Travis County Commissioners Court
September 7, 2004
Item 5
Now, christian, while we have you there and allen in the audience, 5 is consider
and take appropriate action on proposed changes to budget rules for '05. Christian
set out the changes in the budget rules. Any suggestions or highlights we
should hear?
>> I also sent out an e-mail to members of court on some
additional changes that were made subsequent to the agenda being submitted
to --
>> and is that in your August 30th memo or no?
>> that would have been an e-mail from Friday. So I don't
think --
>> did you cover those four things? I don't think i've seen
those.
>> in addition to the changes I submitted with the agenda
backup, there were three minor changes to the budget rules. The first one
is adding some language on page 12 to allow p.b.o. To correct scrivener errors,
type pose. I can read that language out to you. It's a little wordy, but it
met everyone's satisfaction. Ought mat eubgs budget adjustments may be made
at p.b.o.'s dregs to correct administrative or technical errors. They through
but are not limited to misstated line items. If the reupb or oral description
associated with or attached to the budget transfer cleaver indicates that
slightly different line item number was intended. In addition p.b.o. Has the
authority to process automatic budget adjustments needed to correct negative
line items and personnel [inaudible]. That last sentence is already in the
rules. I didn't mean to repeat that.
>> that make sense to p.b.o.?
>> yes.
>> any issues from the court?
>> there was also -- it's been through the auditor's office
and they were all right that change as well. There were two small changes
to what was submitted. On page 19 the sentence -- a sentence related to jury
sequestration. I can't ever pronounce that. The current wording of the cash
fund will be set up for each judge hearing criminal cases. We would like to
change it to a cash fund may be set up for each judge. That matches current
practice. The third change is on page 11. The sentence that was in the original
said specific review by Commissioners court approval. It wasn't correct wording.
It need to do read specific sraoe and approval by Commissioners court. And
we made those changes.
>> there's been one other recommendation. Commissioner Davis
has a recommendation that didn't get incorporated into due to the last week.
It had already been submitted to the court, the budget rules. Commissioner
Davis has -- is recommending and I think Commissioner Davis, if you want me
to read your recommendation.
>> go ahead. That would be appropriate.
>> insert act or paragraph following rule 5 a personnel budgets,
he would like to --
>> what page are we on? We have none of this.
>> I understand.
>> is there a page?
>> page 13. I can read the sentence. It's real straightforward.
The departments are required to utilize permanent salary savings to increase
green circle positions to the minimum of the pay grade. Do you want to kphoepbt
that?
>> it's page 14 in what was submitted as agenda backup.
>> I don't have a page 14.
>> personnel budgets.
>> we go from 13 to 15.
>> I’m sorry, I don't know how it could have happened.
>> we give you an a for saving paper, allen. We didn't know
it was unintentional.
>> I can certainly submit you a fullback-up that includes
page 14.
>> basically to use salary savings to cover --
>> there were no changes on page 14 from the original budget
rules.
>> and the reason for that is that if you notice over the
years the incremental increase in green circled employees, the numbers continue
to increment each year. And of course, some of the basic problems, I guess,
is funding at the discretionary use of the department heads, and that funding
in their budget is apparently not going towards some of the green circled
employees that I think it should go to. And of course that number can increment
and if folks really want to know what that is, what we're talking about, we're
saying about a person may be working in a position making, an example, $20
an hour, and of course he's been -- the [inaudible] and all these analyses
say that person should be making that much, however, they are only being paid
$15 an hour. It's to bring those persons up to where this should be making
the money as far as what they have been surveyed as the market has dictated.
So, again, it's just to take those salary savings to address that and bring
those persons that are green circled into where they really should be as far
as the market. And so that was really the purpose of using the permanent savings
toward that end to bring to minimum so we can kind of bring those numbers
down. It's just another tool to address the green circled employees.
>> isn't that more like a vote of the court as opposed you
don't incorporate something like that into the budget rules. That's a policy
question. I think it's a good one, gut this is our budget rules and this is
how we turn stuff into jose. You had your say, would you mind if I --
>> I wasn't through yet.
>> yes, you had completed and you had stopped and I was responding
back. I think it's a real issue --
>> let me play county judge. Let's let Commissioner Sonleitner
finish, then it will be your turn.
>> I have a real issue with people submitting proposed budget
rules orally on the dais when this has been out here now, alan, what, a couple
of weeks now in terms of anybody who needed to have suggestions needed to
get them to p.b.o. We don't have any copy in front of us. We have something
orally being given to me which my first instinct is that doesn't sound like
a budget rule, that sounds like a policy as to how we're going to handle green
circles in the same way we had a policy related to red lines. There's not
a budget rule on red lines, it's something we do on an annual basis. So I
just -- I just cannot believe we're getting something orally on the dais here
on a budget rule that hasn't been shared with anybody until 11:09 on the day
we're going to at a time up.
>> one suggestion may be that rather than include it in the
budget rules that there be a general discussion with personnel compensation
policies where I believe red lined and green lined employees are discussed
and the use of departmental savings to give promotional raises and the like.
Irrelevant haven't spoken to h.r. About this, but I’m sure this would fall
under their policy guidelines related to compensation and the like.
>> Commissioner Davis.
>> okay. Thank you. It was brought up again, it was basically
discussing what the situation was on that as far as addressing the green circled
employees. However, I know we have included this the budget rules in the past
different things that may roll to ending fund balance. Those situations like
that as far as what to do with those moneys. Of course my concern at this
time was -- was it could be applicable and I think it still should be incorporated
in the budget rules because that governs the budget. And of course it may
be a policy discussion also. That's not to say it can't be all even come compassing.
But I think it needs to reside in two places. The budget rules -- here's what
the rules are. You come here and you have permanent -- you have a permanent
salary savings in your budget, then it should be applicable to address green
circled employees. And that, in my opinion, is part of the budge he will rule.
Everybody got their even interpretation. That's my interpretation of how we
can use it and I think it can co-exist and I think it's all encompassing whether
it's a budget rule or a policy. And I think it needs to reside in both places
and I think it residing here, I think is just as eloquent and just as appropriate
as anywhere else. Whether it's policy or rules. So that's my argument on that.
>> can we hear that language again, then let's hear from
the human resources director.
>> yeah. Departments are required to utilize permanent salary
savings to increase green circle positions to the minimum of the pay grade.
>> would you enlightenous a that?
>> that has a type of decision that's typically been made
as a policy determination after you allocate the general compal allocation,
we come back to you of course with implementation type parameters which we
recognize could change from year to year. In prior years it's been not a part
of the budget rules but as a policy. I believe the court last week made a
decision that you would be looking at the green circled matter in markup,
and I don't know, you are supposed to begin markup -- you begin markup on
tomorrow, and I think the decision also, just to remind the viewing audience
on red lined was made last week that it would not be added to base. So this
is just sort of recapping --
>> the good news is this is September 7th, and we have until
October 1 to have this in place. So why don't we have a revised draft of proposed
changes tomorrow or the next day for us to review with an eye toward making
this decision next Tuesday? There were other changes that were brought to
our attention earlier, right? In addition to the one regarding green item
employees. Can we put them all in one format so we can see what the changes
are? Now, those of us with -- -we cannot contact one another without violating
the law. Let's just let alan know so he can share them with the court not
tpaor bead back from us, but so we will know what the feedback with an eye
toward moving next Tuesday. How is that? Does that get us where we need to
go? In terms of permanent salary savings, there are salary savings part of
which we budget, right? So we're talking about salary savings beyond what's
budgeted.
>> and what we're -- what the Commissioner was looking at
were in the event that you had a position that paid, say, $30,000 and you
replace that position, that person left and someone come in at 25,000, those
are ongoing permanent salary savings. And what he's suggesting is that there
be a rule that the department utilize those permanent salary savings as a
priority to address the green circled positions if in fact that department
has any.
>> that's my understanding.
>> and if we decide to go down this path, the question is
whether we require that that be done or whether we encourage or request or
a softer verb.
>> right.
>> quick question. Would the departments have full knowledge
of what the impact of that particular rule is before we adopted it? And here's
why I say that. If we had 5.75% going to the departments and we've already
said and we want 4% going to the cola, that leaves 1.75%. And I think the
departments would want to know so it could properly comment on that. Will
the 1.75 get -- cover their green circles knowing in a a few of those departments
were going from $8 to $9 -- no, 9 to 10.
>> 10.
>> yeah, going up the one dollar on the minimum wage as well.
They would like to know what they've got left so if indeed we did that policy
do they even have anything left for performance pay or not. I think they are
entitled to information before we would adopt any kind of a rule like that.
What's the impact of the green circle rule that Commissioner Davis just said
on the different departments knowing there is 4% cola, knowing there are things
that happen within pops, things that happen on minimum pay rage, just so that
they know that.
>> we'll get with h.r. --
>> [inaudible] next week's discussion.
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 10:34 AM