Travis County Commissioners Court
September 7, 2004
Item 12
Speaking of budget shortfalls, 12-b, non-routine personnel actions, promotion,
medical examiner's office. Human resources has advised me typically the promotions
are sent to the court for approval. In this case receive the amount of compensation.
This is one of those kind of special positions in the medical examiner o s.
I don't know that I have issues, I just had a note regarding human resources.
I知 satisfied wit. Then I need to check with dr. Bayardo did about it.
>> this person is jumping four grades. You would think this
kind of number would be out there in terms of the pay grades. I知 fine with
it.
>> we did check and the person is qualified and meet the
requirements of that position. We do perceive this as an upward mobility opportunity
for someone internally if someone had been hired in from the outside, they
could have certainly moved in at that level. The policy just requires that
when it's that kind of jump, that the court must act on it and that's the
only reason that it's before you.
>> move approval.
>> this is a forensic toxicologist. Senior. And so this is
one of those hard to fill positions, I would guess.
>> yes.
>> any more discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous
vote. C is a non-routine personnel actions, request for temporary pay for
one records management and communications resources, two, criminal justice
planning, and three is emergency services. In addition to these I know we
have the d.a. Looking into this as well as the county attorney's office. I
think I said pretty much everything I need to say to give the county judge's
position in an e-mail to the court last week. There is another view. That
all the managers have been giving us and [inaudible] has that view today too
and steve.
>> do you want us to start? Yes. Mike and I are here today
representing our departments and I知 representing the emergency services department.
There are some nine employees in that department representing the technology
and communications section, the emergency management section, and the fire
marshal's office. What mike and I decided to do was use a little bit different
approach and that is rather than looking at the policy and trying to maximize
the use of the policy, realizing that we do have a salary savings in our budgets,
that we decided on across the board which would not take to it the 5%. In
fact, in my particular budget, it would be less than half of the savings I知
projecting. I would be estimating around 13,000 for a little -- a little over
13,000 tore this request. And it would be across the board for each one of
the employees of $1,500 except for one, and that's only due to the fact she
would be maxed out at that 5%. I listed the justification as to why I feel
like this is needed at this time. And that is, us a know in the emergency
services department, there has been quite a number of new initiatives that
have been proposed and worked on this past year and will be implemented, we
hope, in '05. And so i've used the justification for that that I am expecting
excellent performance for next year in the implementation of all the different
initiatives that i've listed here. And I can go into detail in each one of
those. I've already done those in work sessions as well as budget hearings
and I think you are well aware of the fire marshal business plan, I think
you are well aware of the fact that I知 sitting on negotiation teams regarding
e.m.s. Interlocal as well as the starflight interlocal. I think you are aware
of the fact that we're implementing [inaudible], in fact we're about finished
with that except for two sections in the county and as a result we're bringing
in additional partners that will utilize that system, meaning the emergency
services districts as well as the police departments. As well as pete baldwin
coming in and explaining to you he now the wanting to now go ahead and put
a coordinator position over the haz-mat program which, as you know through
homeland security grants and other grants has supplied thousands upon thousands
of equipment so now it's needed that that be put into his shop to where he
now has someone that coordinates all that. So without going into a long and
drawn-out detail, you've already heard from me in regards to all of. This
I just felt it was important for me to be here today to let you know I知 very
proud of my staff not only for what they have been doing but what they are
expected to be doing in the coming year and I feel like this particular pay
increase is a compromise in what burden I know it is on you as Commissioners
to try to deal with markup over the next three days and knowing that there
is money that's available here. And so that's why i've used this direction
and mike and I have partner understand coming up with that compromise.
>> and to talk a little about what my proposal is here for
is we have done a reorganization plan for criminal justice planning a few
months back, as you will recall, and that was really based upon some of the
restructuring that will happen in justice and public safety and our division
and some of the new duties our department was taking on. So at that time I
had looked at the functions of the positions that I had and how things need
to be realigned, ass and as I mentioned in my presentation to you back in
April, that we were looking into doing things a little bit deaf of differently
now. Positions had worked and what I was staff was step out of boggs boxes
and work more around team approach. A prime example has been the jail operation
study where my staff did an exceptional job coming together as a team, really
stepping outside of their functional silos and really working together and
doing a lot of functions they hadn't typically done. Those are the types of
functions that I知 going to be expecting staff to do not only now for the
jail study and of course some of those functions are going to be continuing
but also in the future as we approach other projects. I have a small staff,
I only have seven folks in my office so we have to function that way and be
able to coordinate as a team and step outside of our roles a little bit. That's
part of what my proposal today is looking at the policy for temporary pay
increase is looking at what i've been asking staff to do and what I知 asking
staff to do in the future. As danny mentioned about his staff, I just can't
say enough for how they've responded, they've really stepped up to what I
have asked them to do for the various projects we have had and I definitely
expect them to have full -- and have full confidence they will continue to
do that in the future. And also as danny mentioned, I know you have some tough
decisions ahead of you and I really appreciate your consideration of this
proposal that we're putting forward in front of you today.
>> my problem is I voted against these pretty much. This
covers almost every employee in the department. We approved 5.75%. Across
the board is effective early October.
>> yes, 10-1.
>> the department managers have the discretion to go ahead
and allocate the 1.75 as they see fit. There are other departments here, I
just think this money will serve a better purpose in the year ending balance.
Fire marshal's office has f.t.e. Requests, namely three. We do need a haz-mat
coordinator. Pete has kind of been doing that alone. I do think we probably
ought to do a lot more in that area. If we do, it will take additional f.t.e.s.
And nothing permanent, but -- and it wasn't personal on the others that I
voted down. We're kind of in a position where if we keep approving them, then
I think the departments will keep coming and it becomes even more difficult
to start rejecting them. So --
>> the only thing is that I remember the very first one that
came to us, p.b.o. Said that if we voted for that one, that the flood gates
would open, and they indeed did. And so I guess I wasn't for across the board,
I didn't think that's the way the policy was intended, but it was -- i'll
grant you that it was not well written. And this ambiguity -- leaves a loophole
and everybody has jumped through it. But the thing that concerns me I guess
is the wanting to treat everybody equally. And if some got through, then I
think everybody ought to get through. And with the only proviso that whatever
money is being utilized here has to be over and above the salary savings that
will go into the ending fund balance. And I think with that understanding
I can certainly stand one more gulp or gasp and that's what I feel like this
whole thing has been about, huge of water and I知 drowning.
>> I reached my tipping point last week on one of the ones
that came forward that I felt was blatant and subverting the court and what
we had done without any kind of discretion. I guess you needed to see something
like really beyond belief to say, okay, I知 done. We are three weeks from
a new fiscal year and I thought honestly we were going to be doing a lot less
on the cola. It is what it is, it's 4%. On October 1 there's a 4% across the
board pay hike going into effect. And I知 done because this isn't the last
gulp. There are other big departments out there who are preparing to put these
things in and if we had not done that 4%, I would be looking at doing this
right now, but I知 -- I have reached my tipping point. And I知 also getting
concerned that some departments that had the opportunity to deal with their
green circles, that's not you all in front of me, didn't dean with their green
circles first and they should have. And so, judge, you have won me over on
this one at long last. I don't know if it's going to change the vote any,
but I知 with out this one. I think i've reached a tipping point that it's
just -- this has got to stop and it's not going to be the last gulp. There
will be more on the 14th and the 21st. I predict somebody would even try to
be doing it on the 28th unless we shut it down. And probably should have shut
it down two weeks ago but we didn't and I知 ready to shut it down.
>> but the problem I have with that, though, and it's a feeling
that I think everybody will have at one point or another, why do I get punished
for following the rules? Why do I get to pay for everybody else's, you know,
lack of -- I知 at a loss of words. You know, for that. But, you know, it's
that feeling that, you know, you follow the rules and you listen to the presentation,
you follow the intent of the policy and you are the one that gets banged on
the head.
>> this is not turning on performance, it's kind of turning
on luck. If you were the best purchasing employee in Travis County but your
department does in the have excess salary savings, you don't have a shot at
this. The other thing is if you are a lucky employee, you have a shot at temporary
pay, cola, effective October 1, and a shot at part of that 1.75 and it could
be more depending on the manager's discretion. So all of a sudden when times
were tough and we put in place the temporary pay policy in the spring, we
had no idea you would have three bites on the a pretty big apple. At least
I didn't. And I don't know -- christian said the flood gates would be opened
and I agreed. Christian did not say we could not close those gates before
the end of the fiscal year and I知 suggesting now is the time to close the
gates because clearly the compensation picture is clear.
>> the only thing it's a little too late to close the flood
gates.
>> not really.
>> because we still have until October 1.
>> if we [inaudible].
>> we're turning down departments that work for us. Those
departments that do not we were kind of like we have to.
>> well, some of the others work for us also. The thing though
is if you look at the total percentage of county employees who have benefited
so far, then my guess is it's, what, 500 or 600 out of 40 thoufplt they were
lucky. I don't know that everybody else is smart enough to come to us between
now and October 1 though.
>> I think so.
>> give an affirmative vote because we gave them an affirmative
vote. The whole department or virtually the whole department is what i've
had against this. I don't know that talking further would help. I have consistently
voted against situations where it looked like it was an across the board increase
because I didn't think that was the intention of the policy.
>> it wasn't.
>> if I thought it was not intention of the policy, I would
stop it. Unfortunately i'd stop it starting today. Is there a motion?
>> I move that we approve to be consistent with other departments
that have come to us, but i'll promise you thatly look at policies a little
closer.
>> think understand. This is all three.
>> yes.
>> judge, Commissioners, steven bowburg, records management.
I have a couple items related to this. Before I say that, I sure would like
to be somewhere else right now. I知 sorry this is so controversial on this
item. But I think I have one that's a little bit closer to the spirit of the
policy and this is for one individual and it is for an individual that would
have been on our original list had we had the income at that time. We didn't
know we had the income and we had another employee that was approved for a
temporary pay increase under a very similar, almost an identical situation,
the county web master and types of work we think will be done in the future
based on work in the past, award winning work. I can elaborate if need be.
>> this is just one employee.
>> it is.
>> out of how many in the department?
>> 45, approximately.
>> okay.
>> but how many of those 45 wind up getting these increases
is this.
>> I think we are at 11.
>> 11.
>> with three to come next week I think you've proposed three
additional ones.
>> does the motion --
>> mine would be for all three.
>> motion is to approve all three set forth in the agenda.
Any more discussion?
>> yeah, let me -- I said it two weeks ago, I知 going to
say it again. We've just been had on this deal and I expect that managers
that look at their employees that go you are not going to go to bat for us,
you are not going to do the same thing and that's exactly what happened. We
know that. I知 dismayed over the fact that, number one, that there are so
many dollars that are salary savings or that are savings in departments. I
mean I guess -- the amazing thing is that we've got departments that this
has proof tone me that what do you is you submit budget and you have no intentions
of either hiring somebody or there are career ladders or -- because I have
asked where do all of these savings come from. Some departments savings are
not a matter -- they are not departments that create money. So where is the
savings? I mean the savings is somebody was left in the line item as a person
and that person wasn't filled or they are career ladder dollars that you don't
use and you put it in here. I知 not looking for somebody to blame, I知 just
saying there are lots of dollars in the county -- if you talk about scrubbing
or all the terminology we use, there are untold dollars that I guess people2jwst
go this is what do you this with. Either you come up with something that you
know you are going to need or you think that you might need and you use it
for this. You know, it puts us all in an awkward spot, but I fell like Commissioner
Gomez, we started and I remember looking, you know, at christian when he looked
at me and said do you know what you just did. Taken truth of the matter is
I did know what I did when t.n.r. Brought, you know, 77 pages of employees
or however many it was. And we did. And I guess we would all look back and
say we really are taking advantage of something. I知 not looking to blast
the managers for coming because I know what you've done. You've had employees
that say you go down there and get in line before October 1. And that's what
you are here to do. But it sure makes me look at budgets where I知 going,
now, is this person really -- has this person really submitted a budget that
this is exactly -- you can't get exactly, but is this what they really need.
And so I -- I知 going to stand my ground [inaudible].
>> right.
>> maybe we could do --
>> now all we have to do is vote against it. I guarantee
you we try voting against them we won't be happy.
>> linda, can you give an answer how many more of these we've
got? It's my understanding there's bun department getting ready to come next
week or the week after that's $40,000.
>> I don't know in terms of dollars, but there is a department
with 140 actions and yet another with three and one other with one action.
>> on the one that has 140 actions, what is the cost of that
one, please?
>> do you have that cost? P.b.o., Do you have that?
>> $49,629.
>> that's fix to go it us next week or the week after unless
we shut it down.
>> next week.
>> we got hit last week with 40,000.
>> $50,000.
>> any more discussion of the motion?
>> yeah, judge, I just want to make a couple of comments.
>> yes, sir.
>> and I really want to let the departments know I知 going
try to stay as consistent as I possibly can, but there is, I think, a brick
wall right before us and we are facing that brick wall. I really don't think
-- it's our policy, there's a loophole there, no doubt about it, but we stopped
the policy. Closed the loophole. And when these things come about like dealing
with the employees and you have money in your budget and dealing with employees,
especially those employees that you need to make whole, and I think Commissioner
Sonleitner mentioned green circled employees a little bit ago. And those employees
that haven't been made whole, h.r. Going making and going through each department
analyzing the department, comparing to it market and yet they aren't made
whole, but yet you can come and do what you are doing here, I don't think
that's the way to operate, in my mind. But when budget time comes around,
you know, again, I don't know, and maybe we need to tighten up also on the
budget rules also in some of this stuff. Where we have a policy here and budget
rule here. But I知 definitely going to address it. Right now we're kind of
left with the gate open. And it really does put us as a disadvantage because
it's tearing the court apart. That's not good to tear this court apart. I
want your departments to know that, it's not in the best interest of the department
to tear the court apart the way you are doing here now. So if it makes it
a little tougher for us and we have to make some really tough fiscal decisions
for the departments, it makes it tough. Especially when you have an opportunity
to help us in the cause in making fiscal decisions. And I think we all can
play a role in that, but of course the gate has been open and the policy is
already there and of course I知 going to stay consistent as far as what policy
is. But that doesn't mean that I知 not going to tighten down the clamps pretty
severely in my mind next go-round and I think you will see what I知 saying
coming up in the next go-round as far as this budget is concerned as far as
departments are concerned because in my opinion it never will happen again.
I don't know what we're going to do about it, but it won't happen in the format
and the way it's happening now. In my opinion, we've made a mistake by not
tightening up policy whereby you are taking advantage of it. And that's exactly
what you are doing here. So, again, I知 going to stay consistent in supporting
it, but I知 letting you know I知 doing it with strong reservations, departments.
I hope you all hear me because I mean it. Strong reservations this will be
revisited in the very near future, very near future. So I知 just letting you
know in a nice way. But it's troubling. Very troubling. Thank you.
>> all in favor of the motion to approve. Sphoes Commissioners
Gomez, Daugherty and Davis voting in favor. Those against show Commissioner
Sonleitner and yours truly. Thank you, congratulations. Y'all.
>> 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 10:33 AM