Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, July 20, 2010,
Item 15
Since we have you here -- i just notified p.b.o. That we would call up number 15. The matter involving consider and take appropriate on budget amendments, transfers and discussion items. They are headed down here, i guess, that doesn't involve y'all, does it? Thank you.
>> thank y'all.
>> 6 we will have back on next week.
>> thank you. We have already called up 15. There were a couple of these that -- that the court needs to discuss with you. Okay. The earmark for -- for records management, we've intended to spend that $50,000.
>> yes.
>> at some points.
>> yes, anticipation that we might have an increase in postage rates and as we had anticipated we didn't have the approval date at the time we earmarked it last budget cycle. It was an estimate. It's very close to -- to -- to what they've experienced in that may -- may rate increase. The miracle grant that will be reimbursed later on.
>> those are just in the events that a grant is not received by the -- by the time the -- the expiration of the previous grant that the department has -- has funded up front, the continuation of that grant, until we get the final approval. We anticipate will be -- we'll be receiving that approval shortly.
>> > precinct 4 car, car reserve? $5,900.
>> let me look at that. Right quick.
>> it looks pretty routine to me.
>> a 3?
>> yeah. Those are the -- the scanners, the security scanners that -- that were recommended by tcso to be replaced. And i think that's just a routine replacement that we would go to the car reserve to.
>> okay.
>> thank you.
>> the t 1 is just a rearrangement within the it budget for the expenditures that cover some of the expenditure line items from the -- from the maintenance agreement.
>> okay.
>> line item. The two that were placed d 1 and d 2 for discussion, are directly related to a budget rule that -- that we asked and the court approved last budget cycle that -- that any of the expenditures coming out of salary line items be brought to the court for discussion item. It might say in this case you have a precinct 1 asking for some operating expenses to be funded out of their pop salary line item, that being a new, new constable going into that office and -- and he and his staff are -- are working to get a better feel for the -- for the budgeted line items, the expenditure line items. We have worked with that constable's office to -- to align in fy '11, better align those expenditure line items.
>> i guess -- the line item that's coming here for discussion, and -- and from the constable of precinct 1, this particular approach will be addressed in the appropriate manner, where it will -- where it will be within this rule setting for this upcoming budget. Right now, it's not -- it's not in the rule setting --
>> right. One of the things that -- that --
>> [multiple voices] that we attempt to do is gets the operating line items, especially in the small departments, more in line with what it is required based upon the volume of -- of work. One of the things that -- that they found was that the cellular air time was not sufficient to support the -- the warrant activity and other activities going on in that constable's office. So -- so we were supportive of -- of especially with the new constable in office, of -- of them internally funding this. But we were required by the budget rule to bring it forward for your discussion.
>> right. Well, i guess in the future, i guess in the future especially with new elected officials, remember i had brought that up before, when we have new elected officials that come on board, i just think there ought to be some type of introduction to -- to the way things are and the way it should work, especially on the p.b.o. End and letting them know that this is the way it should be. That way we maybe can avoid these kinds of situations in the future. And but that's -- that's something that i had brought up before and hopefully it will be implemented in the near future. Especially with our new elected officials who is really not
>> [indiscernible] as far as a lot of budgeting situations are concerned.
>> we do have marked for january of '11 to orient some new elected officials that we know some offices will have new officials.
>> that would be good.
>> we will follow up as you've reminded us.
>> i appreciate that.
>> any additional comments? So this is because the rules require -- this is before the commissioners court because the rules required the commissioners court to approve --
>> exactly.
>> exactly.
>> okay.
>>
>> [inaudible - no mic]
>> coming forward. I appreciate with commissioner davis was saying about the orientation part. As you know, as a new elected officials, sometimes
>> [indiscernible] i can assure you that the reason for this request is that we need this -- also our revenue shows that we are working diligently to bring money back into the budget, so -- so i appreciate that about the orientation. Very aware of the rules and regulations of p.b.o. And everything. But this happened to the
>> [indiscernible] account that we have that we needed this extra money for has been very
>> [indiscernible] tool in evidence and warrant search and also our civil process. That is the reason that we are asking for this request today and i appreciate p.b.o. Hearing it. If there's any other questions, my staff will be glad to answer. But i appreciate your time.
>> thank you.
>> thank you.
>> finally, there's a request from precinct 2.
>> the -- the precinct 2 has to do with funding of -- of -- of dispatch service that's run out of precinct 2, but it actually does dispatching for a number of the constable's offices, precinct 1, 2 and 3. This is a way that -- that -- that they have allowed their request -- they are requesting 7,000 in salary savings to cover that temporary staffing for that dispatch service.
>> now, that's coming from -- that $7,000, though, is coming from the precinct 3 constable budget.
>> that's correct. Those are salary savings.
>> salary savings. P.b.o., pop scale salary savings. However, what i am trying to get my finger around, maybe the constables can help me, as far as dispatch services are concerned, how do we get into a situation where we have -- i really don't know, that's why i'm asking the question, i'm not a constable, i don't know how they operate their particular offices as far as some of the things they do. But if you have dispatch and you need dispatch services, why isn't there just a set budget amount of money to take care of dispatch services for any constable, whether it's precinct 1, 2, 3 or 4 in those particular -- also precinct 5 constable. Why isn't there just a uniform center budget line item to take care of any dispatch services? Can somebody explain that to me?
>> well, i can. I think -- i think two years ago, all of the precincts -- constables got together, we were trying to -- to have one particular dispatcher at c tech to be honest with you, there's a
>> [indiscernible] there for the constable's office. That never happened. So you have larger departments like 5, which didn't need a dispatcher because the employees, they have more f.t.e.'s. I think in the near future trying to work together, we can answer your question, commissioners, to bring that one budget item together --
>> it makes sense to me.
>> -- around the clock that would work out of c tech, that will take care of this problem because each department, like we team up with 1, 2, 3 teams up and actually we weren't able to even -- out of my budget to contribute to that. But once when i first came in, but weren't able to do it this year. But 3 took it on to continue that service.
>> right.
>> but answer to your question would be wonderful and lovely if we -- if we get that c tech at that chair opened up that it would -- it would solve this problem. It would take care of 1 through 5.
>> right. Well, it would be something i think we need to investigate and look at in the near future. We have the budget cycle coming up here pretty soon. It appears to me that this is something that shouldn't -- shouldn't be occurring, in my opinion. If you have to go to pops salary savings to get $7,000 to deal with dispatch persons that actually in precinct 2 constable's office, to serve precinct 1, 2 and 3. That's -- in my opinion, that's not a good approach, but again that's for another agenda item. I think what we're trying to do today, you're just trying to satisfy the end of the $7,000 for the dispatch services has been rendered. I understand that. But then have to go through this process of going outside of the rules, per se, to the p.b.o. Rules, to accommodate this is -- is really why this is here. It's on the agenda for discussion. So i understand it, but i think that we need to look at some type of way of making it uniform where everyone either pitches in a certain amount to a central dispatch type of situation where this particular situation would not appear again in the future.
>> if you don't mind --
>> my comments.
>> did i leave anything else out, sergeant?
>> i don't believe so, judge, commissioners, sergeant knox. We have been working with this situation for quite a while now. Especially out of constable 1. With not having any dispatcher -- dispatcher available to the deputies. And we've come numerous times to try to ask for an f.t.e. For that. But have not been able to get that f.t.e. To support those deputies that are in the field with dispatch. All of the constables put their head together, i believe this is what they thought was probably the
>> [indiscernible] economical, the f.t.e.'s that we do have on hand that they would be able to do the other necessary things as far as the civil process and the warrants with research and entry and that type of a thing -- search and entry and that type of a thing.
>> so this one dispatcher serves several precincts.
>> three constables, sir.
>> so i mean why the yoanch overage? If we're talking about one dispatch every, seems to me that would be easy enough to fund. So this dispatcher is overtime or --
>> typically, i think that's what's happening, judge. I'm not sure, you probably will want to get with constable 2 on that. What typically happens is deputy constables we start out in the morning trying to serve papers, best time to get them.
>> correct.
>> you know, 6:00 a.m. We cut it off at 9:00. So i'm pretty sure he is having someone trying to cover that extra additional shift for the deputies in the field.
>> yeah.
>> so p.b.o. Has not recommended against the request.
>> no.
>> the rules require commissioners court approval.
>> approval.
>> correct.
>> that's why i nuevo laredo we approve the -- why i move that we approve the budget amendments before us.
>> second.
>> any more discussion.
>> look at this during the budget process.
>> yeah, definitely do that.
>> all right. All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Thank you all very much.
>> thank you. Constable, good to see you and your staff down here.
>> thank you, judge. Now we don't want to see you every week, but once or twice a year would be all right
>> [laughter]
>> y'all take care now.
>> all righty.
>> so we have the health care district, right?
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, July 20, 2010 1:25 PM
