Travis County Commissioners Court
August 31, 2004
Item 21.b
B is the peace officer pay scale. There are people from the sheriff's office
from whom we have probably not heard as much. We probably need those two chairs.
Those who wish to address the Commissioners court on the peace officer pay
scale issue. Especially who represent one or more of the subgroups, please
come forward. Share with us your input at this time. My own view is our revenue
issue after our 2.5 hour discussion earlier today is not as clear as I had
hoped. And in my view we need to take a look at more time, try to figure out
what the money is or can be. In order to start spending it. So I don't see
anything other than really taking another week. And what I hope is that by
next Tuesday when we come in, we not only will have in writing specifically
what revenue opportunities we can vote on. But also what -- what expenditure
challenges we are looking at, also. Yes?
>> your honor, members of the court, I -- I am here today,
I知 ronnie earle district attorney in Travis County, with me is rosemary lindburg
the first assistant district attorney, captain frank maxwell the supervisor
of our investigators, david escamilla is also here, we are here to talk about
the classification of district attorney investigators and county attorney
investigators. Our investigator 2 positions are now at -- at 85 on the --
on the peace officers pay scale. They should be at law enforcement detective
grade 75. Because they do law enforcement connective work. Detective work.
The duties that they perform are -- are much more involved than the classification
that they now, where they now exist would indicate. We would ask that they
be reclassified as law enforcement detective grade 75. This is a quick example
of that. We have an a.p.d. Detective, a tcso detective, a d.a. S office investigator,
they also do exactly the same work. The tcso deputy is a detective on the
detective pay grade with approximately 19 years of service. The a.p.d. Officer
is also a detective with approximately 20 years of service. The d.a.'s office
investigator does exactly the same job as 14 years of experience in the d.a.'s
office and a master's degree in criminal justice. She's classified at a lower
pay grade. The level of sophistication and complexity that these detectives
work is every bit as complex, if not more so in many ways, than that work
by any -- any law enforcement officer anywhere. So we would ask that the investigators
for the district attorney's office and the county attorney's office be reclassified
as law enforcement detective grade 75 on the peace officer pay scale. And
I will be happy to give you additional examples of the level of work that
these investigators do. For example, one of them, sergeant -- investigator
von kelso is a former detective with the fort lucy florida police department,
7 years experience before she came here. Her last assignment was as a homicide
crimes against persons detective. Bob merrill is an investigator in our office,
he retired from the Austin police department with 25 years of service. With
a detective with a sex crimes unit for some years. Handled over 300 sexual
assaults. He was a -- he was a detective and homicide -- in homicide for 12
years. Assigned over 60 -- 60 homicide and every one of them has been cleared.
These are high level detectives. And we would ask that their classification
in the pops scale reflect the level of competence and the level of complexity
in which they engagement I could go on.
>> when did we have the detectives surveyed last?
>> I don't know. [inaudible - no mic] I think 91.
>> I think lieu ann has the -- lou ann has the answer.
>> we quukted the study back in '01 with the opportunity
from the court had a question two weeks ago on sergeants and in the corrections
area, so we took that opportunity to update the study that we had done in
'01 and now it's updated. So we do have data on the investigative positions.
And I believe that was -- that memo was distributed to you today that does
indicate on our urban counties, bexar, dallas, harris, tarrant, that investigator
is behind the market by 4.23%.
>> 4 point what percent.
>> 4.23% on the minimum. We are ahead on the maximum by 7.89%.
>> we haven't seen that. Also my only question would be how
those other officers -- or define them. Whether a detective is the same as
investigator in that type of an office or not. That's why you are meeting
with us, went -- why you meeting with us when you entertain a study like this
is the optimum thing to do.
>> it's okay. You all just finished it. We haven't had an
opportunity to. We have the same kind of investigators perhaps that some of
those offices have and then we have other investigators, particularly in the
types of units that she is talking about where they are doing detective work
from the ground up.
>> can I ask a more fundamental question. I have such great
respect for [indiscernible] [papers shuffling - audio interference] these
seem to be exceptions that we are trying to make fit into the pops scale as
opposed to the pops scale just shows us the way and the answer. My question
is have we thought about the -- these slots that are very specific, that really
although you say it ought to be a law enforcement detective, there's a whole
lot of other stuff that goes with being a law enforcement detective that's
none of the above in terms of certain other kinds of things, is that you guys
get off the pops scale and that we translate this job into one that is --
that is off the pops scale as constable van did with great success of getting
off pops, we -- we picked them up, moved them over, got a classification that
had the same kinds of beginning salaries and end point salaries and they were
able to move them along, get the flexibility so that when these wonderful
folks come over from other departments, divisions, they are not required to
start the at the beginning of the pops scale and you have all of these market
issues. They are able to place them where they want to within the budgeted
resources of that -- of that office and they get flexibility to move them
along to reward not only excellence, but also -- but also longevity. Even
if it's earned someplace else. I would say the same thing about the park rangers.
There was a reason we put the park rangers on this scale to kind of get them
in with some folks that were moving along in terms of salary-wise, but that
allows them to also get placed in a salary range and then we institute something
called performance based pay as opposed to its just an automatic. I just see
frank and so many others being caught up in you are different. And you are
not quite the same.
>> first of all, frank is not on pops, he's a division director
in our office, he's an exception, he's not on pops. We we talked for a long
time and made some concessions to get on the pops scale Commissioner. And
I guess what we are here saying to you today is that our investigator 2 positions
are not different from law enforcement detectives. They are peace officers,
it doesn't matter how many years experience they have. They are doing the
same work. Ras a law enforcement detectives. We know that because we deal
with all of them. We will be glad to talk about that if people want to about
getting us off the pops, but we sure did spend a long time getting on it and
making the decision to get on it and it just so happens this particular group
of people I think just got missloted. For some reason they are slotted along
with folks who do not do similar work and there's another category of individuals
who do the same work. Now, I don't know what's involved in taking an investigator
2 that's currently in this 80 series and trying to fit them into a 70 series.
There was some stuff that had -- that happen understand that that we were
not privy to. But I think what we are saying to you here today is that we
are not different. We are not the exception. In the investigator 2 category.
We have -- we have all of our -- we no longer have investigator 3. There is
-- there's an investigator 3 category in pops scale. And there was only one
ever in our office of those. It was a particular position that was created
for a particular job. And it no longer exists. So it's deceptive that we have
more than one level of non-supervising investigator. We only had investigator
2s. And what they do is detective work.
>> so right now they are slated for the 2.75% increase?
>> that's right.
>> yeah.
>> this would change, this is where we need to get more information,
we just got this over lunch from lou ann, it says that we are about 4% below
an investigator 2, 7.89 above on the [indiscernible] salary f. I translate
the way ronnie had said to law enforcement 75, correct, it means the beginning
salary ought to be 48999 which may very well take care of that deficit on
the one end. But says end point is 65233, which is 6,000 more than where this
says is already way over market.
>> uh-huh.
>> well, I think as we have pointed out. It would really
be important to know whether we are comparing apples to apples. Different
places do things differently. Our investigators function in exactly the same
way as a police department investigator would. Except in many ways their responsibilities
are somewhat different because for example we get a case from the police department,
it's been investigated up to a point. We often have to continue that investigation.
Redo certain things. But as we get it ready for trial. The difference between
getting a case that's ready to be charged, and getting a case ready for trial
is like the difference between a physical examination and open heart surgery.
It's just a vast difference. So our investigators are responsible for helping
get the case ready for trial. Most importantly, in our --in our bifurcated
trial system, separate trial for punishment, our investigators are putting
together the information that is used to show the jury what the defendant
should get in terms of punishment. That's a different responsibility. And
an additional responsibility. So we would love the opportunity to have more
in depth conversation with whichever entity is responsible for compiling this
information for the court. But I知 telling ya, they do different work. They
need to be accurate freezed and classify -- categorized and classified as
detectives, that's exactly what they do. For example, I had a case where birth
certificates were being sold on the street for $500. The defendant had a laser
printer, a state seals, working at the Texas department of health making false
birth certificates. Well, that took a lot of work to put that together and
make it into a prosecutable case. Also a very important national security
issue. So the level of cases that these men and women are involved in is --
is pretty complex. The two people that were charged with illegal dumping of
hazardous waste and dumping it into the 55-gallon barrels of waste into walnut
creek not long ago, our office handled that, environmental crimes. So there's
a wide variety of the kinds of incidents that our people get involved with.
They -- they basically do background information stuff that gets cases ready
to go to trial. We will be happy to talk about that in more detail.
>> judge? Has there ever been -- [laughter] -- I mean, goift
this much stuff on law enforcement. I mean it makes war and peace looks like
overnight reading. [laughter] has there ever been a group that have got together
within law enforcement from everything from corrections to you name it with
h.r. And said this is -- these are the areas that we need to be in, and here's
the peculiaring order, here's what we do, pecking order, we do it just like
you because somebody can walk out of my office, I mean, in 10 minutes somebody
else can walk in my office I知 -- hell I知 10 times more confused than I was
before they walked in. And, I mean, I could have everybody come in front of
me and justify it because everybody has got a justification. For what they
need to be. I am totally confused as to where people need to be on a pay scale.
I can get things, the thing that really is confusing to me, when you start
looking, maybe this data, this statistical information that's given to us
is incorrect because people didn't put the right kind of performance measures
in them. But I have everything that we pay 33% above to the we pay 4% below
that we pay -- I mean, I don't know how to do this, really y'all? I mean this
is really -- maybe just being here two years doesn't qualify you to be able
to differentiate what information I need to take and how I need to determine
what people need to be paid. I have openly said and I will never back away,
law enforcement, whatever agree it is, is a job that not very many people
want. If you have to put on a piece of protective equipment to go to work,
I think that you ought to get paid a commensurate amount of money. Whether
there's a detective or inspector or whether it's a border patrol person. But
I hope that there is information like that somewhere that somebody can give
me a simple little document that says here's what we found, where we get together
on the weekend and we all came out of there with scars, black eyes, whatever,
but we walked out saying that's the best thing that we could get. Because
other than that, ronnie, I am, I mean, I can listen to you and walk out of
here go well, good god I guess I have got to put those people on a different
pay scale as well. Maybe the other four up here have got it. But I am really,
really confused about how I need to coco down on paying what to whom. You
can hear my frustration.
>> certainly. As a practical matter, as a practical matter,
in law enforce, I知 going to generalize, it will building probably -- it will
be everybody in this room is going to have a different opinion. I知 going
to give you mine because I have the microphone right now. As a general rule,
beginning peace officers are generally brought in at the corrections patrol
level. I am not speaking of corrections officers, I have no experience, anything
about that. There are plenty of people here that know a lot more about that
than I do. Generally speaking beginning police officers are at the patrol
level. They generally promote. At that level they wear bullet proof vests
and protective equipment because it's called for. Generally speaking they
promote up, one of the levels they promote up to is detective. Generally speaking
they don't wear protective gear when they are detectives as a general rule.
The people that we use in our office, we don't use patrol officers. And the
county attorney's office and the district attorney's office, we use detectives
whose job it is to go ferret out evidence, put together cases, so forth. As
a general rule those positions pay more than patrol officers. Patrol officers
are usually younger, more energy. Rebound quicker from getting kicked in the
shin, right? [laughter] so you hear a lot of disagreement with all of this.
[multiple voices]
>> he doesn't need it. The vest. Let me add a few things
just kind of from my concerns on this. I have it in my shorten your as county
attorney, I haven't come to a point where i've been able to called upon to
hire an investigator, I have my ideas, my work overall of these years to come
at what I知 looking for in a investigator. Commissioner Daugherty it pretty
much makes basic sense. The kind of work I want down in my office I look to
the sheriff's office, a.p.d., Trying to get someone at a level where they
put together cases. You know I want a detective. What I really like in terms
of whatever that pay is, is some salary that I could entice someone over to
come and do cases for us because we think we need at least that level. In
taking what Commissioner Sonleitner said, I知 open to try in any way to deal
with this. But more importantly, right now, you know, I知 going to be hopefully
in a position where I知 going to be hiring investigators, I知 going to be
able to make my mark on what I want. I知 hoping it's going to be the salary
that I can get what I want for the investigator work that I want to be able
to do. Secondly, just how this problem is com -- has compounded itself, the
truth is I don't know how many investigators we have learned that we have,
actually ronnie's and my office together, it's a small number. We are the
tail. When you get -- that's what Commissioner Sonleitner means when she says
we're different. The idea when you get into talking about peace officer compensation,
the truth is we're talking about the sheriff's office. More so than ronnie
and I got, group constables together. I知 guessing park police, more than
ronnie and I have together. We are the tail, I feel sorry for the guys I jump
in from time to time to try to help their matter. They are pretty much left
over trying to find which way to go. I guess one of the very basic things
is if lieu at that, if you look at that pops scale, you find it says investigator
2, I think other than one and juvenile probation or something there, really
his and my office, I think a good way to start is to change that title, cada
investigator so you know when people start talking about those pay levels
they talk to the right people. Then we come in, say, all right you have bigger
issues to deal with regard to corrections, with regard to law enforcement,
don't forget this tail. These people do important work as well, they put their
lives on the line in the work that they do. I like and agree with what you
laid out. If someone has to put their life any time in danger, any time of
the day, I think they ought to be paid for that. Just to remember them. When
we come forward say okay you have to handle these big issues, but where do
these guys fit in on that? I would argue they fit in very much so with law
enforcement it's what they do. Then it turns out to be a money issue. There's
just only so much pie, you have to make those hard decisions. That's everything
that i've got to say on the matter.
>> Commissioner Daugherty, if I may, we attempted one time
to do what you -- what you asked.
>>
>> [one moment please for change in captioners]
>>
>> ... At a law enforcement detective up until that time
because of the fact it is a similar job. So they were at that same level in
2001 until the scales drifted apart. So just to give you that information
that there was a point in time as late as 2001 that that was the case.
>> the only other thought I wanted to add to this is that
there is a reason why in the preliminary budget you had the planning and budget
office recommend 2.75% wholesale raising because in part this scale has grown
over the years. It started with one group and then there were other groups
that said what about me and other groups said what about me and then there
were distinctions that were made and the court, over the years, was a partner
in the various -- at sometimes recognizing the what about me. Park rangers
always weren't there, investigators always weren't there, constables weren't
always there. They are there now. There are different grades and cobbled together
we've built this house with a funny set of interrelationships. And it may
very well be worthwhile given also the rather indepth feelings that people
have, rightfully or wrongfully, about their part of this house. And maybe
sit back and have an independent look at this. And not -- and having a good
set of compensation skilled people. The planning and budget office has played
a role in this. There's not -- that office is not filled with compensation
analysts. It is not filled with people who are fully understanding all the
nuances in law enforcement and corrections. It's filled with a different set
of skills that have a role to play but it's not necessarily a dominant role.
So I知 just, you know, because you are going to see [indiscernible], we still
have others who are going to come to you and say my room isn't the right sized
room. I want a bigger room or a different room and this door should be opened
and this door should be closed, et cetera. And it is because this scale has
just grown and been packed together. So I think it's possible to do a comprehensive
look. I知 not sure you can just get a bunch of people who are leaders in this
family together in the same room and come up with agreement because they are
very intelligent, very strong willed and very interested in making sure that
their piece of this pie works well. So if I had any influence on this inning,
I would suggest take a comprehensive look at this and get some good, solid
compensation expertise along with law enforcement, corrections and peace officer
expertise because it's just -- if we don't, you'll solve the problem, everybody
will go home and it will come right back next year.
>> so you are talking about after October 1?
>> after October 1, yes. Not between now and October 1. [laughter]
I知 talking about take the time and do it right. But do it right and not say,
okay, you all figure out and come back to us because I think --
>> it won't happen.
>> [inaudible].
>> the scale is not the problem, y'all. The background --
that then becomes whenever you start sitting down with six different groups
and why that is this and this over here is this.
>> correct.
>> and I want to be able to be right here. Trust me, i've
seen every number that you can imagine, and I知 just frustrated to the point
of how do you make sense of this. I mean, you know, where you really want
law enforcement to understand that you want to pay them what they ought to
be paid. And knowing that people are paid differently. Now, I mean I can't
believe that we couldn't ask for, you know, give me your, you know, most level-headed
person that's a representative and we're going to go and we're going to hold
up for the weekend and we're going to find -- and I would love to just, you
know, be a fly on the wall, I mean, just to hear because I think if I had
everybody in the room and everybody got to talk that I could do that. All
of us have a difficult time, you know, doing that because of how many folks
we've got coming at us, not just law enforcement-wise, but I知 trying to be
as conscientious elect official as I possibly can be with compensation, period,
and I have a particular vent towards the proper compensation for law enforcement.
But, man, I am just absolutely blown away by how you can keep as many balls
in the air and figure out what in the world you need to be doing where you
don't have people upset. And like I said, I don't think you are supposed to
get this in two years. But maybe, you know, I can work on it. I mean probably
i'll need to see more numbers.
>> well, I think that you do have a scale -- [inaudible]
because quite frankly I would have preferred the scale to stay very pure and
just apply to the sheriff's office. You kept adding in different folks and
so we tried kind of best as we could to put people where they perhaps belonged
and one of the difficulties and I think perhaps the district attorney investigators
are an exception to the rule, but one of the difficulties is it's apples,
oranges, strawberries and cantaloupe. It's not even comparing apples to oranges.
It is a very different job that different components, they call them all law
enforcement, but what people do in this county. And so what happens is is
that you have folks who want to say I知 the same as those guys and the same
as those guys are always my law enforcement folks. I mean they are the ones
that people compare themselves to. If they were lowest paid they wouldn't
be comparing themselves to, but since they are highest paid they are always
comparing themselves to. I think there are even more implications of some
of those decisions because then what happens is when you say to folks, no,
you are not the same, then you have people who then don't want to do the job
you are hiring them to do because they want -- they are so busy trying to
prove they are the same as the law enforcement patrol officers. And I think
that's -- you know, I think it's the reason we've got some real serious problems
as far as folks doing the job that they are supposed to be doing. But --.
>> but what is common to all is the peace officer status,
though, isn't it? That's what's common.
>> but it's not necessarily the job. I mean there are different
types of law enforcement officers and there are different types of jobs that
they are expected to do.
>> right.
>> and we grant that, but --
>> I think these people are perhaps an exception.
>> all we're saying here today is that our investigators
are detectives. There is a cap going right now. We can change the name of
our investigator. We don't care as long as the pay scale is correct. And,
for instance, when we started a white color crime unit on the general fund,
we put a sheriff's deputies, an a pd , they sit together and work on the same
cases, they have the same qualification, they are carrying the same number
of coast loads, it's just that the d.a. Investigator is slotted lower on the
pay scale because she's called an investigator 2. That's just not right. And
it the same throughout our units where we have investigators who are doing
detective work. White color units, juvenile. In the juvenile system, our investigator
does the majority of the investigation on cases. Even if it comes from law
enforcement. So I think all we're saying here is our investigators happen
to be debts. We're not saying that we're like detectives or like constables,
all we're saying is they are detectives in the true sense of what the job
description is and what they are actually doing.
>> if we actually did that, have you all put a fiscal note
attached to it, is it -- are you -- let me reask the question. Are you presuming
they would be at the same place on the scale, which I guess is the old way
we just to call a compo ratio kind of thing as opposed they just get matched
to that number which is where everybody else on rank and file gets which is
why we create green circles. Bill?
>> well, bill derryberry. I have gone ahead and priced the
cost of this conversion for all the investigators including the one in juvenile
and public defenders.
>> how many are there?
>> 15 and a half.
>> and we have 17.
>> well, you have -- I知 talking about the --
>> general fund. Sorry.
>> and cost of okay the same place they are -- being the
same place they are, sergeants and lieutenants, that version, the cost will
be $109,487.
>> is that assuming that they all got a pay raise and funded
by the general fund? If you simply said you can call them a different name
but there's no pay increase involved, which I知 not sure you are suggestings,
but if you did that, the cost would be zero, but I don't think that is the
assumption that is being put on the table. The assumption is there would be
increased pay on top. Various other --
>> I thought that's what this is about. [multiple voices]
>> let me be real clear. I don't want to just --
>> essentially that is what we -- everybody else on rank
and file we've said groovy, you are on a different place. To a different plays
with that same number unless that department has had the internal ability
to fund the increase and do more than that. So if we do it for this, we're
going to raise all of these huge issues related to why did you do them as
a kr-fpl ompa ratio and everybody else got moved to a different classification
with the same number.
>> it would probably -- the difficulty is that there is only
the 2.75 that's available for the folks on the pop scale. So I mean if it
were a different situation and you were saying, okay, sheriff, this much could
be across the board on your pop scale and this much go out here and address
your different market salary issues or pay just justification issues, then
that would be a different situation, but there's not.
>> what the -- county attorney's office to do the same thing?
>> this is for all the investigator positions. And one in
the juvenile public defender. I can give you the exact amount for each office
if you wish.
>> do you have that on a specific sheet of paper in the memo
you gave us?
>> no.
>> okay.
>> i'll get it later, bill. Thank you.
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 11:02 AM