[Items I.A - I.C] [00:00:12] SPECIAL AGENDA 101 FOR THIS WEDNESDAY JULY 15TH 2026. WE WILL MOVE TO CONSIDER DISCUSS AND ACT ON THE FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEMS UNDER 8.1 A REVIEW DISCUSS AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS ON EXISTING AND NEW PERSONNEL REQUESTS. COMMISSIONER HOLT. >> THANK YOU, JUDGE. IF IT'S OKAY I WANT TO GET TO THIS ITEM BUT FIRST I WANT TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF A COUPLE OF THINGS. THE VERY FIRST THING, THIS DOES PERTAIN TO NEW PERSONNEL AT LEAST INDIRECTLY. BRIANNA, DO YOU MIND COMING TO THE MICROPHONE AND GIVING AN EXPLANATION ON THE DIFFERENT FUND TYPES WE HAVE FROM HIGH LEVEL THAT EXPLAINS WHAT THESE FUNDS ARE, WHAT THEY ARE GENERALLY USED FOR ET CETERA FOR ANYONE WATCHING OR CURIOUS TO LEARN THEIR BENEFIT? >> SURE. OUR MAIN OPERATING FUND FOR THE COUNTY IS THE GENERAL FUND. YOU WILL HEAR US REFER TO IT AS FUND TEN, THAT'S WHERE THE MAJORITY OF ALL PROPERTY TAXES ARE, THAT'S THE NUMBER 1 REVENUE GENERATION STREAM FOR THAT. AS PART OF OUR POVERTY TAX COLLECTIONS WHEN WE CALCULATE THE RATE, WE ACTUALLY TAKE A REDUCTION IN PROPERTY TAX FROM SALES TAX. NUMBER 2 WHEN WE LOOK AT REVENUE GENERATION AS OUR SALES TAX COLLECTION AND WE HAVE DIFFERENT FEES OF OFFICE, COURT FEES, THAT SORT OF THING. INTEREST IN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS BECOMES A MAIN REVENUE STREAM FOR THE GENERAL FUND. THAT'S YOUR GENERAL OPERATIONS WHERE MOST COUNTY EMPLOYEES, YOU HAVE YOUR JUDICIAL WITH ALL YOUR DIFFERENT COURTS, YOU HAVE LAW ENFORCEMENT, SHERIFF'S OFFICE, CONSTABLE'S, THAT'S WHERE THE MAJORITY IS AND THEN YOU WILL HEAR US DISCUSS ROAD AND BRIDGE AND ALL THE PROPERTY TAXES FOR ROAD AND BRIDGE WHICH IS A SET -- SPECIAL TAX, THAT'S CALCULATED SEPARATELY KIND OF AS A BACKUP AND WE TALK ABOUT THAT. THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT PIECES TO OUR PROPERTY TAX RATE. WE HAVE OUR M AND O OUR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS AND WE HAVE OUR SPECIAL ROAD AND BRIDGE TAX -- WE HAVE OUR I AND S, OUR DEBT SERVICE. THAT IS ALL VOTER APPROVED LONG TERM DEBT. THAT'S -- BACK TO ROAD AND BRIDGE WE COLLECT OUR ROAD AND BRIDGE TAX. FUND 50 HAS A COUPLE STREAMS OF REVENUE. THE BIGGEST PIECE OF THAT IS FROM AUTO REGISTRATION SO WHEN WE DO RENEWALS THERE'S A $10 ROAD AND BRIDGE FEE THAT GOES THERE AND ON CERTAIN CASES WITH COUNTY CLERK, THERE'S A ROAD AND BRIDGE FINE THAT GOES TO THAT. WE HAVE A SMALL GRANT FROM THE STATE FOR LATERAL ROAD SO WHAT HAPPENS IS YOU HAVE ALL THE REVENUE THAT COMES INTO ROAD AND BRIDGE FUND 50 AND THEN DURING THIS BUDGET PROCESS THERE WILL BE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE ROAD AND BRIDGE ALLOCATION. SO THAT IS THE FORMULA TO ALLOCATE THE FUND TO -- DIFFERENT PRECINCTS. THAT'S THE MAIN REVENUE OF THE PRECINCT. THE OTHER PIECE IS OUR INS WHICH IS OUR DEBT SERVICE FUND. THE PIECES OF THE TAX RATE, YOUR GENERAL FUND OUR DEBT SERVICE FOR THE INF AND EVERYTHING -- THAT COMES INTO FUND 50 AND YOU HAVE YOUR INDIVIDUAL PRECINCT FUNDS. THOSE ARE TAXING FUNDS AND WE HAVE A LOT AT THIS POINT OF SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS AND SO MOST ALL OF THOSE ARE ESTABLISHED BY COURT FEES, COURT COLLECTIONS. YOU GO AND YOU PAY YOUR TICKET OR HAVE CASE FILINGS WHERE PEOPLE PAY FOR THAT. A PORTION WE ACTUALLY REMIT THAT TO THE STATE AND DIFFERENT STATUTES TELL US HOW THOSE FUNDS HAD TO BE ALLOCATED WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE JP TECHNOLOGY AND SECURITY FUNDS AND THOSE ARE RESTRICTED FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES. WE HAVE A COURT REPORTER SERVICE FUND AND DIFFERENT RECORD PRESERVATION FUNDS. THERE'S SEVERAL OF THOSE AND THEY ARE RESTRICTED TO THEIR USE [00:05:01] AND MOST ALL OF THOSE ARE COMING IN FROM COLLECTION FEES FROM THE COURTS. FOR OUR LONG TERM DEBT, OUR TRANSPORTATION WE ACCOUNT FOR THOSE IN A SEPARATE FUND FOR ALL THOSE BOND PROCEEDS AND THE EXPENDITURES ON THOSE PROJECTS. WE HAVE SPECIAL GRANT FUNDS. ANYTHING WHERE THERE'S A RESTRICTED PURPOSE TO HOW WE CAN USE THE FUNDS THAT COME IN FOR THAT, WE ACCOUNT FOR IN A SEPARATE FUND TO ENSURE WE CAN REPORT ON IT AND THE FUND BALANCE IS KEPT SEPARATE FROM THE GENERAL FUND. SO THAT'S KIND OF A HIGH LEVEL AGAIN SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS LIKE ACTUALLY PUT A LIST TOGETHER JUST KIND OF WE HAVE TO DO IT FOR THE AUDIT JUST IF PEOPLE HAVE QUESTIONS WHAT THESE FUNDS CAN BE USED FOR, JUST GENERAL SUMMARY. DOES THAT HELP ANSWER? >> MY MAIN THING IS WE'RE -- [INDISCERNIBLE] WE'RE BASICALLY IN THE GENERAL FUND. THE COMMENTS WANTED TO MOVE SOMETHING -- >> ONE OF THOSE MOVING TO FUND TEN I THINK ONE OF THE REQUESTS WAS COMING FROM ONE OF THE JPS. IN ONE OTHER SPECIAL REVENUE FUND AGAIN IT'S BY STATUTE HOW YOU CAN USE THOSE FUNDS. IF THERE ARE ELIGIBLE USES WHERE WE CAN USE THOSE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS AND NOT HAVE TO USE FUND TEN WHICH IS MOSTLY GENERATED FROM PROPERTY TAX WE TRY TO USE THOSE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS. SOME OF IT DEPENDS HOW MUCH IS IN THE BALANCE THAT IT CAN SUSTAIN USING THOSE FUNDS SO I THINK THAT WAS ONE OF THE REQUESTS TO MOVE IT SO THAT WAY THEY CAN USE THAT FUND FOR OTHER PURPOSES THAT ARE ALLOWABLE WITHIN IT. THERE'S A COUPLE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS THAT PAY FOR EMPLOYEES, ONE IS COURTHOUSE SECURITY THERE'S THE DEPUTY PAID FROM THAT SPECIAL REVENUE FUND AND I KNOW COUNTY CLERK HAS A COUPLE WHERE THE ALLOWABLE USE ALLOWS FOR YOU TO PAY PERSONNEL COSTS FROM THOSE. AGAIN IT JUST DEPENDS ON WHAT WE COLLECT IN REVENUE, WHAT EXPENDITURES ARE GOING OUT AND WHETHER THAT FUND CAN SUSTAIN SOME OF THOSE COSTS ON THE LONG TERM. ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PERSONNEL. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE ABOUT THE FUNDS? ITEM ONE AS THE JUDGE OPENED HIS RECOMMENDATIONS ON EXISTING NEW PERSONNEL REQUESTS. THERE'S A FEW DIFFERENT ITEMS THAT I'D LIKE TO TACKLE IN THIS. I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST WE IDENTIFY A HARD STOP OF PERHAPS 2:30 P.M. OR 3:00 TODAY GIVEN THE BREADTH OF EVERYTHING WE HAVE TO COVER, WE COULD BE HERE UNTIL MIDNIGHT BUT THAT'S NOT GOING TO -- 2:30 P.M. 2:30 P.M.? >> THAT'S GOOD FOR ME. I HAVE ANOTHER MEETING AT 2:30 P.M. >> LET'S DO THAT AND IN THAT CASE LET'S MOVE THROUGH THIS QUICKLY. THE COUNTY'S ATTORNEY -- ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WILL BE HERE AROUND 1:30 TO GO THROUGH THEIRS -- ONCE WE DO COUNTY ATTORNEY AND SHERIFF SHOULD HAVE HEARD ALL OF THE NEW PERSONNEL AND EXISTING PERSONNEL. I HAVE A COUPLE OF HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST TO THE COURT UNDER ITEM ONE A AS WELL. IF IT'S OKAY WITH THE COURT, SHERIFF, I WILL GET TO YOU ALL IN JUST A SECOND. I'D LIKE TO KNOCK OUT A COUPLE OF HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS BEFORE MOVING ON TO THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE. OUR PERMITTING DIRECTOR, THIS IS SOMETHING COMMISSIONERS COURT COULD HANDLE RIGHT NOW. PERMITTING DIRECTOR CURRENTLY REIMBURSED -- NOT REIMBURSED -- REIMBURSED, THEY'RE PAID AN AMOUNT LESS THAN THE BUDGETED AMOUNT. MY SUGGESTION IS WE REVIEW THAT -- THERE'S MONEY IN THE FUNDS FOR THE PERMITTING DIRECTOR TO BE PAID MORE FOR -- THAN WHAT THEY ARE CURRENTLY BEING PAID. JUST BECAUSE WE BUDGETED A CERTAIN AMOUNT THAT PERSON CAN BE PAID LESS MY UNDERSTANDING THEY DIDN'T HAVE CERTAIN CERTIFICATIONS SUCH AS A CERTIFICATION THEY NOW HAVE -- AS PART OF OUR HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS TODAY THAT WE GO AHEAD AND BUMP THAT UP FEAR THAT BEING SAID THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING WE WANT TO DISCUSS THE SPECIFICS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. >> IS THAT A FUNCTION OF COMMISSIONERS COURT? [00:10:01] >> DIDN'T KNOW IF WE SHOULD BRING THAT UP HERE TODAY AS WELL. SINCE IT IS A BUDGET ITEM. >> IT'S BEEN BUDGETED FOR THE INCREASED SO I THINK -- >> I THINK THAT SHOULD BE JUST A FUNCTION OF COMMISSIONERS COURT SESSION. WE FREQUENTLY BUDGET THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT SOMEONE WOULD BE PAID -- ALLOWS ROOM FOR ADVANCE DURING THE BUDGET YEAR. >> WHEN WE FIRST HIRED HIM TO BUMP HIM UP A FEW MONTHS LATER -- >> I DON'T RECALL HIM. HAS BEEN ACROSS THE BOARD BUT I THINK A BIG THING -- THERE'S A GAP. INCREASE THE BUDGET JUST PAYING HIM -- >> ON THE NEXT AGENDA PLEASE FOR -- SECOND ITEM ON HERE WE HAVE AN I.T. DIRECTOR THAT'S TAKEN ON AN EXCEPTIONAL AMOUNT OF RESPONSIBILITY ON THE RADIO SIDE. I THINK BECKY HAS DONE SOME COMPS -- THE DEGREE OF OF RESPONSIBILITY LOOKING AT HIS COMPENSATION FOR AN INCREASE I THINK OUR IT DIRECTORS NOT SOMEONE WHO WILL EVER APPROACH US FOR THAT. I'M ON THAT RADIO COMMITTEE. I DON'T KNOW HOW HE DOES THE I T STUFF HE ALREADY DOES AND DOES ALL THE THINGS FOR THAT RADIO COMMITTEE HE DOES FOR I'M SLIGHTLY CONCERNED HE DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO SLEEP. I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS HIM RECEIVING AN INCREASE THIS YEAR. >> TOLD ME THE OTHER DAY HE DIDN'T LIKE ME ANY MORE. >> I THINK THAT'S A PERSONAL ISSUE INVOLVING FAMILY MEMBERS IF I RECALL. >> JUST UNDERSTAND HERE WHAT WE ARE DOING IS A RECOMMENDATION. >> THIS BODY IS TO DISCUSS RECOMMENDATIONS TO BE SENT TO COMMISSIONERS COURT. AN ASPECT WE ARE WORKING THROUGH BECAUSE THIS IS SO NEW THAT WE'VE GOT COMMISSIONER -- THE VALUE ADDED RIGHT NOW THE TREASURER BECKY MCCULLOUGH, INTERFACE QUITE A BIT. >> WE GET SPECIAL ATTENTION FROM I.T. BECAUSE WE GET PAYROLL -- I. DID GO THROUGH AND ASK FOR A LOT OF POSITIONS TO TRY TO HELP US... GOING INTO SCORECARDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THERE'S A TOP DOLLAR POSITION -- I. HAVE PAPERS FOR YOU SPECIFICALLY TO I T. I CALLED IT THE I T. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO COORDINATOR AND THE WAY I USE -- BASICALLY HIS MIDPOINT IS ABOUT 1525. HE'S CURRENTLY PAID 132.2. FOR A TOTAL COMPENSATION PACKAGE OF 135. A MIDPOINT WOULD TAKE HIM TO ONE TO 525 OR MAX WOULD BE 175. >> I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED HERE BECAUSE WE'RE AT THE COMMITTEE PHASE HERE AND I THINK THE COMMITTEE PHASE FROM MY PERSPECTIVE WOULD BE TO TAKE REQUESTS THAT COME IN AND EVALUATE THEM AND GIVE THEM A SCORE. I THINK THE OTHER THINGS NOT BEING ASKED FOR ARE THINGS WE SHOULD HANDLE AS COMMISSIONERS COURT AND AS WE'RE PARING DOWN THE BUDGET INSIDE. I RECOGNIZE YOU SAY THESE ARE PEOPLE THAT WOULD NOT ASK FOR IT BUT THAT WOULD BE A FUNCTION OF COMMISSIONERS COURT IN MY OPINION TO SAY WE HAVE A POSITION HERE NOT BEING ASKED FOR BUT WE SHOULD CONSIDER THAT. AM I WRONG? >> I CONCUR. >> I AGREE. I THINK IT'S ALWAYS BEEN CLEAR THAT THESE ARE JUST CONVERSATION AND IT WILL ALSO MAKE THE DECISION BUT INSTEAD OF IF I CAN [00:15:02] PROVIDE YOU INFORMATION NOW THEN THAT WILL PREVENT -- >> I'M NOT QUESTIONING WHAT YOU'RE PRESENTING. I'M QUESTIONING THE TIMING OF HOW WE'RE DOING THINGS. IF YOU GIVE US THE INFORMATION I'M SURE IT'S SOMETHING THE COMMISSIONER WOULD BE WILLING TO DO BUT I THINK WE HAVE PLENTY OF WORK TO DO WITHOUT BRINGING IN MORE. >> THAT'S VERY FAIR. IN A SENSE IT'S ME BRINGING THE REQUEST. THAT'S HOW I SEE THAT LINE BUT I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING COMPLETELY. THESE TWO ARE BRINGING THIS REQUEST -- [INDISCERNIBLE] >> ON OUR OFFICER'S SIDE OF THINGS WE HAVE A LOT OF INTERACTION WITH THE IT DEPARTMENT AND JAMES DOES A TREMENDOUS JOB FOCUSING THE DEPARTMENT AND I THINK -- HE'S FUNDED A LOT OF IT. HE'S DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB TRYING TO BRING US INTO CURRENT PAY FROM WHERE WE WERE ESPECIALLY POST RANSOMWARE AND I KNOW YOU GUYS HAD A WHOLE LOT OF WORK WITH THE RADIO AND THOSE COMMUNICATIONS THAT AREN'T UNDER THE HEADING OF TRADITIONAL IT WORK. TO GET FAMILIAR WITH THAT TO THOSE ISSUES WHICH IS A WHOLE NOTHER THING PEER. >> I DON'T WANT TO CIRCUMVENT GOING DOWN THE LINE. THE SAME SIMILAR COMMENTS -- AND OUR DISTRICT ATTORNEY ON CONVICTION RATES BASED ON THE TECHNOLOGY HE'S HAD AT THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE HAS TRANSLATED INTO A VERY SUCCESSFUL PROCESS TO OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND I THINK WE GO DOWN THE LIST AND I'VE HEARD NOTHING BUT AN IMMENSE AMOUNT OF PRAISE AND SUPPORT FOR OUR I.T. DIRECTOR AND I THINK TO SUMMARIZE THIS I THINK FROM ALL OF US WE ALL HAVE EQUAL EXPERIENCES WITH OUR I.T. DIRECTOR AND THE VALUE HE'S BROUGHT AND TO BRING UP THE TOWERS, RADIO TOWERS, TO ME THAT IS BEYOND -- WAY BEYOND WHAT HIS SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY. HE'S BEEN A CHAMPION OF IT. I THINK WE COULD GO ON AND ON ABOUT OUR I.T. DIRECTOR AND THAT WILL TRANSLATE INTO SOME GOOD DISCUSSION. >> I THINK BOTH OF THOSE THAT THE COMMISSIONER BROUGHT UP ARE VALID. THEY ARE. WITHOUT A DOUBT. >> SOUNDS LIKE COMMITTEES IN FAVOR OF COMMISSIONERS COURT -- >> ABSOLUTELY. >> NEXT ITEM IS SOMETHING WE DISCUSSED QUITE A BIT PEER COMMITTEE INPUT IS VITAL PEER COUNTY ENGINEER PEER WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING ON THE COMMISSIONERS SIDE BRINGING IN COUNTY ENGINEER FOR -- WE DISCUSSED IT AT LEAST IN PART PEER WHETHER IT WAS AN IMMEDIATE THING OR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE FUTURE SINCE 2023 THE COUNTY HAS ONLY GROWN. THE PURPOSE OF THE COUNTY ENGINEER WOULD BE TO INTERFACE WITHOUT ENGINEERING GROUPS ET-CETERA. MY THOUGHTS ON THIS WOULD BE AND I'D WELCOME THE INPUT THAT COUNTY ENGINEER WOULD BE PUT IN CHARGE OF PLANNING, WE'D MOVE IT OUT FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WHICH COUNCILOR FORREST HAS EXPRESSED TO ME BEFORE HE HAS ABSOLUTELY ZERO ISSUE WITH THAT. DON'T MEAN TO PUT WORDS IN HIS MOUTH AND MAKE NEW CIRCUMSTANCES THAT CAUSED THAT TO CHANGE BUT I'D LIKE THE COMMITTEE TO DISCUSS BRINGING ON A COUNTY ENGINEER AND THE VALUE THAT COULD BE ADDED. WOULD IT TAKE AWAY ALL THE ENGINEERING EXPENSES WE'RE SPENDING RIGHT NOW? OF COURSE NOT. BUT YOU USE LAWYERS TO TALK TO LAWYERS. RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE AN ENGINEER TO TALK TO ENGINEERS WITH AS MANY PROJECTS AS WE HAVE I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF VALUE TO BE HAD IN THAT PARTICULARLY WHEN IT COMES TO SOME OF THESE DAILY EXPENSES WE PAY FOR THINGS LIKE INSPECTION, MONITORING JOBS, ET CETERA. THIS ENGINEER JUST SO WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE, WE'D PROBABLY BE LOOKING AT A SALARY SOMEWHERE IN THE 150 TO 200 RANGE I WOULD ASSUME TO GET A QUALITY PERSON THAT HAS THE CREDENTIALS AND EXPERIENCE WE NEED TO ADD VALUE TO THE COUNTY. THIS IS NOT A SMALL PERSONAL ASK BUT IT'S A BIG NEW PERSONNEL ASK AND THEY REPORT UNDER 401 TO COMMISSIONERS COURT. THAT'S THE NEXT ITEM. >> WOULD HE TAKE RESPONSIBILITY [00:20:01] FOR ALL THE PLANNING WORK FIXING IT AND YOU WOULDN'T NEED ALISON OR THE OTHER LADY THE ENGINEER TYPE EVERYTHING OVER. WOULD HE STILL HAVE TWO EMPLOYEES -- >> I'D SEE HIM OVERSEEING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND OVERSEEING ALISON. >> SO THEY'D STILL BE WORKING INSTEAD OF JOHN. >> THAT WOULD BE MY INITIAL SUGGESTION. IF SOMEBODY HAS A DIFFERENT SUGGESTION, I'M ALL EARS. BUT I THINK THERE'S ENOUGH WORK THE COUNTY ENGINEER WOULD DO A LOT MORE THAN JUST LOOKING AT FLATS AND DOING THE ADMINISTRATIVE SIDE WHICH IS WHAT THEY'RE DOING NOW. I'D EXPECT THEY WOULD BE OUT THERE DOING JOB INSPECTIONS. THINGS OF THAT NATURE. >> ME PERSONALLY I WOULD HOPE THEY WOULD TAKE OVER THE WHOLE THING AND NOT HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT. ALISON AND THAT OTHER LADY. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT'S -- HOW THAT WOULD WORK. >> IT WOULD PROBABLY BE CREATING A DEPARTMENT OR IF YOU'RE GOING TO PUT -- >> AHEAD OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. >> THEY STILL HAVE I BELIEVE THE CURRENT ASSISTANT COUNTIES THERE IS MORE OF A CIVIL SIDE. NOT ONLY SHE WORKS ON PLANNING SIDE, SHE ASSISTS AS WELL SO THAT MIGHT BE A DECISION THAT THE COUNTIES -- THE COUNTY WANTS TO STAY UNDER HIM. KIND OF ASSIGNED TO PLAT IS THAT'S NECESSARY. I WOULD THINK. IT'S A QUESTION REALLY FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. BUT I COULD SEE WHERE MAYBE -- SHE DOES A LOT OF CONTRACT MANAGEMENT FOR MY OFFICE IN REVIEWING POLICIES AS WELL. >> WOULD WANT TO KEEP HER. >> I WOULD THINK SO AND THAT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY FALL UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF. >> MY TAKE ON THIS IS I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN AFFORD IT OR NOT BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION I NEED. I'VE GOT REQUESTS HERE OF SOMEWHERE IN THE 94 TO 95 TO $96 MILLION RANGE FOR A BUDGET THAT WAS LAST YEAR 84I BELIEVE. THOSE ARE ROUGH NUMBERS BUT THAT'S WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $10 MILLION IN REQUESTS HERE. MY VISION OF WHAT THIS COMMITTEE'S JOB IS IS TO TAKE THOSE ON PRIORITIZE THOSE AND IF AND WHEN WE DECIDE THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO DO THAT THEN WE WOULD ADD A POTENTIALLY A POSITION. BUT IF WE'RE IN A SITUATION WHERE OKAY WE WILL ADD THIS IN TODAY, THEN WE'RE ANOTHER STEP AWAY FROM WHERE WE WERE LAST YEAR AND I START LOOKING AT WHAT WE HAVE TO DO WITHOUT BEFORE THAT. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY WE HAVE OR WHERE WE CAN BE. WE'VE HAD PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS ABOUT ADDING THIS POSITION BUT IN MY MIND IT'S IF WE CAN AFFORD THAT, HOW ARE WE GOING TO AFFORD THAT. SO I'VE GOT TREMENDOUS REQUESTS OVER HERE AND BUDGETARY ITEMS SITTING IN FRONT OF ME THAT WE HAVE NOT ADDRESSED AT ALL SO I DON'T KNOW IF THOSE ARE THINGS WE CAN LIVE WITHOUT OR NOT. GO BACK TO THE THREE CIRCLES. THINGS WE HAVE TO HAVE, THINGS THAT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE HERE HOW CAN WE PAY FOR IT. WHAT ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO AFFORD? ARE WE GOING TO NOT GRANT A REQUEST OVER HERE IN A LAW ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT AND INSTEAD THIS? HOW'S THAT GOING TO WORK? I THINK IT'S PREMATURE. I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THOSE UP TODAY BUT I'M NOT IN A POSITION TO SAY YES, WE SHOULD OPEN THIS POSITION UP BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN AFFORD IT OR NOT. >> I THINK TO ADD ON TO WHAT YOU JUST SAID IS I THINK -- AND AGAIN COMMISSIONER HOLT, I THINK IT'S A GOOD DIRECTION TO GO TO ADDRESS THE NEED BUT I THINK GOING ANY FURTHER THAN THAT, I DO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER WALDEN. WE CAN MAKE THESE RECOMMENDATIONS BUT I THINK THIS IS PREMATURE RIGHT NOW UNTIL WE GET ALL THAT INFORMATION. >> HANG ON. Y'ALL ARE SUGGESTING I'M WANTING A DECISION TODAY. I'M BRINGING UP THE TOPIC SO WE CAN FIND OUT WHAT INFORMATION EVERYBODY WANTS TO SEE SO THEN AT A LATER TIME WE CAN THEN MAKE THE SUGGESTION TO COMMISSIONERS COURT. THAT'S ALL I'M -- I. DON'T -- I. THINK A DECISION TODAY WOULD BE VERY PREMATURE. THERE'S NOTHING IN WRITING, WE DON'T HAVE AN AGREEMENT. I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE TALKED ABOUT A LOT, WHAT INFORMATION WOULD WE NEED TO SEE SO THAT WE COULD MOVE FORWARD? [00:25:01] THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING FOR TODAY. >> I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT -- WHAT COULD POSSIBLY HELP US HOW MUCH MONEY THIS ENGINEER WOULD SAVE THE COUNTY. >> EXACTLY. VERY GOOD POINT. >> OUR CONTRACT TO DO IT NOW -- [INDISCERNIBLE] >> I'D ASK BRIANNA TO PULL THAT. >> THAT'S AN INTERACTION I THINK WILL HELP US AS WELL. >> NOT EVERYTHING IS NECESSARILY A ZERO SUM GAME IF WE'RE SAVING MONEY IN ONE PLACE I HATE TO SAY YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SAVE ALL THE MONEY TO PAY FOR SOMETHING NOW I DON'T LIKE THAT, I HAVE NOT SEEN THAT BE THE CASE IN GOVERNMENT NECESSARILY BUT I DO THINK FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF HOW MUCH WE NEED, I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD INFORMATION TO HAVE. WHAT TASKS DO WE THINK ARE REASONABLE TO TAKE OFF A PLATE? ASSUMING ALL THE EMPLOYEES YOU'RE LOOKING AT DEPARTMENTS SOMEWHERE AND THE COUNTY IS STILL PAYING. >> I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING IT UP TODAY. THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE DISCUSSED PLENTY OF TIMES. I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT UP EARLY SO THESE QUESTIONS CAN GET ANSWERS SO THAT THE COMMITTEE HERE CAN ASSESS IT AND PRIORITIZE IT SO THAT WHEN WE DO GET IT IN COURT AND WE DO KNOW WHAT OUR BUDGET IS, WE HAVE AN IDEA OF HOW TO TACKLE IT, HOW TO IMPLEMENT IT AND WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST US SO THANKS FOR BRINGING IT UP AS WELL. >> MY ASK WOULD BE WHETHER IT'S RIGHT NOW VERBALLY I'M HAPPY TO TAKE NOTES WHETHER IT'S IN AN EMAIL LATER THIS WEEK OR EARLY NEXT WEEK. SEND ME THE QUESTIONS YOU NEED ANSWERED SO THAT WE HAVE THE DATA DOWN THE ROAD. SOME DATA WE WILL BE WAITING ON WILL BE WHEN THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT RELEASES THEIR NUMBERS ON THAT I DON'T THINK IT'S TIME TO MAKE ANY DECISIONS TODAY. I THINK WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW SO WE CAN MAKE A DECISION. >> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE TOPIC OF COUNTY ENGINEER. I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW. THAT'S WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING. >> I WILL JUST SAY THIS IF YOU START TELLING ME HOW MUCH MONEY WE ARE GOING TO SAVE BY ADDING ANOTHER EMPLOYEE IN EXPENDITURE, I'M GOING TO WRITE THAT DOWN AND BRING IT BACK UP. A YEAR LATER. ABOUT HOW THEY'RE GOING TO PAY FOR THEMSELVES AND ALL OF THAT, I'M GOING TO WRITE IT DOWN AND WE WILL MEASURE AND SEE. THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT TO SAY. I APPRECIATE HAVING AN ENGINEER ON STAFF THAT WE COULD REFER SOME OF OUR DIFFICULT SITUATIONS TO AND THAT WOULD BE A GOOD THING. NOT OPPOSED TO IT AT ALL. I'M JUST TELLING YOU LIKE THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY SITTING HERE, THOSE PROMISES OF MONEY SAVED IN GOVERNMENT ARE DIFFICULT TO BRING BACK. NOT THAT THERE ISN'T A SIGNIFICANT NEED. >> ON THE ITEM SO I CAN CLOSE THE LOOP DOES ANYONE HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO SUGGEST NOW THAT THEY'D LIKE TO KNOW OR IS THAT SOMETHING YOU'D LIKE ME TO BE ON. >> I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF AN EMPLOYEE IS GOING TO MAKE $150,000 WHAT THE COST WOULD BE TO THE COUNTY. >> 190. >> 190? >> I'D SAY 190 TO 200. IT'S ALL GOING TO BE -- >> WALK AROUND? >> RIGHT. >> VEHICLE. >> EVERYBODY NEEDS SPACE. >> I'M JUST SAYING. THERE'S SIGNIFICANT EXPENSES THAT COME WITH HIRING ANOTHER EMPLOYEE AND I THINK WE NEED THE REAL ACTUAL NUMBERS OF WHAT IT WOULD COST. WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO TO OUTFIT THEM, WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO SIT AND ALL THOSE THOSE TYPES OF THINGS THAT COME UP WITH ADDING A NEW EMPLOYEE. >> CLERK AT COMPUTER, ANCILLARY COSTS. WHAT ELSE? >> I THINK THE DEPARTMENT STRUCTURE -- >> I THINK WE'D BE ABLE TO COME UP -- WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO REACH OUT TO OTHER COUNTIES THAT HAVE ADOPTED THIS STRUCTURE AND SEE WHAT MAYBE THEY'VE LEARNED. I KNOW OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE NORTH HAVE ONE. >> JOHNSON COUNTY HAS ONE WITH HIM REGARDING THAT BUT THEY DO NUMEROUS THINGS IN THE COUNTY BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THEY RUN THE ENTIRE PLANNING OFFICE BY THEMSELVES. I THINK -- PLANNING OFFICES WILL HAVE THE SAME FOLKS IN THERE BECAUSE THEIR TIME IS MORE VALUABLE THAN THAT PROBABLY. >> I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE NEED TO LOOK IN ON THE STRUCTURE. I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY SOME GOOD ONES OUT THERE AND SOME LESSONS LEARNED BY OTHERS THAT WE SHOULD IN THIS ROOM WOULD BE [00:30:05] ABLE TO FIND OUT. >> JOHN I. WILL PUT IT TO YOU AT THIS POINT. WE DISCUSSED ONE OF TWO THINGS INVOLVING YOU. THIS IS THE FIRST ONE. THE IDEA OF BRINGING ON A COUNTY ENGINEER OUT OF YOUR OFFICE UNDER ACCOUNTING ENGINEER MAKING IT ITS OWN GROUP. JUST TOSSING IDEAS NOW. I BELIEVE IN THE PAST YOU SAID YOU WERE NOT OPPOSED TO IT OUT OF YOUR OFFICE BUT I DON'T WANT TO PUT WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH IF CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE CHANGED. >> ONCE AGAIN AS FAR AS PLANNING IS CONCERNED THE EMPLOYEE MOVED OVER -- THAT'S NOT THE SOLE FUNCTION BUT TO MOVE HER WOULD -- IF WE HAD HER IN THE SAME OFFICE AND SAME BUILDING IT WOULD BE FINE AND WE COULD MANAGE IT THAT WAY. MOVING TO ANOTHER STRUCTURE AND ANOTHER BUILDING AND CREATING A WHOLE DIFFERENT THERE WOULD BE DIFFICULTIES BECAUSE A LOT OF INDIVIDUALS IN OFFICE PARTICIPATE IN THE PLANNING AND OTHER FUNCTIONS IN THE OFFICE. SO JUST MANDY FORD DOES A LOT OF SCHEDULING FOR IT. YOU COULD HAVE SHALL BE THE NEW INDIVIDUAL IN PLANNING HAS A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS AS FAR AS LOOKING AT THESE AND DIFFERENT FUNCTIONS THAT GO OUTSIDE. THE ENGINEER WOULD BE NICE AND THERE'S PROBABLY DIFFERENT FUNCTIONS FOR THE ENGINEER BUT ONE PERSON WE COULD PROBABLY -- YOU CHOSE TO DO THAT PUT THEM IN THE OFFICE AND HAVE THEM IN THERE. >> SO IF WE HAD IF I'M HEARING YOU RIGHT, IF WE HAD AN ENGINEER COME ON AND CREATED A PLANNING OFFICE, AS LONG AS THEY ARE CO-LOCATED, THAT WOULD ADDRESS -- >> 100%. I THINK YOU LOSE A LOT OF WORK IF YOU TOOK THOSE INDIVIDUALS AND GAVE THEM JUST A FUNCTION -- IS WHAT I THINK. >> REAL QUICK FROM THE ATTORNEY SIDE OF THINGS I THINK THERE'S SOME LEGAL ETHICS CHALLENGES THAT HAPPEN WHEN YOU HAVE ATTORNEYS ANSWERING TO A BOSS WHO'S NOT AN ATTORNEY. THERE'S SOMETIMES ISSUES THERE FROM THE LEGAL ETHICS. >> THEY WOULD ABSOLUTELY SERVE TWO DIFFERENT FUNCTIONS AND ONE THING SOME OF THE OTHER COUNTIES UTILIZE AN ENGINEER FOR PLAT HAS GONE THROUGH GOING BACK OUT AND FIRMING THE CONSTRUCTION -- THE ROAD SURFACE, DRAINAGE AND SO THEY'D BE OUT ON THE FIELD AS WELL AT THAT TIME. BUT I THINK IT WOULD DROP THE WORKLOAD FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS BELOW WHAT THEY NEED TO BE DOING IF WE COMPLETELY MOVE THEM OUT OF THE OFFICE. >> THE DRAINAGE IS A HUGE THING FOR US. >> IT IS. THAT'S PROBABLY ONE OF THE BIGGEST COMPLAINTS YOU GET ON DRAINAGE. SO IT'S ONE OF THOSE DIFFICULT THINGS THAT WHEN I COME BACK WITH AN ENGINEER SAYING HERE'S THE PROBLEM, WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE TO COMBAT IT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT EDUCATION OR THAT EXPERTISE TO COMBAT THAT. SO A LOT OF TIMES WE'RE LOOKING FOR OUTSIDE WHICH I THINK IS A LOT. A LOT OF TIMES WE'RE NOT AT FAULT BUT AT THE SAME TIME WE CAN'T GIVE AN ADEQUATE EXPLANATION WITHOUT AN ENGINEER EXPLAINING THAT. I'D SAY 99% OF THE TIME. MAYBE A HUNDRED. >> IF YOU DON'T MIND I'M GOING TO PAUSE THERE REAL QUICK. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS? THAT YOU'D LIKE ANSWERED? EMAIL ME THOSE AND WE'LL GET THOSE GATHERED IN THE INTEREST OF TIME IF IT'S OKAY WE'LL MOVE ON. VERY LAST ITEM I HAVE IS PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT CAN BE HANDLED EASILY IN COMMISSIONERS COURT. I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC PROJECTS FROM THE JUDGE'S OFFICE INTO 401 DIRECTOR REPORTING TO COMMISSIONERS AND THE JUDGE VERSUS BEING IN THE JUDGE'S OFFICE THAT'S SOMETHING WE'VE DISCUSSED BEFORE AND THAT MIGHT BE MORE SUITED FOR REGULAR COMMISSIONERS COURT. >> AGAIN I THINK THAT SHOULD GO ON THE AGENDA. I THINK THE INTENT OF THIS WAS WITH THE TIMING AND WITH THE AVAILABILITY WHEN THIS WENT DOWN, I THINK IT WAS DONE QUICKLY BUT GIVEN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE NEED WE HAVE WITH THE TALENT THAT WAS OUT THERE TO BE ABLE TO SECURE THAT, I THINK THE INTENT WAS ALL ALONG IT WAS GOING TO BE GETTING GOING START BUILDING HIS OWN JOB DESCRIPTION AND A SENSE OF CREATING THAT. I THINK THE INTENT ALL ALONG WAS THROUGH THE COMMISSIONERS COURT TO PHASE HIM INTO THIS AND HAVE THAT DONE, I DON'T THINK THERE'S [00:35:04] ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT AT ALL. I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE WERE GOING WITH THAT AND I THINK BRIAN AGREES WITH THAT. WE TALKED ABOUT IT SO WE ACTUALLY CAN MOVE ON WITH THAT QUICKLY THAT WILL BE ON THE AGENDA FOR THAT TO GET DONE. >> IF YOU'LL MAKE SURE THOSE TWO THINGS ARE ON THE AGENDA. THAT ONE ON THE AGENDA AS WELL AS WELL AS THE FIRST ONE. THANK YOU. >> ONE THING ON THAT AND WE WERE CHANGING WITH THE COUNTY SYSTEM AND EVERYTHING ELSE AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THIS MORE LATER ON DOWN THE ROAD. INSTEAD OF HAVING IT COMMISSIONERS COURT THERE ARE OTHER DEPARTMENTS OBVIOUSLY OR DEPARTMENT HEADS APPOINTED BY COMMISSIONERS COURT THAT ARE AS -- THE DEPARTMENTS NAMED WHAT THE FUNCTION IS FOR INSTANCE THINGS LIKE VETERAN AFFAIRS. YOU HAVE ONE PERSON SO THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING WE WANT TO DO INSTEAD OF IT JUST BEING COMMISSIONERS COURT WHETHER THE TWO INDIVIDUALS ARE IN THE SAME DEPARTMENT OR IT'S SEPARATE AT SOME POINT PROBABLY NAMING WHAT THEY ARE INSTEAD OF PUTTING PEOPLE UNDER THAT ESPECIALLY IF YOU HAVE SUPPLIES AND TRAINING OR IF THEY'RE WORKING IN DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS FOR THE REPORTING FOR PURCHASE ORDERS, DIFFERENT THINGS. IT MAKES SENSE TO KIND OF CREATE DEPARTMENTS AND JUST SUBMIT DIFFERENTLY AND THAT'S SOMETHING THERE'S ONLY A COUPLE EXPENSES THAT ARE PAID UNDER 401. WE HAD A COUPLE JUDGES AND COMMISSIONERS OUR AUDIT. SOME OF THE ADVERTISING RELATED TO WHEN WE HAD -- I'M TRYING TO THINK. TAX ABATEMENTS. DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT INSTEAD OF HAVING IT IN THAT DEPARTMENT IT MIGHT BE BETTER TO MOVE SOME OF THOSE BUDGET AND EXPENSES TO 409 SO WHOEVER'S IN 401, IT'S JUST THE EXPENSES OF THAT DEPARTMENT AND THAT FUNCTION. THAT'S SOMETHING I NOTICED AND SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT, THAT'S JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT OF KIND OF THAT. >> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION IS THE CHANGE EFFECTIVE WITHIN THE BUDGET YEAR OR SOMETHING WE'RE WANTING TO DO -- >> I'D SAY LET'S GET INTO THOSE DETAILS -- >> THAT'S GETTING TOO MUCH IN THE WEEDS ON THAT. >> CAN WE PIVOT BACK TO A COUNTY -- ATTORNEY. I KNOW YOUR TIME CONSTRAINT. DO YOU MIND WALKING US THROUGH YOUR RECLASS PERSONNEL STUFF? >> SO ON THE RECLASS WHAT WE WERE LOOKING AT WAS THIS GOES BACK IN HISTORY AS FAR AS THE PLANNING OFFICE. THERE WERE -- A. LOT OF THOSE CHANGES CAME OUT AS A RESULT OF THAT. AT THE TIME THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAD BEEN TAKEN AWAY IN AN OFFICE POSITION. SO I NO LONGER HAVE THAT. ONE OF THE CLASSIFICATIONS ON THE OFFICE MANAGER WAS THE ONE THAT WOULD BRING INDIVIDUAL UP TO 77,000. -- SO THE SALARY CURRENTLY FOR THAT INDIVIDUAL IS 67. AND THAT RECLASSIFICATION WOULD BRING IT UP TO 77,000. THE ASSISTANT RIGHT UNDER HER IS CURRENTLY 60 BRINGING HER TO 63 ROUGHLY AND SO THAT WAS THE PURPOSE FOR THAT. >> 77. FROM 67 AND 65 FROM 60? >> NO SO 67,000 -- 67,032... THAT IS OFFICE MANAGER. >> AND THE ASSISTANT WAS 60 TO 65? >> 60 TO 63. 766.61. SO THAT WAS ASSISTANT. THEN ON -- I. HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL WHO IS A CHIEF AND CURRENTLY FIRST ASSISTANT UP TO CHIEF BRINGING IT FROM 125,561 TO ONE 27.29557. >> CAN YOU REPEAT THE SECOND NUMBER? >> $127,295.57. THE CPS WANTED TO HAVE A CHIEF IN THAT HAVE THREE ATTORNEYS IN CPS AND WANTED TO BRING THAT INDIVIDUAL UP BECAUSE SHE DEALS WITH A LOT OF CRITICAL PHONE CALLS ON WEEKENDS. SO SHE TAKES THE BRUNT OF ALL THE PHONE CALLS THAT WE GET BECAUSE KIDS -- NOT REMOVED. THEY REMOVED 247, 365 SO SHE'S GETTING PHONE CALLS ON WEEKENDS, MIDNIGHT, ANY TIME OF DAY THAT [00:40:05] THEY DISCOVER A KID THAT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED. SO I WAS GOING TO BRING HER UP FROM 117.1 59 TO 123.771 AND $0.04. >> THESE WOULD BE IN ADDITION TO -- >> THAT'S CORRECT. AND THEN THE LAST TWO WHEN JAMIE LEFT I FELT IT WAS CRITICAL TO GET SOMEONE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT THAT HAD LEGAL ABILITY TO TALK TO THESE DEVELOPERS BECAUSE WITHOUT HAVING AN ATTORNEY TO EXPLAIN WHY WE'RE REQUIRING SOME OF THE -- YOU'VE SEEN IN THOSE MEETINGS AN OFFICIAL HAS SOMEONE WHO KNOWS WHAT THE LAW IS, WANTING TO BRING THAT IN WITH AN ATTORNEY DOWN INTO THE POSITION. WHEN I DID, IT LED TO VOID SO I MOVE ONE OF THE RESEARCH POSITIONS INTO AN ATTORNEY POSITION AND BROUGHT HER UP TO ONE OF THE PARTS THAT ALLISON VACATED. THE TWO POSITIONS ALLISON WHICH IS GOING TO BE THE PLANNING ATTORNEY 101 -- 101483 TO ONE 06552.57. AND THEN -- >> VERY VALUABLE TO ME. >> IT HELPS OUT TREMENDOUSLY BECAUSE BEFORE WHEN WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT ABILITY TO HAVE SOMEONE INTERPRET THE LAW, SOMETIMES IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN MISINTERPRETED TO THE DETRIMENT OF THE COUNTY. THANK YOU ON THAT. AND ALLISON BARNETT WHICH IS -- WE MOVED HER UP INTO A POSITION AND SHE WAS SITTING IN A -- IN A ROLE AT 64.272 -- 64272 AND WE WANT TO PUT HER AT 98... >> THE 64 WAS THAT -- WAS SHE IN A LEGAL RESEARCH TYPE OF POSITION. >> SHE WAS. >> SO JUST CHANGING THE POSITION FROM LEGAL RESEARCH. >> YES. BECAUSE I MOVED ALLISON INTO A NON-- CLASSIFIED AS A NONLEGAL POSITION. >> MAKES SENSE. >> WERE ALSO ABLE TO GO THROUGH OUR BUDGET AND OFFICE MANAGER. WE WORKED THROUGH THAT AND WERE ABLE TO GET OUR INCREASE EVEN WITH THESE AMOUNTS BEING REQUESTED AROUND 13,000 OVER THE BUDGET WAS LAST YEAR. NOW WITH THAT BEING SAID AT THAT TIME WE DIDN'T HAVE THE 287G TASK FORCE COME IN BUT WE'RE GETTING THAT AND THAT'S 107 -- 107,500. SO THAT'S GOING TO HELP MAKE UP A LOT OF THAT COST WITHIN THAT BUDGET. WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET MONEY BACK. THAT'S THE PLAN. IN ADDITION TO THAT 287G THEY ASK US ALSO BECAUSE WE'RE INVOLVED WITH CPS TO GET INVOLVED WITH AN UNDOCUMENTED ALIEN CHILDREN. SO WHAT THAT DOES IS IT REQUIRES INVESTIGATORS TO KNOCK ON THE DOOR AND IT'S THE KIDS WHO'VE COME UP FROM THE BORDER -- THE BORDER PATROL ADDRESS, THEY WERE SHIPPED HERE AND WE HAVE SEVERAL OF THOSE KIDS HERE IN PARKER COUNTY. WE KNOCK ON THE DOOR AND FIND OUT IF THE KIDS ARE REALLY WITH THE PEOPLE THEY SAID THEY WOULD BE AND THAT'S CRITICAL BECAUSE THEY JUST DISAPPEARED. WE HAVE SEVERAL OF THOSE KIDS HERE IN PARKER COUNTY. >> WOULD DO THAT FOR NOTHING BUT THEY'RE GOING TO PAY US. >> WE'RE DOING -- WE'VE GONE OUT AND VERIFIED AND THE FAMILY'S COMPLETELY GONE. THREE OF THE STOPS MADE WILL BRING 66,500 ADDITIONAL [INDISCERNIBLE] >> TOTAL WILL BE THE 107 PLUS THAT 66. THAT'S WHAT I'M ANTICIPATING OUR BUDGET SHOULD HAVE A -- QUITE A BIT OF SURPLUS ON THE BACK END. >> SOMEWHERE AROUND 175. >> CORRECT. >> THANK YOU. >> WE JUST COMPLETED AND I THINK THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS -- SHERIFF WILL PROBABLY GET THAT AS WELL AS THE AUDIT. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE GONE THROUGH THAT YET. WE JUST COMPLETED OURS TODAY AND ONE GREAT THING THEY'VE SAID SEVERAL OF OUR COMPUTERS -- I. DON'T KNOW IF YOU GOT THAT MESSAGE. >> I THINK ALL OF OURS -- [INDISCERNIBLE] >> IT'S BASED ON THE PROGRAM THAT RUNS THE COMPUTER. >> WINDOWS TEN OR SOMETHING. >> CORRECT. AND TEN UPDATED TO THE EXTENT THEY NEEDED TO KEEP OUT OF THE DPS C. PROGRAM SO THAT -- WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THE [00:45:03] MONEY WE'RE RECEIVING TO GO AHEAD AND PURCHASE COMPUTERS AS PART OF THAT GRANT MONEY. >> I KNOW YOU RECEIVED SP22 MONEY THAT COULD BE USED FOR SOME OF THAT ALREADY APPROPRIATED OUT. >> I'VE COMMITTED THAT MONEY PLUS SENATE BILL 22 MONEY. SO. >> IT'S THE SAME. >> WELL SB -- SUPPLEMENT TWO. >> OH, YES. >> BETWEEN THOSE TWO I GIVE 100% OF THE SB 22 MONEY OUT TO THE EMPLOYEES AND THEN THIS SUPPLEMENT I GIVE PROBABLY ABOUT 70% BACK TO THE EMPLOYEES. IT GOES DIRECTLY ONTO THEIR SALARY. [INDISCERNIBLE] >> AND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THEN THERE'S A LOT OF MONEY COMING IN -- THINGS LIKE THAT. >> CORRECT. >> THE COUNTY HAS TO COVER WHAT THIS IS -- WHEN YOU GIVE THEM THIS INCREASE AUTOMATICALLY GOING TO SHOW AS THEIR SALARY? >> IT BECOMES PART OF THEIR SALARY AND THE 77 LIKE I SAID WE'RE ABLE TO CUT OUR BUDGET SO REALLY THE REQUEST IS 13000. THAT'S NOT THE 77, THAT'S JUST IN SALARIES BUT WE'RE ABLE TO CUT OUR BUDGET ENOUGH THAT OUR NET INCREASE WOULD ONLY BE THE 13000. BUT IN REALITY IT PROBABLY WILL DROP BELOW THAT BECAUSE OF ADDITIONAL MONEY THAT WE'RE GETTING THROUGH THE 287. >> EVERY YEAR YOU'RE GOING TO GET THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY -- >> TO THE EXTENT THAT JET DOES TO. WE'RE BOTH KIND OF IN THAT SAME BOAT AND IT IS -- YOU PROBABLY SUPPLEMENT YOUR EMPLOYEES WITH THAT AS WELL. >> I DO. WE'RE ALLOWED TO SUPPLEMENT THE ATTORNEYS AND INVESTIGATORS AND NONE OF THE OTHER EMPLOYEES ARE BEING SUPPLEMENTED BUT I THINK THE QUESTION THEY'RE GETTING AT IS ARE THE FIGURES HERE INCLUSIVE OF THAT MONEY OR NOT? THESE ARE BASED SALARY NUMBERS AND THE SUPPLEMENTS ARE ON TOP OF THAT. I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU WERE GETTING AT REALLY? >> MY PROBLEM IS THERE'S GOING TO BE A SALARY HERE [INDISCERNIBLE] >> TO ADDRESS YOUR CONCERN THERE, THAT SENATE BILL 22 MONEY WAS SPECIFICALLY TO INCREASE PROSECUTOR'S SALARY SO IT'S NOT JUST HERE. IT'S ALL OVER TEXAS AND I THINK SPRINGER WAS ONE BEHIND THAT. >> HE WAS. >> BECAUSE HE RECOGNIZED IN SOME OF THE RURAL COUNTIES THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO PAY THOSE PROSECUTORS ENOUGH MONEY TO GET QUALITY FOLKS TO STAY THERE AND SO ALL OVER TEXAS IF THAT WERE TO GO AWAY THERE WOULD PROBABLY BE A LYNCHING AT THE CAPITOL BECAUSE IT IS SO WIDESPREAD AND MOST OF THE TIME I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE ABOUT SAYING OKAY WE'RE GOING TO DEPEND ON THAT. IT'S ALWAYS A QUESTION THAT I HAVE. IN THIS CASE I'M VERY CONFIDENT THAT IT WILL BE THERE FOR A LONG TIME. >> FOR SURE AS LONG AS LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR IS THERE. HE'S A HUGE PROPONENT. >> IF SOMEONE WERE TO PROPOSE TO TAKE THAT AWAY TODAY, IT WOULD BE A DRASTIC CHANGE IN THE BUDGET OF EVERY COUNTY IN TEXAS. >> IT REALLY WOULD AND I CAN TELL YOU ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WE'VE HAD, ACTUALLY WE'VE HAD THIS COMING INTO THE COUNTIES THAT ARE UP TO ABOUT 300,000 CONCLUDE I WANT TO SAY -- IN THIS LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION. COUNTIES UP TO THAT SIZE BUT WE'RE STILL HAVING THIS PROBLEM HERE GETTING PROSECUTORS TO PROSECUTE IN ESPECIALLY VERY RURAL COUNTIES IS A REAL PROBLEM. THEY HAD AN INTERIM SESSION HERE BECAUSE THERE'S PLACES THAT CAN'T EVEN GET ELECTED LET ALONE AN ASSISTANT. IT'S A HUGE PROBLEM ESPECIALLY IN WEST TEXAS. AND I KNOW I'VE GOT A FEW FRIENDS OUT THERE THAT ARE PROSECUTORS AND THEY CANNOT FIND AN ASSISTANT. ABOUT TWO, THREE, FOUR COUNTIES [00:50:01] ONE PERSON'S RUNNING THAT WHOLE -- THANKFULLY WE'RE SINCE WE'RE CLOSE TO THE METROPLEX WE CAN ATTRACT A LOT BETTER QUALITY ATTORNEYS A LOT DON'T WANT A MORE RURAL LIFESTYLE BUT WE'RE COMPETING WITH DALLAS AND COLLIN AND DENTON AND WHEN I TOOK OFFICE SHORTLY THEREAFTER I HAD A MEETING WITH THE COUNTY WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT HOW MUCH I WAS MAKING AT THAT POINT. I HAD 50 ASSISTANT MAKING MORE THAN ME AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE COMPETING WITH WITH OUR ASSISTANT SO THANKFULLY TRACK THE PROSECUTOR'S... [INDISCERNIBLE] BECAUSE YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO OTHERWISE PICK WHERE THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE TO COME OUT WITH A WHOLE LOT MORE MONEY. >> YOUR POINT IS WELL TAKEN. WE ARE RELYING ON THAT MONEY AND OVER RELIANCE ON THAT IF IT WERE TO GO AWAY WOULD BE A CATASTROPHE IN MANY COUNTIES. DOES IT ALSO GO TO SHERIFF. >> WE GET 500,000 A YEAR. WE EARMARK THAT FOR VEHICLES. IF IT GOES AWAY WE WILL HAVE TO FIND ANOTHER WAY TO PAY FOR CARS. >> IN OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE PART OF THAT'S ALLOCATED TO THE ELECTED SHERIFF SALARY. >> THEY HAVE TO HAVE A MINIMUM SALARY OF 75000. THOSE RURAL SHERIFFS 75 AND ARE THEIR PERSONNEL AS WELL SO THEY COULD REPAY. >> FOR THOSE THAT DON'T HAVE A PRIVATE BILL [INDISCERNIBLE] >> DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH SB 22 MONEY COMES INTO THE COUNTY? >> 275 TO 58. >> THERE'S A COST TO IT -- >> I WAS WONDERING AS A WHOLE. >> YOUR POINT IS WELL TAKEN. WHAT DO YOU DO WHEN IT GOES AWAY? [INDISCERNIBLE] BUT TO THAT POINT THE STATE SUPPLEMENT SEPARATE FROM THE SB 22, WE GET 105,000 THERE. FOR THE LAST 25 YEARS IN OFFICE WE RECEIVED THAT AND WHAT I'VE DONE TO KEEP THE MONEY FOR MY SALARY LOW IS I'VE TAKEN PART OF THAT AS WELL. WITH THAT BEING SAID NOT THE SALARY YOU SAY THEY ADVERTISE, THE 140. USING THAT STATE SUPPLEMENT ALLOWS ME TO KEEP MY SALARY LOW HERE. >> I'M NOT TRYING TO STEP ON ANYBODY'S TOES HERE. FOR TIME AT 154 -- HAD A TINY PIECE OF THE BUDGET. >> DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? >> ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FROM THE SAME STORY I HEARD TUESDAY? WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET A LOT OF TWO -- WE'VE DONE A GOOD JOB AND WE'RE OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS AS FAR AS ANYTHING IN THE BUDGET. WE CAN MAKE THINGS WORK. WE'RE HAPPY WITH WHAT THE COURT PROVIDES FOR US. THANK YOU GUYS, APPRECIATE YOU ALL. BUT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE 175 MINUS WHAT WE RAISED WE SHOULD HAVE ROUGHLY 150,000 LEFT OVER. AND I SAY LEFT OVER BUT IT WILL BE UTILIZED -- >> THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL RECURRING FUNDS. >> CORRECT. YES. >> YOU HAVE A LARGE DEPARTMENT JUST BUILDING KIND OF A STRUCTURE THAT PRECEDES -- COUNTERFEITS INSTRUCTIONS AND TECHNICAL ADMINISTRATION AS WELL. >> IT HELPS KEEP EMPLOYEES UNDER THEM ALL FOCUS AND DIRECTION. THE TIME AND EFFORT INTO DEVELOPING THE BUDGET EVERY YEAR. EVERY YEAR SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE. IT'S OUTSTANDING. THANK YOU. >> I HAVE ONE COMMENT OR QUESTION. YOU HAVE ABOUT 30 PEOPLE IN YOUR OFFICE -- DO YOU HAVE AN OFFICE [00:55:02] MANAGER CURRENTLY? PROBABLY ONE OF THE FEW OFFICES OF ANY SIZE IN THIS COUNTY -- I. DID GET BUDGET FROM THE ONE COURT. THE YEAR THE COURT -- RECOGNIZING THE GROWTH WAS GOING TO CONTINUE. WENT AHEAD AND TOOK THAT POSITION TO THE PLANNING OFFICE AND PUT HER IN MY OFFICE POSITION. ONCE AGAIN WE TOOK OFF AGAIN. >> YOUR CHIEF ASSISTANT IS DOING -- BETTER USE OF TIME. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> EVEN THOUGH SHE DOES A REALLY GOOD JOB. >> SHE'S ON TOP OF IT. IT'S A GROUP EFFORT. AND HAD GREAT EMPLOYEES OVER THERE. [I.D. Take any other action as needed which pertains to the review of the Parker County budget by the Budget Committee. (Commissioner Holt)] ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? THANK YOU ALL. >> COULD WE SKIP TO ITEM D AND THAT WAY WE CAN THE REMAINING TIME BACK TO THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE? >> MOVING ON TO ITEM D. >> I'M NOT TRYING TO CRITICIZE HERE THESE SESSIONS ARE STARTING TO LOOK EXACTLY LIKE THE BUDGET WORKSHOP SESSIONS FOR THAT WAS A CONCERN THAT I HAD WHEN WE MADE THIS INSTEAD OF A FOCUSED COMMITTEE -- RIGHT NOW I CAN'T REALLY SEE A DIFFERENCE. AND INPUT FROM THE SHERIFF AND COUNCILLOR SWAIN AND THAT'S IT. WE ALSO HAD INPUT FROM BECKY. WHAT I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST IS IF WE'RE GOING TO TREAT IT LIKE A TRUE COMMITTEE WHEN WE GET TO THE SCORING ASPECT I'D SUGGEST THAT'S DONE IN EXECUTIVE SES SESSION. >> IN MY OPINION I THINK THERE SHOULD BE A COMMITTEE FUNCTION AND JUST SET UP AS A COMMITTEE MEETING AND LET THE COMMITTEE DO ITS JOB. AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY STRUCTURED. I KNOW THE -- I. FEEL LIKE A LOT OF THIS WAS HAVING THIS DOUBLE UP WAS A CONSEQUENCE I DIDN'T EXPECT WHENEVER I ASKED TO GET MORE INVOLVED AS A COMMISSIONER BECAUSE I FELT LIKE I WANTED TO SEE MORE UNDER THE HOOD BUT I'M SEEING SOME REPETITIVENESS AND WE ALL HAVE A LOT TO DO. WE HAVE A GOOD COMMITTEE. I KNOW YOU GUYS CAN ACCOMPLISH A LOT AND GET IT DONE. FOR MY OVER HERE I'M GOOD WITH COMMITTEE GETTING WORK FROM HERE -- BRINGING YOUR JOB AND DOING -- BRINGING THAT TO THE COURT IF THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS ARE GOOD WITH IT. >> ARE YOU SUGGESTING WE REVERT BACK TO WHAT WE WERE DOING LAST YEAR WHERE IT'S NOT AS SCHEDULED COMMISSIONERS COURT? >> YES, SIR. >> SOME NOTED IN THAT -- I. DO BELIEVE WE SHOULD STILL ADVERTISE IT A BIT SO FOLKS DO WANT TO BE AWARE OF IT BUT THE SCORING ASPECT IS REALLY THE PART I WANTED TO BRING UP HERE IF WE WANT TO OPERATE WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AND JOHN HELPED ME ON THE LEGAL SIDE. TALKING SALARIES AND GRADING PERSONNEL REQUESTS, SURELY THAT FALLS UNDER EXECUTIVE SESSION. [INDISCERNIBLE] TO EXECUTIVE SESSION. >> AS WE TRANSITION BACK INTO THAT -- EARLIER ON WHETHER I'M NOT HERE OR WE GO BACK TO THE FORMAT LAST YEAR -- WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT. >> I'M FINE WITH STREAMING THE DISCUSSIONS THEMSELVES BUT THE VOTING ASPECT -- IT CREATES TOO MANY COMPLICATIONS TO HAVE THAT IN PUBLIC. NO ONE'S GOING TO WANT TO BE MEAN EXCEPT MAYBE BECKY. [I.A. Review, discuss, and provide recommendations on existing and new personnel requests. (Commissioner Holt)] >> OKAY PROCEED. >> CAN YOU GO BACK TO ITEM EIGHT PLEASE. >> UNDER ITEM EIGHT. >> NEW PERSONNEL REQUESTS FROM THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE. NEW AND EXISTING I SHOULD SAY. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. [01:00:03] WE COVERED A LITTLE BIT OF THIS YESTERDAY OUR PERSONNEL REQUESTS TO MOVE DOWN TO DEPUTY -- TO MOVE A SERGEANT POSITION. A DECREASE IN THE BUDGET -- A. SUPERVISOR FOR US AND THE ONES -- AND ABOVE. I BELIEVE IT'S CRITICAL FOR US TO GET THAT POSITION UPGRADED TO A SERGEANT. ANSWERS TO A LIEUTENANT WHO HAS TWO DIFFERENT DIVISIONS MONITOR AND MANAGES. SECURITY AND THE TRANSPORT DIVISION. WE DO EXPECT THE TRANSPORT DIVISION TO CONTINUE TO GROW OVER TIME. WOULD BE ABLE TO MANAGE THAT A LOT BETTER THAT A CORPORAL WOULD BE BECAUSE A CORPORAL WILL HAVE TO CONTINUALLY DEFER TO THE LIEUTENANT TO MANAGE HIS TRANSPORT DIVISION. IT'S AN EFFICIENT USE OF MANPOWER. WE'VE ASKED FOR TWO DISPATCHERS. OVER YESTERDAY TO ADD MORE STAFF STILL SHORTHANDED AND SPECIAL DUTY OVERTIME MONEY TO COVER OUR SHORTAGES. WITH OUR DISPATCHING STAFF WE'VE ASKED FOR ONE DEPUTY -- THE ANNEX THAT'S BEEN ON REQUEST FOR THE PAST I THINK TWO OR THREE BUDGET SESSIONS. AND THEN EIGHT DEPUTIES. YOU GUYS HAVE HEARD ME SEVERAL TIMES TO TALK ABOUT STAFFING AND MANPOWER ISSUES. YOU'VE HEARD ME TALK ABOUT THE 2.4 OFFICERS PER THOUSAND. THERE'S A LOT OF DEBATE IN LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY NOW ABOUT THE BEST WAY TO IDENTIFY THE NEEDS OF EACH AND EVERY DEPARTMENT. THERE'S NOT REALLY ANY ONE SIZE FITS ALL ROLE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ACROSS THE NATION. A LOT OF IT DEPENDS ON DIFFERENT FACTORS LIKE THE AMOUNT OF AREA THEY COVER, POPULATION DENSITY, CRIME RATE AND OTHER FACTORS THERE HAS TO BE A DEFINITION OF WHAT ACTUALLY IS CLASSIFIED AS LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTION AS OPPOSED TO WHAT'S CLASSIFIED TO COURT SERVICES. SECURITY, JAIL STAFF TRANSPORT. SO WE'VE -- THERE'S A THEORY THAT'S BEEN PROPAGATED FOR A LONG TIME NOW THAT YOU NEED -- YOUR FRONTLINE OFFICERS, PATROL OFFICERS AND THIS IS JUST FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT INCLUDING COURT SERVICES. FRONTLINE OFFICERS, WORKING THE STREETS. THE OTHER 40 INVESTIGATORS AND COMMAND STAFF, WE MEET THAT THRESHOLD NOW. THE PROBLEM WE HAVE IS WE DON'T INCREASE OUR MINIMUM STAFFING HERE WE HAVE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY POSITIONS ON PATROL. WE MOVED RECENTLY THIS YEAR TO THE TWO DISTRICTS -- WHAT IT'S ALLOWED US TO DO IS MAINTAIN MOST OF THE TIME AT LEAST ONE SERGEANT WORKING IN PARKER COUNTY AT ALL TIMES. THERE'S TIMES WHERE SERGEANTS WILL HAVE TO BE OFF FOR UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES. GENERALLY SPEAKING WE GET A SERGEANT ON DUTY. TAKING COMMAND OF A CRITICAL INCIDENT. WE CALL THEM SQUADS HERE EACH SQUAD HAS A SERGEANT CORPORAL AND ASSIGNED DEPUTY POSITIONS. UNFORTUNATELY OVER THE PAST YEAR OR SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING -- WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON AVERAGE... [01:05:02] THOSE 29 SPOTS. THE ISSUE IS MOST OF THE TIME WE HAVE THREE OR FOUR IN TRAINING. WE ALSO HAVE A COUPLE FOR FAMILY MEDICAL LEAVE OR WORKER'S COMP. YOU GUYS GET HURT ON PATROL. IN EFFECT WHAT YOU CAN SEE EVEN TODAY AS WE MAY HAVE 29 PEOPLE ON THE ROSTER BUT WE'RE ONLY WORKING WITH 21 ON PATROL. THE ONLY WAY TO FIX THAT PROBLEM IS TO ADD MORE POSITIONS TO GET MORE STAFF HIRED, TO MAKE SURE THEY STAY LONGER THAN TWO YEARS. LONGER THAN THREE YEARS LONGER THAN FOUR YEARS SO WE'RE NOT IN A CONSTANT MODE OF TRAINING. PAYING FIVE DEPUTIES TO DO NOTHING MORE THAN RIDE AROUND IN THE CAR FOR THREE MONTHS AND LEARN HOW TO BE COPS. THEY'RE ON THE ROSTER, WE COUNT THEM AS WORKING BUT IN EFFECT WHAT YOU HAVE IS YOU HAVE FIVE DEPUTIES WHO DON'T CONTRIBUTE TO YOUR LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES. THREE DEPUTIES WORKING BUT ONE OF THOSE IS AN FTO BUT WHAT YOU HAVE IS -- TALKING ABOUT CARS. YOU HAVE A CAR OUT THERE CAT CORPORAL CAR AND DEPUTY CAR WITH TWO DEPUTIES IN IT TO ANSWER THE CALLS FOR THAT DISTRICT. THAT'S A PROBLEM WE HAVE FOR A LONG TIME. EVERYBODY'S AWARE OF THAT. WE CONTINUE TO STRUGGLE TO MAN OUR STAFF AND STAFF THESE POSITIONS AND WE TALK ABOUT SALARIES AND BENEFITS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. AT THE END OF THE DAY WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MANPOWER ASSIGNED OR AUTHORIZED POSITIONS SIGNED TO ALLOW US TO HIRE ENOUGH PEOPLE TO MANAGE THE FLOW IN OUR DEPARTMENT. TO MANAGE THE VACATIONS THE HOLIDAYS PEOPLE ARE TAKING ON TO MANAGE THE SICK LEAVE AND THE FMLA TIME AND THE WORKERS COMP -- FOR QUITE A WHILE. IN THESE EIGHT POSITIONS BRINGING THOSE THREE OVER PUT US AT 40 TOTAL POSITIONS. PATROL WOULD BE FIVE ON EACH SHIFT. WE HAVE ANOTHER PERSON TO EACH SHIFT THAT BRINGS IT UP TO SIX. THE SERGEANT AND THE PEOPLE ON THAT SHIFT -- WE UPGRADE OUR MINIMUM STAFFING LEVELS FROM THREE TO FOUR OR FROM FOUR TO FIVE DEPENDING ON WHERE WE'RE AT. >> HOW MANY VACANCIES DO YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW? >> RIGHT NOW WE HAVE ONE VACANCY IN SVU, ONE VACANCY IN ALITO, ONE VACANCY IN SRO DIVISION AND ONE VACANCY AS A PATROL FOCUS WE HAVE NOT FULFILLED THAT POSITION AND THREE PATROL VACANCIES. WE HAVE FOUR PATROL VACANCIES, ONE STARTED YESTERDAY. WE HAVE FIVE IN FTO RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE THREE IN WORKERS COMP AND FOUR ON -- AND OF THOSE FOUR ON FMLA I EXPECT THREE OF THEM TO NOT BE WITH US. I EXPECT PROBABLY LEAVE AND GO DO SOMETHING ELSE OR GO SOMEWHERE ELSE. >> SAID BRING THREE OVER HERE CAN YOU TELL US WHERE THEY'RE COMING FROM? >> YES, SIR. ONE OF THEM WOULD BE THE DOWNGRADE FOR THE PATROL CORPORAL TO A DEPUTY POSITION. THEN I EXPECT THE ALITO CONTRACT WE HAVE TWO DEPUTIES ASSIGNED TO THAT. TWO SLOTS ASSIGNED TO IT. WE ONLY HAVE ONE DEPUTY IN THERE RIGHT NOW. I EXPECT ALITO WILL CANCEL -- IS ACTUALLY ALITO PD. I EXPECT THEM TO CANCEL IT SOMETIME AFTER THE FIRST -- THAT'S TOLD ME WHEN THEY EXPECT TO CANCEL THE CONTRACT AND WE BRING THOSE BACK IN THE PATROL. WILL GIVE US INSTEAD OF 37 WILL GIVE US 40. AND AS OF RIGHT NOW YOU'D HAVE ABOUT 33 OF THOSE -- 32? >> MAYBE. THE THING ABOUT LAW ENFORCEMENT THESE DAYS IS ALL OF THESE AGENCIES AROUND US ARE ALL FISHING FROM THE SAME POND AND [01:10:02] THE PROBLEM WITH APPLICANTS THESE DAYS, THERE'S NOT AS MANY PEOPLE WHO WANT TO BE IN LAW ENFORCEMENT THESE DAYS, THAT'S KIND OF AN UNDERSTATEMENT. WE'RE ALL FIGHTING FOR THE SAME EMPLOYEES. WE DO GET APPLICANTS. PEOPLE WE NOT NORMALLY HIRE AND PEOPLE WHO MIGHT BE UNDER INVESTIGATION AT THE CURRENT DEPARTMENT AND LOOKING FOR A PLACE TO GO. MOST OF OUR HIRES HAVE BEEN OUT OF THE ACADEMY. WE DON'T TRACK THE APPLICANTS WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE HERE. >> REALISTICALLY WANT EIGHT MORE EMPLOYEES OR DEPUTIES. >> YES, SIR. >> BUT YOU SAY THEY'RE NOT OUT THERE. >> THEY'RE OUT THERE WE'RE JUST NOT ATTRACTING THEM. >> WE DEDICATE FOR THOSE GUYS AND YOU DON'T USE IT WHERE DOES THE MONEY GO? >> INTO THE BUDGET FOR NEXT YEAR. GOING BACK INTO THE GENERAL FUND WE'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO SPEND OUT OF THE CONTRACT -- WE HAVE A HUGE SURPLUS NOW IN OUR LINES, IN OUR SALARY LINES BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN SHORT DEPUTIES AND DISPATCHERS. WE NEED TO BE TURNING IN A LOT OF MONEY BACK TO THE COURT BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO HIRE THOSE PEOPLE. >> IF WE APPROVE ARE YOU LIKELY TO GET FOUR OR FIVE? NOT EVEN THAT MANY? >> NOT THE WAY -- NOT WITH WHAT WE'RE PAYING. TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. >> WITHOUT THE PAY SCALE ADJUSTMENT WE WON'T BE ABLE -- WE SHOULD JUST GIVE YOU MONEY INSTEAD OF PEOPLE. >> IF WE HAD TO CHOOSE WE WOULD TAKE THE MONEY OVER THE PEOPLE BECAUSE REGARDLESS WE CAN'T FILL THEM NOW. IF WE CAN GET THE SALARY RESTRUCTURED, WE WILL BE AS ATTRACTIVE AS MANY AGENCIES IN THE METROPLEX. THE POND THAT WE'RE FISHING IN. >> THAT MAKES MORE SENSE. >> IF WE HAD BOTH I GUARANTEE YOU WE WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO FILL -- THAT'S A HUGE BITE OUT OF THE APPLE THERE. >> I WILL ASK A QUESTION YOU DON'T WANT TO HEAR BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHERE -- WE'RE JUST GATHERING INFORMATION. THE QUESTION YOU'LL WANT TO HEAR IS WORK THROUGH AND PRIORITIZE SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A LIST. I ASK YOU THAT EVERY TIME AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT BUT -- I'M SURE YOU HAVE THAT IN THE BACK OF YOUR HEAD ALREADY AT SOME POINT. DON'T NEED IT TODAY. WE WILL NEED IT WHEN WE START FIGURING OUT -- I KNOW YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'D BE ASKING FOR I THINK. IF WE CAN'T AFFORD EVERYTHING -- BUT JUST BE AWARE THAT'S THE REALITY OF WHERE WE'LL BE FINANCIALLY I'M SURE. BUT COUNTY ATTORNEY SAID TO THIS 287 SHERIFF'S OFFICE SHOULDN'T BE BRINGING IN OVER $5 BILLION THIS NEXT YEAR -- >> THEY DON'T HAVE ONE FOR THOSE. ONE THING WE JUDGE OURSELVES BY IT'S NOT WORK THIS OR WORK THAT IT'S HOW FAST CAN YOU GET TO PEOPLE. LIGHTS AND SIRENS CALLS, WE NEED YOU YESTERDAY. TEN YEARS AGO OUR COMPUTER PROGRAM STARTED WE WERE ABLE TO TRACK THESE WE WERE JUST UNDER 15 MINUTES TO GET THE PRIORITY ONE CALL IN 900 SQUARE MILES OF THIS COUNTY. 20 -- 24 WE GOT THAT DOWN TO 10 MINUTES AND ONE SECOND AND WE HAD A COUPLE OF HICCUPS AROUND COVID. SO 10 MINUTES WAS PHENOMENAL. LAST YEAR WE WENT UP TO ALMOST 12 MINUTES. 11 MINUTES AND 45 SECONDS. THAT IS DIRECTLY CORRELATED WITH THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WE HAVE BUT DO NOT HAVE OUT THERE ON THE ROAD. IT'S TAKEN US LONGER TO GET TO THE FOLKS WHO NEED OUR HELP HERE. >> CHIEF, IF YOU DON'T MIND, IF I CAN SUMMARIZE THIS IN A WAY THAT MAKES SENSE IN MY BRAIN, YOU NEED EIGHT PATROL DEPUTIES AND YOU'RE ASKING TO ADD EIGHT. BUT YOU'RE ALSO TELLING US WE HAVE 37 SPOTS AND REALLY HAVE AROUND 24 REGULARLY THERE BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE 29 TOTAL. [01:15:04] WE HAVE EIGHT VACANCIES. WE WANT TO ADD EIGHT MORE. AND THAT'S 16. THAT'S TOUGH BECAUSE YOU'RE ALSO SAYING WE'RE NOT GETTING THE APPLICANTS -- YOU NEED PEOPLE AND MONEY AND WE CAN'T DO BOTH. DOING BOTH IS GOING TO BE TOUGH. IF I'M HEARING YOU RIGHT WHAT YOU'RE TELLING US IS IF YOU PAY US MORE NOT ONLY WILL THAT OBVIOUSLY HAVE IMPACT ON THINGS LIKE MORALE AND MORALE IS HUGE. IT WILL IMPROVE MORALE BUT ALSO MAKE A MORE ATTRACTIVE LANDING SPOT. I KNOW THERE'S SOMETHING IN HERE ABOUT LATERAL -- AND HONORING HISTORY SOMEWHERE ELSE -- IS THAT CORRECT? THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. IT BOILS DOWN TO WE COULD THROW WHATEVER POSITIONS WE WANT AT YOU -- BECAUSE OF THE QUALITY OF APPLICANTS AND MAKING THE APPLICANTS MORE LIKELY TO COME HERE INSTEAD OF SOMEWHERE ELSE. IS THAT A FAIR SUMMARY? >> YES, IT IS. SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MONEY YOU ASKED ME ABOUT THE INCREASE YESTERDAY. UNDER THE CURRENT PLAN AND PAY SCALE OUR INCREASE FOR SWORN EMPLOYEES WAS GOING TO BE $271,000 NEXT YEAR. THAT'S ALREADY BUILT INTO THE PROGRAM. >> THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN, YES. >> IF THE COURT DECIDES TO GIVE A RAISE IT WILL BE 562,000. 4% WILL BE 756,000 UNDER THE CURRENT PROGRAM -- THE SB 22 MONEY, WE USE IT FOR VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT BECAUSE THE COUNTY ALREADY IS ABOVE THE SALARY CAP. UNLIKE THE COUNTY AND DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE THE SHERIFF CANNOT MAKE THE DETERMINATION OF WHERE THAT MONEY IS. THAT'S UP TO THE COURT PEER COURT APPLIES FOR IT AND DISTRIBUTES THAT. THAT MONEY SPECIFICALLY THERE WITH THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE HAVE COMING IN THROUGH THIS PROGRAM WE'RE GOING TO BE USING THAT MONEY TO BUY EQUIPMENT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO USE IT TO BUY EQUIPMENT AND FOR RADIO CONTRACT WHICH IS... WILL THAT MONEY CONTINUE IN THE FUTURE? LIKE I SAID AS LONG AS PRESIDENT TRUMP'S IN OFFICE I THINK IT WILL. WHERE I'VE SAID YESTERDAY THEY DOUBLED DOWN AND CAME UP WITH ANOTHER GRANT TO GO FURTHER WITH THAT. I'VE DISTRIBUTED THE SURVEY AND PUT IN THERE EVERYBODY'S GOTTEN A COPY OF WHERE WE PLACE IN THOSE SALARIES FOR EACH RANK. FOR GETTING QUALITY EMPLOYEES BUT THOSE NUMBERS DON'T INCLUDE OUR LATERAL PAY ABOUT 80% OF THE CITIES AND COUNTIES OFFER. THAT'S ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS WHEN PEOPLE CALL UP TO TALK ABOUT WANTING TO WORK FOR US DO YOU OFFER LATERAL PAY. THE SECOND THING IS DO YOU ALLOW BEERS. WE DON'T. A SIGN ON INCENTIVE OR BONUS WHEN WE'RE UP TO $20,000. COUNTY OFFERED TO SIGN OUR BONUS FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS. IT'S SOMETHING WE DON'T OFFER SO WHEN PEOPLE LOOK AT THE COUNTY AT THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND THEY'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH AGENCY THEY WANT TO GO FOR, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT. THEY'RE LOOKING AT WHAT AM I GOING TO MAKE WHEN I GET IN THERE, WHAT CAN I EXPECT AS I PROGRESS THROUGH THE RANKS. THE PEOPLE WE HIRE ON WHO NEED A JOB RIGHT NOW THAT ARE LOOKING AT THEIR FUTURE, THEY'RE LOOKING AT THE PAY SCALE WE HAVE AND COMPARING THEM. GETTING ON A WEBSITE -- TEXAS POLICE SALARIES. NOW IT'S CALLED TEXAS POLICE SALARIES. [01:20:09] FOR THOSE POSITIONS ACROSS TEXAS AS THEY GET THEM IN AND THOSE ARE PRETTY CURRENT. THESE GUYS KNOW ABOUT THESE WEBSITES AND KNOW WHERE TO GO LOOK BECAUSE IN THE WORKFORCE THEY KNOW ABOUT THE WEBSITE. THEY'RE MAKING DECISIONS ON WHETHER TO STAY HERE IN ADVANCE OF AND PUT IN TIME HERE AND WORK SOMEWHERE ELSE. IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR OR THE PUBLIC SECTOR BASED ON -- IN ORDER TO ATTRACT QUALITY CANDIDATES PEOPLE THAT WE ACTUALLY WANT TO HIRE WE HAVE TO BE COMPETITIVE WITH OURSELVES. AND COMMISSIONER CONNELLY'S POSITION ABLE TO FILL THOSE OUT SPOTS. UNDER THE CURRENT CONVERSATION PLAN, ABSOLUTELY NOT. IF WE GET WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR WITH LATERAL PAY AND PAY SCALE I THINK IT WILL ABSOLUTELY BE ABLE TO FILL SOME OF THOSE SPOTS NEXT YEAR. I THINK THE PROBLEM WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AT THAT POINT IS NOT HAVING ENOUGH FTOS TO TRAIN WITH THE INFLUX OF APPLICANTS WE MAY HAVE. >> BEFORE YOU GO FURTHER I WANT TO TELL YOU HOW MUCH I APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU PUT INTO THAT NOTEBOOK THERE. AND AGAIN THE PROFESSIONALISM THAT YOU BRING EACH TIME. >> I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE STEP IN GRADE. IF WE CAN'T COMMIT TO ANYTHING BUT I VOTED AGAINST THE CHANGES THE LAST TWO YEARS AND WHAT I TOLD YOU LAST YEAR WAS I'D LIKE TO SEE THE VERSION THAT WILL GET US TO WHERE WE NEED TO BE WITHOUT HAVING TO REVISE THE DEGREE OTHER THAN THE NORMAL BUILT IN INCREASES IN THE PROGRAM. MY QUESTION IS THIS. IF WE WERE TO VOTE FOR AND APPROVE THE REVISED STEPPING GRADE WOULD YOU WANT ON TOP OF THAT OR IS THE STEPPING GRADE TO US ALL THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR. >> THIS IS THE CURRENT STEPPING GRADE FOR THIS YEAR. GOING FORWARD WE WOULD REQUEST -- >> I'M TALKING ABOUT FOR THIS YEAR. >> NOT THAT -- >> I HAD A COUPLE OF OBSERVATIONS AND I TALKED ABOUT IT BEFORE. THE COPS -- COPS YOU GAVE I THOUGHT WERE REALLY GOOD. THAT WAS REALLY WELL-RESEARCHED. DO YOU FEEL -- THE THING THAT STOOD OUT TO ME IT'S HARD TO COMPARE INVOICE DEPARTMENTS BUT YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT -- THE ONE I SAW THERE WE WERE FIVE OR $6000, WHATEVER IT WAS BEHIND STARTING PAY OUR SMALLER NEIGHBORS, I THOUGHT THAT WAS REALLY CONCERNING AND FRANKLY THAT TELLS ME A WHOLE LOT ABOUT WHY WE'RE NOT ABLE TO FILL SOME OF THOSE POSITIONS. I THINK THAT STARTING PAY IS HUGE FOR US TO TRY TO GET TO WHERE WE CAN AT LEAST MATCH THOSE. I CAN'T RECALL -- I. THINK YOU ALL HANDLED THAT JUST FINE. THIS WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER. ARE WE COMPARING APPLES TO APPLES? WE HAVE OUR STARTING PAY AND THEN OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL PAY. THINGS ON TOP OF THAT. ARE THOSE -- COMPARING BASE PAY TO BASE PAY? DID THEY HAVE THE SAME THINGS ON TOP OF THEIRS. >> THEY HAD MORE. A LOT HAVE SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL PAY. THEY HAVE EDUCATION, COMPENSATION AND A LOT OF AGENCIES ALLOW THEIR OFFICERS TO WORK ON DUTY. A LOT OF -- TALKING ABOUT COPS COUNTIES TO COUNTIES. I UNDERSTAND BEHIND THAT. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE JOBS SPECIFICALLY IT'S LIKE YOU MADE A COMPARISON ABOUT ATTORNEYS. IF YOU'RE AN ATTORNEY YOU CAN GO WORK AT A PRIVATE COMPANY OR FOR A COUNTY OR CITY THAT YOU WANT TO. SAME AS THE POLICE OFFICERS. I DON'T COMPARE SHERIFF'S DEPUTIES TO OTHER TYPES OF EMPLOYMENT. I DON'T COMPARE THEM TO ROAD HANDS OR CLERKS OR DEPUTY CLERKS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. WHENEVER WE LOOK AT THE COMPENSATION PACKAGE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT WE HAVE TO [01:25:04] PREPARE OURSELVES -- COMPARE OURSELVES TO OTHER GOVERNMENT ENTITIES AND WHAT THEY PAY WHETHER IT BE A CITY OR A CO COUNTY. >> I THINK THE OTHER THING WAS THE LATERAL IS SUCH A HUGE THING AND YOU DON'T HAVE IT I GUARANTEE WOULD MISS OUT ON OFFICERS WHO'D LIKE TO MOVE PERHAPS A LESS LAW ENFORCEMENT FRIENDLY AREA TO WHERE PEOPLE REALLY APPRECIATE THE LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY. YOU'VE BEEN AROUND A LONG TIME AND I KNOW WE'RE LEADERS AND SOME FOLKS OVER HERE AND THIS WAS BACK IN THE DAY WE'VE HAD SOME TREMENDOUS PEOPLE HERE COMING TO MIND -- A. LONG TIME AGO. CHARLIE WAS A 30-YEAR HOMICIDE DETECTIVE, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. HE WAS A GREAT HAND BACK IN THE DAY. WE HAD SOME OTHER ONES TOO. THAT COULD BE A HUGE -- CHANGE FOR THE DEPARTMENT THAT... SO I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT PROGRAM GOING. IF POSSIBLE. >> ONE OF THE THINGS I GIVE EVERYBODY THAT WALKS IN THE DOOR, IF YOU CAN AFFORD TO WORK THERE -- THAT'S THE WHOLE THING. THEY WANT TO WORK THERE. HOW WE LET COPS BE COPS AND IT DOESN'T MEAN A LOT TO A LOT OF PEOPLE. OUR GUIDING PRINCIPLE -- THAT'S HOW YOU ACT BASED ON THE LAW UP HERE CAN THEY AFFORD IT. WE DON'T GET A LOT THAT HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE AND WE'RE MISSING OUT -- >> I KNOW WE DEVIATED FROM THE POSITION PART OF THIS WHOLE MEETING. I KIND OF GOT CUT SHORT YESTERDAY TO. HAVE A BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING NEXT WEEK WE HAVE ONE FOLLOWING -- DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY INFORMATION. IF ANYBODY HAS INFORMATION IN ADDITION TO THE REQUESTS ALREADY MENTIONED, WE SHOULD HAVE ALL THE REQUESTS ALREADY MENTIONED WHEN WE'RE MEETING THE WEEK AFTER NEXT. IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE PLEASE SHOOT ME AN EMAIL. [INDISCERNIBLE] >> WE HAVE MORE WORKSHOPS. YES, SIR. SETTING THE TAX RATE THERE IS A TON OF THOSE. >> I KNOW THAT BUT I'M JUST WONDERING -- I THINK WE'RE DONE ON PRESENTATIONS FROM THE DEPARTMENTS. >> IT'S 2:30 P.M. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? ALL IN * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.