:12:30] If we got any form of staffing, I was going to staff it and then enter into future contract negotiations with school districts
[7:12:37] and put that together with the commission's court
[7:12:40] to get their approval for the contract,
[7:12:41] and then they would be able to offset the cost.
[7:12:44] But we need the positions.
[7:12:45] I mean, there's no getting around that.
[7:12:47] We need the positions to do so.
[7:12:50] Any other questions for this year?
[7:12:53] One thing has been brought up.
[7:12:55] Maybe you can clarify this.
[7:12:56] It won't take a long time on this SRO program.
[7:12:59] I was talking to some people from Sibolo
[7:13:01] and they were trying it with steel.
[7:13:03] and they said that the problem they ran into is the school days are long. Those
[7:13:11] deputies have to be there a long day and so they said what happened was that
[7:13:17] it sounded good on the outset but the deputies used up so much over time and
[7:13:26] comp time or vacation time whatever you want to and when you got like to the
[7:13:32] summer or to the Christmas holidays when you figured you would have them more and I understand what
[7:13:37] you're saying when they're driving to school they're they're working so to speak. But they said
[7:13:42] that they wound up being on vacation and comp time so much you didn't get to use them very much.
[7:13:49] Can you elaborate on that idea? That's possible they're they're going to have to burn their time at
[7:13:54] some point in time. Yeah. It's going to have to happen. So when they take that it's going to be
[7:13:59] Just like school teachers, it's going to be harder during the school years.
[7:14:03] We have lowered our overtime significantly since I took office.
[7:14:09] When I came into office in February, I got an email from Miss Douglas who said you're
[7:14:14] in the red in February and I took office in January and it was because the prior administration
[7:14:19] had exhausted my entire overtime budget in three months, right?
[7:14:23] So we've made some changes to our scheduling to be able to have our overtime available and
[7:14:28] it's worked.
[7:14:28] We've had overtime available throughout the year.
[7:14:32] So now we use some of that overtime for increased projects, you know, targeting hot spot locations throughout the county,
[7:14:39] traffic enforcement projects, that kind of things.
[7:14:41] So those deputies that are working school resource programs, they could still come in on their days off,
[7:14:46] work extra overtime, it'd be extra available personnel in the county.
[7:14:54] Any other questions?
[7:14:57] Comments?
[7:14:57] That's it.
[7:14:58] That's it.
[7:15:00] This is like superpoels are from the school board and this is what we'd like some sort of an local agreement that we bring over to us because they have to initiate it. We just can't go inside their house and tell what we're going to do. The way the bill is written, they need to approach us and then we can say yes. Once again, you know, are they offering anything as any payment of anything else or, you know, I know they're probably strapped like everybody else's, but once again, the initial
[7:15:30] So conversation has to originate from them because they are responsible for the safety and welfare of the children.
[7:15:36] I think it has through their proxies and department heads.
[7:15:43] It had reached this far.
[7:15:45] No, no.
[7:15:45] It was good.
[7:15:46] Okay.
[7:15:46] Nice to see you.
[7:15:47] Thank you.
[7:15:51] Any other thoughts on?
[7:15:56] Yes, so even a leprositions work.
[7:15:58] And we'd like to talk to you.
[7:16:02] I said three deputies earlier.
[7:16:03] If that was able to work, it's still preference, three, three deputies.
[7:16:13] That was my suggestion as well.
[7:16:16] Are you good with three deputies?
[7:16:19] Yeah.
[7:16:19] Yeah, fine.
[7:16:27] What else is left on the list?
[7:16:31] Globbled County Fire Rescue.
[7:16:37] I know there are multiple positions talked about.
[7:16:40] One was a chief lieutenant that
[7:16:45] Any thoughts on that?
[7:16:49] We need any administrative or just firefighters.
[7:16:56] I thought why I heard that the captains, those are the ones that we would prefer.
[7:17:02] The captains, because this is just pulling it up out.
[7:17:05] The captains are the lieutenants.
[7:17:06] We need with all the expansion, we need supervisors and buildings.
[7:17:10] So either one of those positions would be adequate.
[7:17:13] So three lieutenants or three captains.
[7:17:15] So does that serve the operation the same way?
[7:17:20] I mean, understand there's got to be a command structure
[7:17:22] and there has to be people there
[7:17:24] and needs to be leadership and experience,
[7:17:26] especially in an area where something is expanding
[7:17:29] and doing that, but what we've also heard
[7:17:31] from the volunteers, from municipal partners
[7:17:33] and all that is, I mean, people responding to calls.
[7:17:37] Like, so, I mean, if money's tied,
[7:17:41] is it one thing, is there a different structure to that,
[7:17:44] Is that really that's still the preference is to have a captain lieutenant the firefighter?
[7:17:48] I mean, what do y'all think so we have two FAOs on each shift? We have four firefighters on each shift and
[7:17:55] then we have the
[7:17:57] Lieutenant on each shift so we have more firefighters on each shift than we do supervisors so at that point if we hire the supervisors we can then
[7:18:05] Move the firefighters to a different like different building so we can I'm lieutenant here a lieutenant here a driver driver
[7:18:13] fire fighter swing but three in a location and it's just it's it's not adequate
[7:18:19] it's not what we need but it'll get us by until we get to that point because
[7:18:23] ultimately you want five four firefighters in each piece of equipment so an
[7:18:27] engine it's the NFPA standard we go we do it with two in Toronto now so we can
[7:18:32] give it three we add one we can put one in Toronto or we can put one on the west
[7:18:36] side of the county so question I'm on favorite boots on the ground yeah
[7:18:41] Yeah, we watch Chicago Fire and all this other crap. So do they actually wear a bucket gear and go in and fight the fires?
[7:18:47] Yes, sir. Okay, that's that's good. Just I just don't want them sitting in the truck. Point fingers like everyone of our guys is certified for structural firefighting and they're also an A&T basic.
[7:18:57] Yeah, that's that's what we need to know.
[7:18:59] Yes,
[7:19:02] so three lieutenant's if that's what the court wants to give us.
[7:19:07] But what what was the preference? I know you listed a couple different options.
[7:19:10] I prefer the captain, but if the lieutenants is what the court wants to give us,
[7:19:13] many jurisdictions, Sibolo's run three lieutenants for many years.
[7:19:16] Sigeen ran lieutenants for many years until they got to the captain's lower.
[7:19:20] Sigeen, or Sibolo, he has a lieutenant in each station.
[7:19:24] And then he just got a battalion chief, I'd say, less than three or four years ago.
[7:19:29] So yeah, lieutenants.
[7:19:31] I think I need to understand more about this work, because we talk about going out to fires.
[7:19:37] and there needs to be X amount of people operating a fire truck for at least
[7:19:44] probably five, right? They're eventually yes. No, to respond to a
[7:19:48] structure fire, right? Oh, there needs to be more than five. There needs to be
[7:19:51] at least 12, 16. Okay, so I mean when you see like city is the game, city is the
[7:20:00] And you'll get all three fire stations, and they'll dump into a call. Now the GCF are there. They won't send a city truck to send our city to similarly get at least three engines. So we're asking to speak on a little bit more, but there is a standard. Yes, Commissioner, to your standard, you're asking for a DCFP does require two and two out? Yes. Outside that, the FDA does have a recommendation of minimum 12 to 15 firefighters for every residential structure fire from there. So what we're current staffing plan.
[7:20:29] And what we have is for our engine companies are, is that two and two out four people,
[7:20:33] our squad units are two because obviously that's all they can hold, but our ultimate goal
[7:20:38] is for minimum each station to have four personnel to allow that two and two out on the
[7:20:42] engine now.
[7:20:43] As we grow and call by increases and we have to separate that engine onto a squad, eventually
[7:20:47] we may go up to six to allow two people on the squad and four people on the engine to maintain
[7:20:51] both apparatus and staff at the same time.
[7:20:53] So the triplet one one and one for each of the shifts will make a difference.
[7:20:58] Yes.
[7:20:58] Yes.
[7:20:58] Like it's not one of those.
[7:21:00] It gives eight on each shift.
[7:21:02] Yes.
[7:21:03] Okay.
[7:21:04] And the reason for the, the captain, you know, I think the Commissioner Wolfe 10s point
[7:21:07] two and years is the, the captain is on shift.
[7:21:10] They're not, they're not a battalion chief, they're not, they're not a, they're not a dust
[7:21:13] jockey.
[7:21:13] They, they are running that shift.
[7:21:16] And the reason we asked for the captains was because having two lieutenants is, you're
[7:21:20] going to have a power struggle like anybody else.
[7:21:22] You have top A personality, someone's got to be in charge.
[7:21:24] With that captain position, it's, that person's in charge of that shift now, the lieutenants
[7:21:28] in charge of the other stations.
[7:21:31] So that's why we were asking for the captains, but whatever commission's court decides
[7:21:34] to give us will be happy.
[7:21:35] And I'm sorry, it's not inherent about this, but on each shift right now, are there
[7:21:38] each of these?
[7:21:39] Are there a captain in the lieutenant on each of the current shifts?
[7:21:43] So currently we have a lieutenant, one lieutenant, two pho's, two drivers, and four, five
[7:21:48] hunters per shift, and there's three shifts to them.
[7:21:50] And those are all full.
[7:21:51] Yes.
[7:21:52] So you're asking for the insertion of this captain into the hierarchy, which would be higher
[7:21:57] than all of those folks. Is that correct? Yes and the reason being is because now we're open to
[7:22:01] multiple stations and so trying to find that across the board leadership for the for the entire
[7:22:07] shift not just the station for the shift now because right now the lieutenant at station seven one
[7:22:12] is over the personnel at Toronto as well but if we as we add staffing we need that oversight for
[7:22:19] the shift.
[7:22:21] That's fine.
[7:22:21] I'll give some lieutenants.
[7:22:22] That's fine.
[7:22:23] How does seniority work?
[7:22:24] See, so a firefighter?
[7:22:26] So if he had two lieutenants and one had a year or more, six months, he would be seeing
[7:22:30] you lieutenant.
[7:22:30] He'd be car shots.
[7:22:32] He could be, but technically, on paper, they're exactly the same authority, and by SOP,
[7:22:37] they're exactly the same thing.
[7:22:52] How does that work with the, why
[7:22:59] higher captains at that level versus promoting lieutenants
[7:23:04] and hiring firefighters?
[7:23:06] We would, we would, our plan would be to promote from within the new positions would,
[7:23:11] so the lieutenant, the three lieutenants would be eligible to test for the three captains.
[7:23:15] Not saying all three of them would get it, but they would have the chance to promote,
[7:23:19] if not somebody from the outside, we could open from the outside.
[7:23:21] And then that opens up a vacancy in lieutenants, fails, move up to lieutenants,
[7:23:26] fire fire, flip to fails, and then we would open up additional firefire positions at the end.
[7:23:30] So
[7:23:34] it's a, it's a vertical movement.
[7:23:35] Yeah, I'm really not trying to ask ignorant questions here and see the difference between
[7:23:41] the captain and the firefighter being being significant.
[7:23:44] I mean, it's, I'm almost too tired to math, but $45,000 is per?
[7:23:50] That includes the overtime, that's why you get these pay scales also include the overtime.
[7:23:57] So that's the built-in overtime, that's why you see it at so high, each fire position
[7:24:02] has built in over time since they worked the 24-hour 48-96.
[7:24:06] But the difference is still $25,000.
[7:24:09] It could be higher, too, because they've worked more over time.
[7:24:11] So the shorter the shifts, you know, last year we ran over on our over time line.
[7:24:17] I guess I'm confused about why we are not opening this to three firefighters.
[7:24:26] We can. We'll fill it.
[7:24:27] What are the court prepared to sign?
[7:24:29] So we were looking at trying to advance the department to the next level.
[7:24:32] I'm getting the leadership established because that takes a bit longer to get
[7:24:38] trained and get up there where a fireman is pretty easy to bring in. Let's try
[7:24:42] to add that leadership side to the fire department so as we grow the
[7:24:46] leadership is already there. We're not having to add leadership later on.
[7:24:54] Whatever conditions court wants to give us, we just need three.
[7:25:05] I think three firefighters.
[7:25:16] You prefer firefighters instead of the command structure of the all thing and one was in it two firefighters. Just. To do what they're saying because there's a need right now. Well, that's all be the same. Yes, it has to be a triplet. That's what right. Right. Yeah. On her and boots on the ground. Like to be out there. But lieutenant will be out there.
[7:25:43] I got you. I do want to make a quick announcement that the Zoom meeting is set to cut off at 6 p.m.
[7:25:50] So anybody that's online, it may cut off and we'll have to restart and you would have to log back in.
[7:25:58] We apologize for any inconvenience. I may make one more announcement. As we get closer, it's 544.
[7:26:04] Or we could take a break if we needed to to restart the zoom.
[7:26:11] But if there's a break, please try to log back on.
[7:26:15] We may have to have a new, is it a new link basically in the same place?
[7:26:19] It's the same link and same information.
[7:26:20] We'll just restart it because once you set a parameter for zoom it can't extend it during the meeting.
[7:26:26] So if we stop at 555 for example, we could set a new meeting to start at 558 or
[7:26:33] four, six, and go till whatever time is set.
[7:26:37] But people will have to rejoin the meeting.
[7:26:39] Okay, just wanted to put that out there.
[7:26:42] We're gonna have to address that.
[7:26:44] So apologize for anybody watching online.
[7:26:47] We may have to take a short break in a few minutes,
[7:26:49] before six, and then please log back into the Zoom.
[7:26:54] Link, back to firefighters.
[7:26:56] The author, they need to be the same.
[7:26:58] Yep, three firefighters.
[7:26:59] Three firefighters, firefighters,
[7:27:01] commissional government or you give a fire fighters instead of captains.
[7:27:07] Yeah, yeah, we got a yes. All right. Thank you gentlemen.
[7:27:11] We're
[7:27:18] at a point where we can go through the summary list.
[7:27:20] Yeah, maybe
[7:27:25] we can beat the Zoom deadline.
[7:27:27] No, thank you.
[7:27:30] Right.
[7:27:31] right. Any any other items we want to do
[7:27:47] we want to take a break so we can
[7:27:50] address the zoom related issue and also maybe clean up that list commissioners
[7:27:59] are y'all okay do you think we could take a short break address the zoom issue and
[7:28:05] then get the the list refined and maybe start working on some summary and
[7:28:10] total of what the cost is. Yes. Is everybody okay with that? Yes. Yes. Okay. We'll go
[7:28:15] ahead and recess at 545. Those again online, please just log back into the zoom hearing
[7:28:23] after we get it set up. Thank you.
[7:29:02] All right. Coming back from recess, we'll reconvene
[7:29:06] this regular meeting of Commissioner's Court at 614 p.m. We still are on item n, which
[7:29:14] is to adopt the Guadalupe County budget for fiscal year 2026, 2027 or FY27. I think we
[7:29:23] took a needed pause to address the Zoom meeting link, but also just take a few minutes. We were
[7:29:32] addressing and having a discussion about finalizing kind of a bullet point list of positions and or
[7:29:40] additional budget items, don't know if there's anything else we need to
[7:29:47] discuss. Commissioners, please hang on one second. I see I mean our MIS
[7:29:54] directors standing in the view have something Chris. It's I know it's the
[7:29:59] 11 hours.
[7:30:00] And if we're going to consider positions, I would just respectfully ask that you consider the network position I have with adding positions and about 10% of our workload is network related. I'm looking to have somebody that we can train in to replace mic for when mic is ready to retire, probably in the next possibly three to five years with our new network equipment and everything. His workloads pretty pretty full and adding.
[7:30:29] the cradle points and everything for Sheriff's Office.
[7:30:34] I can justify this.
[7:30:37] I have a hard time asking for this hearing all the budget shortfalls and I've been kind
[7:30:42] of sitting there hesitating whether or not to bring it up or not.
[7:30:47] We can make it work.
[7:30:50] We may not be able to deliver the same level of service that everybody's got used to and
[7:30:56] if everybody can understand it might take us a little bit longer to get something done.
[7:31:00] I'm willing to move forward with it. I just if there is room and we can make it work,
[7:31:07] just like for you to consider it. That's all.
[7:31:12] Questions or comments thoughts on that?
[7:31:17] I mean the pay grade would be it would be a grade 11 position. So starting at the current page is
[7:31:24] It's $3243, so grade 11 step four.
[7:31:27] I figure that to be probably about $100,000 all
[7:31:31] sudden done with insurance and whatnot, I would
[7:31:35] have to find money to get furniture because I don't
[7:31:37] have furniture to house another person in my office.
[7:31:40] The furniture I have is too large to squeeze anymore in.
[7:31:45] But I can shop around.
[7:31:47] I can look for used cubicles, kind of things, something
[7:31:50] like that.
[7:31:51] But I have a quote for about 30 grand to do pupils in there and I could rearrange the
[7:31:57] office and have extra seats for vendors or anything else after the fact.
[7:32:03] But to
[7:32:06] me, it's a big ask at this time.
[7:32:11] Like you said, I know part of our budget conversation on any of the new positions that would be housed
[7:32:16] within your department.
[7:32:17] Like you said, because of space limitations and layout of furniture, really any position
[7:32:22] and they got added was also coupled with that furniture change,
[7:32:26] but like you said, so you could reconfigure.
[7:32:30] It's hard to just find a place to stick somebody, right?
[7:32:33] It is.
[7:32:34] I had a space, I don't have the space to add another desk
[7:32:37] because the desk that we got,
[7:32:38] when we remodeled this building for just too long.
[7:32:42] And how much was that on the furniture?
[7:32:45] Do you remember the number?
[7:32:46] I believe it was 30 to 35,000 for six cubicles.
[7:32:53] I was on my technicians.
[7:32:54] We got a conference table over here, we've got to take.
[7:33:02] Okay, glad our luggage still left.
[7:33:04] All right.
[7:33:08] Any questions from Ms. Kamala while he's at the podium?
[7:33:12] Chris, let me just ask you this,
[7:33:14] because we're, I mean, we're trying up here
[7:33:15] to figure some things out.
[7:33:17] Is there anything from what you requested?
[7:33:20] I hear what you're asking for now, if it could work out.
[7:33:24] Do you know of anything from what you requested
[7:33:26] it off the top of your head, where maybe you could knock 100,000 off that you know of.
[7:33:32] I could maybe go through and try to do that.
[7:33:36] Most of my budget is operational through it's set up to pay bills so that we keep operating
[7:33:43] and set up to prepare for something for it.
[7:33:46] So there's not a lot that I can...
[7:33:50] Not a lot of wiggle.
[7:33:50] There's not a... I usually end up with money left over to buy into your equipment, but it's always in preparation of something major happening.
[7:34:02] Okay. One big thing right now is our Lenovo computers. Lenovo was dropped off the DIR contract because of Chinese parts.
[7:34:13] the state has not decided to make the change to put them on the you can't use
[7:34:17] this technology list. My fear is that the state puts them on that list and I've
[7:34:21] got to replace 650 computers all at once. And they've gone up a lot, yeah it's
[7:34:32] ridiculous. I put in my cycle through PCs so we don't have PCs hopefully older than
[7:34:39] about five years old. So just to kind of keep cycling through kind of like what you
[7:34:44] talked about the cars is you know just a process of replacing computers.
[7:34:51] Because even in your budget I mean we've had PC life cycle replacement dollars tied to
[7:34:57] funds, but if there are any additional funds
[7:35:00] We've had a lot of discussions that were within a budget or unspent. We've tried to maximize or capitalize on lower cost in a current budget year to buy some of next year's request. If we know there's increases on computers, we know that there's normally say 20 or 25 new county positions with some additional printer or copy or request, scanners, anything like that. A lot of times when we get to the end of the budget process, Chris and I talk through those numbers and say, okay, go through and sweep all your lines, how much money's in your budget. Can we buy some of that equipment now?
[7:35:29] for stuff we know is going to get funded for this cheaper this year I'm still
[7:35:34] expecting to pay still expect enough to purchase another six fifty to
[7:35:40] seven hundred fifty thousand dollars next year
[7:35:45] it's just a bit different year
[7:35:47] than normal any
[7:35:54] other thoughts or discussion on the network administrator or
[7:35:57] furniture I've got two more stations I'm trying to give them was cheap I'll
[7:36:07] all over here.
[7:36:13] I was going to say there's you know there's a lot of stuff
[7:36:16] insured to be seen those rooms. I have I've seen a lot of it again it comes
[7:36:22] down to fitting my office. I totally understand I wanted to make sure that you
[7:36:27] knew of the lots of furniture. We scavenged we scavenged for the 20 years I've been
[7:36:34] here fairly regularly go
[7:36:43] back to district judges real quick it's sir it's a judge
[7:36:48] Heinz also said that she would like to have an admin for the district court
[7:36:53] I'm sorry a staff attorney for the district courts and the admin for both
[7:37:00] district judges to go up two steps since
[7:37:05] we're adding all these things but
[7:37:10] once again
[7:37:10] I think we need to find out how much money we're talking about, don't we?
[7:37:13] We'll find that out.
[7:37:15] Get done adding, I guess.
[7:37:19] Miss Klein over that way, much in the numbers.
[7:37:24] I need, we've got to have the list to start working on it and then.
[7:37:28] Okay.
[7:37:30] And is anybody having written down?
[7:37:32] Do you want me to read what I have?
[7:37:34] Do you want to talk about the staff attorney and or.
[7:37:40] No, it sounded like the regraids weren't still on the table like there wasn't support for some of them and if we're not doing some of them then that's not the folks seem like the discussion had turned to considering the new positions. Is that fair?
[7:37:57] I don't have a single regraid on this list that I collected that the court agreed on.
[7:38:02] Correct. So for the the position request by the district judges of a staff attorney.
[7:38:10] So what you would bring in that was I was bringing it up. Yes, yes, you
[7:38:21] have a problem with it.
[7:38:23] No problem. I
[7:38:28] It's illegal. It's in your your neighborhood. Yeah, I understand
[7:38:34] At
[7:38:37] this point, the only positions that we've approved are
[7:38:42] emergency response and something to assist felony prosecution.
[7:38:46] I definitely think we will get to a point where we will need a staff attorney for the district judges.
[7:38:52] I don't know if that would be shared with the county court of law judges, but it's a very useful thing.
[7:38:56] I know in other counties that I've been involved in, the county attorney's office does do a decent amount of the work that a staff attorney
[7:39:05] what it could do for the things that are at least neutral, or perhaps in the civil realm.
[7:39:13] They're able to do that, and I don't know the capacity for that right now.
[7:39:19] I have never talked to Mr. Wilburn about that, to be honest, I just can't answer that question at this time.
[7:39:24] That's a three question, Judge Hines.
[7:39:27] No, I know, but what I'm saying is I know that the county attorney's office in other counties that I am familiar with
[7:39:32] their work and have been able to provide some of that guidance and work. I don't know
[7:39:36] what that is, what the situation is. I just don't know one way or the other. I haven't
[7:39:41] had the occasion to discuss that. I think it's something that will be needed in the short
[7:39:49] future. But again, I don't know. I don't know if that would be something that could be contracted
[7:39:53] out for them. You know, what's the, Dave says yes, he would like
[7:40:00] Okay, because if we're giving the sheriff more people and other people, he's going to need the extra help.
[7:40:34] To be honest, I have not thought enough about that to make a decision about that at this point in time. Because that was something I thought we. Was off the table with the progression in the.
[7:40:48] Proposition that was provided to the court and
[7:40:53] had it not been I would have thought more about that but that is something that I thought that we were and I know that it was.
[7:41:01] In exchange for, because there were other things that were prioritized, but I just, I mean, that's not something that I have completely thought through.
[7:41:08] I do see where it will be necessary in the very near future, though.
[7:41:12] It's not this budget.
[7:41:14] I don't feel educated enough about the topic right now to speak on it.
[7:41:24] Judge, I don't think we're getting anywhere, so I'm going to make a motion that we approve of your budget as
[7:41:31] presented.
[7:41:33] We're going back and forth.
[7:41:34] So
[7:41:42] let me just restate this commissioner so I understand there's a motion to approve the budget that was
[7:41:51] presented to us from you.
[7:41:53] The recommended budget or the proposed budget because there's two different tax rates.
[7:42:00] The recommended budget.
[7:42:02] The recommended budget that had $2,000 longevity, no cola at a 4% tax increase.
[7:42:09] Yes, sir. There's a motion on the table. Is there a second?
[7:42:23] There's a motion. Is there a second?
[7:42:27] All right, that motion fails for lack of a second.
[7:42:33] Commissioners would you like to continue the conversation and or I just want to yeah, go over that list. We have what you remember.
[7:42:42] I don't know
[7:42:45] Well, over 10 was referring to the last one you did,
[7:42:49] the 4% you're talking about, but we did on that eight hours ago.
[7:42:55] I had a different, but I don't see us getting anywhere today list.
[7:43:02] Yeah, I'd like to know what the number is.
[7:43:05] Okay, you want to restate the list?
[7:43:07] Yes, I'm, yes, I am ready to do that.
[7:43:10] Okay, Ms. Klein, as these are, these are just my notes.
[7:43:14] So if someone remembers it differently, please speak up, because it's just me writing as we're going.
[7:43:18] These are things that I think we had a majority consensus on.
[7:43:22] One are the changes in the grades that do not cost anything for
[7:43:27] environmental health due to the abolishing of the clerk to position.
[7:43:36] It was grades.
[7:43:40] That's what I understood, right?
[7:43:42] It was a re-grade, not a step-infused.
[7:43:44] Yes.
[7:43:47] Yes. Yes. Planner was two. Assistant planner was two and
[7:43:55] Floyd Point manager was one and that is through the
[7:44:00] abolishment of the clerk to position.
[7:44:10] The planner from the
[7:44:11] grading 11 to grade 13 but left point manager was eight to
[7:44:16] grade nine and removed the clerk to position.
[7:44:24] Correct. Yes. I
[7:44:26] I believe that's what was talked about.
[7:44:29] And so it would change, yeah, 12, 5, 13, 5, 10, 4, 11, 4, 8, 3, 9, yes, okay, I'm sorry.
[7:44:36] Okay, ready for the next?
[7:44:38] Yep.
[7:44:39] Okay.
[7:44:40] 3% COLA.
[7:44:43] That's easy because it's already in there.
[7:44:45] Okay.
[7:44:47] $1,000 long Jebady.
[7:44:48] Gotcha.
[7:44:49] Okay.
[7:44:53] JP.
[7:44:53] Let me let me be sure I understand because so we don't go back
[7:45:00] You want, you're saying a 3% cola, and we give $8,000 longevity. Okay. I'm just, I want to be on page.
[7:45:14] JP one, moving the clerk one from part time to full time.
[7:45:21] Okay. So with, with what clerk level is it? So I know what grade one, which is grade four. And are we changing right now?
[7:45:31] in the J.P. pre-held.
[7:45:35] There's $24,000 and $24,000 in part time. Are you leaving that changing it? What amount?
[7:45:41] No, ma'am changing the position from part time to a full time. Okay, so I would put zero in part time. Yes, ma'am. Okay,
[7:45:51] J.P.4, same thing.
[7:45:52] a clerk one. Yes ma'am. Great. Now their part time is 44,000.
[7:46:03] Is that for one position?
[7:46:05] I think they have two.
[7:46:08] It's two isn't it? Yeah. So we're moving one person from part time to full time.
[7:46:12] So I should take their part time from 44,000 to 22,000. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Wonderful time. Keep the part time
[7:46:20] No, 22.
[7:46:21] Okay.
[7:46:21] No.
[7:46:23] Wonderful time.
[7:46:24] You keep the other one.
[7:46:25] Magistrate.
[7:46:25] The part time.
[7:46:26] Excuse me.
[7:46:27] Gosh, associate judge.
[7:46:28] To perform.
[7:46:29] Magistration, duties.
[7:46:32] Part time.
[7:46:33] How much?
[7:46:34] 35,000.
[7:46:36] If it was Ellen.
[7:46:38] Hang on a second.
[7:46:39] I know I've got a question on that.
[7:46:41] So, if we are looking at current
[7:46:49] magistrate.
[7:46:51] Okay.
[7:46:52] So, 35 plus 35,000.
[7:46:53] Gotcha.
[7:46:54] All right.
[7:46:54] 35, 307.
[7:47:00] What's what I have on my sheet here?
[7:47:04] 35, yes.
[7:47:06] 307.
[7:47:07] 407.
[7:47:08] In that word, it's good.
[7:47:24] Sheriff's Office, Chaplain.
[7:47:28] I've got that.
[7:47:29] That's commissary.
[7:47:30] What grade?
[7:47:32] Sheriff.
[7:47:33] Sheriff.
[7:47:35] Which grade for the chaplain?
[7:47:37] Did we?
[7:47:37] and I'm not sure we ever talked about that.
[7:47:45] Okay, rate of $22 an hour.
[7:47:47] I don't know if that helps.
[7:47:53] Oh, that's the police.
[7:48:01] Great six step two.
[7:48:03] Is that right?
[7:48:07] That's the right summary sheet.
[7:48:10] Well, it said 22, but the six two,
[7:48:12] it would be a period of $22 67 cents an hour.
[7:48:17] Yeah, Judge, I haven't looked at it in a while.
[7:48:18] I'm going off the numbers that Mr. Douglas gave me earlier
[7:48:21] and I think you sent me the annual, right?
[7:48:29] But you probably just need the hourly.
[7:48:31] So do you, they just tell Chris the grade and step?
[7:48:35] Yes, but then you got that, right?
[7:48:37] The grade six.
[7:48:37] Yes, ma'am.
[7:48:39] County
[7:48:52] attorney is off this felony, paralegal.
[7:48:54] Okay, wait, wait, wait, okay.
[7:48:56] Is that a paralegal two at a grade 10?
[7:49:03] No, I think so.
[7:49:05] Eight, grade eight.
[7:49:07] What's a paralegal?
[7:49:07] It was requested at 8.3, there are two, there are two support positions, this I think this is the legal admin felony intake that was requested.
[7:49:17] And I think both the, both the paralegal and the legal admin were both graded the same at 8.3 on the, where are they?
[7:49:24] Correct. Yeah.
[7:49:25] On the summary sheet that I have.
[7:49:29] Yeah, I think I think the conversation yeah, I was referred to as a felony paralegal, but that is that person. Yes. Okay, so felony paralegal grade eight. Yes. Yes. Okay.
[7:49:45] The next four constables offices that each have an existing part-time deputy line be changed
[7:49:57] into a full time. So we're removing...
[7:50:00] That equivalent of the part time and going into full time. Awesome. Okay, so the constables have part time money of 60, 70, 80, and 60 respectively. Do I change those? Do we leave those? Where are those moving? You're taking half of each and you're pushing that into the full, into a full time position and then adding whatever the rest is to create that full time position because it's existing person existing space. Okay, so 60, 70, 80,
[7:50:29] 60 to 30 35 40 30 if I'm correct it's it's in part time of fund not a spot
[7:50:39] is that right correct I think that's a confusion yeah so what how much you
[7:50:45] want to leave in that part-time pot to just leave have I think half because yeah
[7:50:49] I think some of them have, yeah, I can do that.
[7:51:04] I just got $400.
[7:51:08] I was like, I was going to be pretty synchronized.
[7:51:11] OK.
[7:51:16] VFD emergency fund, $300,000.
[7:51:21] $300.
[7:51:25] Oops, I got $3 million.
[7:51:27] That's OK.
[7:51:27] Well, OK, got that done?
[7:51:32] Sheriff's office.
[7:51:34] I think we landed on three full-time deputies.
[7:51:45] How many?
[7:51:46] Three.
[7:52:03] I'm sorry, one detail that we did not discuss today, but we discussed in pirate court sessions, was the $1,000 based longevity addition at the timing for that.
[7:52:13] I know we discussed a year versus six months of the employment history.
[7:52:17] I know we discussed changing that to six months, but I can't recall if we landed on that, on that conclusion for it.
[7:52:26] I'm just as long as I'm excluded from it, for personnel it's fine, sorry, one more time.
[7:52:37] You'd have to change the policy.
[7:52:40] Because the current personnel policy state requirement is one year to the base.
[7:52:45] One year to the base.
[7:52:46] The additional longevity base, three years employment to receive the regular longevity, right?
[7:52:51] So we'd have to update that.
[7:52:52] I mean, can we update that in this conversation or is that off the table we need to stick with
[7:52:57] the here because that's what we have in front of us.
[7:53:01] So if you wanted to make it that if you were here six months you got the bonus we'd have
[7:53:07] to change policy.
[7:53:09] Yes.
[7:53:10] And Commissioner, I know I'm interrupting but the elected official salaries are already
[7:53:16] posted and posted.
[7:53:17] I know so it's not going to affect.
[7:53:19] Well that's good.
[7:53:19] It doesn't change that form.
[7:53:20] Make sure that I didn't get it.
[7:53:29] Are we able to do that?
[7:53:30] It's on the potential policy changes.
[7:53:32] If we were able to change the policy to six months,
[7:53:34] I would think we should do that.
[7:53:37] Shouldn't take her that long, is it HR or you?
[7:53:44] I would think so.
[7:54:00] Mr. Ties, do we do it now?
[7:54:03] Or do we have to have it there for the time being?
[7:54:04] No, it's an independent action.
[7:54:06] But you've heard to take a fact you would have to do it
[7:54:10] before October 1st and change policy because right now it says that flat
[7:54:17] longevity amount is approved. Part-time employees at average 24 hours over the
[7:54:22] course of October 1 of the previous budget year with 50% and then full-time would
[7:54:28] get the full amount. So you would have to set a date in that to change the
[7:54:37] personal policy, employee policy.
[7:54:39] And I need a date to calculate the six months, so is it?
[7:54:44] So right now you have to be here a year as of October 1st, so we then gonna make it, you
[7:54:49] have to be here by April 1st.
[7:54:50] Whatever date that is, I need to know that so that I can calculate, because I've got all
[7:54:54] the dates higher of all of 700 people, so I need to, it would make a difference for
[7:55:00] People, if it's April 1st or March 1st or that. Right.
[7:55:09] We're our thoughts on keeping it October 1st and changing it to six months.
[7:55:14] I say we revolve around October 1st because it's our fiscal year.
[7:55:22] Not let her have it.
[7:55:26] First of this year means anybody who hired January 1 of 26 will get it. We'll get it. We'll not because it's October 1 of this year. But she's saying like, October 1 is our trigger date. Right.
[7:55:41] You have to for fiscal year 27 you would have had to been hired in October by October 1 of 25 to be able to get the longevity.
[7:55:51] If we do it as of October 1 but 6 months it would be April 1, correct?
[7:55:56] So if somebody was hired in January, February, March of this year with a change policy of 6 months they would still receive the additional longevity base.
[7:56:07] That's what you're recommending, right?
[7:56:09] Was what I had in mind if the Court's uncomfortable with that.
[7:56:13] I mean, I can flex that to nine if we think this is necessary.
[7:56:20] It is not the Hill that I'm going to die on.
[7:56:23] I just wanted to bring up the details because I know we talked about it and didn't feel
[7:56:26] we reached a consensus necessarily.
[7:56:28] I'm final six months.
[7:56:30] I just need this done.
[7:56:34] I wasn't necessarily.
[7:56:36] I was just saying that was something that we had talked about in prior budget discussions
[7:56:39] and I wasn't remembering what we had landed on,
[7:56:41] and so just for purposes of this client's calculations.
[7:56:44] I'll say it right.
[7:56:46] Just trying to remember the details
[7:56:47] that I know the court had brought up.
[7:56:48] She wanted to.
[7:56:49] Oh, yeah.
[7:56:51] Linda, let me say this real quick.
[7:56:55] So Theresa ran me some numbers recently.
[7:56:59] We have a lot of employees that have been here
[7:57:03] less than a year.
[7:57:05] And so I'm on board with that six months.
[7:57:07] It's like a bonus, you know, thank you for staying and coming to work for
[7:57:13] that's why I'm on board with that six months because it's a bunch, it's a lot of employees.
[7:57:23] I know, just so we can come up and everybody can hear.
[7:57:33] Yes, ma'am.
[7:57:34] I'm just thinking how is that going to affect other employees that had to wait a whole year
[7:57:39] before they received their longevity.
[7:57:46] You understand what I'm saying, right?
[7:57:48] Yes, yeah.
[7:57:49] So that's just something to think about.
[7:57:54] And that was my concern we had talked about
[7:57:56] that is just promoting that consistency,
[7:57:59] the original idea of adding the additional longevity base
[7:58:04] was to try to, again, take it from three years back to one year
[7:58:08] to capture more of those new employees
[7:58:10] that maybe weren't being compensated as much at the county to give that initiative
[7:58:14] and motivation to stay that we do try to take into consideration people starting out.
[7:58:20] We had personal days prior with some of those things that change going, there's been modifications
[7:58:25] to their benefits, if you will, let's try to fund a little bit extra when we can.
[7:58:32] So that is the hard part, you do switch that policy, you're telling other employees that
[7:58:36] had to wait that it's different but it's but I mean still the court has the ability
[7:58:41] to do that. And since I'm up here I'm just going to say this is that we have been receiving
[7:58:50] the base longevity since 2016. That's how long we've been receiving it. I know it's too
[7:58:58] late for me and elected officials because our salaries have already been posted but if
[7:59:04] there is any way that you guys can give that $1,000 base or $2,000 base to the employees,
[7:59:13] I'm requesting that you do that.
[7:59:18] And then by the elected officials not getting that
[7:59:21] base longevity, we actually going to be making less money next year than what we're currently making.
[7:59:30] Well, but we have consistently gotten that since 2016. So just some food for thought.
[7:59:37] Thank you.
[7:59:47] Was that the final?
[7:59:50] Yes.
[7:59:50] And just one question, Commissioner, you had mentioned the
[7:59:54] Regrets that didn't require additional general fund budget, and I didn't know whether the court
[8:00:00] What was considering allowing the county attorney for those two positions to regrade funded completely out of asset forfeiture? And I think that was dependent upon whether or not the court had an appetite for the felony paroleal coming out of forfeiture funds or being paid out of the general fund, right? Oh, and I thought the court had said that I think we are willing to pay for the felony paroleal out of the general fund.
[8:00:31] Right, so I mean, I don't have a problem with that.
[8:00:36] There's that's able to be covered, and I'm so sorry if I forgot.
[8:00:40] I'm sorry.
[8:00:41] Actually, this already, but did Mr. Reborn think that that was something he could cover annually
[8:00:45] through the Forfeiture Fund?
[8:00:46] Yes.
[8:00:46] Those two regrades.
[8:00:47] Yes.
[8:00:48] And if we do get in a bind, he would understand if that was something that we might not be able
[8:00:53] to.
[8:00:53] Yes.
[8:00:54] Okay.
[8:00:55] I don't have an issue with that court.
[8:00:57] I'm sorry.
[8:00:57] I don't mean to be like hijacking these topics.
[8:00:59] Thanks.
[8:01:05] So you're saying now those are going to be under forfeiture?
[8:01:08] The difference in the funding for the Lemme grades.
[8:01:12] He's asking for two regrails, but he says he can cover the funding annually through forfeiture
[8:01:17] funds.
[8:01:19] For the positions or the difference?
[8:01:22] For the difference.
[8:01:23] The difference.
[8:01:24] Yeah.
[8:01:24] Gotcha.
[8:01:26] And I think that Chris is maybe asking for simplicity purposes.
[8:01:31] is they're called legal admin 2 right now if we could just call them legal admin 3 excuse me to
[8:01:37] differentiate them
[8:01:40] and you don't mind I'm going to talk to Linda Linda I'm looking at this thinking
[8:01:46] that the difference in pay we could use we could do because payroll is not my specialty take that
[8:01:54] percentage and do you know 87% general fund and the balance whatever that cost
[8:02:02] of increases to that was how I was thinking that way they're still on the
[8:02:06] grading step and then the system would split it up does that sound okay to you
[8:02:10] okay that was just kind of off the top of my head I'm like I think we can do
[8:02:14] that you think so too okay Judge
[8:02:26] commissioners we talked about the
[8:02:27] constables and moving the part time into full time the deputy far more
[8:02:32] It's all fire code, so it's not a county, it doesn't come out of the county funds, but if the court would allow for me to do that, move by part time into full time.
[8:02:41] And then I could send the numbers to Chris line, the number at the bottom never changes, we just move the money around inside of the budget that's already been submitted in this budget year.
[8:02:51] So we would just basically be pulling money from lines in within the budget to pay for that position.
[8:02:56] So the fire marshal deputy fire marshal position for way you did
[8:03:02] the last year. Yes, the long-for sure.
[8:03:07] It would be the deputy patrol deputy whatever the
[8:03:11] and I'll send you where we can real reallocate the funds within the lines.
[8:03:17] So, yep,
[8:03:23] next year, do you have to that?
[8:03:26] but we're going to be in general front line.
[8:03:29] No, remember you talked about the fire code,
[8:03:31] but we need that money.
[8:03:33] OK, fine.
[8:03:35] I still like to go back to the district admins
[8:03:38] and the staff attorney for the district.
[8:03:43] If we're loading up the sheriff's office
[8:03:46] with extra people, which means they're
[8:03:48] going to need more people and their staff
[8:03:50] to handle cases, they're down one judge
[8:03:54] because he moved to Co-Mail County.
[8:03:55] So there are just two district judges at this time, correct?
[8:04:00] Three district judges.
[8:04:02] Olds, Crawford and Hines.
[8:04:05] They used to be four.
[8:04:06] So the workload is increased.
[8:04:13] Yeah, like so.
[8:04:18] Let's see what the numbers are, Jim.
[8:04:20] Okay, yes.
[8:04:24] Yeah, we're this deep into it.
[8:04:26] We're all way up to our knees in it.
[8:04:30] You're right about there.
[8:04:31] Yeah.
[8:04:40] Are you still here?
[8:04:41] Come on.
[8:05:09] Are we waiting on the summary? Are we still talking about additions? It seems like every time we pause, we bring up another panel. The last thing is that you'd be quiet, somebody else walks up. Yes, I'm sorry that that was the last. I've got a couple of questions. Did we have a consensus on the policy change on the base longevity or not from six months, nine months?
[8:05:39] what you
[8:05:43] like six months. It's not it's not a hill I'm going to die on.
[8:05:52] It's five six months.
[8:05:55] That if you could do that April first, set the date. Yeah, you're a mother. Are you fine with six
[8:06:00] months? Yeah, six months. I don't like and have concerns about it but there's others. Everybody else is
[8:06:07] saying they're okay with it. It seems like it's one of us hadn't thought of it.
[8:06:13] No, it was just simple like what Ms. Douglas said that we have told other employees year
[8:06:18] over year that they had to be here one year. It also was calculated on the part-time employees to
[8:06:24] receive 50% of the additional longevity base that they work a certain number of hours on a consistent
[8:06:29] schedule over a period of time. That may have to be looked at also if it's shortening it but that's
[8:06:35] that policy decision.
[8:06:38] I mean, that's, it's really just the history
[8:06:40] because I've had those individual conversations
[8:06:43] with employees that started right after the date,
[8:06:46] whatever we said it, whether it's six months, nine months
[8:06:48] or a year there's gonna be employees that are very close
[8:06:51] that don't receive that.
[8:06:53] And I've just had to have a number of those conversations.
[8:06:55] So probably just have a little different history
[8:06:57] and experience with it, so that's why I like that
[8:07:01] consistency component of it.
[8:07:03] I don't think it's wrong to consider something else. It's just one of those things.
[8:07:08] Isn't it true that that's what we have to call it? I mean, it's sort of a bonus or whatever,
[8:07:14] but officially that's what we have to call it. It's a longevity based, it's an addition to
[8:07:20] the longevity payment. Yeah. So could we establish that for this budget it's six months, but then we
[8:07:29] go back to what we've done before, it's a policy decision. Yeah, I think it's for
[8:07:36] her calculations today, but we have to come back and vote on it separately. So it's just
[8:07:43] for what she's asking for calculation wise. Sounds like April 1st, Chris. The way
[8:07:50] to get at least close to accurate on the estimated amounts. Right.
[8:07:58] We choose at the end of
[8:08:00] to go back to the one year deal, it would be less.
[8:08:07] And then there were three other positions, network administrator, the 4-H position in the
[8:08:11] staff attorney.
[8:08:12] We
[8:08:16] didn't really have a consensus on those, I know we talked about them.
[8:08:19] The 4-H deal was something I said at the end of the day, if there's something there.
[8:08:23] That's me.
[8:08:24] But the staff attorney was discussed.
[8:08:28] That's why I'm curious what the numbers are, if we're able to do anything or it's something
[8:08:36] before I just got a text from this book and she wants to
[8:08:41] correct one position to correct three is a minimal question.
[8:08:48] Good to know people are still here in the kitchen taking my offer.
[8:08:52] I don't
[8:08:58] think anybody can argue that we're not going through this and doing our due diligence.
[8:09:50] Now she changed it to a clerk too.
[8:09:56] I'm asking you to have the line open.
[8:11:09] . . . . . . . . . . .
[8:11:23] . .
[8:11:23] running all over.
[8:11:52] Not a
[8:11:55] good one. It's not a good one.
[8:12:04] Go back, you folks. Too late. It's never too late.
[8:12:26] It's very risky in there.
[8:12:28] Chief,
[8:12:31] you must live a very boring life to sit here all day long.
[8:12:50] Thank you, ma'am.
[8:13:01] Thank you, ma'am.
[8:14:05] That's what I understand, yeah, just so that's how much that's
[8:14:14] This is how you get in the middle of your gym.
[8:15:23] She popped up and then she disappeared.
[8:15:27] She was there to like two seconds.
[8:15:33] Commissioner
[8:15:33] government. I think it's Commissioner Wolverton coming back.
[8:15:38] Commissioner Wolverton?
[8:15:41] She's back.
[8:15:44] They said you popped up and they came back there.
[8:15:47] Oh boy, I don't think I'm flugging it.
[8:15:55] Well, we're not ready for
[8:16:00] it.
[8:16:03] Well, she's got my hand to talk. She shouldn't just start talking.
[8:16:07] There's an end-castor that would like to speak.
[8:16:09] you can project. What are we doing? Chris, we're not there yet. I mean you can get it set up
[8:16:17] in case we need it. We'll wait for Commissioner Wolver 10 for those in the courtroom and watching
[8:16:23] online. We apologize. We have Auditor making a summary list but we don't have the totals and numbers.
[8:16:29] When I was going to ask the court what do we want to go into executive session to address some of the
[8:16:34] items we have there while others trying to work on actually it's just to go
[8:16:39] in and plug each of these individual items into business and legs of
[8:16:44] spreadsheet. Calculate the numbers even put it in the budget to run
[8:16:49] totals on expenditures and revenues to try to come up with the cost. What we have in
[8:16:54] front of us is just a summary list of all the items that we're talking about
[8:16:57] I'll type down in detail.
[8:16:58] Right.
[8:16:59] I'm trying to log on.
[8:17:01] Okay.
[8:17:03] That sounds good.
[8:17:04] Yes.
[8:17:04] Let's do that.
[8:17:05] You can just start speaking.
[8:17:06] You do have to raise your hand.
[8:17:08] I do.
[8:17:09] I do.
[8:17:09] Where did she go?
[8:17:11] I think she's talking to somebody.
[8:17:13] It's calling.
[8:17:14] Yeah.
[8:17:14] Okay.
[8:17:14] Yeah.
[8:17:16] Okay.
[8:17:17] It's wonderful.
[8:17:19] It's, yeah.
[8:17:21] Judge.
[8:17:22] Yes, ma'am.
[8:17:22] I have an end-caster that was like to speak.
[8:17:26] Who is it?
[8:17:27] It says end-caster was all the information I have.
[8:17:30] Okay.
[8:17:33] Can you unmute him? Can you hear us? Yes, sir.
[8:17:38] Go ahead. Good morning, Judge Commissioner. This is Michael Castro. I don't know if we
[8:17:43] spoken already on the volunteer fire department's piece of it, but speaking for
[8:17:47] Geronimo, I know we sent you all an email regarding what we were kind of
[8:17:52] talked about as proposals and stuff. I know this is a busy time and I've been on
[8:17:57] this all day. For Dronomo, I just wanted to ask, is there any way that we can remain
[8:18:05] at the 60,000? We saw that the rebeller proposal was for 45,000, but we were asking if there
[8:18:11] was any way that we could remain at the 60. We do know that there are some opportunities.
[8:18:15] We are working through that. We are getting better in house staff training. We got new people
[8:18:20] coming on board. We got to give them up the power to make them readily available to be
[8:18:25] be active and may cause an efficient manner and everything, but right now this year going
[8:18:32] through leadership changes and some budget opportunities in-house, we are just asking
[8:18:40] to not request for an increase. We would like to remain at the 60,000 if that's something
[8:18:45] that we would like to request. Thank you all for your time.
[8:18:50] Thank you Michael any
[8:19:00] thoughts or conversation on that item are we going to
[8:19:06] executive session for a few moments. If that is the preference of court we can do
[8:19:12] that. I think we should we should knock those out.
[8:19:17] Table
[8:19:20] was there anybody else that had their hand raised?
[8:19:23] No, they're not even, they're not even being conscious.
[8:19:26] Everyone, our plan is to move to item 9, address so he's executive session items.
[8:19:34] While Ms. Klein, our auditor is going through the list of summary list of changes that have been
[8:19:41] recommended by a consensus and majority of the court on the proposed budget.
[8:19:45] So we will move from item N before we make any decisions.
[8:19:51] will move to item 9. That is executive session in accordance with chapter 551 of the Texas
[8:19:56] Government Code Subchapter D. Commissioner's Court will convene in the-
[8:20:00] We'll close session to discuss the following items. And any final action or vote will take place in public under executive session item A.
[8:20:08] Senate Section 551.071, consultation with the governing bodies of attorney to deliberate pending or contemplated litigation.
[8:20:16] As well as item B, person in section 551.074 to deliver the appointment employment and duties
[8:20:23] of public officer employee and that's road and rigid administrator as well as the director
[8:20:28] of human resources will recess from this regular session of commissioners court and enter close
[8:20:33] session at 7.05 p.m.
[8:20:46] Action of must see any comments or conversation that needs to occur in open meeting on item
[8:20:53] May under executive session.
[8:20:55] No, sir.
[8:20:56] Health.
[8:21:00] Okay, hearing no potential motions and no discussion items.
[8:21:03] We'll take no action on item A. We'll move to item B.
[8:21:06] Presented section 551.074.
[8:21:10] To deliver the appointment employment and duties of the public officer or employee to whip,
[8:21:15] well, bridge administrator and director of human resources.
[8:21:18] We'll start with well, bridge administrator since it is first on the list.
[8:21:22] Any discussion, any more potential actions to consider on that item?
[8:21:33] Okay.
[8:21:33] I know we had a discussion.
[8:21:34] Is it still kind of a plan at this point with Road and Ridge Administration we've accepted
[8:21:42] applications that there may be an item that we revisit in the upcoming agenda to consider
[8:21:48] having interviews of a few of the applicants or just to potentially engage with the conversation
[8:21:54] with current employees.
[8:21:55] I know that there's kind of a different conversation.
[8:22:00] I would like to have interviews with at least two,
[8:22:02] maybe three people.
[8:22:04] We're sorry I didn't hear that.
[8:22:06] Commissioner Wolventon said he'd like to have interviews
[8:22:08] with maybe two, if not possibly the candidates
[8:22:13] for road and bridge administration.
[8:22:17] What dates are we looking at?
[8:22:21] September 15th?
[8:22:22] What potential date for interviews?
[8:22:24] As soon as possible.
[8:22:26] I can be here 13 Friday
[8:22:30] or Monday. It doesn't matter. Do we want to try to schedule interviews with candidates on a court day or a non court day on the 15th?
[8:22:42] See if we can do it on the 15th. Our courts are usually long and gone out so if you do it without a court day, unless you just want to go and send court day, stay here till 10 o'clock.
[8:22:53] They won't stay here until then, Bob.
[8:22:59] Which individuals would like to be on that interview list?
[8:23:03] I'll do it.
[8:23:05] I'll be on it.
[8:23:06] Well, no, I'm saying the entire quote is going to be on it, but I'm saying for either Taylor
[8:23:10] and Orbury to reach out to candidates for us to schedule interviews with Mike Brooks,
[8:23:19] Mark Green, and you had one of the gentlemen you went up to.
[8:23:23] Mr. Murray.
[8:23:24] Mr. Murray.
[8:23:34] Any additional candidates?
[8:23:36] All right, we'll try to reach out to candidates to consider potentially scheduling interviews
[8:23:44] and see what that schedule looks like and have them communicate with court members if that's okay.
[8:23:51] Okay, next is Director of Human Resources.
[8:23:55] as well as some may have forgotten because it was early this morning.
[8:23:59] We did have our HR director retire.
[8:24:03] We took the time to acknowledge and recognize her for our service and say thank you.
[8:24:09] We also went in the closed session to have that conversation saying what now?
[8:24:14] The job posting and potential applicants.
[8:24:18] I believe the job is still posted and we're still receiving applications.
[8:24:23] Historically, with open positions like that as court, we have considered placing or naming
[8:24:28] an interim director in the meantime while we go through the hiring process.
[8:24:33] Is that something the court would like to consider?
[8:24:38] Judge, I move that we name Lois Ali as the interim human resources director and said her salary
[8:24:54] We do have a motion and a second any further.
[8:25:00] Discussion? I'm sorry.
[8:25:05] Hearing no other comments or questions, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? During no opposition, that motion passes. Any other items to discuss under item 9 on our agenda?
[8:25:21] All right, then we will move back to our. Normal action items on our agenda, where we left off prior to going into executive session, and that was item in to adopt the
[8:25:33] Gwadleud County budget for fiscal year 2026 through 2027 or FY27.
[8:25:39] When we left, we had created a summary list of proposed changes to the budget.
[8:25:44] This kind went into the budget room and did our best to be accurate.
[8:25:50] I mean, timely to work through all of those changes to come up with a number
[8:25:54] and cost for individual funds, general fund juvenile road and bridge.
[8:25:59] So, especially with new funds, all of those things. Chris, I don't know if you got me to
[8:26:05] just go over that summary if you want to give any more detail on what you looked at.
[8:26:14] So, I went through, I've added the positions I reduced the part time. I went through the
[8:26:21] longevity, redepling ethic. I have you look at it because I just went and amended anybody
[8:26:27] who's been here was hired before, on or before April 1st of 2026, amended that longevity
[8:26:40] because then they would get the base, although that, again, that does require a policy change.
[8:26:47] On the constables, I did go through because their peace officers and our policy requires it,
[8:26:53] that we include certification pay.
[8:26:56] So I did add to that, but it wasn't discussed in court,
[8:26:59] but it is part of our policy.
[8:27:01] So I made that assumption that is included in there.
[8:27:06] What you have in front of you includes all the funds.
[8:27:10] I would ask Patrick Pinder here.
[8:27:13] I would ask that we just leave your fire code as is
[8:27:17] because I wasn't sure what to take out.
[8:27:20] And it is a self-funded fund.
[8:27:21] And I mean, I know Patrick had volunteered to balance it out, but the fund is healthy.
[8:27:26] You can handle it, and you want to go back and do that in a later time.
[8:27:30] You could do that.
[8:27:31] One of the real cool, one of the challenges on the fire code was we went, or Chris went
[8:27:35] through looking at those individual items, with Mr. Pender trying to find the value that
[8:27:41] was equal to the amount of what the position was, but going in looking deeper when you look
[8:27:45] at fuel and some of those other things, it was cutting some lines that are operational
[8:27:50] on necessities below what is being used currently while fueling is up and some of those other
[8:27:55] things. So appreciate the effort but at the same time if the court wishes to add a position
[8:28:00] that fire code fund is healthy. It is separate from reserve or from general fund and probably
[8:28:07] just to be safe would recommend that the court just add the position to the fire code as opposed
[8:28:13] to reducing all those other lines creating probably future budget amendments.
[8:28:18] That would, that would be my great request, please, please.
[8:28:25] I've gone through, we've added those positions, taken in the county attorney's office, the two adjustments that took the increase out of the forfeiture fund.
[8:28:38] Went back with the longevity because Senate Bill 22 does not pay for longevity.
[8:28:44] I had to go back and make sure that Senate Bill 221 isn't more than 275,000 for the county
[8:28:52] attorney and not more than 500,000 for the sheriff's office, added
[8:29:00] juvenile, thank you,
[8:29:01] Judge, I almost forgot about juvenile, added juvenile back in there, hopefully
[8:29:11] next.
[8:29:11] No, I think that's in, what did the total?
[8:29:13] you're you're right at about two million dollars for the increased
[8:29:18] positions and the total and the increased longevity with all the funds that's
[8:29:23] around what did I say one point one point eight total about 1.7 with general
[8:29:30] fund plus juvenile red bridges course affected because we added longevity that's
[8:29:40] that's what it looks like on the summer sheet was that that summer sheet all of
[8:29:45] lines. One million nine eighty nine oh thirteen eighteen or a million nine hundred eight nine thousand thirteen
[8:29:52] and ours.
[8:30:00] Court members.
[8:30:03] I know that was a lot of potential changes and plugging in, but that's where I believe
[8:30:12] everybody was looking for was what that total cost was to those changes.
[8:30:19] So with that around
[8:30:20] two million, we had discussed earlier that historically a million gets brought back in from
[8:30:28] the previous year. Oh well yes. And then we were looking at all my and I was talking about the
[8:30:34] million dollar land purchase that we had discussed, but that's where I was willing to be at in
[8:30:40] relation to additional. So from what I'm reading in my mind at this late hour, it's really not a
[8:30:51] reserve and then, or it could be less based on what we don't know comes back at the end
[8:30:58] of this fiscal year.
[8:30:59] Am I being correct about that?
[8:31:01] Yeah, and your balance is going to change greatly differently on what departments
[8:31:06] hire and fire how many positions are open.
[8:31:09] What sales tax looks like if we get another February, we got a huge sales tax abound, helped
[8:31:16] Offset our
[8:31:19] Lost this you property taxes. That was
[8:31:22] Sorry good news bad news. That's what I said to your email. It's like good news. We're getting more sales facts bad news. They're getting less property taxes
[8:31:32] Okay,
[8:31:35] thank you for that work on that. I'm just flying.
[8:31:43] Okay
[8:31:43] I mean hearing that number and total. I mean is there anything else you want to address it?
[8:31:49] I would like Joe China to have an opportunity to come up and address the port
[8:31:58] Good evening
[8:32:07] I know that I made a request for a staff attorney, I left dinner with my family, and I actually came down here to talk about why that's important. I know public safety has been a big concern for the court as evidence to buy the positions that y'all are willing to fund, but that does include the court system.
[8:32:24] and right now our court system is drowning and we are not able to keep up with
[8:32:29] the massive amounts of cases coming from the county attorney's office the
[8:32:33] increase in dockets and we are working with three district courts less than
[8:32:38] Comal County is and they have a similar population not to mention they have
[8:32:42] three full-time district courts and we have one. If we don't get a staff attorney the
[8:32:47] reality is we can't keep up with the workload which is also a danger to the
[8:32:52] citizens. We can't move people through, get cases closed, get people transferred to
[8:32:57] TDC. If we can't move cases through the system, I've also been working on a jail competency
[8:33:03] restoration program with blue bonnet that will require a mental health docket. I'm willing
[8:33:08] to add that docket, but I need help on the back end. The reason that matters for taxpayers
[8:33:14] is the average wait time for a bed can be up to a year where the taxpayers are paying for
[8:33:21] that person to be in Guadalupe County jail, you would have to ask the sheriff how much
[8:33:24] that costs per day, but it's a lot. If we can restore them to competency in our jail,
[8:33:29] we can get them pled, get the case completed, and ultimately save the tax payer's money.
[8:33:35] But this is something I've been asking for now for two years, and we are at a point that
[8:33:40] it is almost in crisis for the courts. So I'm here to answer any questions that you might
[8:33:44] have. I will also say we are putting more burden on the county attorney's office right now
[8:33:50] because they have to do things that a staff attorney could do like jury charges and things
[8:33:55] like that. And I know, Mr. Wilborn said that they are also overworked and understaffed.
[8:34:00] So this would be a stopgap and an effort to stall having to add a complete new district
[8:34:06] court here in Guadalupe County.
[8:34:11] So one of the things that when this was brought up earlier, I said that I wasn't educated
[8:34:17] about at the moment because I had reshifted my focus a little bit with the most recent
[8:34:24] proposals, so I'm glad that you're here to talk to us about it, is that I know that sometimes
[8:34:29] the county attorney can fill the role of a staff attorney in a sense, but when it comes
[8:34:33] to things that are, of course, criminal, then you would have your conflict of interest.
[8:34:37] So I wanted to talk a little bit about that and talk about, you know, maybe I think really
[8:34:42] also research for the courts, probably right and briefing on potential appellate issues
[8:34:46] so that there's no, at least minimal, overturning by the appellate courts and why that's important
[8:34:52] so we can maybe talk about that a little bit.
[8:34:55] So one of the things that a staff attorney brings is not just on the criminal front of
[8:35:00] Obviously, it's also on the civil side. I'm not, I'm sure the courts turn me talk about the massive new legislative requirements for civil cases, motions for some re-judgment and things like that. What that is doing is taking time away from my ability and judge Crawford and judge old ability to even have criminal buckets. If we shift those to a staff attorney and they can do the research and they can help us, we spend less time doing that more time in the courtroom.
[8:35:26] The other thing they can help do is research motions to suppress and things of that nature.
[8:35:32] Everyone's goal is to try these cases one time for lots of reasons.
[8:35:36] One, resources, but two, the cases that get appealed the most are cases with child victims
[8:35:41] and you don't ever want a child victim to have to go through a second trial.
[8:35:46] And a staff attorney can be working on things while we are on the bench.
[8:35:50] We are oftentimes asked to make decisions very quickly.
[8:35:52] And the county attorney's office does their best to give us a heads up.
[8:35:56] But if we can text someone and say, I need to research on this.
[8:35:59] I need a case on this right now.
[8:36:01] I can't ask the county attorney's office to do that.
[8:36:04] Is the county attorney's office even able to fully research or give opinions on certain criminal cases
[8:36:09] when they're prosecuting entity?
[8:36:11] They're not.
[8:36:12] So they have to represent their vested interest.
[8:36:15] They should never, they do try their best to try to give both sides if I ask.
[8:36:21] but that's not their job and frankly that's unfair to them.
[8:36:24] So they're an advocate, they deserve to be allowed to be an advocate and let the justice
[8:36:28] system work on its own, which is why we need a staff attorney.
[8:36:31] So they can research both sides and present both sides to us.
[8:36:35] So we're going to talk about suppression issues as well for the court and just what that means
[8:36:41] is that in often in cases one side will present a motion to suppress and so that will be
[8:36:47] the suppressing evidence so that the judge or jury, whoever the trial effect,
[8:36:52] cannot consider that evidence and ultimately reaching a verdict.
[8:36:55] And so that decision by a judge is really important because if they do suppress that evidence
[8:37:01] and later it's appealed and that appeal is granted, that it means that case has to be tried
[8:37:06] again with that evidence in consideration for that subsequent verdict, which is bad.
[8:37:12] It's a huge waste of time and resources and it's terrible for a victim.
[8:37:16] And so I think for me, that's really of shining importance, if we can have someone that
[8:37:23] provides that stop gap.
[8:37:26] I think also, you know, for the judges, when you're so deep into, you know, evidence,
[8:37:32] making rulings, avoiding appeal, that having somebody else that can have an expertise in
[8:37:38] deeply researching and knowing, I don't know what we're using, Westlar or Lexus or whatever
[8:37:42] it is, right?
[8:37:43] If they're an expert on that, then it allows them to exercise at expertise, and I think
[8:37:48] if we have somebody that is really good and really competent, then it can very much
[8:37:53] save us a lot of time and a lot of money in the end.
[8:37:56] I agree with Commissioner Ott, and my request was to set it at what a felony line prosecutor
[8:38:03] would make.
[8:38:04] I don't want to compete with Mr. Wilborn for quality lawyers.
[8:38:07] I also understand they're not supervising someone, and so it wouldn't be fair to set them
[8:38:12] like the felony chief rate or the family justice chief rate and so the
[8:38:17] fairest thing I could think to do so that we all have quality attorneys, the
[8:38:20] county attorneys and the staff attorney would be to set it at a felony line
[8:38:24] level.
[8:38:27] In court I was asked by Mr. Wilbur to let the court know that he fully
[8:38:31] supports this to prevent the backlog of having the staff attorney as someone who
[8:38:37] has been a trial attorney for the state. I know that when the judge, when you're
[8:38:42] I'm preparing for closing arguments, questioning witnesses, running around like mad, having
[8:38:48] to judge say, oh, state, by the way, I need you to do this, or can you, in addition to
[8:38:53] preparing your closing argument, can you go, prepare the jury charge, can you go, prepare,
[8:38:58] we need you to do our planning to fax and conclusions of law, which is what we do now.
[8:39:04] And it comes to us, and so I can tell you that takes away from, it slows us down,
[8:39:12] it slows
[8:39:12] We have Mr. Wilborn who does support this and it would help the county attorney's office in a big way.
[8:39:18] I also wanted to touch one more thing Commissioner on appeals. The number one way cases get
[8:39:23] overturned is motions to suppress and jury charges and we are making decisions on the fly and
[8:39:28] trying to change jury charges and if I have someone working on that from start to finish there's
[8:39:34] a lot less air in that jury charge which reduces the risk of appeal as well.
[8:39:40] I'm playing ping pong on the same side here as opposed to, you know, as you all know,
[8:39:46] the legislature does potentially change every two years and so I remember as a prosecutor
[8:39:52] with jury charges, with child victim cases, feeling very challenged about...
[8:40:01] I'm hoping that that jury charge was perfect. And then sometimes you're wanting to research an issue, not even really know like what all do I need to research based on all these legislative changes? And I hope I get this right and the judge told me to come back in 15 minutes and is that enough time? And I think that's. That is really difficult. It is really nerve-wracking and ultimately it's nerve-wracking because you want justice for the parties. So I just wanting to share my experience with that and then how important I think it is.
[8:40:30] It's one, ultimately, that burden's not fair for the citizens, right?
[8:40:33] Because the prosecutors are representing victims, which are your constituents.
[8:40:37] And it's really unfair for them to be handicapped when the defense isn't experiencing that
[8:40:42] same handicap, because the defense isn't doing the things that we ask.
[8:40:46] And they've been very gracious about helping, but it's really not fair to the citizens,
[8:40:50] and we'd like to take that burden off the county attorney's office.
[8:40:55] I had brought up before and I didn't get the support, but I would like to go ahead and
[8:41:00] and add the just the judges felony line attorney
[8:41:05] and also actually staff attorney.
[8:41:07] And then also their administration going up one step.
[8:41:13] I know you wanted to, but don't think I can get to today.
[8:41:15] Hi, understand.
[8:41:16] So here's the reality, right?
[8:41:18] I'm trying to balance what the court is doing.
[8:41:20] I've tried to listen to everything that the court is doing.
[8:41:22] We adore our admin staff.
[8:41:24] They work very hard.
[8:41:26] They have been given so many more requirements.
[8:41:29] But if the answer from the court
[8:41:30] as we are not doing great increases for anybody, please ask for that next year.
[8:41:36] I think our administrators are wonderful enough that they can get behind that and understand
[8:41:41] especially if a staff attorney can take some of that workload off of them.
[8:41:45] I will be coming right back and asking for it next year, but this is my effort to work
[8:41:49] with the court.
[8:41:52] I'm in support of the staff attorney.
[8:41:55] I think that we have not done pay-gray rates across the board and I think for consistency
[8:42:00] in fairness purposes. I think that we need to stay consistent. I am on board the staff attorney.
[8:42:06] I really think it's very important to be very meaningful.
[8:42:09] Thank you, Commissioner.
[8:42:11] It should be the pay rate.
[8:42:13] You get two of that one.
[8:42:15] Do you support the staff attorney?
[8:42:16] Ms. Clark, is that 165.08.81 on the summary spreadsheet? Is that?
[8:42:24] I've already added it. I went down to the county attorney's office.
[8:42:28] It's one of the felony attorneys, the same amount of money, and it would be $123.6.
[8:42:35] But with all the benefits, the same.
[8:42:37] It's $163.209.
[8:42:42] $163.209.
[8:42:45] And if you were to get those three admin assistance up one step, how much would that be?
[8:42:53] I believe there would be round numbers.
[8:43:00] It's three positions, two steps, is like about 43, two or so.
[8:43:05] 43,200?
[8:43:07] If that's two steps.
[8:43:09] Okay.
[8:43:12] Ish.
[8:43:14] Where are you going to go back and talk about all the other regrades or only those?
[8:43:17] No, just this one.
[8:43:21] Yeah, I know.
[8:43:22] If you'll accept one step, maybe that would pass.
[8:43:25] Yes, I would accept one step, Commissioner Wilberton, yes.
[8:43:29] Yeah, it'd be 21.
[8:43:33] It is.
[8:43:34] Now, now I'm 32.
[8:43:35] We're doing close to 1,000.
[8:43:38] So, did we raise anybody else?
[8:43:43] No, we're not.
[8:43:45] I didn't raise anyone else.
[8:43:47] Right.
[8:43:47] I don't think you're going to get this year.
[8:43:48] That's okay.
[8:43:49] Listen, like I said up here, I'm making efforts to work with the court.
[8:43:54] I am here to say, though, that the district court is a very important part of the process
[8:44:00] and without a staff attorney to fill the stopgap, we are drowning.
[8:44:06] And the next thing we would have to do is ask for a full another district court, which
[8:44:09] comes with a court administrator and a court reporter and a significantly higher cost increase
[8:44:13] to the citizens of this county.
[8:44:16] Okay.
[8:44:18] Do you have any other questions for me?
[8:44:20] No, I do not.
[8:44:21] No, ma'am.
[8:44:22] Thank you.
[8:44:27] Okay.
[8:44:31] Any other items?
[8:44:37] I didn't add that number, Chris Kahn?
[8:44:42] 163 209, that's with benefits and health insurance and all that.
[8:44:45] I was saying just to the $1,989 for 18, just so there was all that was all.
[8:45:05] I could
[8:45:14] do
[8:45:21] something like we could say, general fund, it takes the payroll to $64 million, $924,55, and that way I make sure that what you have in your numbers are correct. Now that doesn't include juvenile. With everything but juvenile.
[8:45:43] Tell them about trying to help us give to a point to be able to include that in a moment.
[8:45:46] motion to consider for approving the budget. I mean, I think it's a summary sheet that
[8:45:55] is listed out as probably the most accurate detail of the changes. Correct. And without
[8:46:00] listing them all, I mean, we could, the cost of living, the new positions for constables,
[8:46:06] the associate judge magistrate fire departments, county attorney, sheriff, commissary, part time
[8:46:13] a full time for JP-14, Consuel-1234, and again, some of these are restating that environmental
[8:46:22] health change, funding from county, 24th turn, fire code, volunteer fire departments.
[8:46:29] Plus the staff attorney.
[8:46:31] Plus the staff attorney.
[8:46:32] There may be the easiest way to be accurate and have a document that reflects the changes,
[8:46:37] right?
[8:46:38] That would make me maybe feel better because I just want to make sure that it all reflects
[8:46:46] accurate.
[8:46:48] Okay.
[8:46:49] Any anything else to talk about during the budget conversation, I don't want to throw
[8:46:58] a wrench in things.
[8:46:58] Just brainstorming.
[8:47:00] I do want to ask a question now.
[8:47:01] Now, if the court is willing to spend $2,150,000 give or take out of reserves to address
[8:47:12] these things that are on this list, is the court willing to spend more out of that
[8:47:18] to help offset the tax increase?
[8:47:22] I know that wasn't a big part of the conversation.
[8:47:25] If it's not, that's fine.
[8:47:26] I just want to just say, is that part of what was previously
[8:47:32] considered as one of the options of spending money out of reserves.
[8:47:36] That's what reduce the tax rate is what you're saying back to 4%.
[8:47:40] Or any, right?
[8:47:42] That's what, because part of the conversation that goes on is that fund balance,
[8:47:46] how it got built, how it is, is strong, but concerned by some about future spending
[8:47:51] and what that looks like.
[8:47:53] But there have been comments out in the public that make you kind of think sometimes
[8:47:56] that go, hey, if we do have that strong fund balance and it has saved up money,
[8:48:00] some of these items that are priorities in public need should be addressed.
[8:48:04] But at the same time, should some of it be used to offset the amount of tax rate increase that's going to the public?
[8:48:11] So what would that number be?
[8:48:13] It just depends. I mean, it gets back to that same conversation back to the court
[8:48:19] going what's that's too much out of reserve, right?
[8:48:22] Can we pull the chart? I'm sorry, I just...
[8:48:24] No. Can we pull the chart back up with the options?
[8:48:27] Was it this one? Yeah, it was it went back to the 4% increase of 3493 tax rate. We're sitting at a little over two right now with what Chris figured right?
[8:48:42] It would be an additional $1,145,155 dollars. But that may be what you're getting back.
[8:48:54] Yeah, that quite possibly could be a wash with what's going back with it.
[8:48:59] So it does get into that conversation, or are you getting back to spending that 2.1 out
[8:49:08] of reserves and what the tax rate decreased to 4% is covered by the return funds of
[8:49:13] unspent, correct, budget dollars, right?
[8:49:18] What do you say tax rate decreased?
[8:49:19] We are just talking about a decrease in the ceiling, correct?
[8:49:22] The decrease from the ceiling, it's the lower amount of increase.
[8:49:26] As it turns out, 11 and a half hours makes my brain go...
[8:49:31] So back to the judges, original with
[8:49:37] these positions, and everything we've just discussed.
[8:49:43] And I'm saying that because I feel like a lot of court members are in this direction
[8:49:49] of this budget is ended up being a true compromise, right?
[8:49:52] This is not a budget anybody wanted.
[8:49:54] It still doesn't reflect anything that really addresses all the needs that other bodies
[8:49:58] have been talking about.
[8:49:59] Hello?
[8:50:00] But it also has a tax rate increase to the public of us just trying to balance that revenue shortfall. But now that some of those funds have been used to address those needs, does it make it a little bit easier? A little bit softer to say we're also considering the amount of tax rate increase to the public and using some of those saved up dollars where it's at this point only a little bit more and we're addressing all the concerns.
[8:50:27] If my calculation says it will be taken 3.295 out of the reserve to make everything work
[8:50:34] to go back to the 4th sin increase in taxes.
[8:50:38] First client, yes, ma'am.
[8:50:40] Can I start entering those changes?
[8:50:42] Do we have a consensus to make those changes?
[8:50:46] On what you went over on the blue sheets.
[8:50:48] It seemed like there were at least three court members that were willing to support the
[8:50:54] three changes on the blue sheet.
[8:50:59] Okay,
[8:51:03] so let's, can we talk about the options on both sides of this?
[8:51:07] If that is our, that is our prize package, if we pull none of the general fund and it
[8:51:15] all went to a tax increase, first is if we pull, if we did no tax increase and pulled it all
[8:51:19] out of general fund, what are our parameters and what's in the middle?
[8:51:22] So
[8:51:24] if we, you're saying if we pulled, if we went to them, and it depends on current
[8:51:31] rate versus no need revenue.
[8:51:33] Yeah.
[8:51:33] I'm sorry.
[8:51:33] I just thought we could get the boundaries of each one and we can talk about what the
[8:51:37] range is.
[8:51:38] No problem.
[8:51:38] So the current year is at 3304.
[8:51:40] No new revenue rate is supposed to bring in the previous year tax money.
[8:51:44] If we went to that, we were $4 million short on maintenance and operation.
[8:51:48] That's only an MMO number.
[8:51:49] It's probably a little bit of a felt there if you had to pull everything out of reserves.
[8:51:53] And that's with none of the changes we've talked about, right?
[8:51:59] If we're talking about making those changes in addition to this, we're adding $2.15 million
[8:52:03] to whatever number we're talking about. But just the no-new revenue rate,
[8:52:07] we'd have to pull $4 to $5 million out of reserves.
[8:52:11] And the 5.65% increase at the 3549 is just break even with the COLA-only
[8:52:19] No extra long jeopardy in any of the changes and then we were talking about in addition that pulling out 2.15
[8:52:25] 5.65 increase is pulling 2.1 out of reserves correct so we could move
[8:52:32] Money from those the two of the building the land purchase
[8:52:37] You're saying try to move back to 4% correct if we move back to 4% it would be 2.1 plus that figure at the bottom of the 4%
[8:52:52] So
[8:52:59] that would be the building purchase line, the land purchase line in the little less
[8:53:05] than 300,000 that would come out of potentially the text.match if that is the text.match
[8:53:15] and estimate is a text.match something that it's like an all run on package.
[8:53:18] It's an estimate that has been tried to build upon multiple years and not to
[8:53:24] the labor, just because the text.funding shift and dynamics completely changing.
[8:53:30] If you want a project in state and federal funding, you have to use local
[8:53:33] dollars to initiate it. Don't have to initiate a project, but I mean you're not
[8:53:37] going to get state and federal dollars to be major transportation projects.
[8:53:45] If you have handy the chart of the tax increases over time, do you have it by percentage?
[8:53:59] Do we have a bad percentage?
[8:54:01] Yes.
[8:54:02] This one?
[8:54:04] I don't think it shows a percentage.
[8:54:13] What I have done in the past, one of the easiest ways to look at this is
[8:54:21] to go to where
[8:54:26] would you like to start?
[8:54:29] Let's just say, so a 6.5% increase is that what you're looking at or the amount of, how the numbers match up to the different options that were with your columns?
[8:54:44] 10.9% 6.5% 6
[8:54:54] .74%
[8:55:02] 9.62%. We'll
[8:55:08] look at a couple more of these in all. 4.93%, 6
[8:55:21] .22%. Okay. Now these notices are a little bit challenging because it's combining the amount of new revenue in a calculation, that truth and taxation. So like when we talk about a 5.65% tax rate increase, our budget notice is still going to read 6.2%.
[8:55:42] So that's not exactly that number when you look at that because of the state requirements
[8:55:47] on how we're mandated to inform the public of what revenues coming in.
[8:55:54] It's a little bit deceiving.
[8:55:56] So 5.65 or 5.6.6.2 and then notice.
[8:55:59] For it.
[8:56:00] Okay.
[8:56:00] And what was 2020?
[8:56:03] Okay.
[8:56:04] Thanks.
[8:56:04] 7.7.
[8:56:10] Let me go back to this.
[8:56:11] I want to make sure I didn't tell you something wrong.
[8:56:13] So
[8:56:18] here's the notice for the budget as we're talking about it.
[8:56:22] This is the proposed budget.
[8:56:24] So it shows that 6.2% increase.
[8:56:27] Even though the tax rate increase over the money revenue rate is 5.65.
[8:56:35] So I mean to your point, I don't know if you're just asking that.
[8:56:40] But I mean the 6.2 is not that far off from the other tax rate.
[8:56:45] There's a trend from a percentage standpoint.
[8:56:47] point, so I think that's something we hadn't really looked at.
[8:56:51] Thank you.
[8:56:56] I said, didn't want to muddy the water, but I did have a few individuals that I've had
[8:57:00] budget conversations, just citizens ask about fund balance and go look, think some of
[8:57:06] these things should be funded, but if there's extra money there, and it's that bad, citizens
[8:57:11] are also coupled with higher cost and higher everything, shouldn't some of those funds be used
[8:57:17] to offset the amount of tax rate increase,
[8:57:26] but then it gets back into other than you're
[8:57:28] spending more out of fund balance, or offsetting what would be coming back.
[8:57:33] Right.
[8:57:33] You're basically watching, from the averages that typically come back, it's a year to
[8:57:40] fiscal year, it's a wash.
[8:57:45] But like when you were talking about commissionering, look at the 2.15 out of fund balance, you expect
[8:57:52] to get let's say half of that back at least right or then spent funds. If we went down to the
[8:57:57] 4% just to try to limit the amount of increases much as possible, it's probably going to get that
[8:58:02] one point, one five or one point five back and it's not going to be three and a half million dollars
[8:58:10] out of the corner. Maybe close to two and a half million dollars not a fun amount. So I'm
[8:58:18] good with that.
[8:58:19] Yeah, we're, I think
[8:58:26] we've done a great job of going through all of this, um,
[8:58:34] um, final
[8:58:35] positions, now looking at decreasing the proposed rate, getting a little out of their general
[8:58:43] reserve,
[8:58:46] saving the taxpayer money, providing jobs,
[8:58:54] focused around public safety as we've discussed.
[8:58:58] So, I don't know what else we need to talk about.
[8:59:00] Are you saying the 4% or the 5.65?
[8:59:04] Well, that's what the judge was saying.
[8:59:06] Do we want to go a little bit further with, you know, we have the ceiling set at 3549.
[8:59:15] Yeah.
[8:59:16] We have that ability to go down back to his proposed 4% with what I'm saying, you see the
[8:59:26] I can't see quite that well, 1.5 million, something like that, 1 million, 1.45 million.
[8:59:31] That typically comes back fiscal year, that's not spent fiscal year 27, that typically
[8:59:39] comes back, goes back in the reserve.
[8:59:42] So on my end, I'm thinking it's a wash.
[8:59:45] So we're good.
[8:59:46] 4% we're taking that 2 million, we've discussed out of the reserves.
[8:59:51] What is 4% read on the notice?
[8:59:58] The great question.
[9:00:04] We have that notice in the recommended budget, right? Yeah, it would have been there. It's, yes, correct. It should be in the recommended budget.
[9:00:17] I can, I can live with that 4%, I'm a little bit concerned about, you know, what if we wind up with the same mass next year, we have this year, you know, where we're going to have to go into the fund balance again, you know, that's the thing I'm concerned about.
[9:00:34] But I could I could live with it.
[9:00:40] It's in the big scheme of thing
[9:00:42] It's just a very small amount to take out a reserve. Yeah, it's a size
[9:00:48] We approve it. That's better than we have here. Yeah, you get to go home
[9:00:55] Well, the other thing is too if you if you look at some of the cities and and I know the school districts are coming
[9:01:02] and they're going to get pounded with taxes.
[9:01:05] So we don't need to compound the problem.
[9:01:13] I know Chris is looking for that.
[9:01:14] I mean, not to beat the issue over and over.
[9:01:18] I mean, it would have been very different
[9:01:20] if the revenue loss and the appraisal loss wasn't there.
[9:01:24] I think it would have been in the position
[9:01:25] with increased sales tax to be able to consider
[9:01:29] 20 to 30 new county positions, adjustments,
[9:01:32] a number of things and not had the tax increase that we're talking about.
[9:01:40] Yes, ma'am.
[9:01:42] So I've pulled it up on my spreadsheet and in the original recommended budget with 4%,
[9:01:47] that is a 34, 93 rate.
[9:01:52] The notice shows that that's a 4.75% increase because it's based on how much space in your budget.
[9:01:59] and we increased the reasons 4.75s because you increased your vet service.
[9:02:06] Welcome, roll.
[9:02:13] Okay.
[9:02:16] You have, what is the breakdown of, can you just a second, I have it here?
[9:02:22] It should be 2752.
[9:02:24] Oh, this is 2752, 0212 and 0529.
[9:02:30] 3493, yes sir.
[9:02:32] So, Immunil is 2752, that service is 0212, model road 0529,
[9:02:57] but the overall tactic being
[9:02:58] back to what you originally said.
[9:03:02] And not, I mean, I believe there's a majority of commissioners' court that's run the vote
[9:03:06] on the previous.
[9:03:08] I'm just thinking, for me, I think it changes in the discussion to be able, I'm still concerned about the future with potential changes and the tax rate implication levels things.
[9:03:20] But if there's a willingness to address those need issues out of thumb balance, if we can help offset a little bit of that increase for the taxpayers, I think I'm more inclined to support it.
[9:03:30] All right.
[9:03:36] I don't have that blue sheet. I don't have that sheet.
[9:03:44] So what we just need
[9:03:46] to reference that in just my reference, each one individually or just read it off.
[9:03:52] Let me sign. Chris Klein, if we, Chris, if there is a potential motion to consider to approve
[9:04:00] the budget and the motion just references the summary sheet of changes to
[9:04:07] proposed budget with the addition of the staff attorney on it. Is that are you
[9:04:12] good with that? That's good and whatever other things you're talking about with
[9:04:16] the major capital projects that you either are or not. You don't mind like because
[9:04:22] if there's a change to those capital if we're removing those from capital
[9:04:25] project from 700, they need to be removed from the list, right?
[9:04:30] Correct.
[9:04:31] And now I need to move the transfer's in, transfer's out.
[9:04:35] Let's go to this real quick.
[9:04:36] Here's the capital project bill list, or capital project fund 700 list of those listed
[9:04:43] items.
[9:04:45] So if you take a building out, gosh, I'm sorry.
[9:04:50] So if you did, there's been discussed before, if you did, take the two main for the building
[9:04:55] and purchase out of play, is it?
[9:05:00] Cover what we're talking about.
[9:05:04] It does, but we go back to that where it's, you have an unassigned fund balance of $49.6 million. With $8,750,000, and if you left these in, you're still basically what we're doing is deficit budgeting. We have more expenses than revenue, whatever shortfall we have you're pulling from reserves. That's what we're talking about right now, right? So whether it's for these changes, any of that stuff,
[9:05:31] you can swap and plug-in play to say it's out of the general reserve fund.
[9:05:37] It's the same thing.
[9:05:39] Correct.
[9:05:39] I get that.
[9:05:40] If the court wants to, yes, we can absolutely remove building purchase and or land purchase
[9:05:46] from this.
[9:05:48] The result, I think, is going to be the same.
[9:05:50] It'll be the same.
[9:05:51] That's, I mean, is when it gets down to that.
[9:05:54] It's just the preference of the court, basically.
[9:05:57] I think it'd be a good idea to remove both of them at this present time.
[9:06:01] time and just finish up what we have on the books now.
[9:06:06] Just say and remove those two.
[9:06:08] Yes sir.
[9:06:09] Okay.
[9:06:10] In a pinch, I mean it's all reserved money.
[9:06:13] If it's needed, if there's something coming up.
[9:06:15] There are all of them.
[9:06:15] Just see there.
[9:06:17] Okay.
[9:06:17] Remove it too.
[9:06:19] Yes sir.
[9:06:19] Three million dollars.
[9:06:22] Do we need to remove the second one?
[9:06:24] Or are we solid with removing the first one?
[9:06:27] Just the first one.
[9:06:28] And we break even with what we have.
[9:06:30] I know it's not right. I know it's not right, even. That's the long-term for it, but
[9:06:34] is it more a balanced approach from what we think we're going to spend? Because it's about
[9:06:38] $2 million and $152,000 with the additions on the summary sheet, the changes to the proposed
[9:06:45] budget, and then the other going from $5.65 to $4 with the anticipated unspent funds from the
[9:06:53] Departments that kind of options, that would be the same.
[9:06:55] Yes, factors between like 260K and 290K.
[9:06:59] Right, correct.
[9:06:59] Yeah, so I mean, we get there with, if that's the, if that's the in-between, and we get there with just removing the building purchase.
[9:07:06] Okay.
[9:07:08] If that, if-
[9:07:09] Yes.
[9:07:11] First, third.
[9:07:12] Okay.
[9:07:14] I'm going to make a motion at 9.56pm to adopt the global accounting budget for fiscal year 2026.
[9:07:24] 26, 2027, FY27, with the changes to the proposed budget discussed with also the consideration
[9:07:38] of the building purchase for 2 million to be removed from that effort projects list
[9:07:47] and adding that staff of tiny for
[9:07:55] the district judge position.
[9:07:59] Right, we have a motion. Is there a second? Second. Do you have a motion and a second to about the
[9:08:06] global county budget for fiscal year 2026, 2027? Yes, ma'am.
[9:08:12] I hate to even bring this up, but does that include the pay raise for the county auditor?
[9:08:16] Because it would make, it was included when they did that.
[9:08:19] but is that part of your motion? Does that include the rights for the
[9:08:23] Auditor?
[9:08:24] Was it?
[9:08:24] Because it would exceed the highest pay elected official and the court would need
[9:08:28] to, the commissioners court would need to enforce that.
[9:08:30] So was it automatically included when 3% was put in the budget for everybody except
[9:08:36] elected officials?
[9:08:38] So it was, it was already in there, you're saying that, just make sure it's very
[9:08:43] transparent so that it's not either it needs to be included or specifically not included because
[9:08:50] I don't want to not present it. You don't want it to be in there and not have people know
[9:08:57] it's in there, right? So it's already included in there we just really need and when it's
[9:09:02] to understand if we're voting on this it is including that and what you're saying is what
[9:09:08] With that three percent, you're exceeding the highest common set and elected official.
[9:09:13] Elected official.
[9:09:14] Mr. Ties, any?
[9:09:18] I would say, Mr. Engelke, if you're going to include that, it could be, you know, me
[9:09:24] with your honor.
[9:09:25] No, you don't.
[9:09:25] You don't have to withdraw.
[9:09:27] You can state that it's included in your motion, as long as your second approves.
[9:09:31] Okay.
[9:09:32] Second to that.
[9:09:34] Okay.
[9:09:34] Well then, I will do this much. I will state that the auditors, salary, COLA, 3% is included
[9:09:42] in the budget.
[9:09:45] Correct.
[9:09:46] Now, as always, Commissioner German, seconds.
[9:09:48] Yeah.
[9:09:49] Okay.
[9:09:49] So, we do have a motion and a second to adopt the budget.
[9:09:54] Any other comments or questions?
[9:09:56] Yes, this team.
[9:09:57] You deserve the race tonight, believe me.
[9:10:00] As much as we put you through, we do deserve it. I didn't get everything I wanted, but it's
[9:10:09] enough inside the letter for me to vote with it. Any other comments, questions?
[9:10:17] All right, all those, and we're hearing no other comments or questions, no further discussion,
[9:10:23] all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any more opposition that motion passives?
[9:10:29] I will leave the item. I will set the 2026 tax rate to fund maintenance and operation
[9:10:34] expenditures for fiscal year 2027. In court, as talked about, if it still is the wish
[9:10:45] of the court to be at a total tax rate of 3493, correct, then that maintenance and operation
[9:10:55] Section tax rate would need to be set at 2752.
[9:11:02] I also move.
[9:11:04] Second.
[9:11:05] We have a motion and a second to set these.
[9:11:07] It's 2026 tax rates from maintenance and operation expenditures for fiscal year 2027 at 0.2752.
[9:11:16] Since any other comments or questions?
[9:11:19] No, sir.
[9:11:20] Any other discussion, all those in favor say aye.
[9:11:24] Any opposed?
[9:11:26] Any opposition in that motion passes.
[9:11:29] Item P set the 2026 tax rate to fund lateral road expenditures for fiscal year 2027.
[9:11:37] And the lateral road rate will need to be set at 0.0529.
[9:11:46] Second.
[9:11:47] You have a motion in the second to set the lateral road tax rate for expenditures in fiscal
[9:11:53] year 2027 at .0529.
[9:11:58] Any other comments or questions?
[9:12:01] No, sir.
[9:12:02] All right.
[9:12:02] Hearing no other discussion, all those in favor say aye.
[9:12:05] All right.
[9:12:06] Oppose.
[9:12:06] Same time.
[9:12:07] Hearing no opposition in that motion passes.
[9:12:10] and item Q set the tax rate 2026 to fund debt service expenditures for fiscal year 2027.
[9:12:22] And that rate would be 0.0212.
[9:12:30] Second.
[9:12:31] Did have a motion and a second to approve item Q and set the tax rate for 2026 to fund debt service expenditures of 0.0212.
[9:12:43] Any other discussion?
[9:12:48] Right.
[9:12:48] Hearing no other comments or questions, items in favor say aye.
[9:12:51] Aye.
[9:12:52] Opposed?
[9:12:53] Same time?
[9:12:54] in no opposition that motion passes.
[9:12:57] And we'll move to item R, the order setting the 2026 tax rate
[9:13:02] for Glottalippe County.
[9:13:05] Again, this is based on the 5.65,
[9:13:10] and it shows a different maintenance and operation tax rate
[9:13:14] than the actions we just took.
[9:13:16] So we will need to change this order
[9:13:21] We're setting the 2026 tax rate to reflect the maintenance and operation going from 2808 to 2752 and the total tax rate from 3549 to 3493.
[9:13:38] 3498, 3493.
[9:13:42] Is that correct?
[9:13:43] That's correct.
[9:13:44] Okay.
[9:13:45] Okay.
[9:13:45] I so move.
[9:13:47] Second.
[9:13:48] Do you have a motion in the second to approve and adopt the order for the 2026 tax rate
[9:13:54] for readily becoming with a total tax rate of 0.3493, with maintenance and operation
[9:14:01] of 2752 INS at 0212 and then a lot of loaded 0529.
[9:14:09] Any other comments or questions?
[9:14:12] All right.
[9:14:14] Hearing no other discussion, all those in favor say aye.
[9:14:17] Aye.
[9:14:18] Opposed?
[9:14:19] Same time.
[9:14:20] Hearing no opposition, that motion passes.
[9:14:25] And item S ratify the property tax increase reflected in fiscal year 2026, 2027, or FY27 budget,
[9:14:34] it, pursuant to local government code section 11.008c,
[9:14:43] is this reference on that section
[9:14:46] of the code for that statement that reflects that 4.75% tax rate increase?
[9:14:55] Yes, correct.
[9:14:55] that shows the additional amount of revenue and from new products.
[9:15:03] So, is there specific language we have to use in that motion, so it's done accurately?
[9:15:13] Read the statute right now. It says adoption of a budget that will require raising more revenue
[9:15:17] from property taxes than in the previous year requires a separate vote of the commissioners
[9:15:21] court to ratify the property tax increase reflected in the budget. A vote under this subsection
[9:15:27] is in addition to and separate from the vote to adopt the budget or a vote to set the tax rate
[9:15:33] required by chapter 26 tax code or other law.
[9:15:37] That is what it says. So I would recommend that
[9:15:42] Moved to ratify the property tax increase reflected in the fiscal year 27 budget.
[9:15:51] So the fiscal year 27 adopted budget can't be my language.
[9:15:55] Recorded language.
[9:16:01] So just had adopted budget basically, and what stated here pretty much,
[9:16:08] still moved to ratify
[9:16:11] the property tax increase reflected in the adopted fiscal year 2627 budget pursuant
[9:16:20] local government code, Subsection 111.008.
[9:16:27] Yes.
[9:16:28] Good.
[9:16:28] In fact, you have a motion in a second on action item S. Any further comments or questions?
[9:16:39] Getting no other discussion. All those in favor say aye.
[9:16:42] Aye.
[9:16:43] Opposed?
[9:16:43] Same time.
[9:16:45] Hearing no opposition, that motion passes.
[9:16:47] and will move to item T, the request for variance from the requirements of Section 10 Road Construction Section A9 General Requirements.
[9:16:56] Guided County Subdivision Regulations roll to the 550 Riley Road, lot 70 and the Herbert Riley Subdivision located in Precinct 1.
[9:17:06] Yes, at the request of the individual who is requesting the variance.
[9:17:11] So I would ask that we take no action on this item today, and Ms. Rogers, if you would
[9:17:19] either remind me of you put it on September 15, agenda.
[9:17:23] Thank you.
[9:17:27] So we'll take no action on item T. We'll move to number eight on our agenda announcement
[9:17:33] of upcoming World of County Public Events.
[9:17:36] Anybody want to make an announcement of the upcoming event?
[9:17:39] Well, there was one for the night, but it's all over, so I can't announce it anymore.
[9:17:43] Thank you.
[9:17:47] Thank you.
[9:17:47] Thank you for voting.
[9:17:48] I have a few announcements.
[9:17:50] So the City of New Bonfels and Seguine will hold separate 9-11 Memorial events for 9-11.
[9:17:56] New Bonfels Police Department will hold theirs at 7-30 a.m. at the main plaza and the City of Seguine will hold their September 11 event at downtown Central Park at 8-45 a.m.
[9:18:07] and that's on Friday 9-11.
[9:18:10] Nationwide out is October 6th, so please contact your county
[9:18:13] first responders and law enforcement departments to request a visit.
[9:18:18] Thank you.
[9:18:19] Any other announcements?
[9:18:21] Just real quick, is our last budget judge,
[9:18:26] definitely a memorable one.
[9:18:29] I'm wondering, thank you, especially Ms. Klein,
[9:18:33] for our 12-hour day that we just had, but thank you very much.
[9:18:41] It's a good budget. I think we did a great job.
[9:18:44] I think we worked through it, and I think we did a good job.
[9:18:49] I'm going to do that. I mean, it's been a long day, but we hammered it out.
[9:18:55] That's why people should do.
[9:18:58] Okay.
[9:18:59] Random mixed regulatory scheduled commissioners court will be September 15th.
[9:19:05] Second.
[9:19:05] Correct.
[9:19:07] All right.
[9:19:08] We've already addressed item 9 on our agenda.
[9:19:12] We're moved to item 10.
[9:19:13] Is there a motion to adjourn?
[9:19:14] No, to adjourn.
[9:19:15] Second.
[9:19:16] We have a motion and a second.
[9:19:17] All those in favor say aye.
[9:19:19] Aye.
[9:19:19] I propose that we are adjourned at 10.08 p.m.