Commissioners Court - Regular Meeting

All right. Good morning, everybody. Today is August 31st, 2026. The time is 9.03 a.m. And I'll call this meeting of the Salary Grievance Committee of Guadalupe County to order. Our agenda today is we're going to have pledges to the U.S. and Texas flag and silent prayer. So please stand up.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Honor the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one and indivisible. Good to see everybody this morning. I hope everyone's doing well. We have never had a grievance committee hearing before. This is a first. We do have a very good set of individuals that have come in this morning to help the county and assist us through this process. We do have some housekeeping to take care of before we get started. But before we do anything, I'd like to move to number three on our agenda and just do a roll call to establish our quorum. If you would please start on my right. Just, if you'll grab the microphone, maybe just say your name into the microphone, please.

My name is Tessa Velasquez.

Thank you.

I'm Beatrice Bejarano.

Benita Bingham.

Maria Estela Esparza. Carol Chumkiu.

Matthew Schuelke.

Carolyn Lowry. Carlin Hinckley.

All right. Thank you, committee members. We do have a quorum this morning. As part of our process, we do need to adopt procedural rules for the committee under item four. Those are in the first page of the red folders we did hand to you just before the meeting. We don't have to rush through this part if anybody would like more time to look over the salary grievance committee rules of procedure and conduct We can absolutely do that Does anybody have any specific questions about the rules? Any changes that you'd like to make to the rules I And just for those watching out there, we tried to have a very simple set of rules and procedures just that lay out the time speaking limits that also keep a certain amount of conduct in decorum through a meeting so we can keep things professional this morning, try to be efficient and be respectful of everybody's time. The committee consists, and I'll just run through a few of these things. I don't want to read through the whole thing. Committee consists of 10 members. It's supposed to be nine members that were selected by Commissioner's Court that were previously on the grand jury list and myself. Statute lays out the requirements and makeup of this committee once selected by Commissioner's Court. I am a non-voting member. I'm simply a meeting facilitator or ex-officio member, again, non-voting. This committee is made up of nine individuals, but as you see, we have eight individuals sitting up here. We had a few individuals that had conflicts, were out of town and or school. I do want to take this moment to say thank you very much to the individuals who came today. Without you here, we would not be able to hold this important process. I know some of you were probably pretty surprised to get that summons. But again, I want to say thank you. These are unpaid volunteers at this point, and they probably smile a little bit when I say volunteers because they got a jury summons that says you shall appear. So thank you sincerely from all of us at the county for taking time out of your busy schedule. We're going to have individuals come up individually. I will announce those people. I'm just still talking about the rules. Each presenter or speaker or aggrieved will get 10 minutes to speak. I will, as the county representative, have an additional 10 minutes to present some budget information and just talk about the timeline of events that have led up to this grievance process. um individuals if anybody would like to speak from the public we'll get one minute to speak and then of course the the the committee members will have 10 to 20 minutes it's up to them if they'd like to ask specific questions of the individual presenting of myself or ms klein and county staff if they just want to have a conversation among themselves It's going to be very similar for those that are in the audience that sit in Commissioner's Court or are aware of the process, very similar to that just with different members. We have the cards at each of your place on proper protocol on how to state a motion and or a second, ask for discussion. If at any point, again, members, you have any questions, don't understand something, want to slow down or stop, you just get my attention and I will do my best to help us through that process. Any other questions or comments about the rules of procedure or conduct for our hearing today? Okay, if there are no discussions, we do need to take action to adopt the procedural rules for the committee today. I would ask, is there anybody that would like to make a motion? It's okay to be shy. We have to kind of break the ice the first time. So if anybody would like to make a motion to adopt the rules, you could just state I move or make a motion to adopt the procedural rules for the committee.

Make a motion to adopt the rules.

Okay, we do have a motion. Would you state your name again?

I. Beatrice Bejarano.

Thank you. We have a motion. Is there a second? Okay. Thank you very much. All right. We do have a motion and a second to approve and adopt the procedural rules for the committee today. Are there any other comments or questions before we consider adopting those rules? Okay. Hearing no other discussion, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? All right, hearing no opposition, then we have adopted the rules. Right, we're gonna move to number five on our agenda, and that are hearings on the grievances submitted pursuant to local government code section 152.016A. As I previously stated, all, and I will give some instructions to the committee members before we started, but for those in the audience, that section in local government code lays out the requirements of what a county must do to go through a grievance process. Commissioners Court previously decided there's two options to select elected officials or nine members previously on the grand jury list along with four alternates. Of course, we're sitting here with these eight members who are present today to go through this process. Individuals who Wanted to file the grievance who have a concern about their their salary their compensation or allowances as set by commissioners court Only have this Avenue. They're required to file a written Request within five days after their notice and we do have three individuals in Guadalupe County that have submitted their written Grievance on time and in proper fashion to be considered for this hearing we have the first First individual is Grievant Number 1, John Terry, Justice of the Peace in Precinct 3. And Mr. Terry, I'm going to invite you up to the podium. His request is in your folder. His current proposed base salary is $88,400. He's requesting a 3% cost of living increase, which equates to $2,652 for a requested salary of $91,052. Mr. Terry, you have 10 minutes to speak to the committee.

Good morning, everyone. Thanks for coming today. My name is John Terry. I'm the Guadalupe County Justice of the Peace in Precinct 3. I've spent 12 years as a sheriff's deputy, and now my eighth year as a justice of the peace. I'm sure some of you have already seen some of the Facebooks and some of the newspaper articles.

A lot of it was half-truths.

So being said today, I filed the grievance to keep our budgets aligned and in order. This is not for me to gain any extra money hardly. I think it's $102 a paycheck with a gross income. So it's not much. But my thing today is an agreement has never been filed, and Commissioner's Court can sometimes get a little out of control. And this is basically to hold Commissioner's Court accountable. So I'm going to read a few pieces of what the county policy says and what it basically states. And I'll kind of make it short for you because you've got a lot to hear today. But when it's dealing with COLAs across the board, we're basically considered employees. It doesn't really specify who an employee is. So it takes elected officials and employees, and it doesn't really specify that. And what it says is basically a commissioner's court, if they decide to exclude us, they have to give us a reason. And we have not been given a reason. And that's basically what I'm here for today. I'm going to read a few bullet points that I have written out, and then I'll be done. Three of the four commissioners who voted that elected officials do not get a 3% COLA all have extra incomes. Not every elected official has an extra income. One of the commissioners advised me the day I wrote this that they were under the impression that one of the elected officials was speaking for all of us, and that was not true.

I'm also a taxpayer and a citizen who takes pride in my community. I also have to deal with rising costs myself.

No county employee was given a COLA. I openly in a letter along with other elected officials fought for all the elected officials to get a COLA and then we were excluded. In my 20 years of service in Guadalupe County as a public servant, I've never seen a COLA given to some and not all. With the COLA given to some and not all, We will have employees making as or almost as much as their superiors. A lot of the elected positions in Guadalupe County are 10% or more behind where we should be. It will be more next year. Next year or the year after, it's going to be 15 to 20. And that's going to be hard for the county judge at that time to make that happen. And that's going to make more people mad than 3%. so with employees getting a three percent cola and the elected officials getting nothing we put the county further behind and in a future bind this only comes out to 102 dollars a pay period for me it's going to be a little bit more for the rest but it's still not much in commissioner's court i know we had our auditor and the county judge tell the commissioners it's not much money and it's going to help in the future if we did it and they didn't so I want to thank you all for being here today. I know it's hard on everybody, but I appreciate it. Thank you. You all have a good day.

Okay. Thank you. All right. Committee members, I'm going to give a little bit of background on our budget process and some of the actions that were taken by Commissioner's Court, and then we'll open it up for any conversation. Let me set another timer. As part of our normal budget process in Guadalupe County, there are very similar requirements across a number of counties, but everything can be a little bit unique. In counties that have a population under 225,000 like ours in Guadalupe County, the county judge is the budget officer. So I started beginning of May with our budget process to have individual department head meetings with all of our elected and appointed officials. They had already submitted their written request of budget. We go through that process of meetings, and we consider what priorities are and what real needs of departments are. And as part of that process, we will look at salaries, not only for elected officials, also department heads that are appointed and not elected, but also the almost 765 county employees that we have. Look across departments, across positions, titles, and those things. One of the biggest challenges with the county budget or government budgeting process is We don't realize and understand how much money we have to work with until we get to July 25th when we have been working on the budget for months because the certified appraisals and the appraised role doesn't come out until the end of July. Not to bore you with all those details, but just so you understand the process, we talk through all the requests, meet with all the departments, find out how much money we either have or don't have, and then have to make some pretty tough decisions. And that's pretty consistent every year. This year it was much more challenging because we had a few things going on, and that was a depressed real estate market, high inflation, interest rates are up, not as much activity. We still have a lot of growth in Guadalupe County, but it's going to be more of your more densely populated kind of starter home subdivisions, which a lot of activity is going on but didn't have a bunch of value. In addition to that, we had additional state exemptions for personal property that were given. If you remember it, we voted on last November that basically increased $400 million of appraisal reduction. That was an impact to the county, had a refreeze calculation. Don't have to go into all those details, but it wasn't a normal revenue year for the county like we had seen. And I had to make a tough decision to recommend a budget to Commissioner's Court that did not have a raise for county elected officials, appointed officials, or employees. We only had a $2,000 additional longevity base built into the recommended budget that I handed to commissioners. Now, what that means is we have a normal longevity program at the county where you get paid $5 every month for as long as you've been working at the county, but you can't receive it until you've been here for three years. We have historically, not every year, but when we can, we give an additional longevity base. And it's not a bonus. It's an additional bonus. um payment to county employees to say thank you for your longevity and staying here and being here the benefit of doing that in my mind was that it's not a built-in expense for the following year that it if the county couldn't afford it it could be taken taken away right that's not the goal but if things became that bad there's that structure Now fast forward to me bringing a recommended budget to Commissioner's Court. We had budget workshops on August the 10th. We had a lot of elected officials and departments going, hey, we're growing too much. There's too many needs. They need to be addressed. Not giving a raise, not having any new positions with this tax increase is not palatable. It's not something we can succeed in. So you did have a couple elected officials that stood up at that hearing that day at the podium and stated, Look, we'd rather see a COLA, or cost of living, for all county employees. We're willing to not take a raise as an elected official. Now, that wasn't any three of the elected officials that we're talking about today. Again, you've got 25 elected officials. You had three or four elected officials stand up in court on August the 10th and said, we don't need to take a raise, but our employees need that raise. As part of those discussions on August the 10th and August the 11th, Commissioner's Court came to a consensus and said we should not have the additional longevity in, we should put 3% cost of living in for all county employees across the board. When we got to August the 11th, Commissioner's Court, that is the date that we were required as the county to set the published notice for the elected official's salary, compensation, and any pay or allowances, and put it in the paper. Essentially, you're not making the final decision that day. That comes tomorrow, but you're required to publish it. Once you do, it's set. Because of some of the comments that were made by other elected officials, by some of the interaction that was going on, some other requests, Commissioner's Court voted four to one out of the five members, four in favor of and one opposed, to not give elected officials a raise. We had already removed the longevity out, so it wasn't $2,000 for employees or electeds. And you had the Commissioner's Court vote four to one to remove the raise from the elected officials. As part of that, again, concern because it's not all that common that that happens. It usually is consistent, but there have been other years where adjustments have been made for electeds where they received more in certain instances than county employees. But in this year, that vote was taken not to give the electeds, but to focus on the hourly employees. Now, we come to this process where a few elected officials are going, hold on a second, I think this needs to be looked at a different way, and they've filed a grievance. I can get into much more detail on the county budget and the tax rate and some of those challenges, but I don't want to give an hour-long presentation about the county budget and all of those things. But I absolutely will be able to answer, hopefully, and if not, Ms. Klein can help, any questions about any part of the process any maybe maybe a little bit more detail of the discussion that took place in commissioner's court hearings but in your folder i just want to double check because i've got so many papers here so yeah you've got the the detail of the current requested what the proposed was and the difference but I don't think, is Doreen still in here or not? No, it's okay. I don't think we have a list of all elected officials, right? Oh, it's the last, sorry. Okay, that's what I was trying to find. Thank you. Thank you. So, I mean, just to give an idea, if you want to see the high level, all the elected officials. I believe there was one question you had earlier kind of while we were going through instructions and I said, well, hold on. We're not there yet, but we are. We're there now. One of the questions came up was if there is a position with the same title like a justice of the peace or a constable or there are multiple of those positions, are they paid the same? I said. Yes and no, right? It's always a complicated answer at the county. But for, if you look at some of those like Justice of the Peace, JPs, which what we're talking about with Mr. Terry, you can see that the salary is the same at the 88.4, but the auto allowance is different. And that's always been a challenging conversation because years ago, individuals either took on more responsibility and kind of made a case for that. And then even if it changed, it was hard to make those adjustments because that history and the memory was there. It's very different now. We've tried to standardize those salary and compensation levels more so now than ever before. But as you can see, they're a little bit different. And then when we go to that longevity column, the third box, and go down, those are listed differently because people have different levels of tenure and experience. And it's not the experience, it's just the amount of time at the county. But I was thinking if I was one of you, I would want to see that list of all the elected officials. Are there any members from the public who wish to give any comments on the first grievance?

Is there anybody online? Judge, I think we ask, according to the rules, we'll move to questions from the committee to the grievance and the respondent, and then allow the public actually, I believe, if I'm not mistaken, it's after... ALL THREE.

OKAY.

WE'LL MOVE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. WE'LL ALLOW THE COMMITTEE TO ASK QUESTIONS OF THE GRIEVANT AND THE RESPONDENT, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE TO THE NEXT GRIEVANT.

THANK YOU.

YES, SIR.

SO COMMITTEE MEMBERS, YES, MA'AM.

I HAVE A QUESTION. So it was mentioned that some of the people spoke at the meeting, some of the elected officials spoke at the meeting, and they voted not to have the COLA for themselves, but to their employees. Is there a rule as to how many of those committee, I mean, how many of those elected officials have to be present to adapt, to speak for everybody?

No, ma'am. There's no rule. There's no rule set in place like that. It's at the discretion of commissioner's court. Typically, that does not happen. Typically, you don't have a group of individuals stand up and say, I don't want to take a raise. I think they were just communicating and voicing their opinion in an effort to try to get a cost of living raise for their employees. But to your question, and tell me if I'm wrong, You had three, if not four, elected officials stand up at the podium and say that, but the other 20 were not present. And at the same time, a few of them were, but at the same time, I got a text from one of them and said, they don't speak for me. And then somebody else said, I don't like that. So it's... I don't remember any one of them saying, I speak for every single elected official. But at the same time, there was an overwhelming sense in this exchange like they did speak for a majority of the group, but I don't think they had talked to everybody.

So that was- So is that the norm?

No, ma'am. I mean, I've been at the county. This is my 16th year, done a number of budgets. I cannot remember a time when- a majority or multiple people came up to the podium during our budget process and said, I'm willing to give up my raise. Now, it has happened. You've had one constable that came up and was willing to give up a new requested position in favor of something else or an individual wanting to advocate for something they felt really strong about. This was a different exchange than I'd ever seen before on pay. because of how tight things are. We already had a little bit of a tax increase being proposed and recommended and talked about. And then the overarching and high-level big picture was we're trying to get a cost of living for county employees. And that's when you had some of those elected officials saying, well, don't give me one. Give it to the employees. Okay.

Thank you.

Does anybody have any questions for Judge Terry that was up at the podium earlier? It could be anything about his submittal, his comments, his position, responsibilities. You don't have to if you don't want to. I just wanted to say this is the part of the hearing that it would be appropriate to do that.

I do have a question.

Yes, ma'am.

Maybe a little bit off. I'm all new to this, but this text, THIS RAISE, WHAT AREAS DOES IT AFFECT IN THE COMMUNITY? IS IT GOING TO AFFECT THEIR TAX RATE? I NOTICED YOU SAID WE HAD A TAX DECREASE ON THE PROPERTIES AND THERE HAS BEEN BECAUSE OF COURSE WE UNDERSTAND THE RATES AND EVERYTHING GOING ON IN THE MARKET, IN THE REAL ESTATE MARKET. HOWEVER, WILL THIS PAY RAISE INCREASE TAX RATE OR what area in the community's income is that going to affect?

That's a great question. In Guadalupe County, our general fund operating budget is right at $100 million. That's for 40-plus departments, 765 employees, for a number of operations that are all important and all critical, and they all are required to work together to provide service to the public. And if you look at the total request in these three individual cases, it is very Minimal in the fact when you compare it to the overall budget So one cent on our tax rate equates to about two million dollars of revenue Whether these are approved or not, I think Again good question, but I think it should be based on the merits of the issues being brought up I don't think we'll have a huge area of the budget that would be at a deficit or at a negative position if for some reason you decided to give an employee $2,000. We'd have to go find that money. I'd have to get with Ms. Klein. Now, part of the salary grievance process as laid out by the local government code is that if all nine members of a salary grievance committee vote to approve the request of the elected official, commissioners court shall make the change in their budget. Now, since we don't have nine members, that can't happen today. If six to eight members vote in favor of the request, then it requires Commissioner's Court to reconsider, but does not require action to approve. So just wanted to give that reference and didn't go into great detail. But very good question. I think when you're looking at a $100 million budget IF THERE WAS A REQUIREMENT OF COMMISSIONER'S COURT OR A REQUEST THE COURT RECONSIDERED TOMORROW AND CHANGED IT BASED ON Y'ALL'S RECOMMENDATION, A $2,000 OR $5,000 OR $7,000 CHANGE IS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD JUST HAVE TO ADJUST AND FIND AND MODIFY. WE STILL HAVE TO FIND THE MONEY BUT NOT A HUGE ISSUE AND DEFINITELY COMMISSIONER'S COURT AS PART OF OUR BUDGET PROCESS HAS ALREADY SET THE PROPOSED TAX RATE. WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CHANGE IT NOW.

Even for tomorrow no matter what I just wonder how it would affect the community and the people sure overall based on

RIGHT. AND THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. IT REALLY IS. BECAUSE THESE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS ARE NOT HUGE IMPACTS, BUT A COUNTY BUDGET'S MADE UP OF THOUSANDS OF LINES, LOTS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE, ALL THESE DIFFERENT DECISIONS, AND $2,000 HERE AND $5,000 THERE ALL ADD UP TO $100 MILLION. SO THE INDIVIDUAL REQUEST ISN'T THAT MUCH, BUT TO YOUR POINT, IT IS PART OF A BIG OVERALL PICTURE.

BECAUSE AS IT IS A COMMUNITY RIGHT NOW, I'M SURE THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN DISTRESS. And then based on that, even if the tax rates go up, then they're going to be in a bigger distress while others are suffering. So I was wondering where was that money coming from?

Sure. No, good question. I anticipated it would be part of y'all's conversation today of that very thing. Does anybody have any questions for Judge Terry on his specific request? Does any committee members have any specific questions for me or the county about our process, the decisions that were made, how things were handled?

No.

NOW PROPER TIME TO SEE IF THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO... NOT YET.

NOW'S THE TIME TO MOVE ON TO THE SECOND AGREEMENT. SO THE PROCESS ALLOWS FOR THE AGREEMENT TO SPEAK AND THE RESPONDENT, AND THEN TO ASK QUESTIONS, AND THEN TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO HEAR ALL OF IT. AND THEN THE PUBLIC, BECAUSE THE PUBLIC ONLY HAS ONE MINUTE TO COMMENT, THEY NEED TO HEAR EVERYTHING SO THEY CAN COMMENT ON EVERYTHING INSTEAD OF USING THEIR ONE MINUTE UP AT THE BEGINNING. AND THEN FOLLOWING ALL OF THAT AND ALL OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT, THEN THE COMMITTEE WILL DISCUSS AMONG THEMSELVES, FROM THE PODIUM, FROM THE DIAS, BUT WE'LL HAVE A DISCUSSION REGARDING THESE ITEMS AND DETERMINE WHETHER THEY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION.

Many members, anything else before we move on to the next grievance? All right, agreed. Number two is Theresa Keel, our county clerk. Now, Ms. Keel, you may approach the podium. Her current proposed base salary is $103,400. She is requesting a salary increase of $10,000, which equates to a total of $113,400, and also in the request is an auto allowance in the amount of $3,000. Ms. Keel, you have 10 minutes, and I won't start your time until you get over to the podium.

Good morning. My name is Theresa Keel. I'm the Guadalupe County Clerk, and I would like to tell you a little about myself. I began my career in the land title real estate industry in 1982 in Camel, Guadalupe counties. In 1993, I went to work for a software technology company, providing solutions for county clerk's offices throughout the United States and the U.S. Virgin Islands. motivated by my passion for the county clerk's role, I ran for office in 2002 and was elected. I took office in 2003. As the county clerk, My constitutional and statutory duties mandate a broad range of responsibilities, including the recording and management of real property records, such as deeds, mortgages, judgments, military discharges, assumed names, cattle brands, vital records, birth, death, and marriage license, and many more. I serve as the clerk of the Constitutional County Court, the Commissioner's Court, the statutory county courts at law, managing misdemeanor, criminal, civil, probate, mental health, and guardianship cases. I serve on the bail bond board and was appointed by the Commissioner's Court as the countywide records management officer. Most recently, I've had to take on the duties of elections. due to the top three positions being vacant. A key focus of my leadership has been modernizing county services through technology while preserving historical records dating back to 1820s. I've also championed a paperless office initiative promoting electronic filing and digital management to enhance efficiency and reduce cost and improve access to public records. I've implemented a free public recording notification service where people can sign up to be notified if a document has been recorded in their name. I've completed many educational programs and received many, many honors. I'll go ahead and get to the point. Now that you know a little bit about me, let's talk about why I'm here and what I'm in front of you today for. Over the past several years, it has become apparent to me that there doesn't seem to be a fair and equitable pay structure for public officials and employees. If you take a look at page seven, OF THE SPREADSHEET IN FRONT OF YOU LINES 271, 272 AND 273 SHOWS THE PERCENTAGES OF RAISES ACROSS THE YEARS. I THINK THE DISPARITY IS QUITE NOTICEABLE. THE APPOINTED OFFICIAL SPREADSHEET SHOWS THE SAME THING. SO I HAVE TO ASK, DOES GUADALUPE COUNTY HAVE A TRANSPARENT METHOD FOR DETERMINING COMPENSATION FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES? WHAT'S THE ACTUAL PROCESS AND THE FACTORS CONSIDERED? Is it the statutory responsibilities, the workload and volume, the title given by the Constitution, the number of employees that are supervised, complexity of the office, the legal liability or the revenue collected? How can one determine whether the compensation is equitable if criteria used aren't identified? ALSO NOTICE THE SPREADSHEET, THE COUNTY CLERK, DISTRICT CLERK AND COUNTY TREASURER, ALL WOMEN ELECTED OFFICIALS DO NOT RECEIVE AN AUTO ALLOWANCE OR COUNTY VEHICLE. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THE COUNTY AND DISTRICT CLERK BOTH HAVE SATELLITE OFFICES AND SHIRTS. WHAT OBJECTIVE CRITERIA DETERMINES WHICH ELECTED OFFICIALS RECEIVE AN AUTO ALLOWANCE OR COUNTY VEHICLE? ARE THESE CRITERIA APPLIED CONSISTENTLY? Now let's talk about the records and how they affect the entirety of local government. The records that my office manages. I remember it clearly. It was March 13, 2020. The county judge had decided to close all offices to the public in order to promote safety due to COVID pandemic. I called him immediately. I said, we can't close. The economy depends on the county clerk's office recording records and making records available to the public. We provide access to information not otherwise available. The county clerk's records are of utmost importance to keep real property and business moving in Texas. We have to stay open.

We did stay open.

People were driving to Guadalupe County to obtain their marriage licenses and birth records because other clerks didn't understand the impact of closing their offices. We maintained safety procedures and required appointments for people to come in and feel safe while needed services were provided. We allowed one person on our records room at a time, and the customers were grateful we didn't close. We did our part to keep the economy and real estate moving in Texas. Now I have some questions for you. What do you think would happen if the County Clerk failed to accurately maintain the records of the courts, the judicial system? Could the judges or courts function without an accurate history of what had been filed, ordered, and decided? What would happen if the County Clerk failed to accurately maintain the records of Commissioner's Court? How would the auditor or anyone know, for that matter, what had occurred six months ago or even six years ago? What would happen if the criminal court dispositions weren't accurately and timely reported to DPS? We do that. Could law enforcement rely on the information available through the state's criminal justice systems if we didn't do our job? What would happen if property records weren't accurately recorded and preserved? How would we know who owns what property? How would the tax assessor collect the accurate property taxes? How about the family that's trying to establish ownership of the family farm years from now? What about birth records? Would anyone have a problem with that? Marriage records? Would you be able to apply to Social Security to receive pensions or layer information? This is just a small example of the many departments that depend on the records of the county clerk to be accurate and reliable. So we're back to why we're here today. What objective policy explains why the county clerk is treated differently? If the county clerk is responsible enough to be entrusted with the county's official records, the judicial records, property records, and other statutory responsibilities assigned to this office, then surely the compensation package should reflect those responsibilities. IF YOU WERE CREATING THIS POSITION TODAY KNOWING ONLY PORTIONS OF EVERYTHING THE COUNTY CLERK IS LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR AND KNOWING HOW MANY OTHER OFFICES DEPEND ON THE RECORDS MAINTAINED BY THE COUNTY CLERK, WOULD YOU DECIDE, WOULD YOU DESIGN THE COMPENSATION PACKAGE IN THE WAY IT IS TODAY? I DON'T BELIEVE YOU WOULD AND I THINK IT'S TIME TO CORRECT IT. TAKE A LOOK AT PAGE 6 OF THE ELECTED OFFICIALS. Look at years 26 and 23 and the percentage that's given across the board. Now look at page five and the year 2020. Do you see that for years 20 through 23, the commissioners gave themselves just over a 24% increase in pay, but other elected officials didn't receive that? Which goes back to the county policy. If one, they should all be fair. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME HERE TODAY. I KNOW YOUR TIME IS VALUABLE AND I'M SO GRATEFUL FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU. I HOPE YOU HAVE A WONDERFUL WEEK. THANK YOU.

Committee members, I'm not going to go through the same discussion. I'll just remind you again, no elected officials were provided a COLA in this year's normal process. The budget does show less this fiscal year since all employees and elected officials in last year's budget or the current year got a $2,000 longevity and that was removed in exchange, if you will, during our normal budget process to give all county employees the cost of living instead of the longevity. I know I didn't talk very much about the auto allowance. It was looked at. The county has had a process that was in place from before I started in 2011. And it's very different all over the board because not everybody has exactly the same functions, responsibility, all those things. But I have also witnessed over the years and heard stories from people that have been at the county longer where elected officials used auto allowance as a way to get additional compensation. And then commissioners years and years ago would argue for an auto allowance because of their responsibility to go out and interact with the public or drive or look at a property or a road. And then they'd say they didn't get paid enough, so they would basically absorb that auto allowance into pay, and then a couple years later be advocating for another auto allowance. It was a way to go back and forth. I'm not saying that's what this is. I just want to give you some reference to say all of these things have happened over time, right? Ms. Keough and I have had conversations about the auto allowance before, and either agree or don't agree. But as the budget officer, I try to keep a tight tightly shown things if you will and not everybody always agrees and I understand that and respect it but really try to ask the questions if an auto allowance is requested what part of the function of the office is required to go out and do that and drive around and look and you know she made a mention of the the satellite office you know you start asking questions about how frequent is the travel does the department have a vehicle that's already assigned to it paid forth county funds A lot of the conversations and I'm just speaking generally not with Miss Kuehl. I will look back at past expense lines because even if elected officials or employees do not have a auto allowance They're able for work-related travel to get compensated by mileage and if those lines of expense are only $400 it doesn't justify in my opinion a three or four or five thousand dollar auto allowance or buying a county vehicle and I don't know what those expense lines were, but these are some of the conversations I would have during a normal budget process with anybody to just say, what's warranted? Is that really needed? Now, in all fairness, if you went back and looked at some of the other elected officials that already had an auto allowance, you could probably have some of the same arguments and maybe even reduce or remove some of those. But it is much harder to reduce somebody's pay rather than add something on.

Can I have one more minute?

Sorry.

You want to wait until they have a question?

Just to follow the rules, your uninterrupted time, respond at uninterrupted time, and then committee questions.

So it's my 10 minutes over?

Yeah, just since I started. We'll come back to you. We'll get them to ask, and then you can mention whatever you need to. So again, it's all those things. that swirl around during normal budget conversations. It's nice. I know policy has been mentioned. Nothing like a good government policy. And this is just my opinion at this point. Everything doesn't always fit into the nice, neat little box. You try to have a policy to give you structure and or direction, but not everything fits in. We've changed salary and compensation at the county for all employees to a grade and step after we did a salary study to try to create more structure instead of having everybody argue and advocate for their one little thing that they wanted or five little things they wanted every budget to try to promote consistency. The challenge with elected officials is we don't have that structure, but Ms. Klein, as our auditor who's been here over 30 years, and myself sit through a budget process, and every year we try to look at other counties to some extent. It's usually about 10 to 12 counties that we think are similar in size and budget and population, at least within a range, and look at those averages of what these positions are paid. We try to kick out the high and the low and look at median and average and say, what does that look like? for this year that wasn't done the same way because we knew how tight things were and then ultimately I recommended a budget that did not have a COLA or raise in it for elected officials so that part really wasn't something we were going to spend a lot of time on because we were sitting there going we don't have the money to consider it. Now coming back after the court made that change and with the COLA then it became a timing issue but there's no perfect scenario in which you can have every elected official compensated exactly the way they want unless you give more funds. I'm not saying that every elected official is compensated exactly where they should be. Please don't hear that because you have neighboring counties who are very similar in size but different in operations, some who are very same in operation. DIFFERENT IN SIZE AND BUDGET AND SCOPES. THERE IS A COUNTY IN WEST TEXAS CALLED LOVING COUNTY. IT HAS LESS THAN 100 PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN IT. GOT A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF OIL REVENUE. THEY HAVE MORE MONEY THAN THEY KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH. ALL OF THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS MAKE OVER $100,000 A YEAR IN A COUNTY THAT HAS LESS THAN 100 PEOPLE, AND WE HAVE 210,000 PEOPLE IN GUADALUPE COUNTY. Harris County, now that has six or seven million people in it, just had a salary grievance committee hearing because only one elected official was not getting raised to $305,000. That's the spectrum of county government and the decisions that are made because there's different dynamics that go on in all these things. So I just wanted to put some of that into perspective and say we do our best to look at comparables, but everything is not exactly identical you can't say okay those five did that so we need to do exactly the same thing for the same reason any questions for the agreement miss keel

I have two questions.

Yes, ma'am.

First one is the auto allowance. So I don't know if anybody can answer why was $3,000 given to that one? And also, you mentioned going to shirts, I believe, because there was a thing there. Who determines how often? You mentioned about? Is there a car to go and come? And if there were receipts turned in, how much were those receipts for the year? Or to kind of come up with an amount. Because I'm kind of curious about the $3,000. And then the second question I have is, she mentioned she does a lot of work for positions that are vacant. So those vacant positions, are those going to be, is this like a constant thing, or is that what the job description said, hey, when there's a vacant, you're going to automatically do them? And does anybody consider that more work should be compensated, I guess, for having to handle more than what the position was required? So those are the two that I have.

JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. I'M SORRY. JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY PEOPLE. YES. AND WE'RE KEEPING A RECORD. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN EVERYBODY STARTS TALKING, EVEN IF IT'S FOR SOMETHING SMALL, IF YOU'LL JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND THEN START TALKING. I HAD DOREEN ASK ME TO REMIND EVERYBODY. I'M SORRY.

YOU'RE GOOD. BEATRIZ BEJERANO.

THANK YOU, MS. BEJERANO.

MS. GIL, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THE AUTO ALLOWANCE? THAT WAS THE FIRST QUESTION.

AS I STATED, No one can determine, it's up to the judge, what criteria he uses for an auto allowance. I chose 3,000 because it was the lowest number on the chart that had already been given. And I did request the auto allowance for the three positions, myself, the district clerk, and the treasurer, because we are the only ones that do not receive it or have a vehicle. I just don't believe. Everything's been fair and equitable. I also wanted to mention, if I can at this time, I was appointed the county records management officer for the countywide records. I used to get a stipend out of my records management. I no longer get a stipend for those additional duties which are not statutory or constitutional, requested by the court to do it. I COULD GET A STIPEND. MY REQUEST, MY REQUESTED BUDGET INCREASE OUT OF MY RECORDS MANAGEMENT WILL NOT AFFECT THE GENERAL FUND, WILL NOT RAISE TAXES. JUST A THOUGHT.

YOU SAID THE COUNTY CLERK IS NOT THE STATUTORY RECORD KEEPER OF THE COUNTY?

I'M A STATUTORY RECORD KEEPER OF MY OWN RECORDS, BUT THE COUNTY VOTED, THE COUNTY CLERK Commissioner's Court many years ago elected the county clerk to be the countywide records management officer.

So if you didn't do that, who would do it?

The court would have to vote on it.

And the vacant positions?

I believe she was referring to the elections office, which, in all fairness, occurred after I turned in my budget, so I don't know if it can be considered. But I am taking care of the election duties at this time. I did request from the court additional money for that, and the court voted it down.

Chris, can you pull up the past expenses from the county clerk for mileage reimbursement? Do you have any idea off the top of your head how much mileage reimbursement has been requested for travel to other departments?

No, I don't. I can tell you that myself and two other employees do a lot of traveling, and we don't always turn it in because we're so busy. It's not worth the small amount of travel.

And when was the last time the county clerk position was adjusted more than the normal cost of living?

Only one time in my tenure.

I'M SORRY, ONLY ONE TIME IN MY TENURE, AND THAT WAS IN 2008. I'M SORRY, JUDGE, I CAN GIVE YOU A COPY OF THAT. WOULD YOU LIKE ONE?

IT'S OKAY. WE'LL SHARE UP HERE. Oh, thank you. I know you're looking for it, Chris. Sorry, I was just curious.

I don't see where you're turning in mileage. Like, do you have shirts at all?

Exactly. No, we don't. We go weekly. We don't turn it in.

So there's no expense in that line?

No expense history.

Okay.

But that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. We go to banks. I'm responsible for the registry of the court investing miners' monies. We go to the banks. We do a lot of traveling for our jobs.

Chris, do you have the summary list in our budget docs of the past increases for elected officials? Do you have that spreadsheet with you?

I've got a spreadsheet that has like the cost of living that has been done historically, but not for this specific official.

But if you want me to... No, I was just wondering, because I know we had made adjustments to different departments multiple years, but didn't know if that was... if that was readily accessible or not. So back to your question on the vacant positions. So there's a group or committee called the Election Commission that's made up of the county judge, the county clerk, the tax assessor collector, the Republican party chair, and the Democratic party chair by statute. It's like a group like this, but it's the election commission. That is the group that hires and or fires an elections administrator in the county. We had a vacancy in that position. We've had meetings. We had over 100 applicants in that group of officials or that election commission body decided not to interview anybody because there there weren't a good set of qualified individuals to consider even out of a hundred applicants in those that's what we were very surprised it was i hate saying it like this but it seemed like a lot of individuals that were required to apply for so many jobs were applying for that job because of the way it was listed Long story short, we move on, have the election commission meeting. It was very apparent that we were going to have a challenge in that office to be able to hold an election, to comply with state requirements, to do all of those things without an elections administrator, at least a point of contact. Ms. Kuehl became that person, one kind of voluntarily, kind of because there was like the nobody else at the same time, and she's jumped in, spent a tremendous amount of time and effort to be involved in elections and try to help facilitate that. She brought these concerns to the court. when we had our discussion about elected official salary. We had another discussion about Ms. Kuehl's salary, and court members were not in favor as a whole to make that change. Some of the reasons and or justification and or opinions that were made during that process were that other officials had taken on additional tasks at different times, even if they weren't exactly the same or to that level, and weren't compensated additionally for them. Ms. Keel's argument is that it's, It's hard to compare those requests because she's had to basically transplant herself from her office into elections and be extremely, extremely busy to be in compliant with state requirements, make sure there's an election going on. But again, the opposite part of that discussion was you have elected officials saying, I took on an additional job. Even if it was less, it was a sacrifice. It was additional duties. It was all those things. And those employees weren't compensated. Why should that employee be paid for extra? So that was some of the discussion that went on. A lot of it was accurate and some of its opinions. But, I mean, there's, again, you want to try to be consistent, but also everything's not exactly the same. I'm talking about salaries sometimes. ANY OTHER? YES, MA'AM.

I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. BEATRIZ BEJERANO. MS. KEEL MENTIONED THAT SHE AT ONE TIME GOT A STIPEND. WHAT IS THE PROCESS OF STARTING THAT STIPEND AGAIN OR WOULD SHE HAVE TO RECOMMEND OR ASK FOR THAT OR HOW DOES THE COURT HANDLE THAT?

SO THROUGH A BUDGET PROCESS, IT WOULD TYPICALLY BE A REQUEST FROM THE ELECTED OFFICIAL FOR US TO CONSIDER IN A BUDGET PROCESS.

OKAY.

Mr. Tice, as part of a hearing like this today with that request, this committee could make a recommendation for, they can make a recommendation if they'd like to for compensation on just about anything. They're just not able as a committee to reduce the salary of an elected official. Is that fair to say?

Correct, Judge. This committee cannot reduce anything. However, you're not bound by the request. So therefore, you could make a motion. And if seconded and passed for the full amount of the request, you can make it for any amount above the full amount. Make it for $1. As long as it isn't a negative amount, this committee has complete discretion in their recommendation.

My name is Carolyn. Can we know what your stipend was? Was it equivalent to what you're asking now?

I haven't done the math. The stipend was, it was $75.69. It was $10,000 a year. at the time it was removed in 2019.

And was it reduced from your pay or was it moved to general fund?

It was moved to general fund.

So it still received the compensation, just not from the same line for the same purpose?

Right. And I'm asking what the court's determination is for my salary. I'm asking, my entire question is, how do you determine what factors represent my salary? Do you just pick a number out of the air? Do you just go by another county's salary? Do you look at the duties of the office or the complexities of the office? Knowing that the county clerk was created by the Constitution as the record keeper for the entire county. They are also the authenticator for the county judge's actions. We provide information and we maintain historical data. If you want to find out who your ancestors are in Guadalupe County, you can come to the county clerk's office to learn that. IF YOU WANT TO LEARN ABOUT YOUR PROPERTY, WHO HELD YOUR PROPERTY PRIOR TO YOU OBTAINING IT, YOU COME TO THE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE TO FIND THAT INFORMATION OUT. WE'RE THE HISTORIANS, THE RECORDS KEEPERS, AND WE MAINTAIN THE HISTORY OF GUADALUPI COUNTY AS WELL AS THE JUDICIAL RECORDS AND BIRTH AND DEATH. SO IT DOESN'T, NOT EVERY DEPARTMENT DOES THAT. Not every department in the county of which I'm compared to has an equal amount of shared duties. I feel like at certain times, the court and the judge do not really understand what the role of the county clerk is for.

And I felt like it was time to let them know.

My response, committee members, is this year it was a different process because we had $27 million of requests and no money to work with. We had departments submit over 100 new position requests, adjustments, equipment, salary things, regrades, new equipment we haven't considered before. And by the time we work through our normal budget process to try to validate and justify what priorities there were, We found out that they had reclassified and recalculated free ceilings for exemptions all across the county, and we had lost $1.46 billion of appraised value. In addition to that, those additional personal property exemptions, which gets taken off of our total appraised value, went up to $399 million. When you add back in $864 million of new property, all those new houses and new buildings you drive by when you're driving around the county, only added back a fraction of what we lost. And we had to recommend, my first recommended budget had a 4% tax increase in it with no new positions, only $2,000 longevity and no raises for county employees. at a time where I voice concern about inflation, about what food costs, how much fuel is, what insurance is done, and all of those things. So to Ms. Keel's direct question, your salary didn't get considered this year. Didn't even look at it. And I'm just responding to your question going, This year was very different because by the time we got to that point where we would normally look at it and try to look at other counties, look at what the request is, see if it's anywhere close. I stated earlier, everything's not identical, so you can't just go pick five counties and say she needs to make that. You try to consider all those factors, but this year, by the time we got there, we knew There's no room for making those adjustments. We were only going to consider a raise or longevity that was equal to what county employees got. And that was my recommendation as the budget officer to recommend a budget that only had the longevity, but it was consistent for county employees and the elected officials. One more time. We're going to get moving here.

That didn't have anything to do with what factors determine the way you pick a salary. And I understand it's an unfortunate time this year because of the money lost. I brought to court the past 20 years, the past six years, the past 10 years to bring to their attention the inequities of the salaries throughout the board, throughout all of the elected officials. That was my intent. That was my hope, that they would listen. You can look at the appointed officials. They received much higher. In fact, the election officer makes a tremendous amount of money, but there's no one in that position to fill it. I have to fill it. I just want to thank you for your time. Any other questions?

So, Teresa, the factors that are considered for an elected official salary, first, I try to look at what other county electeds are making in, again, 10 to 12 counties that Chris and I picked, knowing they're not exactly the same. We also tried to look at the amount of work that that individual is doing. You're right, we don't understand every part of every job. Is your job important? Absolutely. so were other 40 department heads. Because as I've stated, without everybody working together, this whole thing doesn't work. You talk about percentages in your historical breakdowns. You were historically back to those compensations where you show a lower percentage paid more than half of the elected officials that are on this list that show a larger percentage. So when we go and look at those 10 or 12 other counties, and the county clerk might have been $8,000 paid low, but a JP was $35,000 underpaid, we had to make some of those adjustments. And we've tried to do that year over year. And there are certain years you just can't make those adjustments because the money's gone or it's too much of an increase, so you try to split it up. If you have a mechanism for fairly considering all elected officials and their pay and their duties, the job that it requires and the job that they do, I'd love to catch up sometime because it's not that smooth or not that easy. But I think when you look across the board at the commissioners, the JPs, the commissioners, I mean, you've got the tax assessor, constables. I mean, all those things. I know you and I could have a long discussion about the duties, the responsibility, the amount of time, the opinions of others from the job that's done, all those things. But there was a time not very long ago when the district clerk, the treasurer, and the county clerk didn't make $100,000, right? And I feel like you look back a few years where there's been advancement made. It's just... Once we got away from flat raises, that separation and larger increases kept getting a little bit more because they were percentages. Historically, the county was giving flat raises to county employees, and it really created some compression problems. We created the grade and step, looked at some other counties, gave percentage raises, trying to create that separation so you didn't have a chief deputy or an office supervisor making as much as their boss in the department. So that was one of the things we tried to facilitate over time. It's just you don't fix it all at one time. Any committee members, any other questions for our county clerk, Teresa Kuehl?

I HAVE ONE. SO YOU HAVE THREE EMPTY SLOTS AND YOU'RE DOING THE WORK OF THOSE THREE EMPTY SLOTS. WHAT HAPPENS TO THEIR SALARIES IF THE PEOPLE WERE THERE AND THEY'RE NOT THERE? SO WHO GETS THAT MONEY? THEY WOULD BE PAID IF THEY WERE THERE.

THEY WOULD BE PAID IF THEY WERE THERE.

So you're asking if the positions are open, what happens to the money?

Yeah.

The money is still kept in those individual lines for hopefully soon when those positions are filled. If there are any unspent funds, it goes back into reserves. It goes back into like a savings account, if you will, for the county.

So do you have the money then?

The money is there in those positions.

Can it be reallocated?

portion of it or any part of it could yes if as long as the positions not filled it could be now part of the story though goes back to when we first started having these discussions as the election vacancy occurred is Ms. Keil, and I agreed with her 100%, did not take action to fill those positions because we thought this was a very temporary process. She didn't want to hire people and then the election commission hire a new elections administrator, come in and go, somebody I've never met hired these new positions and I don't support having these people here. It could have been a weird dynamic that we didn't want to put the new elections administrator or those new employees in jeopardy of losing their job or being restructured. We anticipated originally this was going to happen for a few weeks. This has now gone on for a few months and could likely go on through the end of the year because of the timing of the election and all of those things. So now I think that mindset has shifted where if Ms. Keel is going to continue to be involved in elections, maybe trying to hire those positions going, we need those positions filled. We need the help. Does that, I think that's fair, right?

Yes, but, yeah. Yes, and wish there was more time in a day to interview them. And we're looking for experienced people, yeah.

Any other questions for Ms. Keel or myself?

No, thank you all.

Thank you. No, she said no. All right, and agreement number three is James Springer, Constable Precinct One. I see him coming up to the podium. His current proposed base salary is $88,400. He's requesting a 3% cost of living increase, which equates to $2,652, or a requested salary of $91,052. Constable, the floor is yours.

Good morning. So I'm Constable Springer. Just so you know that I've been serving this community since 1991. I came here as a paramedic. After that, I became a police sergeant with the city of Seguin, and now I'm the constable, and I've been a constable for eight years. And actually, I'm not requesting a 3%. I am okay with not receiving a 3%. My grievance is that this county has allowed other heads of departments to speak and speak for me. Nobody speaks for me or my department except for me. I'm OK if other elected people will want to come up and say, we'll forego our 3% and give it to other people. And I'm OK with that, because everybody's in a different financial position in their life. I do have a problem with if I'm going to give up that 3%, then it needs to go to the people that are on the lower end of the pay scale that are struggling to pay bills. But when you're giving that 3% to other people in this county that are making well over $100,000, I don't think that's right. I don't think that's fair at all. I'm OK without a 3%. But I don't like some of the things that have been happening lately when it comes to this county and allowing other department heads to come in and speak about raises to even interject themselves into my budget request are and start making decisions outside of commissioners court on what somebody should receive. I STAY IN MY LANE. I DON'T QUESTION WHAT THEY DO. I DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT. THIS YEAR HAS BEEN VERY ODD. I'VE NEVER SEEN THIS BEFORE WHERE OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE INTERJECTING THEMSELVES AND THE COURT SAYS, WELL, YOU KNOW, THEY SHOULDN'T DO THAT OR THE COURT SAYS THAT. WE'RE NOT LISTENING TO THEM, BUT APPARENTLY THE COURT IS BECAUSE, WELL, THEY TOOK THE RECOMMENDATION OF THOSE OTHER ELECTED PEOPLE. My problem is I just don't want this to happen again. I'm okay with that at 3%. It's not part of my complaint. Judge, you and I have worked eight years together on budgets. Not one in those eight years have I ever asked for a pay increase, a raise of anything. I never have. You and I have always worked together, but this year was just a VERY STRANGE YEAR, AND IT WASN'T JUST BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF FUNDS THAT THE COUNTIES HAD TO DEAL WITH. IT'S OTHER PEOPLE INTERJECTING THEMSELVES INTO THIS PROCESS. AND I JUST DON'T CARE FOR IT. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

THANK YOU. IF YOU WANT TO JUST STAY AT THE PODIUM, I'LL JUST TAKE A COUPLE MINUTES AND WE'LL SEE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS. Again, I know we've been through a lot of this. Don't want to go into repeating what we have discussed. What Constable is talking about as part of a process that's really never happened before is once the recommended budget came out, There were a number of officials that were very concerned about having so much need and having all these budget requests, but none of them being really put in the budget. And some were, but I mean, because of those budget constraints and increased tax rate proposals, It's very, very slim compared to a normal budget year. Once that occurred, the sheriff along with some county attorney, some other elected officials came to Commissioner's Court with a written document asking us to increase, asking Commissioner's Court to increase property taxes by 15% to be able to have the funding to basically approved some of what was requested. Ultimately, the majority of the court said, no, that's too much and that can't be handled. The court voted instead of my recommended 4% tax rate increase to cap the proposed tax rate increase at 5.65%. After that meeting took place, then Sheriff, along with others, decided to have a meeting with appointed officials and one with elected officials, where only some departments participated. There was a lot of moving parts and different people talking in all different directions that didn't include all of Commissioner's Court, who's the governing body that ultimately has to decide. And I think that's what the Constable's referring to. So everybody was working in all directions this year trying to find different solutions and people agreeing and not agreeing. And I know the conversation that Constable Springer and I had earlier was very similar to what he told you today. His concern was having other people inject themselves into a process that he feel like He's the best one to communicate for his department. He knows the details. He wanted to request what he needed, explain why it was needed, and then be the one to talk on his behalf for the people he represents. And he still did that. It's just there were a lot of moving parts and swirling around and conversations and people involved, and it's never happened like that before. So we're navigating those things as a county. But thank you for the clarification, Councilman. THE REAL GRIEVANCE AND THE ISSUE TODAY IS NOT REALLY THE PAY AMOUNT, IT'S JUST THE PROCESS THAT HAS TAKEN PLACE TO GET TO THE DECISION.

THAT HAS TAKEN PLACE THIS YEAR, AND IT SHOULD NOT EVER. YOU KNOW, PEOPLE VOTE FOR THEIR COMMISSIONERS AND FOR YOU, AND YOU ARE THE GUYS, YOU'RE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE MAKING THOSE DECISIONS ON BUDGETS AND EQUIPMENT, ALL THOSE DIFFERENT THINGS. AND WHEN I HAVE A BUDGET MEETING, I HAVE THE BUDGET MEETING WITH YOU. BUT TO THEN FIND OUT THAT OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE INTERJECTING THEMSELVES INTO MY REQUESTS, INTO MY BUDGETS, AND RECOMMENDING WHAT I NEED, THEY DON'T TELL THEM WHAT THEY NEED. THEY SHOULD NOT BE UP HERE OR IN PRIVATE SAYING WHAT I NEED. SO THIS YEAR HAS JUST BEEN ODD, BUT THINGS I BELIEVE HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO HAPPEN THAT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN.

Committee members, any questions for Constable while he's at the podium? No. Any questions for me or the county side, if you will, on this matter and this grievance?

Yes, ma'am.

Carlin Hinckley. So it's not a budget issue, it's a chain of command issue? Is that what you're kind of saying?

I suppose you can look at it that way.

Because they shouldn't be putting their fingers in your pie.

But they are. But they are.

And so how does that get resolved?

It hasn't been resolved. Is it up to him? Right now, I guess I'm speaking about two different topics. One is this grievance on the cost of living. I'm OK not receiving it. But I think it should have been handled differently. I think that if the county is in such dire straits financially, maybe they should have capped it. Maybe they should have said, all right, 60,000. Everybody making under 60,000 is going to get that 3%. Everybody who is above 60,000. And I'm not saying 60,000 is the right number.

I understand.

But it should have been capped, maybe. And people making over that to save money this year, they don't receive it. Keep in mind that if somebody who's making $45,000, I would imagine they really need that cost of living. But I make $88,000, and I'm not going to receive that. But then you have somebody with the county that's making $120,000 a year, but they're receiving it. That doesn't make sense to me. I don't know how that is a money-saving issue. And now when you have a whole group of people who you are giving different pay raises to, you're going to have, or the county's going to have a problem in the future when the pays are not equal anymore. And then they have to do pay surveys and waste time doing that and then have to probably raise the elected people's pay to keep that balance. So it just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. The other subject is the budget itself. The budget's always been the head of that department sits down with the county judge and they discuss it. They find out sometimes some things are removed, some things are added, increase of something. I remember one year I had put in, I don't know, $8,000 for fuel, but fuel prices are going up. Judge said, let's put $12,000 in there. NOW, UNDERSTAND THAT IF YOU DON'T USE THAT $12,000, IT GOES BACK TO THE COUNTY. SO THERE'S TWO SEPARATE ISSUES HERE. BUT ONE THING IS IN COMMON. SOME PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTY HAVE INTERJECTED THEMSELVES INTO THIS PROCESS. AND THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE THIS.

WHAT'S YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR THAT NOT HAPPENING?

WHAT'S THAT?

WHAT'S YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR THAT NOT TO HAPPEN AGAIN?

DON'T ALLOW IT.

Who is the don't allow it person?

The county judge and commissioners.

Oh, okay. I think he heard you.

So to kind of be Paul Harvey, I'm going to tell my age and then tell the rest of the story today. County government is very different. Let's talk about a city. In a city like Seguin, Cibolo, Schertz, Brownfields, San Marcos, you have this structure that has a city council that are typically volunteers if they get paid very minimal, but they have a city manager that they've all hired to be the individual that runs things. All of the department heads are employees of the city and direct to one person. WHETHER IT'S THE POLICE CHIEF, THE FIRE CHIEF, THEIR RECORDS PERSON, THOSE ARE ALL EMPLOYEES AND ARE DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE TO THAT INDIVIDUAL AS CITY MANAGER, AND THEY CAN TELL THEM WHAT TO DO. WHEREAS YOU TAKE COUNTY GOVERNMENT, BIG OR SMALL, SOMETIMES YOU MIGHT HAVE A COUNTY MANAGER, WE DON'T, BUT IN A COUNTY, ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE EQUAL. THEY HAVE THE EQUAL LEVEL OF AUTHORITY. NOBODY'S AN EMPLOYEE OF THE OTHER. THE ONLY PERSON AN ELECTED OFFICIAL HAS TO ANSWER TO ARE THE VOTERS. So a lot of people have this misconception, the county judge is in charge of everything and everybody. And it's one of those positions where you're responsible for everything, but you're in charge of nothing. You have to find a way to get people to work together and have everybody going in the same direction. But if I tell the constable today, you're not gonna run traffic or code in this area, I want you over here. He can smile at me and say, yeah, I'm not gonna do that. And there's no repercussion because I'm not his boss. COMMISSIONER'S COURT IS MADE UP OF FIVE ELECTED OFFICIALS, THE COUNTY JUDGE AND FOUR COMMISSIONERS THAT ALL HAVE EQUAL VOTING POWER. THAT MEANS AS BUDGET OFFICER, I CAN BRING A BUDGET BACK LIKE I DID THIS YEAR AND THE ENTIRE COURT CAN GO, I DON'T LIKE THAT. AND THEY CAN CHANGE IT. AND I CAN VOTE AGAINST IT AND THE COUNTY CAN STILL PASS A BUDGET. AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT HAS GONE ON THIS YEAR. THE SHERIFF HAS COME IN AND SAID, I DON'T LIKE THAT. WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS A DIFFERENT WAY. I DON'T LIKE IT. I DON'T APPROVE OF IT. I CAN CALL AND TELL THEM TO STOP. IT'S NOT GOING TO STOP ANYTHING. So that is the challenge in county government that it's, in my opinion, to Constable Springer's point, it would take all five elected commissioners, court members to say the same thing at the same time to sell somebody. This is not healthy. This has been divisive. This is not productive or efficient. We need to address these issues in a different way and the way you're doing it is not okay with any of us. But until all five people do that, I think these actions in that direction and interaction will continue. I think it's actually going to become more frequent.

And I don't have any problem with any other elected official coming up and hearing speaking. They're allowed to. Right. Right? But I'm watching, or it feels like Commissioner's Court is making decisions based upon what he says. And that's where I have a problem. So... He spoke. Other people spoke, said no 3%. That's what y'all did. And now I have my budget, and I had requested two new positions in there, and somebody, the sheriff has interjected, and now my budget is his recommendation. That's not right. So that's my problem.

Can that be fixed? Or is it too late?

I don't know. I mean, the budget has not been voted on, from my understanding. And I think that happens tomorrow. Correct. Right. It's tomorrow. So can it be fixed? Yeah. But I also think that it would be, there's not enough time for me to sit down with the judge and talk about why the recommendation that is being given doesn't work for me. So I do contact my commissioner, and she knows my feelings on it. And she will speak for my department tomorrow.

Tomorrow, September 1st, we do have our agenda posted for Commissioner's Court. We have multiple items relating to the budget, which are adopting the tax rate individually by maintenance and operation, interest in seeking and lateral road, the different components of our tax rate. We also have our budget that has to be voted on, as well as an individual item that sets the salaries, allowances, and compensation for elected officials. So to your point, I mean, some of these are going to be addressed tomorrow in talk, but you've got a lot of different people that have different opinions. some people think it's too concerning to spend money at this moment and you have others going no we have the money let's spend it here's a list of things I want all of that has to be discussed and decided on tomorrow which should be interesting but today for the salary grievance committee it it really is that component of the individual compensation and or requests that have been brought up today so there's there's still time just tomorrow's the time

Good luck.

Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Real quick question. Beatriz Bejarano. So Mr. Springer, today I know you talked about you didn't care about the 3% COLA salary. You just wanted to talk about some grievances or whatnot. But do you still want us to make a recommendation on your increase? Or are you saying you didn't want to do that?

I'm OK. Everybody's in a different financial situation. In my financial situation, I'm fine without a 3%. Okay. Right? I am. Okay. What I don't like is how the decision was made.

Okay.

Any other questions? Constable, thank you very much. Thank you. Yes, sir. I'm just reading our policies we adopted this morning just to make sure. Mr. Tize, is now the proper time for public comment if anybody wishes to make?

Yes, Judge. Okay.

Is there anybody in the courtroom today in person that would like to make a public comment? Good morning.

Good morning.

My seat is over where you guys are, and I also drink on the grind every time, so I appreciate that.

That's awesome. My name is Jacqueline Ott.

I am the commissioner for Precinct One. I am the commissioner for Constable Springer as well. I appreciate all of you being here in your service. I just wanted to talk about a couple of things that the court voted on. for just a little bit of clarification and perspective. I'm not going to give you an opinion. I'm just going to give you the facts that I considered in some of this just so you have it in making your decision to know a little bit more because I think that a lot of time things come out in social media or in the news outlets and you don't really get the full picture of what we're thinking about as a court when we're making our decisions. So I want to give you a couple pieces that are at least important to me. So One of the things that I want to make sure is clear is in the beginning when Ms. Keel, who I very much appreciate for the work that she does, and none of what I'm about to say is in conflict in regard to that, for the work that she does at all, but it was mentioned earlier that the three people that don't get vehicle stipends are women and that the women are not the ones getting the stipend. I am a woman, the only one in Commissioner's Court. I do receive a vehicle stipend. I do not feel that Commissioner's Court has been discriminatory toward me in any way or that I'm treated any differently because I am a woman. So I want to make sure everyone understands that and that there's no misunderstanding about it at all. In regard to the additional money that Ms. Kuehl requested for County Clerk, I am one of the people that voted against it, and I want to tell you why. Because we've had multiple people that serve as appointed and elected officials that have had to cover two positions when we've had a vacancy in the past, recent past and currently going on. And I wanted to give you a few of those examples. And for me, the issue was equality and fair treatment of everyone at the same time. Actually, Judge Terry, who's sitting in the back, he is the Justice of the Peace for Precinct 3. And there was a period of about six months a couple years ago where the Justice of the Peace for Precinct 4 was out due to having to care for a family member. And he covered both of those elected positions. No extra pay. Bryce Holton, who is our assistant emergency operations coordinator, who also serves as an assistant fire marshal, also had to cover the full-time job of our fire chief when we had that vacancy. No extra pay. That recently ended this year. Linda Douglas is our elected treasurer for the county, and there was a period of time that went on for months, maybe longer than that, where we did not have a director for HR. She had to cover both of those jobs. No extra pay. Mike Brooks, who is our road and bridge administrator, who's previously our assistant administrator, we currently have a vacancy for the head administrator, so think of it like a president and a vice president of a company. Mike is currently covering both of those jobs and has for a little over a month, no extra pay. My background in the county, to some extent, was as a prosecutor. And I worked as an assistant district and county attorney for a number of years. And during several of those years, I personally covered two different positions, two different attorney positions, full time. No extra pay. I don't think that any of those people, including myself, are saying any of that or have brought that up for any additional accolades or anything like that. It's simply to tell you that while I certainly appreciate the extra work that Mrs. Keel is doing, and it is a legitimate amount of extra work, it has happened quite a few times in the county. And we have not paid anybody else extra for doing that. It's something that we know we have to do as a team to cover these additional positions. So in my opinion, and the reason I voted no is because we have not done that for any of these other people. And this year, above all years, we don't have the money to do it. One of the things that Judge was explaining is that we have a unique year financially. One of the reasons why, or one of the big reasons why, and we don't really fully understand all of the reasons why, unfortunately, because it's a new thing, is that our appraisal district came to us with a larger number in tax exemptions than we anticipated before. In fact, $1.5 billion more that is exempt, meaning it's not taxed. So it's money we cannot use for these things, and we didn't see it coming. We still don't fully understand why. Some say it's a glitch in their internal system. Some say it's several years of exemptions that weren't originally counted. It's not something that happens under our umbrella, so it's not something we know about or can really do much about other than investigate it. It's never happened before. But for that reason, we have a lot less to work with, and we're starting at a deficit before we even move forward with working with the budget. So some money has to be pulled out of savings already just to balance it, just to make it the same as it was the year before. And that's really difficult. One of the reasons, again, why we're having such difficulty is that we wanna keep our employees. We wanna give them the appropriate cost of living adjustments and such like that. So again, this year is very difficult, but when Ms. Keel asked for that extra money, it's not anything about not appreciating her work. but that we don't even have enough money without pulling from savings to pay the employees. We have a cost of living adjustment to actually keep up with them being able to pay their bills. We don't have anything extra, and we have not done that for multiple people in the past. So I just wanted to share all that information with you so you have it. That was part of the reason why I made the decision I made. But again, not to say that anyone isn't appreciated. We certainly appreciate everyone. This is just an extremely difficult year for all of us. So thank you all for your time. Thank you.

Any other individuals who'd like to speak? Commissioner?

I'm Steven Gurman. I'm the precinct floor commissioner in Guadalupe County. First thing I want to say is, from the bottom of my heart, I really appreciate you people coming here today. This is a process. And y'all are part of a process. We've never done this in Guadalupe County. I sincerely appreciate each and every one of you coming here. That being said, I've been a commissioner for four years and eight months. This budget cycle has been extremely difficult. We have to make some significant decisions tomorrow. We are operating with something that was, you've heard here already, it was handed to us. I'm the one that made the motion for the tax rate that we set, which is like a 5.6% increase. A substantial portion of that increase is just to get us back to an even keel from what the state inflicted upon us where we lost value. My rule of thumb as a commissioner is The tax increase should, this isn't a normal budget process, should reflect the amount of inflation. Because we have to buy tires, we have to feed the inmates in the jail, and y'all all buy groceries. You know they're expensive. So that's my rule of thumb. I HAVE TOILED AND TOILED AND TOILED WITH WHAT WE DO WITH THIS BUDGET. AND THERE ARE OTHER COUNTIES THAT ARE IN THE SAME STATE WE ARE. I LISTENED TO OR WAS ON A CONFERENCE LAST WEEK VIRTUALLY AND THERE ARE OTHER COUNTIES SAYING THE SAME THING. I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THAT AS A LITTLE BACKGROUND AND SAY Y'ALL ARE SITTING IN A DIFFICULT SITUATION AND WE ARE TOO. The judge is the budget officer of the county, but the budget is ultimately, like he said, handled by the five members of the court. And this year is really difficult. Let's hope we don't hear another year like this. But right now, here's where we are. And that's really all I wanted to say was that I sincerely appreciate y'all coming and helping us with this process, because it is a process. And that's all I have to say. Thank you.

Anybody else in the audience? Is there anybody online?

Not that I can see.

Okay.

Balance.

Too many papers. Okay committee members now is the time if you'd like to have any further discussion about any of the individual grievances to talk through that maybe we just start with the first one see if you want to have any further conversation and then if there's no conversation at that time we could consider any potential motion if anybody would like to like to do that. So any We can just ask questions or have a conversation as a group. That's what this time is for. And the first, again, first agreement was John Terry, Justice of the Peace Precinct 3, with that request of $88,400, with a 3% up to $91,052.

Yes, ma'am. Would you state your name again?

Thank you. Mary Estella Esparza. I have a question. As a judge, how many hours a week do you perform work?

That's a good question because the Justice of the Peace in Guadalupe County probably does as much work as anybody because we're on call 24-7. I don't care if they want to argue it to my face, they can. But we're on call 24-7. Anyone in my house, if I get a phone call at night, so we do inquests because we don't have a medical examiner. So we get a call. If anyone dies in our area or any other precinct, the judge is not answering their phone. We get woken up and everyone in our house gets woken up because I turn my phone on very, very loud. So it's hard to say how many hours.

One other question. Go ahead. This is not directly for you, but my question is, what is the starting calendar year for, I know some places start in September, late September. What is the calendar year for this job? October 1.

Our fiscal year is October.

October.

Okay.

Thank you.

That's up to y'all.

Can I make one?

If you want to, absolutely.

Okay, well, I, Beatrice Bejarano, move to motion to be made about the salary for Justice of the Peace Precinct 3 at $97,972. $97,972? Yes. Yes.

Okay, there was a motion to increase Justice of the Peace Precinct 3 salary from $88,400 to $97,972. Is that a correct pre-statement? Yes. Okay. Is there a second?

I second.

Do you have a second? Can we get the name of the second? I'm sorry.

Carol Shimku.

And I know we have a motion and a second. I would like to just ask, when we're looking at that summary sheet, and it has the current and requested, for your motion, the $97,972, does that represent the 3% COLA at 91052 plus the $1,200 of longevity plus $5,000 of auto allowance and plus the cell allowance of $720?

It does.

Okay. So I just give some frame of reference as to what that number consists of. Any other comments or questions about the motion that is on the table?

Yes, please. Since the Justice John Terry was here and he heard how you don't have any money, does he still want more money?

That was, I mean, you don't have to. I mean, that was the request, right? That was the grievance that was filed.

Do you still want to make that request, considering what you've heard today?

Is your request still valid after you heard the testimony about the budget and everything else?

You still have the same request right now as you did when we started this morning?

Any other questions or comments about the motion?

No.

Okay. We do have a motion and a second. Hearing no other discussion, all those in favor say aye.

Sorry to interrupt. It's got to be a roll call vote. Individually? According to the rules that were adopted, call each person's name and they will either say yes or no.

Okay. Well, if you don't mind, then let me get to this. Sheet balance for voting.

How many votes does it take to pass?

For this body to recommend the increase to the court, it takes at least six. In the event there were nine, a unanimous vote of nine members would require it be added to the budget. A vote of six to eight is a recommendation to the commissioner's court to be considered that it be added. However, it's still discretionary.

Motion. And tell me your name again.

Carol Shinkey.

Carol Shinkey. And you made the second, correct? Yes. And Beatrice, you made the motion? Mm-hmm. Okay. And if y'all don't mind, I know we keep saying our names a lot, but if we can just start down at the end. There was a motion in a second to increase the salary and compensation for Justice of the Peace Precinct 3, John Terry, to that $97,972 that encompassed COLA, longevity, auto allowance, and a cell phone. IF WE'LL JUST GO DOWN THE LINE AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND THEN JUST VOTE IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED.

MY NAME IS TESSA VELASQUEZ, AND I AM IN FAVOR.

OKAY, NEXT.

I ALREADY DID IT, RIGHT?

WELL, WE'LL JUST GO.

OH, BEATRICE BEJARANO, IN FAVOR.

BENITA BINGHAM, IN FAVOR.

Mayor Stella Esparza in favor.

Carol Shimku in favor.

Matthew Schuelke, no.

Carolyn Lowry in favor. Carlin Hinkley.

I'm sorry, no. They don't have it.

Okay.

So that motion does pass with...

Six yeses are in favor and two against.

No, don't, let's not start.

Y'all can have a conversation afterwards if you'd like. All right, so the vote counts. We have six in favor and two against. All right, and we will move now to The second grievance was Ms. Theresa Keel, the County Clerk. Current proposed salary was $103,400. She was requesting a salary increase of $10,000, which equates to $113,400 per year. And in addition to that, also requested an auto allowance in the amount of $3,000. Any questions and or discussion on this item?

My name is Tessa Velasquez and I wanted to ask about the fact that other people are also doing other people's jobs and not getting the amount. Just because they weren't getting paid for it, does that mean that it was right to not get paid for it, for doing the extra work? Is that something that could start happening instead of it being like an unequal thing to give it to one person?

That's a great question. That's some of the conversation that took place, right? Because I think in a lot of instances you want, as a commissioner's court that's trying to make these decisions, not everything's identical. It doesn't always fit in that nice little meat box. But you also try to promote consistency as much as possible. Because there are good arguments for different things. With 40 departments, you can have one department say, this is the most important thing that's going on, and this is why we need to focus on that. but then another department can come up the next day and make just as good an argument for what they're operating in, right? But to your point, I've also heard from the individual requesting this going, right, but we can't go back. And if you never start somewhere, and you just say no every time, you'll never do it the first time, right? So, I mean, there's nothing preventing this body or Commissioner's Court from starting something. But I'm telling you my opinion, but also based on conversations and comments from commissioners, You've had a number of individuals that have had jobs that they had to cover that weren't theirs that weren't compensated. And I think as was stated at the podium earlier, that was the mindset of majority of commissioners court. And that was something that was considered very heavily going, how can you do it for one, if you have similar situations that were told no for doing something that was very close to the same thing. And that was the mindset, I believe. Yes, ma'am, you have a question.

Mary Estelle Esparza. As county clerk, just as a clerk, a job is a job. And we all ought to be thankful we have jobs. But I think that at this point with the economy and the people and when you look at the overall picture of the way things are, 105 right now even is a very good pay for county clerk. I AM AGAINST A RAISE AT THIS POINT OF TIME DUE TO THE ECONOMY AND HER PAY AS WELL. AND AS FAR AS DOING ASSIGNMENTS IN A JOB, WE ALL HAVE MULTITASKS ALL DAY LONG AND I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO BE COMPENSATED FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL TASK WE PERFORM. I THINK HER PAY IS GOOD AND I OPPOSE IT AT THIS POINT. THANK YOU.

Any other questions and or discussion, committee members, before we consider potential motion?

OK. I'm a stinker. Carlin Hinckley. You're allowed mileage. And you stressed a couple times that you drive a lot and some other individual in your office. But you don't claim it. But now you want money. No. I just want you to understand why I'm going to say no. I understand. Okay. Claiming the mileage, that can add up.

Okay.

Any other questions? Any other discussion? Hey, committee members, this would be the time if anybody would like to make a motion for us to hear that.

So Matthew Schulke, motion to deny.

We do have a motion to deny the formal request of the salary agreement number two. Is there a second?

Carlin Hinckley. Yeah, I second that.

We do have a motion and a second to deny the request submitted by our county clerk, Teresa Keel, as salary agreement number two. COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS BEFORE WE CONSIDER TAKING A VOTE ON THE MOTION? OKAY. AGAIN, THE MOTION WAS TO DENY THE REQUEST. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

JUDGE.

YES, SIR.

WE HAVE TO GO INDIVIDUALLY.

OH, SORRY. IT'S COMMISSIONER'S COURT. YOU'RE AT THE SAME EVERY TIME. I'm in my mode in court. Thank you, Mr. Tyes. Will you please state your name again? We'll go one by one.

Tessa Velasquez, in favor to deny.

Okay.

And I thank you for stating that. I know it's a little bit, when there's a motion to deny something, if you agree with that, you are in favor of denying it, right? So good job stating that.

Do I have a question before I say mine? Yes, ma'am. If I don't agree with the full amount but a lesser amount, do I say it or I just say no?

No. Since there's a motion and a second on the table to deny the request, you either support that denial where it stays the same or you would have to vote against that motion.

I, Beatriz Bejarano, vote against the denial.

Benita Bingham, vote against the denial.

Maricela Sanchez Esparza. I am voting no pay raise.

Carol Shimku, going to vote against the denial.

Matthew Schuelke in favor.

Carolyn Lowry against the denial.

Carolyn Hinckley for the denial.

Okay, we do have four in favor of the denial of the request and four against.

Flip a coin. OK, that was inappropriate.

No, you're fine. So I mean, in that event, there's really no tiebreaker. I mean, we could consider another motion if somebody wants to make that motion. IF SOMEBODY HAS A DIFFERENT IDEA, IS THAT CORRECT WAY TO HANDLE THAT, MR. TAYES?

CORRECT, JUDGE. IN FACT, THE COMMITTEE CAN CONTINUE WITH MOTIONS UNTIL THEY STOP MAKING MOTIONS. YOU'RE NOT LIMITED ON THE ACTIONS. SO SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE COMMITTEE, SOMEBODY MADE A MOTION TO INCREASE IT BY $100,000, JUST THROWING A HYPOTHETICAL OUT THERE, AND THAT FAILED, AND THEN ANOTHER COMMITTEE MEMBER WANTED TO COME BACK AND MAKE A MOTION TO INCREASE IT BY $10, you can come back and make that second motion. So until the committee has voted in favor of a final action or stops making motions, the committee may continue.

So committee members, is there anybody that would like to make another or different motion?

And, Judge, just to be clear, the committee can also discuss now. If you want to discuss, have a discussion among the committee itself, you don't have to just come up with something. Just make a motion. Right. The committee can have a discussion amongst themselves about what they think is a good idea, what they may or may not want to do, what they may or may not agree with. It doesn't all have to come in the motion form.

Right. Everybody's getting a feel of what it's like to be on Commissioner's Court right now. It's not always fun. It's a challenging place to be to make these decisions and consider things. And y'all are in a tougher spot because you're not involved all the time and know all the backstory. But y'all are doing great so far. So just if anybody, like Mr. Tye said, if there were a few people who voted against that, maybe you weren't in 100% favor of going, nope, no raise. Maybe just talk through some of the ideas. Why didn't you like that idea? If you had another preference or concerns, we could just have a discussion too. Yes, ma'am. Very good suggestion.

This is Benita Bingham.

Benita Bingham, I work for a large corporation.

And believe me, y'all's job, I would not want. I would not want to figure out people's salaries. But to not give somebody something when they're doing something that is over and beyond their job, and even giving them less money? You're not going to get qualified people to do these positions in the future. She might quit. Who are you going to get to hire her at what you're asking? It's very difficult to get qualified people to come over for less money from other positions. I do believe she deserves more money. Not maybe what she's asking, but something.

To me, that's a slap in the face not to give her something.

So I would recommend to bring it up $1,625, which is what she's currently making and the difference of the $3,000 and the $2,365, I do believe. SOMETHING. THAT'S MY RECOMMENDATION.

NEW SPEAKER WHAT WAS THE TOTAL AMOUNT?

NEW SPEAKER I THINK IT'S TO BRING IT UP TO $1,006 AND $450. THAT'S MY RECOMMENDATION.

I, BEATRICE BEJARANO, SECOND THAT MOTION.

WAS THAT A MOTION?

THAT WAS MY RECOMMENDATION.

I DON'T KNOW IF I WANT TO.

WELL, I'M MAKING THE MOTION, I GUESS, FOR COUNTY CLERK TO GET 106, 450. OKAY.

THERE'S A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND?

Benita Bingham seconds it.

We do have a motion and a second for County Clerk Tree Skeel to receive total compensation $106,450. And just to clarify the motion in the current salary, it shows $103,400 plus longevity coming out to $105,765. IT WOULD JUST BE TAKING THAT DIFFERENCE AND ADDING IT TO THE SALARY, CORRECT?

YES, CORRECT.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WE DO HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION?

ARE YOU ASKING FOR THE SECOND?

NO, WE HAVE THE MOTION. JUST SEEING IF ANYBODY HAS ANY OTHER COMMENTS THEY WANT TO MAKE BEFORE WE CONSIDER VOTING. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION?

to ask how she feels about it?

If you want to, sure.

How do you feel about that?

I am grateful for anything I get. But I'm looking for equity. And if others are getting 3%, it should be equivalent. Just a thought. But I'm grateful. Thank you for considering how I feel about it.

Any other comments, questions? So I just want to give you kind of a little bit of a sneak peek kind of through the looking glass, if you will. I made the comment and kind of joking that y'all were on commissioner's court now because that's what it feels like. When you get to elected official salary, it's very challenging. The court voted four to one. I was the one individual that did not support the decision. And I wanted elected officials to get the same raise as county employees because I feel like we're all together, we're all a team, that if everybody has to suffer, we should all suffer together. When everybody gets to benefit, we should benefit together. There's been a lot of effort, even if some don't agree with where their salary is put at. We try to consider all these positions across the board, make sure that there's separation between department heads, elected officials, their staff, that they're competitive to some extent, that we try to look at all those things. So I just wanted to give that reference point where All these individuals that voted on Commissioner's Court had valid reasons for doing what they were doing, and it wasn't a perfect scenario. It's nobody's fault that it happened that way. It just kind of worked out. But it is a challenge sitting up here as a non-voting member on a grievance committee where I don't get a raise this year. I didn't file a grievance. I didn't run again. I'm finished with my term the end of this year. I've been at the county for 16 years, right? I work hard. I spend a tremendous amount of time at my job. And when everybody has a problem, who do you think they call? They're calling me at nights and on the weekends and all those things. So it's a unique dynamic to think about all these things because we have some very, very good and hardworking people that aren't going to get a raise this year. Now, I don't completely agree with that, but now we're in a scenario where we don't have the luxury as Commissioner's Court because of timing to go back and reconsider the pay for those other people. And I'm not saying this because I don't want y'all to do something or I want you to do something. I'm just saying I understand 100% the difficult position y'all are in as committee members trying to decide on what to do just sitting here, because you only get to consider the request that's in front of you. And it's a tough one. So just again, I respect y'all. And I'm here if you have any other questions. I know there is a motion and a second. to change the grievance number to Teresa Keel, our county clerk, total compensation to $106,450. Any other comments or questions before we consider that?

How much would the 3% be?

What would the 3% total be?

3%, Teresa, you're getting the same number, 106502. 502, yes. 106502. Yeah, it's just $50.

So I'm fine. Any other questions? Okay, we do have a motion and a second. If you'll please start on the end one more time. We're all going to learn each other's names by the end of this morning.

You're okay. You can take a minute if you need to.

I know we're all looking at you, but don't feel like you're pressured. Just hold on a second if you need to think about it for a moment. So when I was a brand new commissioner we had to do redistricting as you're thinking this is me stalling for you the very same thing happened to me because I didn't know what I wanted to do and I was brand new and it was the first time that the courtroom was filled up and the people made valid really I mean complaints and justification as to why Maps should be drawn a certain way. But I was concerned about people in Precinct 2 having to drive around McQueenie and up the river to vote. And I just had to do what I thought was right. Well, I apparently made a bunch of people mad. But in that situation, the judge then went one by one like we're voting today. And he got to me and I froze. He passed me up. He's like, we'll come back to you because I paused for so long. But it all worked out.

Tessa Velasquez in favor?

Beatrice Bejarano in favor of the motion.

Benita Bingham in favor.

Stella Esparza in favor.

Carol Shimku in favor.

Matthew Schuelke against.

Carolyn Lowry in favor. Okay, so that motion does pass we have a

Was that just one in opposition? Okay. I just want to make sure we got the right. All right. Y'all are doing great. One more. Grievent number three was Constable Precinct One James Springer. Again, if you remember, Constable Springer had In the documents, it talked about the 3%. His bigger concern was about the process that had taken place and who was involved and other people speaking on his behalf for his budget and department. So I just wanted to open it up for conversation, see if you have any questions or would like to have any discussion at this time.

Carlyn Hinckley. I'm with him that people shouldn't be deciding something for my department. But is this the board to address that issue or is it your five-man team?

So this committee doesn't have the purview or isn't able to have that kind of interaction to have an influence over that. So great question. I mean, if y'all would like to, you're welcome to voice your opinions because it was brought up as part of this process, and you're absolutely able to do that. But specifically to your question, right, this salary grievance committee can't tell another elected official, you can't do this, you need to stop, or there's something could occur, right? Yeah. Good point, though.

Stella Sparza. I'm very grateful in your humbleness to consider others before yourself. And I'm with you in regards to really with the economy and the inflation, where things are, people shouldn't be so much caught up on themselves when we have so much going on around us that there's other people that could use the race besides ourselves. AND THE FACT THAT YOU FEEL HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT OTHERS SPEAKING FOR YOU, I'M VERY IMPRESSED. I'M VERY IMPRESSED. AND IT'S VERY HUMBLING OF YOU AND I THANK YOU FOR THAT.

I DO. NEW SPEAKER I BELIEVE THAT OR IN MY VIEW, I THINK INSTEAD OF DECREASING THE SALARY, I WOULD JUST KEEP IT THE SAME. For the constable? Have the current salary versus the proposed? Because that's decreasing it.

Oh, you're talking about, I mean, because of the longevity that changed?

Right.

So the current is $92,855 with the salary, longevity, law enforcement certification, and uniform allowance. And the proposed is about, what is that, 91,915? And you're saying in your opinion, just in conversation, that it should stay at the 92,855? Yes. Any other thoughts on that idea? Again, it was not a motion, just kind of somebody expressing what they think should happen. Any opinions? I can talk a lot. I just don't want to push y'all.

But either way, we need a motion.

Correct. I mean, if somebody doesn't have any other talking points, anybody doesn't want to consider any other potential discussion, if somebody wants to make a motion, y'all are absolutely always able to make a motion if you'd like.

Matthew Schulke, motion to keep his salary current $92,855. Carol Schimpf, you all second.

Okay, we do have a motion and a second to keep the salary the same as current, not the actual small reduction. So that would be keeping the 92,855. Was that the correct restatement? Correct.

Okay.

Any other comments or questions on that motion? Okay, hearing no other discussion, we'll start one more time by saying our names and voting.

TESLA VELASQUEZ, IN FAVOR. BEATRICE BEJERANO, IN FAVOR.

BENITA BEINGHAM, IN FAVOR.

CAROL SCHUMKE, IN FAVOR.

STELLA SPARS, IN FAVOR. CAROL SCHUMKE, IN FAVOR.

MATTHEW SCHULKE, IN FAVOR.

CAROLYN LOWERY, IN FAVOR. CARLIN HINKLEY, IN FAVOR.

That's 8 in favor and 0 against. For the Constable Precinct 1 salary to remain the same as current, not be reduced, that's $92,855. All right. Salary Grievance Committee. Thank you very much for your time today. As I stated earlier, we've never done this before. I think things went really smooth because of all of your willingness to participate. Do we need anything else, Mr. Tice?

We do. Because the committee voted to recommend an increase on these individuals, they have to submit a written recommendation to the commissioner's court. We have a form that will just state the motion. who made the motion, who seconded, and how each person voted. And we're just going to ask that you sign next to your name and how you voted just to indicate. And that form will be passed along and considered in commissioner's court tomorrow. So please don't leave just yet, because we need everybody's signature on three forms.

Committee members, thank you very much. With no other business, we'll move to Item 8, and we will stand in adjournment at 11.17 a.m.