Travis County Commissioners Court
January 13, 2009
Item 9
9. Consider and take Appropriate action on Constable precinct two Proposal to transition Certain peace offices from The classified pay scale to Non-Travis County sheriff's Officer peace officer pay Scale effective January 16, 2009.
>> good morning.
>> good morning.
>> lou anne, compensation Manager. We are here before you to Present the transition for Individuals within the Precinct 2 constable area From classified back to the Non-psl peace officer pay Scale, that should be Effective January 16th, That is the same effective Date that the new pay scale Goes into effect with all of The other constables and the Park rangers and the Investigators that were -- That pay scale was approved Back during the budget Process.
>> okay.
>> > couple of questions, There's a note that says Hrmd, the policy that allows Placement at step 1, 3 or 5, But there are a couple of Recommended for step 6.
>> let me clarify.
>> okay.
>> that recommendation Includes where they would End up on their step. We would place the initial Approval would place them at The step 1, 3 or 5 per the Policy. Then for those individuals That would have received Their step increase, from January -- from October 1st to January 15th, we Are asking the court to Approve that you approve Their automatic step Increase on January 16th. So there's no -- there's No -- no indication that They would have not received Their step increase for the Fiscal year. And then those -- those Staff that have the step Increase effective January 16th to 9/30 at end of the Fiscal year, those employees Would receive it on their Anniversary date. It's this group that we are Just asking you to -- to Pick up those that -- that The step increase would have Occurred between October 1st and January 15th.
>> this department has money To cover this because the -- Because the cola is Effective January 1 and not October 1.
>> the cola was effective October 1st. There was an administrative Decision made by the prior Constable to not award the Cola on October 1st. Knowing that this transition Was in the works and so Has -- so that money was set Aside to support this Funding. Travis can speak to that.
>> I guess -- I'm sorry, go Ahead.
>> the cola is going to Partially cover it on an Annualized basis, though, It's going to cost about $15,630 more. That's taking into account All of the increases, the Various transitions in the Steps less the cola. So the cola is already being Taken into account, it's 15,000 more.
>> so the department is Eliminating one position to Cover additional costs in The future?
>> no.
>> but there was permanent Salary savings from the Transition as well as the Pulling back of the cola in Order to make it a wash for This -- for this budget Cycle. However, there was always a Consideration that once Constable 2 went back on Pops, there would be a Financial consequence which Was an ongoing funding at a Higher level.
>> if this item was approved Today, I'm
>> [indiscernible] From the planning and budget Office. We would add it to next Year's target budget. There's been some -- I guess Some termination dealing With transition people Leaving, still being owed Vacation time, various vac Canes we would monitor their Budget this year. Since that budget so there Would be in the positive, we Would do that sometime this Year. Next year there is a $15,000 Cost.
>> then -- can I finish? Just to close the loop. In regard to that increased Funding, that comparatively To the other constable's Offices because now Everybody is on the pops pay Scale. This is -- this is just the Cost of putting everyone on The same pay scale.
>> that's correct.
>> okay.
>> my final question is so When all is said and done, In will be a savings of $7,600 and some changes Change.
>> there's no savings. It's an additional cost. I know this proposal has Been -- there's been a bunch Of different versions of This, but we met with them During morning, double and Triple checked, there's Additional costs involved. There's no savings.
>> all of a sudden I'm Disappointed.
>> no --
>> we did our best to find It in --
>> but as of today, 100% of The -- of the additional Cost is covered. It may be a fiscal impact Next year or am I wrong?
>> this year three Variables, one is these Increases are not effective Until January, there is Savings involved, but also People have had to leave for Termination, which happens In all departments. It's a small department so Going to be additional Funding they may need for Termination pay. Plus the various increases For this. We will monitor their Budget. We don't expect it to be a Major impact at all. I would expect it would be Fairly small number. Less than the $15,000 Number.
>> we don't need to see the Figures before we take Action on this? I figured that I have Seen -- that we have -- that It indicated a saving.
>> a put together a quick Spread sheet that shows the $15,000 cost.
>> may we see it? I'm happy to walk you Through it.
>> this may be that stumble I thought we might have.
>> can we give the clerk One, too?
>> yeah.
>> okay. Let me just briefly walk you Through this. If you look at the first Number on the top $49,676. That's the cost if we look At the beginning salaries Where all of the people that Are proposed to move to the Pops scale, if we look at What their salaries were Back in the December for The -- compared to what they Will be moving to the pops Pay scale it's going to cost Roughly 49,676 more. Keep in mind we also have The -- the cola funding that Wasn't allocated earlier in The year. So if we move that $34,000 Over to cover that cost, That's where you end up with A $15,630 additional cost.
>> today? So where is that money Coming from? What's the source of that Funding?
>> for next year we would Add it to their target Budget, then if we need to Cover those increases this Year, we would come back and Try to either find it Internally through vacancy Savings or ask for it Through the allocated Reserve.
>> if we approve this today, We basically have approved Adding an additional $15,630 To this year's budget. But the department may be Able to generate this amount Through salary savings or Some other --
>> that's correct.
>> means.
>> it's our understanding -- Is our understanding with The department that there Will be efforts made to Generate the 15,630? Let the record show there's An affirmative nod.
>> [laughter]
>> okay.
>> I move approval.
>> I think that I would like To ask a few question ifs i Get a chance.
>> yes, sir.
>> thank you.
>> when I spoke with leroy Yesterday and also spoke With the department, went Through a lot of up and down Question and answer Sessions, trying to figure Out how this was going to Impact us for this upcoming Budget cycle of -- of -- Because with the backup -- What it really shows is that Basically not being an Impact, it would kind of be A wash. We just talked about '09. But -- but the source of Funding according to what -- To after speaking with leroy Was that there were some Permanent salary savings That we could look at that This wouldn't necessarily Have an impact. I hope that's what I'm still Hearing -- in other words The money will be there. For -- for 10 rather -- even Though this -- this '09 Money is still available. It wouldn't really be a -- More of a ratchet up effect As maybe what I'm hearing.
>> sure.
>> so I just want to make Sure that the information That I received after Digging down deep into this With h.r. Department and Also with p.b.o. Is still Holding true this morning. As far as that type of -- of Funding mechanism. Now, but it came back to me Because we have wrestled With this thing back and Forth one year after each -- I think this was the only Constable that -- that Officed that was on a Classified pay scale and of Course now going back to -- To the other constable, At -- non-tcso pay scale as Far as pops is concerned Is -- makes it all equal, Which we have heard. My question is this -- is There any -- any policy -- Any directive that -- that Because this is -- because Of some of the complications That sometimes we are Running into these things, That any policy directive That -- that this doesn't Return to the -- to a Classified situation, let's Say a constable says well i Like the idea, I would like To go back to a classified Pay scale. All of them could go back to A classified pay scale. My question is how could we Make sure that -- I don't Know if we have any legal Authority to do that. But I saw this and I kind of Questioned that, how could We make sure that this stays On an equal playing field as Far as benefits are Concerned. Can somebody answer that Question for me, please?
>> yes, Commissioner alicia Perez, executive manager for Administrative operations. The answer to your question, The short answer is no. There is no guarantee That -- that this or any Constable will stay on the Pops scale.
>> okay.
>> but that would have to Come back to the Commissioners court and -- And there would have to be Significant justification For going off of the pops Scale. This is the only time that I'm aware that this has ever Happened with the constable Or certainly the -- the Sheriff has never asked to Go off the pops scale. The justification for that Time was that the -- that The scale was broken and it Did not provide either the Flexibility or the -- or the Pay that that particular Constable felt was merited. We have a new constable, With the changes that y'all Made last year in the Increases in the constable And the non-pcso pay scale, He's satisfied that he can Work within the scale and Indeed we can -- he can Recruit and retain peace Officers within the new Approved pay scale. Thank you, that's the last Question that I had.
>> Commissioner Davis, you Mentioned you were correct Yesterday when we spoke with Leroy, you mentioned that There appeared to be things That would cover this. We reviewed the numbers, we Found an error in the spread Sheet. That accounted for some Savings that weren't there.
>> so it is the permanent, What leroy stated to me Yesterday still holds true This morning.
>> well, at the time that You and I talked, Commissioners, about 4:00 And about 5:30 last night, We found an error, talking With alicia, and indicated At that point that our Preference would be to pull The item and delay it one Week. Unfortunately that didn't Get done and we are here, i Apologize that I didn't get A chance to get back to you This morning.
>> thanks for working a full Day yesterday mr. Nellis.
>> I move approval, judge.
>> second.
>> what's the department's Annual budget? Roughly? It's big enough to generate $15,600 savings.
>> all in favor? That passes by unanimous Vote. Thank you. Good luck to the new Constable.
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:
Tuesday, January 13, 2009 2:03 PM