Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, August 10, 2010,
Item 9
Let's call up the vehicle item. And that is number 9. 9. Consider and take appropriate action on the following issues: b, requests by constables for vehicles and equipment comparable to the sheriff's office; and c, mobile radio replacements. Good afternoon.
>> thank you judge, good afternoon, judge and commissioners. This item is -- is for you guys to discuss and review what we've done with the policy. First off, i would like to thank the current members of the vehicle users committee that spent a lot of hours. I think we've had between 12 and 14 meetings to revise this policy. So there was a lot of time and effort put into this. The significant changes that we've had here with the policy, including our -- pretty much overall rewrite are bulleted in the memo. The big item is the replacement criteria wording going from an and to an or for the vehicle age and mileage. The second one is we tried to clear up and -- and the vehicle categories, if you will recall, in the current version, we have primary, secondary, we also have named vehicles, shared patrol, constables, it's kind of all over the board. What we tried to do is get -- get vehicle categories that could be used generically, across the board, for any purpose. And so what we did, we came up with -- with these six different categories. Patrol vehicles, general law enforcement vehicles, other general law enforcement vehicles, general use vehicle, and then a special use vehicle and equipment. And probably the question is what is the difference between a general and an other? The other is a -- is a law enforcement vehicle, but typically not used for law enforcement, even though they are peace officers, aka the district attorney's office, juvenile probation, they do need some type of official vehicle that will
>> [indiscernible] other law enforcement duties. Special use vehicles, this category could run across the board, anything from e.m.s. To equipment that t.n.r., road maintenance might use. It's -- it could be anything, just really. Then the last item is the addition of an appendix, appendix number 2. Which -- which we had problems with ordering vehicles and the -- the different types of vehicle maybe in the same category with numerous type of items. What we are trying to do in appendix 2 is to come up with an equipment listing for a recommended category of vehicle. In the sense of a patrol vehicle will come with this list of equipment. That doesn't mean that the ordering department has to get every item on that list. But these are the recommended items that would be in that appendix. Same thing with the general law enforcement vehicle and the other general law enforcement vehicle category. The general use vehicle, since they are really across the board, there's not a standardized list that we could use for that. Same thing with the special use and equipment list. Those pretty much are bought, each one is different. So you can't really go across the board and get a -- get a generic list for those. Those are the -- i guess the big changes in the policy and i would be glad to -- to answer any questions that you would like concerning what this might have budget consequences, what type of vehicle would generally budget for what. So -- so i would be glad to answer anything --
>> is there any difference in the recommended change in policy, will there be any variation from what's already embedded in the budget, per se, as far as in the preliminary budget, would that impact the existing numbers that are in the preliminary budget, even though we are recommending -- recommending positive changes, i want to know if the numbers, if there would be any variation in the existing numbers that we have.
>> there's a slight decrease --
>> okay, hold. Let me get the answer. Okay. Go ahead.
>> i can refer to
>> [indiscernible] but i think there's a slight decrease in the patrol vehicle from 39,200 to 38,500. But that's really -- depending on other departments, what they have submitted, i think just came probably would be better able to answer that than i would.
>> just to be clear, is the question concerning just the vehicle package not the policy change just yet, correct?
>> yeah, the vehicle package itself. In other words, we have already forecasted to do things and this upcoming fiscal year, cord to the preliminary budget -- according to the preliminary budget, is there anything that we are doing here today alter any of those numbers?
>> first just to be clear as well on the policy, my understanding when we were discussing the policy in the meetings was that it was going to be something that would be discussed this budget process. But probably not implemented until fy 2012. However i could be corrected.
>> that's correct. We knew this was going to be a lengthy process. So we didn't believe that we would be able to complete this prior to this budget period. So these changes would not affect anything in the fy '11 budget, so it would be next year in the fy '12 budget when it goes into effect. We will be able to secure the list and appendices in ordering so we will have a better handle on that next year. But fy '11 is under our current vehicle policy.
>> correct. However the question of -- the cost of compared to what has been budgeted previously, yes, there is -- there is an impact there.
>> what impact?
>> [laughter]
>> thank you, judge. You took that --
>> there's two questions
>> [laughter] one is the vehicle packages, which -- which have to do mainly with how the constables are budgeted currently. I know that they are here, randy is here as well. With what the unit price is per vehicle, the other question that would need to be addressed is the proposal which i'm not sure if this was discussed when i was coming downstairs which is the or versus and. Currently the policy is you have to have so many policies and you have to have so many years depending on if you are a patrol vehicle or what was termed right now a secondary vehicle but will be changed versus what the proposal is, which is an either/or situation. Just as an example on that, at the current unit price, i would probably have to run it again with the proposed changes, if -- if the court goes in that direction, the difference would have been this year as an example, approximately $5 million more. In other words the total fy vehicles, eligible per the current policy that was used for the preliminary budget was 7,231,600 and the -- the new benchmark per the new proposed policy would be 12.2 -- $12.3 million.
>> a $5 million difference if implemented this year.
>> if implemented this year, i think that i need to go back and revise that to include also an increased unit price if it is determined that the unit price is not -- it's going to be changed for the constables, for example.
>> so do you have the specifics that generated this $5 million difference.
>> ah yes. I received that from mike joyce, yes. It more vehicles are eligible is basically what it comes down to because we held the heavy equipment at the same level for this analysis. So it's just -- just that because -- because you only -- you have an either/or situation, instead of an and situation, there are more vehicles that would be eligible this year. Obviously over time, that would smooth out a little bit, but overall it's a more expensive policy obviously because that restriction is lifted somewhat. You also have a newer fleet, but you would have perhaps on the back end decreased maintenance costs, however we would not be able to ascertain what that impact would be yet.
>> a differential is a whole lot barrier than i imagined.
>> it's pretty good. But anyway --
>> but you had a backup that shows that number of vehicles.
>> we can secure that.
>> how many pages is it?
>> not very long, mike, right?
>> it's just a worksheet that includes all of the vehicles.
>> here's my problem, it was eight or nine months we last addressed this issue and i guess we revised the composition of the committee. In my view, if we can act on some of this, this year, we ought to. If not, so be it. There are three or four kind of big questions. It's either/or. What years, what mileage are we using.
>> we are going to be using the same mileage basically that we have got now currently. I believe eight years and 90,000 miles and then three years and 60,000 miles for -- for the sheriff patrol. So that's going to remain the same. The only difference is you would have -- you would have an or so that it would be the -- the vehicle reaching either the 90,000-mile criteria or the eight years. Currently, you have to obtain both of those to be replaced. So -- so, you know, one of the issues, i believe it was constable thomas brought up, he had a vehicle that was 150, 160,000 miles and -- but it did not reach the age criteria, so he was -- so he was driving his vehicle that had a whole lot of miles, but didn't reach the age, so you had that and that was thrown in there and -- and wasn't getting replaced. This would curtail those situations. Also, in the past, mike has been able to make his decisions in fleet management on these vehicles, also. This would enable the fleet services to be able to make these decisions more readily. Even with the current policy, we don't -- we don't replace all of the vehicles that actually meet the criteria, also. I just want to point that out --
>> we have a recommendation that replaces all of the vehicles this year. Last year we did not.
>> so we replaced this year how many.
>> 7,243,600. The count unfortunately i would have to add them up from
>> [indiscernible]
>> get that number in the backup, also. Let's get that number, also. I guess here's the problem that i'm having. Eight years is a long time for a car. At some point the reliability comes into play. I have heard stories about having to put the oil in your trunk so when it leaked out you would stop, open your trunk, i guess put a quart of oil in, go on about your business. But -- but so if we've got workers unable to perform because of transportation issues, seems to me that that would be a matter that we should try to address. We have about 1100 vehicles plus equipment. But a more basic question is, i guess, how many -- how many automobiles do we have that really are used day in and day out, in the regular performance of duties? Seems to me that if you are -- if you should be in your car all day, working for the county, it's a different matter than if you use a car once or twice a week. You know, maybe we need a different -- does this eight years, 90,000 miles apply to like transportation equipment and --
>> equipment --
>> transportation trucks.
>> equipment is a little bit different -- i won't say category, it's a little different animal. Typically heavy equipment and large commercial vehicles will obtain higher mileage.
>> okay.
>> you have a different type of --
>> so no, i can take no.
>> yes, sir.
>> okay. How easy is it for us then to identify the vehicles that are used each and every day, for the better part of the day, in the performance of county duties and responsibilities.
>> well, i know mike has given us underutilized vehicle list prior. I don't know how difficult is it, mike, to look at per mileage or --
>> not that difficult. Need a computer to pull it out.
>> those are the problems that we've been hearing about. Why wouldn't we try to focus on them. Then if we have to wait a year to fix it, so be it. But during this budget process, i think we ought to at least determine that. If we can.
>> sure. And one thing that we also have, we've had for the last several years just so that you are aware, in -- in the adopted budget, preliminary budget recommended and the adopted budget the court in the past several years has also chosen to take that recommendation as the failing vehicle's earmark on the car reserve so if this is a vehicle that is in what we used to call lemon status, in other words really needs to be replaced now.
>> right.
>> there is a vehicle for the departments to go through mike and ask for that sort of funding mid year from the commissioners court. Now it's 95,000, that's only going to get you so many vehicles, two or three probably, and that's debatable if that should be higher or not. But there is at least an outlet for departments to do that.
>> which would make it a case by case determination of whether the vehicle was still serviceable or not. My concern with this is i hear how -- i understand how there is a desire for a bright line rule. But at the same time, i am concerned that the bright line rule perhaps is -- pushing it out too far. An additional 5 million-dollar hit annually on our vehicle cost is a significant hit, particularly in light i'm assuming that by changing these categories around and also the -- i'm also concerned with the -- with the equipment package that the constables are demanding, that unit costs of these vehicles is also rising. So to have a bright line rule that scoops up significantly more vehicles in the replacement policy at the same time that our per unit costs are going up, at the same time that i'm seeing a much higher degree, much higher expenditure on law enforcement functions in the constable's offices, i'm just thinking this is a very slippery slope.
>> in that determination of overall vehicle cost, we had a meeting -- well, we may have had it on more than one occasion, but if i remember correctly we looked at trying to get some kind of consistency as far as trying to use some of the same similar equipment per vehicle as -- as needed for that particular service. I'm -- i'm referring back to the digital cameras, which is something that i know we had laid out and i guess that i want to make sure that -- that if those things are still in place, and also are included in the particular case, i do -- i do realize there may be some things in the preliminary budget that maybe reflecting some of the things that we're trying to do, but i don't know who all is supposed to get those. And -- and according to -- to what -- i guess service that -- that particular vehicle will be -- will be used for. And so i'm kind of all over the place as far as seeing exactly what that is all about and of course the -- the purchasing office was to look into that and i just want to make sure that we are still in -- en route on that digital camera situation which is very critical. That's a -- that's a hot button issue in this community and it's probably hot button all over the nation. Making sure that we have enough video cameras for situations that need to be recorded. So -- so i guess are we still in -- in line as far as --
>> commissioner, as you know, what you are referring to is with our sheriff's officers, we had the company go out of business, they quit servicing the cameras. I'm on so many committees, but the committees that are working with this, we are going to the panasonic arbitrators now. We do still have a few old analogs in some of the constables office. I think constable one in his budget made a request to replace those with the new pansonic arbitrators.
>> [indiscernible] has -- they committed with those needed to be replaced and were funded, that they would go with the panasonic arbitrators. We are trying to get all of our equipment to be standardized and the same for obvious reasons, cost, maintenance.
>> right.
>> we are hitting on that.
>> okay. Okay.
>> the control vehicle package, according to the backup, and this is one area of confusion that i have here, we have category patrol vehicle, vehicle -- patrol -- sorry, blah, blah, blah, patrol vehicle and then we have general law enforcement vehicle. And then in the spreadsheet, with regard to what equipment is assigned to a patrol vehicle versus a general law enforcement vehicle, it -- general law enforcement vehicles have only slightly less than what the law enforcement vehicle has, correct?
>> correct.
>> the main difference between those two categories is the camera system and the overheadlight system. On the general law enforcement, the group felt that the overheadlight bar was not necessary. And the camera was not necessary because these vehicles will not be utilizing or doing patrol duties, patrol enforcement. So the decision was that that wasn't a necessary item for those vehicles, even though they might need undercover or whatever the use might be, that they would still need some of the light, some of the sirens, and -- and that long list. The other general law enforcement category was very minimal as far as the equipment. It was quite a bit of difference. Again that was the cars for the district attorney, the juvenile probation office and that sort of a thing. But the patrol and the general law enforcement, the big difference is the camera and the overheadlight bar and reason being is non-patrol.
>> the per unit -- i'm sorry, go ahead.
>> just to correct -- there is an inclusion of cameras in the constable vehicles, i believe that was approved by court.
>> that's where i'm going, the constable's vehicles are a combination of patrol vehicles and general law enforcement vehicles, is that a correct assumption?
>> i guess in the future the constable would be a patrol vehicle or a -- order a patrol vehicle or order a general law enforcement vehicle. You don't have a constable vehicle. They would order a patrol vehicle or a general law enforcement vehicle. Currently you have several different groupings in precinct 1, if you categorize their vehicle to the proposed policy, precinct 1 would have 10 patrol vehicles and two general. Precinct 2 would have 22 patrol vehicles and two auxiliary. Precinct 3 would have 17 patrols, that's it. Precinct 5 would have 33 general, one patrol, precinct 4 would have 5 general and no patrol.
>> [indiscernible] really your patrol category would be precinct 1, 2 and 3. And the majority -- in fact, only precinct 1 is -- is -- has the general category. So currently, those precincts 1 through 3 have the camera systems and would be classified as a patrol vehicle and would be replaced as a patrol vehicle at that 38,000 or $39,000 price tag.
>> so it's about an $8,000 difference as the constables decide what they want in their budget with regard to how they want to distribute their vehicle budget across general law enforcement or patrol vehicles.
>> correct.
>> because i do notice, although this was not back up to -- to this item, i did notice in the -- in the budget item no. 19, the distribution -- now, this is constable 2's numbers, but intriguing. With regard to the split between law enforcement and civil. I believe precinct 2 was in the realm of -- of 700,000 and precinct 3 was in the realm of $1 million. That was just according -- that was based on salaries, though. But all i'm saying is that this is a choice that the precinct -- that the constables are making at the precinct level as to the distribution of their vehicle budget, whether they are getting a general law enforcement vehicle or whether they are getting a patrol vehicle.
>> correct.
>> one comment that we had made to t.n.r. As well on the vehicle equipment cost comparison is that they also patrol vehicles also have mdc's and radios in addition to the cameras. So for example i believe the -- the -- they have this, correct. The sheriff vehicle is 39,200 including the camera system, however if you also add an mdc and a radio, turns out to be approximately $56,255. Whereas the constable vehicle with a camera, mdc and radio would be 51,555 per vehicle.
>> so these per unit costs in our backup don't include the mdc and the radio?
>> correct.
>> so tell me again, the incremental additional cost of an mdc and a radio is --
>> the mdc is 10,555 and then the radio is $6,500. And then i believe the camera system he has listed under the sheriff patrol is 6500. And then one other note is that each office also includes, it has to include $10,000 per office for computers and servers to tag and manipulate the video.
>> that's software and stuff, the infrastructure for that, correct.
>> that's per office, not per vehicle.
>> budget question --
>> [multiple voices]
>> the problem, this may not be a problem, it may be resolved, is communicating and talking to one another. So if -- if the -- if the radio system i guess motorola, one of them, but anyway spectra, if -- if that is in place, will it be able to -- will they be able to talk law enforcement be able to talk to each other on the radio? Travis county, though, sheriff and constables, whoever else is using them.
>> they all have the ability to talk with each other now.
>> they will stay on the same -- okay.
>> the only thing that i would like to add is that we always have to also include, i just need to get with them on this, that is -- that is even though you -- even though you buy things, even though you buy a complete package, may buy a new radio, may buy a new mdc, there's also maintenance attached to that as well. Once you install it, once you have to maintain it, then that's when i come into play because right now i have the budget, the maintenance budget for constables. For -- for installations, for uninstalls. Now, some of that is included when you initially buy. But if anything is broke, anything has to be -- to be installed again, uninstalled, any ongoing maintenance, once all that is put in, then that comes out of the emergency services maintenance budget.
>> budget.
>> and so i do that for all departments except for tcso. So as we're talking about whatever you are talking about here, i just want to bring out, keep bringing this up to folks, there's other dominoes that fall, not that they are significant dominoes, i have $150,000 in that particular line item, i usually am within it. If we change things, the one thing that makes it difficult where i have to go to mike or the constables, which they always work real well with me, just that i don't like to go and ask them for money out of their budget. I'm just saying as we include costs, let's include the big picture which includes maintenance costs as well.
>> which means to me that even in a maintenance situation if you have something similar, as far as radios are concerned, for an example -- i guess my question then, are these similar type radios? Or is that a variation as far as manufacturing is concerned? Do you --
>> very similar, yeah. In fact i'm already with this replacement schedule that i'm going to have to do, with some of the radios, the
>> [indiscernible] spectras, we are now working with the constables' offices as well as tcso and even though it's the same type radio that can still do the same type of things, there's different levels and tiers that you can purchase. For instance this year we're going to actually add vhf to some of the radios. Well, some of the constables we talked to don't need that feature. So therefore we won't put it in there. So even though it has the same ability of communication, there's some different academic sorry that you can put -- accessory that you can put on a radio that some people will want, some people will not want. It really doesn't have anything to do with what we're talking about here unless we were to say across the board everybody is going to have the same thing. In my world that's not realistic, wouldn't be practical to do that. Right now, as i can say, i have already started working on that replacement list, working out real well, constables are deciding who actually need it, who doesn't. Some do, some don't.
>> all right, thank you.
>> let me ask you this, of the number of patrol cars that you just gave us for constables, how many of these are hand me downs from the sheriff's office and how many were purchased for the constable?
>> all of them have been purchased for the constables unless it's an auxiliary vehicle. They are normal vehicles, brand new vehicles. So the three year patrol car at the sheriff's office, that's replaced under the policy, three years and 60,000 miles. They didn't go to the constable.
>> sheriff
>> [indiscernible] it will become a general law enforcement vehicle for them. They will take it out of the patrol system and use it for the detective and some other use. They keep it within theirs, but it's -- it's taken out of patrol.
>> okay, there's 250, 300 patrol officers, i'm assuming there's about that number of cars. They're keeping all of them?
>> [multiple voices]
>> in my absence one day?
>> understand that these are trigger points, also. We triggered this on april the 1st on the mileage and the year. It's not until the following year it could be 12 months to 14 months down the road until we get new cars in, equipped put on the road. By that time the car is at least four years old, probably has 70, 80, 90,000 miles on it at least. The sheriff's department, if i'm reading my cliff notes correctly, should have 11 vehicles this career that they are replacing internally with no charge. In other words, pulling out one of their admin vehicles, whatever vehicles they have, that's not a patrol vehicle, pulling it out. It is probably 8, 9, 10 years old, probably has 150,000 miles on it. It's one of those patrol primary vehicles that we pulled off of patrol. We are replacing those vehicles in the sheriff's department that way.
>> so after their tcso auxiliary, they have a my mileage on them, the next stop is to be auctioned off.
>> yes.
>> so how many patrol vehicles for the sheriff's office do we have in 2011 preliminary budget?
>> i can tell you the amount. It's 3,146,000 for all of theirs. Unfortunately the analysts didn't break it down, let me see if i have a list.
>> 75.
>> 75.
>> [laughter]
>> there's 67 of the other secondary vehicles that will be replaced.
>> 75 patrol, 67 auxiliary or general?
>> general.
>> all of those are for the sheriff's office?
>> no, sir. That's total vehicles in the general side. It would be 7 --
>> list of things for next week. We will be able to get the sheriff's office and let's go through the -- list of patrol vehicles for constables. And -- and verify that in fact all of those are original vehicles in the constables' office.
>> sure.
>> and the less -- let's review our language on our policy regarding secondary use, primary use, secondary use, tertiary, thereafter. Mr. Gieselman, enlighten us.
>> i would also like to take another look at that $5 million. I think it's probably a high number, lump sum one first year. What it would be, i would like to get you an annual average, net increase over a longer period of time. Because i think it probably overstates the and/or issue. And we kind of perhaps rushed this to press and we can give you a better long-term view of what that cost is going to be. It will be an increase in cost, but i don't think it's 5 million net every year.
>> i don't either.
>> well the constables asked for six years or how many miles?
>>
>> [indiscernible]
>> six years or 90,000. And recommendation is eight years and 90,000. So -- so for next year, i guess the question would be how much additional money would be necessary to go from 8 to 6.
>> for just the constables, sir?
>> right. So when i think of constable vehicles, instead of me thinking they are having a secondary vehicle periodically, they really are given new vehicles when they need them or when we can afford them and they request them.
>> that's correct. The secondary vehicle label was what got us messed up. Secondary vehicles were not secondhand vehicles. No, secondary vehicles, i wasn't here when that term came up.
>> [laughter] but i think it was very confusing. You had a primary vehicle which was really your patrol vehicle. Secondary vehicle was really everything else, then an auction cellular vehicle that met the replacement criteria but was still good enough to keep around and you let somebody use it.
>> whether we are under the current policy or under the policy that you have laid out here, constables or tcso, we're getting new vehicles, meeting the replacement criteria, and going into auxiliary vehicles. And then beyond that, going to -- going to auction.
>> they really don't want to be in that, when we met the criteria, trying to get them to auction, yes, in effect it was their getting new vehicles, we really need to curtail the auxiliary vehicle and keep it for a limited period of time, we are trying to do that with this policy, also.
>> when i see the figure, i should think vehicle --
>> when you see 38, $39,000, that is a patrol vehicle, comes with all of the bells, whistles, cameras, lights, whole shooting match. Except the
>> [indiscernible] that $38,000 does not include
>> [multiple voices]
>> does not include approximately another --
>> 23,000.
>> $17,000.
>> so --
>> yeah.
>> so whenever we see patrol vehicle, we should think 38-5 plus 17,000.
>> yes, ma'am.
>> when we see a -- a general law enforcement vehicle, we should think 31 plus the 17 if they get the mdc and the radio as well.
>> right.
>> correct.
>> have we landed on whether those general law enforcement vehicles would get an mdc and radio as well, that --
>> i think currently they do.
>> they already have them.
>> so can we -- can we amend this spreadsheet to include the mdc and the radio to get the full picture?
>> we can do that.
>> because it would be nice for this vehicle equipment cost comparison to include the mdc and the radio as well.
>> good analogy.
>> okay. So when the -- with we get a new patrol vehicle for the sheriff's office, we include the -- for law enforcement, we include the mdc's and the radio. All right. When we get a patrol car for the constables, do we include the mdc's and the radio, also? So we really ought to be using the figure in excess of $50,000 instead of --
>> correct.
>> of high 30's.
>> $56,000.
>> i don't know what the replacement time line is. If it matches up to vehicles or not.
>> the replacement time line is pretty much the same for -- for either vehicle.
>> mike, under the sheriff's office, i will kind of weigh in a little bit given your question. The radio is a good example that we are now with our current radio system fifth generation on some cars. So i have radio systems that are pushing 20 years old. So when you replace a vehicle, that does not mean that we replaced the radio in the vehicle.
>> that's what i was trying to get at to make sure --
>> [multiple voices] that figure is segregated. The mdc is on a fairly similar replacement pattern with the county's it policy with computer replacement. We get about three years, give or take, maybe four, on your average mdc. We are now on our fourth generation of mdc's. So the reason i think p.b.o. Has segregated those figures historically is because every time you get a replacement vehicle for the sheriff's office, you do not need all of that equipment. Now, if you get a brand new vehicle, you add staff, then those other components come in. And it's also segregated because -- because whenever you add an mdc or a camera system, now that we have gone full digital, county it will come to you and say we need an additional x amount of dollars for digital storage capacity. Which i know currently is running, you know, probably three -- six figures a year in additional storage capacity. So as danny said, there's a lot of add-ons, but for clarification, that's why those numbers have been historically segregated because we don't replace them on the same exact pattern that we do. Of the vehicles.
>> and they are purchased from its or through danny. One thing that i was talking -- rodney was mentioning as well, that we might want to look into the consolidation or some sort of consolidation to make it easier to identify all of the costs at once.
>> well, let's hear from the constables since they are here, i know that they are eager. To share their views with us. Two of them are eager. Good afternoon.
>> good afternoon. Judge and the commissioners. First of all, i want to say thank for you the opportunity to be here. Thank the committee to doing the hard work, mr. Wade and mr. -- mr. -- mr. Mike joyce and the rest of the committee.
>> i don't have any -- i do want to clarify because i think commissioner eckhardt was asking a question about -- about auxiliary when it comes from the sheriff's department and goes from the sheriff's department and goes through auction, that that doesn't happen all of the time. It goes to that next step would be the constable's office. If it's in reasonable mileage. But i -- i think that we have accomplished a lot. I don't have really a lot of complaints. I think this is past, once you get through looking at your numbers and everything, won't be to put 5 million hit one time. I think when you look at it, spread it out over some years, it might be a little bit at the first time, if the new policy is going into effect. But i think overall years you will see that it be a benefit to the county, because those vehicles will be a lower mileage, i think that you will get more of a return on your auction. So i think that's the lesson in disguise and also we do need the cameras. If i had a camera in one incident, i think it would solve some of the problems that i have on a particular investigation. But we do need those cameras. And i think -- i appreciate them being approved in the budget. I think that's it. I'll let constable mccain talk.
>> constable, travis county precinct 3. One of the reasons we came here, you know, originally to do this policy, i think we've been coming in front of you every year since i've been in office since 2005, it's to replace i guess one of the big factors in here that we -- you know, the maintenance costs of repairing these vehicles in the down time of employees is the productivity of our -- of our -- my deputies on the street. It's one of the factors is not put into all of this -- all of the cost of the vehicles and all of that. Is that when every time one of my vehicles goes down, it usually takes two people to transport, one to pick up, one to transport the vehicle, sometimes towing them in. Also just the manpower down. That's one of the factors that we haven't put into all of this. When we put a county employee into the office, he's not able to do his -- performing his duties, that's costing us. Costing us all in productivity. That's one of the factors, that's why -- every year i have come to the commissioners court and basically brought this up because the manpower is down. When i see my staff three or four people down taking care of vehicles turning into the fleet services departments, where i am transporting vehicles, repairing vehicles, guys you don't have vehicles, looking for auxiliary vehicles to fill in, which we have a deficit when we weren't have auxiliary vehicles. When the vehicles go down we're actually in haunt looking for a replacement -- in a hunt looking for the replacement vehicles. One of the factors, why it's so par for us to -- important for us to have an updated fleet. When the productivity goes down, doesn't do the citizens any good to have the deputy you away from doing his job. Fleet services worked really well in getting my particular fleet i feel we use the word battle every time to get this my particular office up to par. And constable thomas is coming to the office -- last two years?
>> one and a half.
>> same rude awakening to keep your fleet going, working. This is one of the tools that it takes us to do our jobs. This isn't a luxury item, it is a tool to do our jobs, that's all that we are asking for here is to have our tools that work. I think with this new policy we originally presented all constables presented to you six years and the 90,000 miles. We all agreed to the vehicle use committee to go for eight years or 90,000 and one of the reasons i still look at it, basically replacing these vehicles we're going to hit 90,000 around six years on most of these vehicles. Judge you hit it right on the nail, we are going to be looking at replacing these constable vehicles every six years. In the seventh year sitting up in 100 something thousand miles on these constable vehicles. Any of these, we are going to be up in the 100,000 miles which is way past their use time, the reliability time on them all, that's one of our key factors in here. We want to keep our fleet going, keep our deputies work and safety factor. We are transporting people. We are in the people business. So, you know, safety factor, work
>> [indiscernible] all about.
>> constable thomas brought up some points in the earlier discussion. I think the judge mentioned, he had a vehicle that he had to carry oil in the trunk. That kind of struck me. Of course that still lingers. You mentioned constable king that you've had vehicles actually that break down and of course when that happens, you have to send somebody, deploy someone from doing something else to pick this person up and -- and of course hopefully continue to -- to provide that service. My question is, on an average, can you possibly tell me, i guess it all depends on whatever the vehicle repair work that need to be done, certain things require more time in the -- in the maintenance shop than other things. Can you basically tell me how long that particular vehicle that broke down was actually out of service that ended up impacting you delivering the kind of service that you need delivering?
>> greatly impacts it. We are looking anywhere from days to sometimes up to a month or so, depending on what's broken down on the vehicle.
>> depends on what repairs need done to the vehicle.
>> carrying a case of oil in the back of our cars.
>> all five of y'all are doing it.
>> when i worked as a deputy for precinct 5 and precinct 4, i carried oil in my cars, all -- every one of them because it gets to such an age they are all getting up into 90, 100,000-mile range, every one of us have had that issue. I guess that i could speak for the other constables, the fact is because i have actually worked for two of the other constables. Worked three offices now and it's -- it's the same issue with all -- all five of us. We're having the same issue. I will speak for constable four right now. Mike and them have got it all set up to replace some of their auxiliary. I think she's lacking still five, she has five auxiliary vehicles. That aren't primary vehicles. That fleet is way pastime. Needs to bring that all up to par. Those auxiliary vehicles are former sheriff's vehicle cars. Those vehicles are all up in the 125, 145,000 miles on those vehicles. So all of the constables across the board, we are way back. Those cars do go down. I have worked -- i mean radiators going out on me out in the middle of del valle when i worked for four. Easy when you are out there somewhere in the middle of nowhere they go down, takes manpower, tow truck, another deputy pick them up. Each one of us impacting us on our work hours of keeping the employees productive.
>> mike, do we have -- can we pull up the statistics on the number of days, certain units have been out of service and the distribution of those units through the sheriff's department and the constable? That would be good to know.
>> if i can --
>> yes, sir.
>> judge, if i could -- if this is on, hello. But anyway, the answer to what commissioner davis was saying, down time, i think also the fleet does a decent job, the auxiliary vehicles the reason it might be down more than it is, sometimes it's past that $500 they want to. That means for example i have
>> [indiscernible] patrol cars for those auxiliaries and sometimes when they go down, that means if it goes down to the point that i'm putting more money in it, i have to try to get another auxiliary car. I think that's one of the most down types, i agree with constable mccain. It affects us. I had a situation mr. George was working with me on a particular unit, a funeral escort, it completely went out. That's not safe at all.
>> sure isn't.
>> but the thing is i feel we get this passed work all through the numbers, we won't have to be here much. The newer cars will keep you -- the money going, keeping the deputies going and less maintenance. We appreciate y'all's time.
>> thanks.
>> in the last past years, when i was -- we presented it last three budgets before, i don't know if you ever -- i would come here every year since 2005, and these vehicles range in the maintenance repairs and all, my fleet and precinct 3, running anywhere from four to up to $10,000 in maintenance repairs. That's because of an older fleet. You know, then that's not including the down time. So it's why we're so key getting this policy changed for us all, so we don't have such a dilapidated fleet especially with us. We are law enforcement vehicles, running non-stop, serving court papers, warrants. These vehicles are running non-stop. Nothing different than what the sheriff's department is running these vehicles, transporting people, you know, transporting court stuff, picking up people for the judges. These vehicle are very -- we don't have down time unless people want them back in the court. We need to go back and get them -- excuse me judge i'm an hour late because we had downed vehicles.
>> stacy suits, chief deputy precinct 3. I have two very quick points that i would like to make. Part of the confusion with the old policy about secondary, primary, auxiliary, how that all works and fits together, with this emphasis about talking about patrol vehicles, i want to clarify that for -- for people out in the media, general public. It's like our cars are marked. Whether we are out serving civil process, working warrants or if they are doing traffic stops or transporting prisoners, you know, we feel we need the equipment to -- and the cam cameras to keep everything straight and on the up and up. And so it's not necessarily every constable car is patrolling and justified by it because it's doing a random patrol through the neighborhoods or responding to 911 calls. They are off doing other day to day business. And as they need to respond or back up the sheriff or back up a.p.d. Or come up with -- to someone that's had a wreck in the intersection, they need to secure -- secure the wreck scene, until someone gets there to take -- to take the accident reports, in some cases we do the accident reports ourselves, i don't want to say -- the justification is being able to have the equipment to do your job on the spot. Then the -- then the other final note that when we were on the vuc consideration, half of the vehicles that -- on the constable list that i was looking at were all -- that would be up for replacement, because they -- because under eight years or 90,000 miles, half of those were already on the list because they were on the fleet manager's repair list because of extensive repairs. Like what mr. Gieselman said, that is going to be less than the five million. When you take -- when you take the fact that we've -- that we've -- in some cases in some budget years have not done the replacements, done on the cars, that were represented because of the maintenance cost and kept 'em, i mean, you know, like the last seven cars that our office replaced, three of them were towed. To fleet services to be auctioned off. They did not drive themselves out there.
>> normally the -- i guess this is -- this is something else -- but i'm concerned about the cost of maintaining. You know, it doesn't take very much to get tremendous maintenance costs, especially with cars. Everything is kind of sophisticated. Ain't like it used to be. You can kind of go in there and mess around, everything is computerized all of these other kind of things, really changed. But so it's pretty expensive. My question, though, is within this particular total amount of money that we are looking at here, if we do the n.b.c. And the radio and the patrol cars running a little more than $55,000, what -- what does the warrant cover in the purchase of the vehicles. Are they a five year warranty from front to back, all things taken care of as far as maintenance, upkeep, stuff like that. Or three year warrant? What type of warranties come with this particular price that we're looking at today on the vehicles?
>> it would -- on the vehicle it would be.
>> how many years? How much?
>> i believe it's three years, 36,000 miles
>> [multiple voices]
>> pardon me.
>> three years, 36,000 miles.
>> no extensive warranty anything like that, it's basically -- is that cost reflected in this total amount here that we're talking about today, or is that warranty outside of the cost?
>> that's warranty that comes with the car at this purchase price that we're showing.
>> just three years.
>> anything after three years that break down, anything like that go wrong, county have to pick it up unless they have extended warranties offered i guess applied. Okie-doke, thanks.
>> so of the 17 patrol cars in precinct 3, how many of those were new and how many came from the sheriff's office?
>>
>> [indiscernible]
>> we finally
>> [indiscernible] last two replacement cycle, we have pretty much gotten rid of all of the really old ones. Turned in a bunch of cars that ranged anywhere from 140 to 170,000 miles. Right now, we have 17 cars, patrol cars and then we have three auxiliaries, one of those auxiliaries is a sheriff's vehicle that we got as an interim measure when we had one of our vehicles totaled.
>> so it's 17 patrol cars purchased for precinct 3 constable?
>> yes, sir. We got them replaced over the last five years being in office, as one of the -- we came in front of you every year, i don't know if you remember in the past year, kept coming up here, a lot those cars replaced, emergency replacement issues. Turned into a whole job of me getting my equipment repaired on vehicles. I'll be honest with you, it's very aggravating for me to have to spend so much time just to get my tools to do my job. We've been real -- i thank fleet services and everybody for being able to do it. It's been a continuous non-stop working on vehicles. Should be one of my lesser issues. I should be -- have tools -- equipment should be there, we have been adamant coming to you every year seriously for the last five years, you guys have gotten a bunch of replacement. In front of you here, discussions came past, first, in 2005, 2006, that was when we were in dire need, when -- when they -- constable thomas is in that same thing, here he come into office, this fleet that's dilapidated.
>> let me ask. It's my understanding from mr. Suits that it's y'all's position that all of your vehicles should be patrol vehicles?
>> yes.
>> is that your position as well?
>> i have 12 patrol and two what you call
>> [indiscernible] vehicles.
>> because i'm just going to put it out there in the universe that this is a finite pie. If you want all patrol vehicles, there will be less vehicles overall. It's just because there's -- it's a finite pie. Mdc stands for mobile data computer.
>> so -- so y'all need those.
>> yes.
>> constables need those, too.
>> yes, sir.
>> so this -- this enables them to do what? Is this like -- this computer input in the car? Similar to the office?
>> again, you have to remember on the radio and mdc's, all that
>> [indiscernible] that part of it is that -- doesn't mean that every time you are going to buy or replace a radio or a vehicle that you are going to have to buy a brand new mdc or radio.
>> media, can you --
>> come to the microphone.
>> but the radio is longer -- the life of the radio is longer than the life of the vehicles
>> [multiple voices]
>> the only thing that you have to do, that's really what i was speaking to, is that the only thing that you have to do every year is if -- if stacy replaces a vehicle, then there's an installation that's involved in that. And that is you have to take out the existing equipment because you can still reuse it, mdc, you can do that with, unless it's wore out and a radio you can do that with. So they don't have to buy a new radio and mdc every time. What they have to do is when they switch out the vehicles, old one to the new one, that's when i come into play. That is -- it requires installation, repair moneys in order to do that. Now with a brand new radio or a brand new mdc, usually you include that cost in that initial installation. But for the -- for the ongoing, that's when it hits my budget and so -- so i'm just wanting to -- i think david would say the same thing, that is we just need to make sure there's a backup maintenance cost that's also supported, otherwise i have got to go to their department or to p.b.o. Or i've got to go to mike joyce. All nice people but --
>> [one moment please for change in captioners]
>> are the changeout costs of the radios substantive?
>> are the what?
>> the change out, if the radio is still on and you have to put it in a new vehicle, is that labor factor substantive?
>> uh-huh.
>> i think we ought to look at that.
>> david, any input since we have you here? You've been quoted four or five times already.
>> i'll see if we can make all that true for you. The computers, cha what allows them to interface with the computer system at the 911 center that allows the intersection to the state and national databases for the records checks and things like that. So it gives them a lot of capabilities in the car to do checks. It doesn't make the dispatchers interface with them over the radio and things like that. So again, constables, i think all the constable patrols are getting the mobile data computers. Commissioner davis, the mobile data computers and the digital video systems are maintained for five years. We get five years maintenance on them right up front. So we cover them just a little bit longer than three years, 36,000 you get to the vehicles. And again, we try to make it until we think they're going to be replaced.
>> does that also -- i guess i really don't know, you know, when you buy a new vehicle they have the manufacturer's warranty. They say you get three years from bumper to bumper. Some are for five years. It just depends on the manufacture on the vehicle. My concern, i guess, is how much money -- we buy a brand new vehicle. They provide a lot of service to travis county, but after three years, i'm just wondering outside of just normal maintenance, changing the oil, changing air filters, things of that nature, outside of just regular maintenance, how much have we actually spent on those things like you need to replace a valve or the piston go out or it overheats. Maybe need another headgasket. All these kind of things, that type of maintenance, which is outside of warranty after 36,000 miles or three years, i think is one of the two. I don't remember exactly how the manufacturer's work on that. But i'm concerned about that cost and how we experience that cost, especially those that are on patrol that's probably get a lot of service usage. I don't know where we are on that. It would be good to know if we had the numbers. This young man brought up -- he brought up $10,000 to repair. That's a lot of money. And so i'm trying my best to minimize the expense as much as possible, but get the most bang out of the buck. And so i don't know if that's maybe a direction we can go in to look at that, but maintenance and warranties i think ought to be hand and foot operations, in my opinion. And you brought up five years for those other things, but in this particular case when you purchase, it just appears that there's a manufacturer's warranty, more like a 36 month, 36,000 miles. I don't know, whichever comes first.
>> sir, i'm your computer geek, so i can address the computers and the digital video.
>> but that was my point is to try to cover that and also this other. I'm glad you brought that up.
>> there's nothing
>> [ inaudible ]
>> since we're talking about the mileage, i think i asked mike, if all depends if the constable, are they chrysler, dodge? I think they go up to five years. So there are some savings for the country. Chevrolet comes with a chevrolet package. That might be a little bit more.
>> which one, danny?
>> the chrysler, the dodge chargers is like five years, 50,000. So that's a savings for the county as opposed to a crown vick. Crown vick is 336 like mr. George said. And i think chevrolet is coming out with a package. I don't know the mileage on that. Those are the things that i guess they will be looking at also.
>> i think they all need to be considered if we look at that.
>>
>> [inaudible - no mic].
>> you've got some savings.
>> i would like to make one note on the mdc computers. We're using -- we're not fully using our mdc's is what my vision with the future was for the mdc's was and what we were going to do. It is working with this and getting this. One of our issues is the fact systems and i won't get into the sensitive subject is the future was for us all as constables to try to e e-mail these returns animal care services all that and in the future as soon as we get that all ironed out, the future is the constables will be able to e fail the returns back to the courts and all that. The systems are set up where we can in the future. That's what we're getting as soon as we get our other -- the system done with the jp's where i can communicate back and forth with the jp, send the returns back. We're moving papers a lot faster and all that. And that's where it's going to go with this all. Snoobs we get the other system and software going, those programs going, in which i see that coming hopefully in the future sooner rather than later. The productivity in us constables will be a lot faster. Returns a lot faster to us all. We still have to hand deliver them all, but we can do the e e-mail, e signature on the back of these returns. It's not just for checking people wanted and all that. It's so we can do all our electronic e failing system.
>> we requested several pieces of additional information. Do we think we'll have that by next tuesday or do we need a couple of weeks?
>> i'd say we need a couple of weeks, judge. If you can bear with us.
>> okay. Then we'll have it back on in a couple of weeks then and hopefully take action that day. I guess one question would be whether we're looking at 2012 or whether we at least can land on some of these immediately. I mean, there is some question about what equipment goes on constable vehicles. And it seems to me that we ought to go ahead and decide that. We may have defacto decided anyway, but i think it would be good for us to go ahead and take a formal vote on it so we would know. It comes up two or three times a year. It's an interesting issue, but i'm worn out by it. See y'all in two weeks. Thank you for the dedication, hard work, etcetera.
>> thank y'all.
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, August 10, 2010, 2010 1:30 PM
