Travis County Commissioners Court
August 31, 2004
Item 20
20 b is consider and take appropriation action on the followed proposed personnel
amendments. We do approve a already. Project consent motion. B to request
for a temporary pay for purchasing office employees.
>> I thought I saw an e-mail where she was not bringing it
here. I thought I saw an e-mail that she was dropping the request. I thought
I saw that.
>> we do have a justification e-mail from cyd. That was --
that was attached to -- to the personnel backup.
>> okay.
>> I think the question was whether she felt that she needed
to. I think she was saying she already had the authority. I think I reminded
her that yes, it's coming under a very unusual policy and every single one
of them are coming through Commissioners court because it requires a paf to
be able to execute what it is that we are talking about. You can't just execute
a paf like this.
>> I oppose this and circumvents the policy. And the justification
is insufficient. And we have given an across the board increase to -- to rank
and file employees as we -- as we have indicated our inclination to do for
the last three or four months. There is a motion?
>> question. Did the purchasing board have -- have a recommendation
on this?
>> no, we haven't met yet.
>> so there's not a possible way to pump this, judge, to
see what the purchasing board says about this?
>> I would vote against it if it's not on the agenda. If
that's the way to get it done, it doesn't bother me.
>> pull it and talk.
>> that's why I thought it had been pulled and was going
to go to the purchasing board.
>> it would be a lot better than us.
>> I think so, too. Reflect 7 the independence of the purchasing
office and board.
>> I’m happy to pull it, judge.
>> defer to the purchasing board if you all can get moving
on it.
>> judge, could I -- could I add a comment that -- that the
paychecks that were issued to these employees, which were 27 employees, it
was in their paychecks today.
>> already?
>> how could it be if it's on our -- if it's on our thing
today. I don't understand that.
>> these were processed over h.r. By the auditor's office.
>> these are across the board versus additional duties, right?
>> yes. Cyd did -- did her -- did her justification included
the expectation of exceptional -- [multiple voices]
>> approval.
>> into the future.
>> how? Because I’m not seeing anywhere in here saying it's
already gone through. Sues son.
>> we do not believe that the purchasing agent needed that
approval because the order she has from the purchasing board allows her --
what we saw allows her to do a lump sum. Are you interested in -- in the lump
sums that have been paid so far this year?
>> what's the interpretation of that legally, judge?
>> I’m interested in knowing the total amount of money, half
a million.
>> just tell you judge, in the -- in the --
>> $40,000 is what I’m looking at right here.
>> i've got these mixed. Some of these are in the general
fund, some aren't [multiple voices]
>> let me say this, in the departments that report to the
Commissioners court, there is $452,534. And then elected officials, 56,503.
Cscd, which does not come out of the general fund, that's the difference.
350,182. -- 350,982. Appointed officials, auditor's office, purchasing, 151,850.
Juvenile court 4,538. So the biggest amount of money approved are in departments
that -- that do report to the Commissioners court.
>> in total how much? 800,000 instead of --
>> about 100,000, judge, yeah.
>> I apologize being 300,000 off.
>> yeah, because 350 of that is not in the general fund.
With t.n.r. I don't know how much some of that might not be in the general
-- in the general fund. But -- but departments that have gone through hrmd,
its, facilities management, records management, medical examiner, t.n.r.,
E.m.s., Cscd, district clerk, civil courts, criminal courts, constable one,
juvenile court, purchasing, our office, which does not require Commissioners
court approval and --
>> the question is whether the purchasing agent could legally
do that.
>> right. And I don't know that I want to know the answer
anyway because if it comes to me I was going to vote against it, but the other
four members may well want to know.
>> be happy to give you that discussion in executive session
if you like.
>> speaking of executive session ...
>> we will call that item up under the consultation with
attorney to the open meetings act.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified: Thursday, October 27, 2005 11:04 AM