[00:00:05] >> GOOD EVENING. I'D LIKE TO WELCOME YOU ALL TO OUR BUDGET HEARING. [1. CALL TO ORDER] THANK YOU FOR COMING. WE WILL NOW HAVE ROLL CALL. JUSTIN, CAN YOU HEAR NOW OR CAN YOU TALK NOW? >> YES, MA'AM. MS. LEWISON. >> HERE. >> MS. MCMULLEN. >> PRESENT. >> MS. MASSEY. >> HERE. >> MR. KEITH. >> HERE. >> SOON TO BE DR. KEITH. MS. GREEN. NOT HERE YET. MR. ROBINSON. >> HERE. >> MR. STOWERS. >> RIGHT. >> MR. ELLIOTT. >> HERE. >> SEVEN MEMBERS PRESENT. ONE HASN'T MADE IT YET. YOU DO HAVE A QUORUM, MADAM CHAIR. >> THANK YOU. CAN I GET AN APPROVAL ON THE MINUTES? [3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES] >> SO MOVED. >> SECOND. >> BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECOND. THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MINUTES, LET ME KNOW BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSITION? THERE BE NONE. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT JUSTICE GREEN HAS ARRIVED. WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO UNFINISHED BUSINESS. [4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS] JUSTIN, IF YOU WOULD READ I-30. >> YES, MA'AM. 24-I-30. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 23-OR-47, 2024 ANNUAL BUDGET, PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS, TO PROVIDE A 1% SALARY INCREASE FOR ALL ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES, TO PROVIDE A 7% SALARY ADJUSTMENT INCREASE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS, TO UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE CERTAIN POSITIONS, AND TO ADD CERTAIN POSITIONS FOR VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS EFFECTIVE JUNE 29TH, 2024. >> NOW, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE THAT, BUT WE ALSO HAVE I-41. >> ESSENTIALLY, SINCE THIS IS UNFINISHED BUSINESS AND WAS REFERRED BACK TO THE COMMITTEE, IT IS IF YOU ARE BACK IN THE MIDDLE OF DEBATE. THE MOTION HAS ALREADY BEEN AS A DUE PASS, SO YOU ARE BACK INTO DEBATE, OPEN TO MAKE MOTIONS HOWEVER YOU WANT TO HANDLE IT. IT'S AS IF YOU LEFT OFF WHERE YOU WERE. >> JUSTICE STOWERS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, MS. MASSEY. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE 24-I-30 FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE FACT THAT WE HAVE OTHER ORDINANCES ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING THAT FULFILL THE BASIC REQUEST OF THAT ITEM. DO I HAVE A SECOND TO TABLE 24-I-30? >> SECOND. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECOND. IS THERE ANY QUESTION, DISCUSSION? IF THERE BE NONE, JUSTIN, WILL YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE? >> YES, MA'AM. THIS IS THE MOTION TO TABLE. MR. ELLIOTT. >> YES. >> MR. STOWERS. >> YES. >> MR. ROBINSON. >> AYE. >> MS. GREEN. >> AYE. >> MR. KEITH. >> YES. >> MS. MASSEY. >> AYE. >> MS. MCMULLEN. >> NO. >> MS. LEWISON. >> YES. >> SEVEN AYES, ONE NAY. >> THANK YOU. THAT HAS BEEN TABLED INDEFINITELY. NOW WE'RE MOVING ON TO I-41, [5. NEW BUSINESS] WHICH IS NEW BUSINESS. >> YOU READY? >> NOT CALL THE ROLL, BUT WOULD YOU READ I-41? >> YES, MA'AM. 24-I-41. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 23-OR-47, 2024 ANNUAL BUDGET, PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS, TO PROVIDE A 2% SALARY INCREASE FOR ALL ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES AND TO PROVIDE A SALARY ADJUSTMENT INCREASE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 7TH, 2024. >> YOU'RE RECOGNIZED, JUSTICE STOWERS. >> YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE SEND THIS ITEM TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DUE PASS RECOMMENDATION. >> SECOND. >> SECOND. >> BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECOND. IS THERE ANY QUESTION AND DISCUSSION IN REFERENCE TO I-41? >> QUESTION. >> JUSTICE KEITH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> THIS WOULD BE TO HUTCH. WHAT'S THE EFFECTIVE HIRE DATE FOR THIS? WELL, THIS IS FOR EVERYBODY THAT'S WITH THE COUNTY. >> NOW, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS, IF YOU PASS THIS, WE'LL ADJUST THE PAY SCALE. YOU'VE NOT PUT ANY RESTRICTIONS OR GUIDELINES OR ANYTHING THERE WITH IT. WE'LL ADJUST THE PAY SCALE SO THEY'RE WORKING HERE. >> NOBODY WILL BE EXCLUDED. I GUESS THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE, WHAT I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE. >> I'VE GOT A FEW EMPLOYEES WHO'VE BEEN HERE FOR OVER 30 YEARS. [00:05:03] THEY'RE PROBABLY OUTSIDE THE RANGE, BUT THE PAY SCALE WILL BE BORN. >> THIS IS STILL OUR ATTEMPT TO GET IN LINE WITH THE JOHANSEN STUDY OR TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE MARKET? >> TRYING TO KEEP UP WITH MARKET. >> MARKET. THANK YOU. I YIELD. >> THANK YOU, JUSTICE KEITH. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS IN REFERENCE TO I-41? IF THERE BE NONE, JUSTIN, WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE? >> MS. LEWISON. >> YES. >> MS. MCMULLEN. >> YES. >> MS. MASSEY. >> AYE. >> MR. KEITH. >> YES. >> MS. GREEN. >> AYE. >> MR. ROBINSON. >> AYE. >> MR. STOWERS. >> YES. >> MR. ELLIOTT. >> YES. >> EIGHT AYES, NO NAYS. >> THIS WILL GO TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT FOR FINAL APPROVAL. WE'RE NOW DOWN TO I-42. JUSTIN, WOULD YOU READ I-42, PLEASE? >> AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 18-OR-21, ESTABLISHING COMPENSATION AND PER DIEM RATES FOR ELECTED COUNTY OFFICIALS AND JUSTICES OF THE PEACE. >> JUSTICE STOWERS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE SEND THIS ITEM TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DUE PASS RECOMMENDATION. >> SECOND. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECOND. IS THERE ANY QUESTION OR DISCUSSION IN REFERENCE TO I-42? JUSTICE MCMULLEN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> NOW, JUST EXACTLY HOW HAS I-42 CHANGED FROM WHAT IT IS, THE PROCESS THAT WE'VE HAD BEFORE? >> I'M SORRY. WAS THAT DIRECTED AT ME? I'M SORRY. ESSENTIALLY, IT WOULD CAP COMPENSATION GROWTH FOR ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS AT 3% IN A 12-MONTH PERIOD, A CALENDAR YEAR, NOT TO DIP BELOW 90% OF THE STATUTORY RANGE THAT THE ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE ENTITLED TO. IN THE EVENT THAT IT DID DIP BELOW 90%, IF YOU DIDN'T PROVIDE COMPENSATION RAISES FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND YOU DROPPED TO SAY AN 85%, THE QUORUM COURT AT THAT POINT COULD MAKE IT A SALARY ADJUSTMENT UP TO 5% TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU DIDN'T DIP BELOW THE 90 PERCENTILE. EFFECTIVELY, THIS WOULD LEAVE ELECTED OFFICIALS AT ABOUT 96% OF THE TOTAL COMPENSATION RANGE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS. >> THANK YOU. >> YES, MA'AM. >> JUSTICE STOWERS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, MA'AM. I JUST WANT TO FURTHER ENDORSE THIS ORDINANCE IN THAT THE LEGISLATURE PROVIDED FOR COUNTY ELECTED OFFICIALS, THE FULL-TIME ONES AS WELL AS JPS, FOR A 7% INCREASE IN THIS LAST YEAR. I BELIEVE THE REASON THIS ORDINANCE IS BEFORE US IS WE DIDN'T FEEL IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE, EVEN THOUGH THE STATE HAD APPROVED IT TO PROVIDE ELECTED OFFICIALS WITH A 7% INCREASE WHEN WE'RE GIVING OUR COUNTY EMPLOYEES TWO. WHAT THIS DOES IS BALANCES THAT OUT AND SETS A PARAMETER AT A 90-100 RANGE WITH A MAXIMUM ANNUALLY OF 3% TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE AS ELECTED OFFICIALS BEING COMPENSATED FAIRLY, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, BEING COMPENSATED COMMENSURATE TO HOW OUR EMPLOYEES ARE COMPENSATED. I YIELD WITH THAT. THANK YOU, MA'AM. >> THANK YOU, JUSTICE STOWERS. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> MS. MASSEY, IF I COULD TOO AS WELL. IS THAT IF IN THE EVENT THAT THIS DOES PASS, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE PRUDENT TO BRING UP YOUR PER DIEMS FOR YOU SPECIFICALLY SINCE YOU DON'T HAVE SALARIES. YOU'RE PAID ON A PER DIEM. STATUTORILY, YOU HAVE TO ESTABLISH YOUR PER DIEM PER MEETING. IF THIS WERE TO PASS, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE PRUDENT TO PUT FORTH AN ORDINANCE AS WELL WITH THIS PACKET TO PROVIDE WHATEVER THAT 3% IS FOR YOU GUYS. IT'S PROBABLY ABOUT $20 MORE A MEETING. BUT IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS ARE COMFORTABLE WITH, I COULD PUT THAT FORWARD AS WELL. >> YES, PLEASE. >> THANK YOU. >> ARE ANY OF THE QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSIONS IN REFERENCE TO I-42? CAN I GET A MOTION? >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE SEND I-42 TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DUE PASS RECOMMENDATION. [00:10:03] >> SECOND. >> SECOND. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECOND. JUSTIN, IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, I ASSUME THERE ISN'T, WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE? >> YES, MA'AM. MR. ELLIOTT. >> YES. >> MR. STOWERS. >> YES. >> MR. ROBINSON. >> AYE. >> MS. GREEN. >> AYE. >> MR. KEITH. >> YES. >> MS. MASSEY. >> AYE. >> MS. MCMULLEN. >> AYE. >> MS. LEWISON. >> YES. >> VERY GOOD. >> THANK YOU. THIS WILL GO TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT FOR FINAL APPROVAL. WE'RE NOW DOWN TO I-43. JUSTIN, WOULD YOU READ I-43, PLEASE? >> YES. AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH RESPONSIBLE AND SUSTAINABLE GROWTH OF PERSONNEL POSITIONS IN PULASKI COUNTY GOVERNMENT TO ESTABLISH AN EVALUATION PROCESS FOR PERSONNEL POSITIONS. >> JUSTICE STOWERS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> MAKE A MOTION THAT WE SEND THIS ITEM TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH A DUE PASS RECOMMENDATION. >> SECOND. >> BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECOND THAT WE SEND IT TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT. JUSTICE LEWISON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. PLEASE SPEAK INTO THE MIC. >> IS THERE ANYBODY FROM HR HERE? >> GOOD EVENING. >> THANK YOU. >> MY QUESTION IS, WHY IS THIS REALLY NECESSARY? >> WHICH PART? >> BEFORE THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WE MIGHT HAVE RECEIVED 25 REQUESTS PER YEAR TO BE PROCESSED BY OUR OFFICE. THIS PAST YEAR AND THE PREVIOUS YEAR WAS HIGH TOO. THIS PAST YEAR, WE RECEIVED APPROXIMATELY 98. THAT'S A HUGE VOLUME OF REQUESTS THAT HAVE GOT TO COME THROUGH IN A VERY SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME FOR YOU ALL TO RECEIVE THEM BY APRIL AND BE ABLE TO MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON THOSE. DUE TO THE SHEER VOLUME, THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME PARAMETERS SET SO THAT WE ALL MEET DEADLINES AND CAN GET IT BEFORE THE QUORUM COURT IN ORDER FOR YOU TO MAKE A TIMELY DECISION. >> THANK YOU. >> CAN I ADD AS WELL, MS. LEWISON? RIGHT NOW, THE PROCESS IS BASICALLY A VERBAL THING WHERE HR WILL SAY, HEY, WHEN ARE YOU HAVING A MEETING? WE'LL SAY LATE APRIL. THERE'S NOT A ESTABLISHED PROCESS ON PAPER AS TO WHEN DEADLINES NEED TO BE MET. THIS WOULD BASICALLY MAKE IT VERY CLEAR FOR EVERYBODY. >> YOU'RE GIVING IT A DEADLINE THIS TIME. >> RIGHT. INSTEAD OF A MOVING TARGET. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, JUSTICE LEWISON. JUSTICE MCMULLEN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> I WAS CURIOUS AS TO WHY THIS WAS COMING UP IN THE BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING FOR ONE AS OPPOSED TO THE AGENDA COMMITTEE MEETING. >> BUDGET HANDLES ALL PERSONNEL ISSUES. YOU HAVE FOR THE LAST EIGHT OR NINE YEARS. >> I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THAT. >> I'M 100% SURE ABOUT THAT. >> WHEN I HAVE BEEN ON HERE. BUT THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION. I SEE WHERE IT IS A PERSONNEL ISSUE, BUT THEN AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S NOT QUITE A BUDGET. >> WHAT'S YOUR LARGEST EXPENSE FOR THE COUNTY? >> WELL, THE LARGEST EXPENSE WOULD BE WHAT? >> PERSONNEL. >> THEN THE QUESTION, THIS BASICALLY, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, GIVES MORE POWER TO HUMAN RESOURCE, CERTAINLY, AND IT TAKES IT AWAY FROM THE ELECTED. >> NO, MA'AM. ALL IT DOES IS SET A TIMELINE. IT SETS A DATE. WE NEED YOU TO GET YOUR STUFF OUT ON TIME SO WE CAN GET IT TO YOU ALL. >> THEN TWO, I SEE THAT IT JUST SEEMED TO HAVE COME UP ON FRIDAY. I WAS WONDERING IF THE ELECTED OFFICIALS OR THE DEPARTMENT HEADS HAD BEEN INFORMED. >> YES, MA'AM. OF WHAT? THAT WE'RE SETTING A TIME? >> BASICALLY, YES. >> WELL, THIS WILL BE NOTIFYING THEM THAT THERE WILL BE A TIME. >> THIS WILL BE NOTIFYING THEM. >> YES, MA'AM. LUCKILY, I DON'T HAVE TO GET DEEP INTO HR ANYMORE. IT'S NOT MORE OF MY DEPARTMENTS. BUT LIKE SHE SAID, [00:15:02] WHEN YOU HAVE 98 REQUESTS, EVERYBODY WANTS TO TURN THEM IN AT LAST MINUTE, AND WE'RE SUPPOSED TO THEN RUN THEM THROUGH PAYROLL AFTER THEY'RE EVALUATED AND GET ALL THE INFORMATION AND THEN GET IT TO YOU ALL. YOU CAN'T REALLY DO THAT A FEW WEEKS BEFORE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. >> AND I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF THERE ARE ANY ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THE OFFICE. I'M SORRY, IN THE CONGREGATION WHO WOULD WANT TO COMMENT ON THIS. ALL RIGHT. >> GOOD EVENING, SHERIFF HIGGINS. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THIS ORDINANCE. IS WHAT WAS SENT OUT FRIDAY INCLUDES A LOT MORE THAN JUST A DATE TO TURN IN ANY CHANGES THAT WE'RE EXPECTING OR NEEDING OTHER CHANGES? >> I DIDN'T WRITE IT. >> THERE'S CHANGES IN HERE RELATED TO ONLY ANY ELECTED OFFICIAL CAN ONLY SUBMIT 2% OF THEIR STAFFING. THERE'S OTHER NOTICES IN HERE ABOUT ALL POSITIONS, ELEVATIONS, MUST BE SUBMITTED TO HR VIA COMPLETED REQUEST POSITION. MY CONCERN ON THIS IS THERE'S MORE TO IT THAN JUST A DEADLINE. WE WILL FOLLOW THE DEADLINES. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WHATEVER DEADLINE HR SUBMITS. IF THEY WANT TO SAY DECEMBER 1ST OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, WE'LL FOLLOW THOSE DEADLINES, BUT THIS ORDINANCE HAS MORE TO IT THAN JUST THAT DEADLINE. UNLESS THERE'S ANOTHER VERSION THAT WAS SENT OUT AFTER FRIDAY AND THAT'S MY CONCERN. MY REQUEST WOULD BE AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL THAT WE'RE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THE ORDINANCE, COMMENT ON THE ORDINANCE. BUT THERE ARE SOME THINGS, SOME MINOR CHANGES I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN IT? IF WE'RE GOING TO PUSH THIS, WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE WHERE THE ELECTED OFFICIAL HAS COMMENTS HAS A SAY IN SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE BEING SUBMITTED. I'VE ONLY HEARD ONE THIS YEAR AS IF IT'S ONLY ONE THING MAYBE IT'S BEEN CHANGED. >> THERE WAS ONE QUESTION ABOUT ONE COMPONENT OF IT. I'M ASSUMING THIS IS REFERRING TO THE 2% GROWTH. THIS IS POSTED ON FRIDAY, AS EVERY OTHER AGENDA IS POSTED ON FRIDAY. THAT'S FIVE BUSINESS DAYS OR FIVE DAYS FOR SOMEONE TO CONSUME AND ASK QUESTIONS. I WOULD OFFER, HOWEVER, A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT ON THE EXEMPTIONS OF ARTICLE 1. RIGHT NOW, TO EXCEED THAT 2% GROWTH, YOU BASICALLY HAVE A SERIES OF EXEMPTIONS, DECREE OF EXECUTIVE ORDER, ANYTHING THAT'S BASICALLY STATUTORILY REQUIRED OF YOU GUYS TO DO, I WOULD OFFER THAT IF YOU GUYS DID WANT TO EXCEED THAT 2% GROWTH, THAT YOU DO IT VIA A RESOLUTION OF THE OR COURT, BASICALLY STATING FOR THE SAME REASONS OF AN EXECUTIVE ORDER, THAT, HEY, A NEED EXISTS, WE'RE PASSING THIS RESOLUTION, THE QUORUM COURT CAN VOTE ON THAT AND IF THAT IS AGREED UPON BY THE COURT THAT GRANTS YOU ANOTHER EXEMPTION THAT YOU CONTROL, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WOULD MAKE THAT MORE PALATABLE? >> NO. IF I CAN SPEAK, I WOULD ASK, AND I REALIZE YOU SENT THIS OUT ON FRIDAY. AS PULASKI COUNTY SHERIFF, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS GOING ON IN THE COUNTY. AND FOR US TO TAKE THE TIME TO REVIEW A DOCUMENT SENT OUT ON FRIDAY, BE PREPARED FOR A TUESDAY. I DON'T THINK THAT'S FAIR TO ALL THE ELECTED OFFICIALS. LET US REVIEW IT AND HAVE A CONVERSATION TO ADDRESS IT. NOT SUBMITTING IT UP IN THE LAST MINUTE ON A FRIDAY. I THINK IF YOU WANT COMMENTS ABOUT EACH SECTION THAT THERE'S SEVERAL SECTIONS THAT I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT, AND ALL I'M ASKING THIS BODY IS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY FOR MYSELF AND OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS TO REVIEW THIS DOCUMENT AND SUBMIT SOME CHANGES TO IT. WE DON'T MIND, AND WE WORK WITH HR. I THINK IT'S GOOD THAT WE'RE ABLE TO DO THAT. I APPRECIATE HR STAFF. THEY'VE DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB TRYING TO WORK WITH US, AND WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT. BUT I THINK AS ELECTED OFFICIALS, WE SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY MORE THAN TWO DAYS BUSINESS DAYS TO REVIEW OR ACTUALLY LESS THAN TWO BUSINESS DAYS TO REVIEW A DOCUMENT. SO ALL I'M ASKING YOU TO DO IS TO POSTPONE THIS DECISION ON THIS AND ALLOW US TO REVIEW IT. [00:20:04] >> WELL, JUSTICE MACON, DO YOU STILL HAVE THE FLOOR? >> NO. >> JUSTICE STOWERS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> YEAH. MY OLD FEEBLE MIND HAS GOTTEN OFF TRACK. ARE WE ON 21I42 RIGHT NOW? >> 43. >> THANK YOU. >> DON'T EVER GO TO THE LEGISLATURE. >> WELL, I GUESS WILL WE BE VOTING ON THIS NEXT WEEK IF THIS GOES TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT? >> YEAH. YOU WOULD HAVE AN ADDITIONAL WEEK. >> I WANT TO COMMENT ON THAT. BUT DURING THE FULL QUORUM COURT, WE DON'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. YOU DON'T LET ANYONE COME UP AND SPEAK DURING THE FULL QUORUM COURT. ONLY OPPORTUNITY WE HAVE TO A CHALLENGE AN ORDINANCE IS AT THIS TIME AND IF YOU PASS THIS AND GO TO FULL QUORUM COURT, WE KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN. WE WILL NOT AS ELECTED OFFICIALS, OUR OPINION WILL NOT MATTER, IT WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED. WHAT HARM DOES IT DO? RIGHT NOW, WHAT WAS MENTIONED ABOUT THE DECEMBER. IF HR SENDS A NOTICE OUT TODAY THAT SAYS DECEMBER 15TH IS A DEADLINE, DO YOU KNOW WHAT WE WILL DO? WE WILL FOLLOW THAT DEADLINE, LIKE WE HAVE ALWAYS DONE. I CAN APPRECIATE THE HR WANTING TO HAVE A SET DEADLINE FOR EVERY YEAR. THAT PORTION I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH. WE CAN DO THAT. WE WILL FOLLOW HR'S GUIDELINES. IT'S THE OTHER THINGS IN THIS ORDINANCE THAT SEEM TO BE LOOKED OVER. THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. >> SUCH AS IS WHAT I? >> SUCH AS THE 2%, SUCH AS THE EXCEPTIONS, SUCH AS. >> LET'S STOP WITH THE 2%, I WOULD LIKE FOR SOMEONE, WHETHER IT BE HR OR JUSTIN TO EXPOUND ON THAT, PLEASE. >> I'LL BE HAPPY TO. BASICALLY, THIS CAME ORGANICALLY OUT OF CONVERSATIONS WITH SEVERAL OF YOU ALL BASICALLY WITH CONCERNS OF GROWTH AND PERSONNEL COSTS AND THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES THAT ARE BEING ADDED TO YOUR BUDGETS OR INDIVIDUAL BUDGETS. ESSENTIALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE COUNTY'S REVENUE GROWTH BEING ON CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, HUTCH. ESSENTIALLY ON AVERAGE ABOUT 3%. THAT'S WHAT YOU EXPECT YOUR PORTION OF WHAT YOU GET IS ABOUT 3% GROWTH. GROWING YOUR PERSONNEL AT A 2% IS LESS THAN 3%. THAT'S, OF COURSE, IF YOU HAVE THE MONEY. YOU DON'T HAVE TO CONSIDER A 2% INCREASE TO ANY DEPARTMENT AT ANY GIVEN TIME, NO MATTER WHAT YOUR REVENUE STREAMS ARE. YOU CONTROL THE RESOURCES THAT ARE PROVIDED TO THE ELECTED OFFICIALS. >> I THINK THAT'S A VERY GOOD PORTION OF PART TO HAVE IN HERE BECAUSE I DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT EVERYONE WANT TO ADD ON. I UNDERSTAND YOU FEEL THAT YOU NEED THESE EMPLOYEES, BUT WE ARE ACCOUNTABLE TO WHO WE CURRENTLY HAVE. IF WE CANNOT MEET THE NEEDS AND CURRENTLY, IF WE DON'T MAKE SOME DECISIONS, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO GIVE THE 2% TO OUR CURRENT EMPLOYEES AND THAT'S FIRST AND FOREMOST, ABOVE ANYTHING ELSE IS WHAT WE HAVE NOW. NOW WE CAN GRANT YOU ALL AND LET YOU DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO, BUT THEN WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WHEN WE CANNOT MEET THE NEEDS AND PAY OUR EMPLOYEES? >> IF I CAN COMMENT. >> PLEASE. >> THE CURRENT SYSTEM, WE SUBMIT ELECTED OFFICIALS, WE SUBMIT POSITIONS. WE WORK THROUGH HR, SOME OF THEM ARE SUBMITTED TO THE QUORUM COURT, SOME ARE NOT. FROM MY EXPERIENCE. BUT THIS BODY MAKES THE DECISION, AND BELIEVE ME, WE DO UNDERSTAND THERE'S LIMITED RESOURCES. I EXPECT YOU TO BE GOOD STEWARDS WITH THE RESOURCES. YOU ALREADY MAKE THAT DECISION. IF HUTCH TELLS US, WATCH YOUR BUDGET, KEEP IT CLOSE, WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO DO THAT. THERE ARE NEEDS WITHIN THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS. BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT DO I EXPECT THIS QUORUM COURT TO BE ABLE FILL ALL THOSE NEEDS? NO, I DON'T. BUT WE WILL SUBMIT THE NEEDS THAT WE BELIEVE ARE NEEDED. THIS BODY MAKES A DECISION ABOUT WHETHER IT'S A 2% LIMIT, A 1% LIMIT, A 10% LIMIT. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF WE MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS. YOU HAVE TO BALANCE THAT'S LOOKING AT MY BUDGET, THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, BUT YOU ALSO HAVE TO CONSIDER EVERY OTHER ELECTED OFFICIAL AND TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION OF THEIR NEEDS. [00:25:01] A 2% LIMIT COULD END UP BEING ZERO. WE UNDERSTAND THAT. WE UNDERSTAND TRYING TO MEET. I AGREE WITH GIVING EMPLOYEES RAISES. NOW, I DON'T AGREE WITH SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE BEING DONE AS IT RELATES TO FMLA. >> THAT'S NOT A PART OF THIS. >> I AGREE. >> WE HAVE SOME LIGHTS ON, SO JUSTICE KEITH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, JUSTICE MASSEY. MAYBE THIS IS TO JUSTIN FIRST. BECAUSE THIS IS A BUDGET COMMITTEE ITEM, IF WE DON'T ACT ON THIS TONIGHT, WILL IT GO UNTIL NEXT YEAR BEFORE WE ACT ON THIS? >> YOU COULD TABLE IT TECHNICALLY AND THEN TAKE IT UP IN OCTOBER. >> BUT WOULD WE HAVE TO CALL THIS, IT WOULD BE DOING OUR REGULAR BUDGET CYCLE. >> RIGHT, IF YOU GUYS JUST SAID, HEY, WE WANT TO TABLE THIS UNTIL THE NEXT SCHEDULED BUDGET MEETING, THAT WOULD BE FINE. THAT'S NO PROBLEM. >> WHAT ABOUT IS THIS THE WAY IT'S DONE IN OTHER COUNTIES? >> I HAVE NO IDEA. >> WE'VE NOT CHECKED WITH OTHER COUNTIES. >> I HAVE NOT. >> IF WE TABLE THIS AND PICK IT UP IN OCTOBER. WOULD IT BE TO THE QUORUM COURT'S ADVANTAGE, I KNOW THAT THERE ARE OTHER POSITIONS THAT'S ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT. WOULD IT BE GOOD PRUDENCE FOR US TO APPROVE THOSE POSITIONS IF WE'RE TABLING THIS TO MAKE SURE WE'VE GOT CLARITY ON WHAT WE'RE DOING? >> I DON'T THINK ONE HAS ANYTHING TO DO OTHER TONIGHT. >> YOU CAN TABLE THIS. ESPECIALLY IF IT GETS US ON THE SUPPER. >> MR. KEITH, I WOULD STRONGLY AGREE WITH YOU THAT AS LONG AS I'VE BEEN DOING THIS AT THE STATE AND COUNTY LEVEL, I'VE NEVER SEEN A PERFECT ORDINANCE. >> ABSOLUTELY. ANYTHING. WHICH IS WHY AGAIN, WHEN WE STARTED THIS AND REFLECTING UPON IT, I THINK IT WOULD BE AS WELL, IT PROBABLY DOES NEED TO BE AMENDED TO PROVIDE AT LEAST A MECHANISM FOR THE QUORUM COURT TO INTERNALLY SAY, LOOK, WE SEE THIS NEED, THEY'RE CREATING A DEPARTMENT OR SOMETHING HAS HAPPENED THAT WE NEED TO EXCEED A 2% PERSONNEL INCREASE FOR ANY PARTICULAR DEPARTMENT AND DO IT VIA RESOLUTION FROM THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO THE QUORUM COURT SAYING, HEY, WE AS THE BUDGET COMMITTEE WHO ARE CHARGED WITH LOOKING AT PERSONNEL MATTERS, BELIEVE THAT THIS NEED EXISTS, AND AS A STATEMENT THROUGH THE RESOLUTION ARE WANTING TO PASS THAT. QUORUM COURT CAN SAY, WE UNDERSTAND THAT YOU AS THE BUDGET COMMITTEE WHO UNDERSTANDS PERSONNEL, WE'RE GOING TO PASS THAT RESOLUTION. IF THAT RESOLUTION IS PASSED, THEN YOU CAN EXCEED YOUR 2%. IT'S YOUR DECISION AS MEMBERS OF THE QUORUM COURT, AND YOU'RE NOT HANDCUFFING YOURSELF. EVER WANT TO PAINT YOURSELF INTO A CORNER AND THIS PROVIDES SOME SORT OF AN OUT. >> I'LL CLOSE WITH THIS, AND THIS IS JUST A REMINDER TO MY FELLOW JUSTICES. WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO NO MATTER WHAT POSITIONS COME IN HERE. WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO VOTE UP OR DOWN. WHILE WE'RE SPLITTING HAIRS ON 2%, 1%, OR WHATEVER, IF THAT'S A STICKING POINT, WE DON'T HAVE TO INCLUDE IT AND IF WE SO CHOOSE THAT A POSITION OR POSITIONS ARE NOT APPROPRIATE, THEN WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO NOT APPROVE THOSE. I YIELD WITH THAT. >> THANK YOU, JUSTICE KEITH. JUSTICE ROBINSON, YOU RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU. I THINK JUSTIN, YOU PRETTY MUCH ANSWERED MY QUESTION BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO MAKE A COMMENT THAT AS THE BUDGET COMMITTEE, WE CAN AMEND THIS ORDINANCE OR MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND THIS ORDINANCE IF WE WANTED TO MAKE IT 5% OR IF SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN AND WE NEEDED TO PASS A RESOLUTION OF WHATEVER ELECTED OFFICIAL CAME BEFORE US AND SAID, HEY, I NEED 10 EMPLOYEES FOR THIS POSITION. I THINK AS THE BUDGET COMMITTEE AND TRYING TO SET SOME STANDARDS, I DON'T THINK THIS FATS INTO A CORNER THAT SAYS, HEY, WHOEVER, MR. ELECTED OFFICIAL, MISSES ELECTED OFFICIAL, YOU CAN'T PRESENT TO HR MORE THAN 2%. I THINK IF THERE'S A JUSTIFICATION IN THERE, I THINK WE HAVE THAT ABILITY TO LOOK AT IT AND HEAR IT AND SEND IT ONTO THE FULL QUORUM COURT IF WE FEEL THAT'S PRUDENT. I YIELD TO THAT. >> THANK YOU, JUSTICE ROBINSON. JUSTICE MCMULLEN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> THAT MISS LEWISON ACTUALLY HAD IT BEFORE I DID SO I'M GOING TO LET HER GO AHEAD AND SPEAK. >> ACTUALLY, JUSTIN ANSWERED MY QUESTION THAT I WAS GOING TO ASK. >> WHAT WAS THE QUESTION I ANSWERED? >> WE'RE TRYING TO FIND OUT ABOUT THE PERCENTAGE BECAUSE YOU KNOW HOW WHEN THEY COME IN, THEY SAY THAT WE'VE GOT ALL THIS MONEY THAT THE COLLECTORS GOT AND I JUST WANTED TO KNOW, [00:30:05] WHAT PERCENT OF THAT GOES INTO THE GENERAL FUND BECAUSE I DON'T THINK PEOPLE REALIZE A LOT OF THAT MONEY DOESN'T GO INTO THE GENERAL FUND THAT'S COLLECTED. IT GOES INTO ALL THESE OTHER ENTITIES. THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING FROM. >> BY LIKE FEES AND COMMISSIONS? >> YES. >> IF YOU COLLECT $500 MILLION IN TAXES, HOW MUCH ACTUALLY GOES IN TO THE FUND? >> IS THAT WHAT YOU MEAN? IF THEY COLLECT A HALF BILLION DOLLAR IN TAXES, HOW MUCH IS THE GENERAL FUND? >> RIGHT. HOW MUCH ARE WE GETTING? WHAT PERCENTAGE? >> LAST YEAR YOU GOT ABOUT 7.5%. >> THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO KNOW. THANK YOU. >> SEVEN AND A HALF PERCENT OF A HALF A BILLION? >> YES. >> HALF A MILLION. >> YOU'RE DONE. >> PRETTY SMALL. >> THANK YOU, JUSTICE MCMULLEN AND JUSTICE LEWIS. >> BYE. >> YOU DO WANT TO SPEAK. >> WANTED HER TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE HER CHANCE UNLIKE HER TIME. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THERE SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN SOME STRONG FEELINGS ABOUT THIS. WHAT I WANT TO KNOW AT THIS POINT IS, WOULD YOU COMMENT ON WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD AS FAR AS PROCEEDING WITH IT? >> I JUST WHAT I'M ASKING IS FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW, NOT JUST MYSELF, BUT OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS TO REVIEW THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED AND THAT WE CAN BRING THIS UP, WHEN THIS BROUGHT UP LATER THAT WE CAN CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION. LATER. I DISAGREE WITH MOVING IT TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT BECAUSE THAT SHUTS DOWN ALL COMMUNICATION BETWEEN ELECTED OFFICIALS AND THIS BODY BESIDE PHONE CALLS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I AGREE WITH YOU IT DOES. AS FAR AS BEING ABLE TO DISCUSS AT TIMES, WE ARE LIMITED THERE ARE CERTAIN GUIDELINES THAT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW. BECAUSE OF WHAT I AM SENSING, THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY DONE. SOME OF THIS, WE ALREADY, BASICALLY, AS YOU SAID EARLIER, IT TAKES CARE OF ITSELF. YOU DO WONDER, WELL, JUST WHY IS THIS COMING UP NOW? I DON'T THINK THAT THERE IS ANYTHING AT ALL WRONG WITH ALLOWING THE STAFF, THE ELECTED OFFICIALS, AS WELL AS THE DEPARTMENT HEADS, EXTRA TIME TO DISCUSS THIS. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT AT ALL. I THINK IT'S VERY DEMOCRATIC. THEREFORE, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION AT THIS TIME TO WELL, I WOULD SAY TABLE IT TO TABLE IT PERHAPS FOR 30 DAYS. >> TABLING IS TABLING. IF YOU WANT TO POSTPONE. >> WELL, LET'S POSTPONE IT THEN, PLEASE. >> UNTIL? >> WELL, I WAS LOOKING AT 2025, BUT THEN I THINK SOMEONE SPOKE AGAINST THAT. I'M SEEING HEADS SHAKE, SO I WOULD SAY AT LEAST FOR 30 DAYS. >> I LIKE 2025. >> I WOULD SAY FOR 30 DAYS. MAYBE THAT'S A LITTLE MORE PALATABLE. >> I'D VOTE FOR YOUR 2025. >> WOULD YOU? DID YOU'LL HEAR HIM? >> ALL IN FAVOR SAY I. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR? IS THAT A MOTION? >> WELL, NOW, I AM MAKING A MOTION. THE ONLY QUESTION IS WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO GO FOR 2025? >> I JUST NEED YOU TO [OVERLAPPING] >> I'M GOING TO SAY A LITTLE TABLE IT. DOES ANYONE ELSE WANT TO TAKE THIS UP AT THIS POINT? >> WELL, I CAN'T BECAUSE I'M CHAIRING. >> YOU'RE MAKING A MOTION TO TABLE IT THEN? >> BUT OF COURSE, WE WANT TO KNOW FOR HOW LONG. >> UNTIL OUR BUDGET MEETING IN OCTOBER. >> WE HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE ON THAT FOR 2025. >> THIRTY DAYS. >> THEN 30. >> TWENTY-FIVE. >> TWENTY, 25 OR 30. GO AHEAD, CATHERINE. [BACKGROUND] >> POINT OF ORDER. I HAVE NOT RECOGNIZED YOU. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS MOVE ON. ARE WE GOING TO VOTE ON THIS? ARE WE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE THIS TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT? ARE WE GOING TO TABLE IT? CAN SOMEONE SAY SOMETHING? [00:35:03] DECISIVELY. UNDECISIVELY. >> JUST FOR A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. I BELIEVE THERE IS A MOTION AND THERE WAS A SECOND. >> NO, THERE WASN'T NO. >> THERE WAS NOT A SECOND. I YIELD. BUT I DID STILL HAVE MY LIGHT ON. >> WELL, I DIDN'T I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T SEE IT, BUT YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, MA'AM. I WANT TO START BY SAYING I WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORT THIS ORDINANCE AS IT'S WRITTEN. THE PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE IS TO ESTABLISH RESPONSIBLE AND SUSTAINABLE GROWTH OF PERSONNEL POSITIONS IN PULASKI COUNTY GOVERNMENT AND TO ESTABLISH AN EVALUATION PROCESS FOR PERSONNEL POSITIONS. IT SEEMS LIKE EVERY TIME IN MY 20 YEARS HERE, THAT CONVERSATION COMES UP ABOUT EVALUATING OUR EMPLOYEES. TRUST ME, IN MY 28 YEAR CAREER IN MANAGED CARE CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS, I'M EVALUATED EVERY YEAR. SEEMS LIKE EVERY TIME THAT SUBJECT COMES UP, THE ELECTED OFFICIALS, AND WHEN I SAY THEM, I DON'T MEAN US AS JPS, BUT THE FIVE, THAT THEY DON'T WANT HUMAN RESOURCES OR THE QUORUM COURT, FRANKLY, OR ANYONE ELSE TELLING THEM HOW TO EVALUATE THEIR PERSONNEL, AND HOW TO REPORT THAT TO HR AND HOW TO COMMUNICATE THAT EFFECTIVELY WITH HR. I AM A HARD NO VOTE ON TABLING THIS EVENING. I BELIEVE IT NEEDS TO MOVE FORWARD. HOWEVER, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION IN ALL FAIRNESS THAT WE SEND THIS ITEM TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITHOUT A RECOMMENDATION. >> [BACKGROUND] I DISCUSS THAT. >> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECOND THAT WE SEND THIS TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITHOUT A RECOMMENDATION. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I WILL START. >> ABOUT THAT MOTION THAT I MADE EARLIER. >> I'M SORRY? >> THERE WAS A MOTION THAT I MADE. >> THERE WAS NO MOTION. >> [BACKGROUND] MADAM CHAIR, MS. MCMULLEN MADE A MOTION TO TABLE. >> BUT THERE WAS NOT A SECOND. >> THEN THE MOTION DIES FOR LACK OF A SECOND. THEN IT WOULD MOVE TO HIS MOTION. >> WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW. >> NO. WE WANTED TO POSTPONE ACTUALLY. >> WE HAVE A MOTION. CAN WE HAVE SOME ORDER, PLEASE? I DO NOT WANT TO HEAR THE COMMENTS UNLESS YOU'RE ASKING TO BE RECOGNIZED, AND YOU KNOW HOW WE DO THAT. I DO SUPPORT THIS ORDINANCE. HOWEVER, I ALSO SUPPORT JUST FOR THE SAKE OF LETTING ELECTED OFFICIALS LOOK AT THIS ORDINANCE. I SUPPORT HOPE PUTTING IT OFF UNTIL OCTOBER TO OUR OCTOBER BUDGET. BUT I SUPPORT THIS FOR A LOT OF REASONS. SOME OF YOU COME UP HERE WITH SHARE IF YOU'RE ONE OF THEM WITH A LARGE REQUEST, AND THEN WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT AND DEBATE. CAN WE DO IT? WE CAN'T AFFORD IT. CAN WE AFFORD IT? WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DENY RAISES AND IF WE DO THAT AND ALL THIS STUFF. THEN IF WE GIVE YOU WHAT YOU ASK, THEN IT PUTS THE COUNTY AT PERIL BECAUSE THEN WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO FOR THE NEXT YEAR. BECAUSE WE ARE EXPANDING OUR BASE. WHERE IS THAT REVENUE GOING TO COME FROM? I TOTALLY AGREE WITH SUPPORT RATHER, POSTPONING THIS TO OCTOBER. I WISH WE WOULD DO THAT. BUT I KNOW WE DO. I KNOW WE HAVE A MOTION, BUT I'M TALKING NOW, SO THAT'S WHY I HAVE THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW. BUT I DO SUPPORT THIS. YES, I AM ONE OF THE PERSONS WHO WANTED TO SEE THIS GO FORTH BECAUSE WE NEED TO GET SOME STRUCTURE. WE NEED TO STOP COMING HERE WITH I'VE GOT 10 EMPLOYEES I NEED HIRED AND THAT STUFF. WE NEED SOME STRUCTURE WITH THAT. ONCE AGAIN, I'M WILLING TO DISCUSS THIS WITH YOU AND SIT DOWN AND TALK TO YOU ABOUT IT, AND MAYBE I'LL CHANGE MY MIND AND I DO THINK WE NEED TO AMEND IT. I THINK THAT THERE DOES NEED TO BE SOME AMENDMENTS TO THIS ORDINANCE. I WOULD LIKE FOR THE PERSON THAT MADE THE MOTION AND THE SECOND, [00:40:04] IF THEY WOULD PULL IT AND MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS TO OCTOBER, I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT SO THAT WE CAN FURTHER DISCUSS IF YOU WOULD BE SO KIND AS TO DO THAT. >> AM I RECOGNIZED MA'AM? >> YES, YOU ARE. >> I WOULD PREFER AN UP OR DOWN VOTE ON MY MOTION. >> OKAY. >> YES, THERE WAS A SECOND. >> YES. >> THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS SEND TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION. THAT IS THE MOTION THAT IS ON THE FLOOR. THAT IS WHAT THE DEBATE WOULD COVER WOULD BE THE MERITS OF THE ORDINANCE. THAT IS WHERE YOU ARE AT IN THIS POINT OF THE DELIBERATION. >> JUSTIN, WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE? I DON'T GUESS THERE'S ANY MORE. >> MR. ELLIOTT. >> YES. >> MR. STOWERS? >> YES. >> MR. ROBINSON. >> AYE. >> MS. GREEN. >> AYE. >> MR. KEITH? >> NO. >> MS. MASSEY? >> NO. >> MS. MCMULLEN. >> NO. >> MS. LEWISON? >> NO. >> ITEM FAILS. >> WE ARE NOW MOVING ON TO I-44. THE TRANSFER. I'M SORRY. WE'RE AT I-44. FORGIVE ME. JUSTIN, WOULD YOU READ I-44? >> YES, MA'AM. [BACKGROUND]. >> WITNESS I-43. >> YES. THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY IS SINCE MY MOTION FAILED, I WOULD THINK WE WOULD STILL BE ON 43, AND THAT THE MOTION THAT YOU MADE EARLIER WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. >> DID MS. MCMULLEN MOTION RECEIVE A SECOND? >> NO. >> THEN THAT MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. >> MS. MASSEY DIDN'T MAKE A MOTION. >> I CAN'T MAKE A MOTION, SO THAT'S WHY I ASKED YOU TO PUT YOURS FOR SOMEONE TO MAKE A MOTION. WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? >> LET'S CIRCLE BACK TO THAT AND MAYBE CONSIDER A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. >> THANK YOU. >> MOVING ON TO I-44. JUSTIN. >> YES, MA'AM. 24-I-44 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 23-OR-47 2024 ANNUAL BUDGET PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS, TO TRANSFER CERTAIN MAINTENANCE POSITIONS FROM THE SHERIFF'S DETENTION FACILITY BUDGET INTO THE GENERAL SERVICES BUDGET. >> JUSTICE STOWERS YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> MAKE A MOTION. WE SEND THE ITEM TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DUE PASS RECOMMENDATION. WE'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE OUR COMPTROLLER AND CHIEF OF STAFF. >> WE STILL HAVE A MOTION. WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN A SECOND YET. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECOND. >> I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE HITCH TO EXPLAIN. >> WELL, AS A SHERIFF WOULD AGREE, AND ALL REMEMBER BACK IN THE BUDGET WHEN I BROUGHT YOU CARRY OVER, I GOT MONEY APPROPRIATED TO ADDRESS THE FOUNDATION ISSUE AND THE AIR CONDITIONING HVAC ISSUE THEY HAVE AT THE JAIL. SINCE WE'VE STARTED ADDRESSING THAT, WE'VE STARTED FINDING MORE PROBLEMS, AND I'VE BEEN USING MY GUYS FROM JAIL AND SERVICES TO GO OUT THERE AND ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES. I'M SURE THE SHERIFF HAS MORE THINGS TO DO THAN WORRY ABOUT THE MAINTENANCE OF THE BUILDING WHERE SEEMS TO APPEAR THAT WAY AND SOMETIMES WITH HIS PEOPLE WE'VE BEEN TALKING TO. MOVE OVER MINE, WE FILL THE POSITIONS, WE TAKE IT OVER LIKE WE HAVE TO OTHER BUILDINGS. THEN HE DOESN'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE MAINTENANCE. >> JUSTICE STOWERS, ARE YOU DONE WITH YOUR QUESTIONING? >> YES, MA'AM. I YIELD. >> JUSTICE MCMULLEN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> YES. >> SORRY. >> WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT, OF COURSE, YOU WERE TRANSFERRING. THE MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT, AS YOU SAID, HAS BEEN UNDER THE SHERIFF FOR YEARS. >> WELL, THOSE POSITIONS LISTED RIGHT THERE. >> THOSE ISSUES WITH THE BUILDING, IT HAS BEEN SHIFTING SINCE 2000 AND HERE RECENTLY. >> IN ABOUT TWO YEARS, IT STARTED HEAVING. IT'S NOT SINKING, IT'S HEAVING. >> HEAVING. YES. THERE'S MORE THAT HAS HAPPENED. I THINK AS A RESULT OF FLOODING, [00:45:01] IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. >> WELL, WHEN YOU'RE RUNNING SPRINKLERS ON THE ROOF, IT TENDS TO ADD A LOT OF WATER TO A CLAY BASE. WHEN THE DRAINS AREN'T MAINTAINED, THERE'S NO PLACE FOR THAT WATER TO GO, WHICH WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF CLEANING THAT OUT NOW. WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF REPLACING THOSE AIR UNITS. I'VE ALREADY ORDERED 14 WITH THE MONEY YOU APPROPRIATED ME AT THE CARRYOVER. WE'VE GOT ABOUT 10 MORE WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO DO. >> NOW, MY NOTES ARE INDICATING THAT AS A RESULT, THAT IT'S ALREADY OUT FOR BID. A REQUEST [OVERLAPPING] >> OF AIR UNITS? >> WELL, A REQUEST WAS SENT OUT FOR BID. >> NO, WE'VE ORDERED THEM. THEY'RE ON ORDER. >> BUT A COMPANY HAS BEEN SELECTED TO ASSESS THE DAMAGE TO ACCESS THE BUILDING. >> WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THAT FOR A MONTH OR MORE. >> IT'S IN THE FIRST STAGE BASICALLY. AT THIS POINT. >> WE'VE ALREADY STARTED CAMERING THE DRAIN LINES. WE HAD TO DIG ONE OF THEM OUT FOUR FEET OF DIRT TO GET TO IT. WHOEVER HAS BEEN DOING THE MOWING AND THE MAINTENANCE LIKE THAT HAS NOT KEPT THE DRAINS CLEAN, THEY'RE FULL OF GRASS AND DIRT. WE'VE CLEANED THOSE OUT. WE BROUGHT A CAMERA SYSTEM IN SO WE CAN CAMERA THE LINES TO SEE WHAT'S IN THERE. WE CAN SEE WHERE THE BLOCKAGES ARE AND SEE HOW MUCH WATER IS BACKED UP AS EXAMPLE, AND WE'VE GOT MORE PICTURES THAN I CARE TO COUNT. WE UNPLUGGED ONE DRAIN THE OTHER DAY AND THREE HOURS LATER, IT WAS STILL RUNNING. IT'S COMING FROM THE BUILDING SO THAT CLAY YOU HAVE AROUND THAT BUILDING IS HOLDING THAT WATER. >> NOW, THAT'S REAL TECHNICAL. I IMAGINE SOME OF THE MEN MIGHT UNDERSTAND THAT BETTER THAN I. >> IT'S PRETTY SIMPLE WHEN YOU GOT WATER? >> WELL, YEAH IT'S FLOODING AND IT'S SINKING, BASICALLY. >> MA'AM, IT'S HEAVING. IT'S PUSHING UP. IT'S THE OPPOSITE OF SINKING. >> THE OPPOSITE OF SINKING. ANYWAY I KNOW THIS. I REALIZE SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE FOR THIS. WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT, IS THAT IT NEEDS TO BE DONE IMMEDIATELY. >> WE ARE DOING SOMETHING IMMEDIATELY. >> IT'S COMING UP NOW INSTEAD OF IN APRIL. >> THIS IS A BUDGET MEETING WHERE YOU ADDRESS PERSONNEL ISSUES. >> OKAY THEN. >> DO YOU WANT ME TO DO YOU OTHER [OVERLAPPING] >> I SEE SOMEONE THAT WANTS TO COME IN ON THIS, AND I'M PRETTY SURE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BRING SOME INFORMATION THAT IS USEFUL. >> THIS BUILDING HAS BEEN A PROBLEM FOR A LONG TIME. ONE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT I GET FROM THE QUORUM COURT IS THAT I BRING A LOT OF STUFF UP HERE. I'M ALWAYS ASKING FOR MONEY. THIS BUILDING WAS NOT MAINTAINED FOR SEVERAL YEARS UNTIL I TOOK OFFICE. WE HAVE TAKEN STEPS TO IMPROVE, REPAIR THIS BUILDING. AND WE'VE BEEN DOING THAT. I'VE GOT A POWERPOINT. IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE IT ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE DONE. THE COMMENT WAS MADE EARLIER. I'M SURE THE SHERIFF DOESN'T WANT MAINTENANCE. YES, I DO. >> CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION? SO I'M BEING SERIOUS, I'D LOVE TO WORK WITH YOU. YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER HOW WELL YOU'RE GOING TO WORK WITH, BUT I DON'T GET A RETURN PHONE CALL, SO I WANT TO ASK YOU A QUESTION. >> CALL ME? >> YES. >> NO. I'D LOVE TO WORK WITH ME. THERE'S NOT A PROBLEM WITH MY MAINTENANCE TEAM AND YOUR MAINTENANCE TEAM. THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF COMMUNICATION. THE REASON WE'RE ADDRESSING THE BUILDING RIGHT NOW IS BECAUSE IN JANUARY OF LAST YEAR, WITH ALL THE HEAVY RAINS, WE STARTED SEEING SEPARATION IN THE EXPANSION JOINTS SEPARATING MORE. I PUT FORTH A REQUEST TO GET A REQUEST PROPOSAL TO HAVE AN ENGINEER COME LOOK AT THE BUILDING, COME LOOK AT THE GROUNDS. WE STARTED THAT. WE STARTED THAT PROCESS, AND THEN WE RECEIVED FROM YOUR OFFICE A NOTICE THAT TELLS THE CONTRACTORS, THE ENGINEER NOT TO COMMUNICATE WITH US, BUT TO ONLY COMMUNICATE WITH YOUR OFFICE. WE'VE GOT THE EMAIL OF THAT. AND SO WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES. THERE'S MORE GOING ON IN THIS BUILDING THAN THE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS THAT'S USED TO KEEP THE AIR CONDITIONED UNITS COOL. EVERY AIR CONDITIONED UNIT ON THAT BUILDING THAT IS PART OF THE BUILDING HAS BEEN OCCUPIED IS FUNCTIONAL. [00:50:02] THE COUNTY JUDGE, BARRY HYDE, WHEN I TOOK OFFICE, HE INITIALLY TOLD ME EVERY UNIT ON THAT BUILDING, THERE'S BRAND NEW UNITS, EVERY UNIT HAS BEEN REPLACED, AND I INFORMED HIM THAT'S NOT TRUE. ALL OF THEM HAVE NOT BEEN REPLACED. THERE ARE SOME THAT THEY NEED TO BE REPLACED AND UPDATED. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING TO MAINTAIN THEM. IF YOU HAD GIVEN US THE MONEY, THE AMEN, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH YOU HAVING THE SWEET MONEY. I'VE TALKED TO JPS ABOUT HAVING A SWEET MONEY THAT COMES FROM THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE. THERE'S ABOUT $2 MILLION FROM VACANCIES THAT HAD THAT SWEPT TO THE GENERAL FUND, AND THAT'S FINE. I'M HAPPY WITH THE MONEY WITH YOUR TEAM TRYING TO HELP. I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT. BUT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MOVING ALL OF MY MAINTENANCE PEOPLE, WHO ARE MAINTAINING THE BUILDING, THERE'S MORE GOING ON TO THE BUILDING THEN JUST DRAINAGE. >> I AGREE. I'VE SEEN IT. >> AND I CAN SHOW YOU WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING AND ALL THE MONEY THAT WE'VE BEEN SPENDING TO KEEP THIS BUILDING RUNNING. THE BUILDING IS 30 YEARS OLD. THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE IS OVER 50 YEARS OLD. EVEN WHEN STERLING WITH GEL STANDARDS DOES HIS YEARLY EVALUATION, HE SAYS, AT SOME POINT, WE GOT TO DECIDE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THIS BUILDING. AT SOME POINT BECAUSE THE BUILDING IS OLD [OVERLAPPING] PEOPLE I WANT TO ASK CHIEF HENDRICKS TO COME UP TO TALK ABOUT [OVERLAPPING] >> WE CAN OBVIOUSLY TALK ABOUT A COUPLE OF THE ISSUES YOU'VE POINTED OUT THERE. FIRST OFF, WE ASKED THE HARBOR TO PROVIDE US A COPY OF THEIR FINDINGS. SECONDLY, I'VE SEEN YOUR MAINTENANCE BUDGET AND I SEE THE TRIAL BALANCE. I RAN IT FOR YEARS. I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU'RE SPENDING THE MONEY FROM, BUT IT'S NOT OUT OF YOUR MAINTENANCE BUDGET. >> 1188. >> I LOOKED AT THAT. YOU BOUGHT SOME STOVES, YOU BOUGHT SOME OVENS, I FOUND ONE AIR UNIT. HOLD ON, JUST LET ME. >> WE HAVE THE DOCUMENT TO SHOW YOU EXACTLY. >> I HAVE THEM TOO. I KEEP THEM. I'M THE ONE THAT YOU GET THE DOCUMENTS FROM. >> NO, THIS IS NOT FROM YOU. >> THEN HOW DOES WAS IT PAID FOR? >> WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING TO MAKE THESE REPAIRS, WE ARE USING AVAILABLE MONEY WITHIN THE CURRENT BUDGET. DO WE NEED A LARGE BUDGET? ABSOLUTELY. >> DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY AIR UNITS YOU HAVE DOWN RIGHT NOW? [INAUDIBLE] INTRODUCE YOURSELF. >> TED WILSON, THE DETENTION FACILITY MAINTENANCE SUPERINTENDENT. WE CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE ANY DOWN. >> THEY'RE NOT FUNCTIONAL. YOU HAVE 24 OF THEM THAT NEED TO BE REPLACED. >> THOSE ARE SERVING UNITS THAT ARE NOT OCCUPIED. >> REALLY? >> CORRECT. >> THEN WHY ARE YOU RUNNING THE SPRINKLER ZONE? YOU TELL ME YOU HAVE TO RUN THE SPRINKLER ZONE TO KEEP THEM COOL. >> WE'VE GOT TWO UNITS THAT ARE CURRENTLY OCCUPIED. THOSE OTHER THREE THAT ARE WORKING IN THAT SECTION, IT'S BEING OCCUPIED BY THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. >> THEN WHY ARE THERE SPRINKLERS ALL OVER EVERYTHING IF YOU SAY IF YOU TURN THE SPRINKLERS OFF THE BUILDING OVERHEATS? >> NOT THE BUILDING, THE UNIT ITSELF. >> THE UNIT OVERHEATS BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT, BUT DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE WATER IS DOING TO THE BUILDING? YOU REALIZE THAT'S A FLAT ROOF THAT IS INSULATED AND REFLECTIVE THAT YOU'VE GOT IN SOME PLACES AN INCH AND A HALF OF WATER ON? NOW, IF THEY DON'T WANT TO DO THIS, I'M FINE WITH TURNING THIS THING BACK OVER TO YOUR OFFICE. I DON'T NEED THE HEADACHE. MY GENERAL SERVICES GUY DON'T NEED A HEADACHE. BUT YOUR BUILDING'S FALLING APART. >> [INAUDIBLE] THIS WHOLE THING BECAUSE THE HEAVING THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, I'VE GOT CHIEF CHARLES HENDRICKS. >> THANK YOU. >> CHIEF DEPUTY AT DETENTION. I'VE GOT CROMWELL'S REPORT THAT SAYS HEAVING HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE IT WAS BUILT. >> IT FLUCTUATES. >> IT'S IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH. HAVING HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE IT WAS BUILT. >> THAT'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. >> WE'VE GOT A ARTICLE FROM 2000, AND THIS IS SIX YEARS IN HUTCH, WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT ALL THE PROBLEMS RELATED TO THAT BUILDING AND THE PROBLEMS WITH THE CLAY. >> YEAH. >> THE WATER THAT'S RUNNING OFF THAT BUILDING IS 80 YARDS AWAY FROM THE PROBLEM AREA, 80 YARDS EAST OF WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THE DRAINAGE THAT COMES OFF THAT BUILDING GOES NOWHERE CLOSE TO H. >> RIGHT. BUT HAVE YOU REALIZED, HAVE YOU STOOD OUT IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING AND LOOKED AT THE BUILDING AND SEE WHERE WHEN YOU'RE 80 YARDS FROM THAT BUILDING, WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT? NOW, IF I'M 80 YARDS LOOKING TO H FROM WHERE THE WATER IS [OVERLAPPING] >> NO. YOU WALK OUT IN FRONT OF ANY PART OF THAT, AND YOU LOOK AT THAT BUILDING, WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT? [00:55:02] >> I'M LOOKING AT A 30-YEAR-OLD BUILDING THAT NEEDS REPAIR. >> NO. YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE TOP OF THE BUILDING BECAUSE WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU'RE RIGHT. THAT'S A 30-YEAR-OLD BUILDING. THIS ONE'S 110 YEARS OLD. THE ONE ACROSS THE STREET IS 120. THAT'S THE NEW SIDE. THE OTHER ONE IS THAT. >> I'LL SAY THIS TO YOU. >> Y'ALL CAN BUILD A NEW JAIL FOR ABOUT $65 MILLION, AND WE AIN'T GOT TO WORRY ABOUT IT. >> I'M ALL FOR THAT TOO. >> POINT POINT OF ORDER. JUSTICE STOWERS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> IF I NEED THE MONEY I MISSED, AND I DREW A BLANK ON YOUR NAME. >> MS. KERRY SAID SHE'D SUPPORTED. MAN Y'ALL CAN BUILD A NEW JAIL, AND WE CAN MOVE ON. >> JUSTICE STOWERS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, MS. MASSEY. >> YEAH, I TICKLE THE SHIT. >> SO MR. HUTCHINS, ARE YOU AND YOUR TEAM YOUR MAINTENANCE TEAM, GENERAL SERVICES, HOWEVER YOU REFER TO THEM, YOUR TEAM MAINTAINS THE MAINTENANCE IN EVERY BUILDING IN COUNTY GOVERNMENT OTHER THAN THE JAIL? >> CORRECT. >> SO WHY WOULD IT NOT THEN BECAUSE THAT'S THE AREA OF EXPERTISE OF YOUR MAINTENANCE TEAM. IT'S NOT A LAW ENFORCEMENT FUNCTION. SIR, I HAVE THE FLOOR. >> YES. >> I HAVE THE FLOOR. >> BUT YOU'RE MAKING ASSERTIONS THAT ARE MISLEADING. >> I HAVE THE FLOOR. >> POINT OF ORDER. >> ARE YOU? >> THANK YOU. >> YEAH, THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. >> JUSTICE STOWERS, CARRY ON, PLEASE. >> MR. HUTCHINS, I SUPPORT THIS ORDINANCE WHOLEHEARTEDLY. I BELIEVE IF YOU AND YOUR TEAM CAN PROVIDE THE MAINTENANCE FOR THE REST OF OUR FUNCTIONS AND OUR ABILITIES AND OUR FACILITIES, THAT YOUR TEAM CAN DO THE SAME FOR THE JAIL. ON THE SUBJECT OF A NEW JAIL, WE'VE HEARD SHERIFF HIGGINS MENTION SEVERAL TIMES IN PUBLIC MEETINGS ABOUT HOW MUCH HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A TAX INCREASE, A SALES TAX INCREASE OF A QUARTER TO A HALF PERCENT. I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT HE'S PROMOTED. HOWEVER, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT YOUR PLANS AND YOUR YOUR STRATEGY. >> JUSTICE STOWERS. >> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A NEW JAIL VERSUS ONE THAT WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN. >> JUSTICE STOWERS, POINT OF ORDER.. ARE YOU FINISHED, ARE YOU IN REFERENCE TO WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING? >> I'M STILL IN REFERENCE TO WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING. >> NO. >> MADAM CHAIR, CAN I MAKE A SUGGESTION. CAN WE TAKE A BRIEF THREE-MINUTE RECESS AND REGROUP? >> SURE. >> JUST TO REFOCUS ON WHAT IT IS WE'RE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT HERE, WHICH IS POSITIONS AND NOT EVERYTHING ELSE? >> GUYS, JENNY LO JUST FILED FOR DIVORCE AGAINST BEN AFFLECK AND I'M ALL TALK ABOUT. >> WELL, JUST ONE MOMENT. JUSTICE GREEN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> I QUALLED A QUESTION, PLEASE. >> THAT'S AN UNDEBATABLE MOTION, JUSTIN, WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE? >> YES, MA'AM. YOU ARE VOTING NOT ON THE ITEM. YOU ARE VOTING ON THE MOTION TO QUALL THE QUESTION, WHICH IS IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATIONS. YOU'RE NOT VOTING ON THE ITEM, YOU'RE VOTING ON THE MOTION TO QUALL THE QUESTION. I NEED A VOTE SHEET. MR. ELLIOTT? >> YES. MR. STOWERS? >> YES. >> MR. ROBINSON? >> YES. >> MS. GREEN? >> YES. >> MS. MASSEY. >. AYE. >> MS. MCMULLEN. MS. LEWISON. >> NO. >> FIVE AYES, TWO NAYS. THE MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION PASSES. >> JUSTIN, DID YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE ON THE ITEM. >> YES, MA'AM. YOU'RE NOW VOTING ON THE ITEM, 24I44. MR. ELLIOTT? >> YES. >> MR. STOWERS? >> YES. >> MR. ROBINSON? >> NO. >> MS. GREEN. >> AYE. >> MR. KEITH HAS LEFT, MS. MASSEY. >> NO. >> MS. MCMULLEN? MS. LEWISON. >> NO. >> ITEM FAILS. [01:00:10] >> THAT'S IT, RIGHT? >> YEAH >> WE HAD 4-3. JUSTIN, DID YOU COUNT THAT RIGHT? >> YOU HAD THREE NOS AND FOUR AYES. >> RIGHT. YOU SAID IT FAILED. >> YOU NEED FIVE. IT'S THE MAJORITY OF THE BODY, NOT THE QUORUM. >> THE MAJORITY DEVOTED TO AYE. I HAVE 4 TO 5. >> YES. >> ARE WE READY? >> AT THIS POINT, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A THREE-MINUTE BREAK. >> THAT'S FINE. EVERYBODY SAID IT'D BE FUN TO BE ON THE BUDGET COMMITTEE, RIGHT? >> NO. >> TAKE A PAUSE FOR THE CAUSE. WE'LL BE BACK. [BACKGROUND] >> CAN I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION, PLEASE? A BUDGET HEARING IS NOW BACK IN SESSION. WE ARE BACK IN SESSION. I RECOGNIZED JUSTICE STOWERS. YOU ARE RECOGNIZED? >> YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO RECONSIDER 24I43. >> THAT'S PROPER MOTION. IT DOES REQUIRE A SECOND. ON A MOTION TO RECONSIDER, IT'S NON-DEBATABLE, NON-AMENDABLE. YOU'RE BASICALLY VOTING TO BRING THAT ITEM BACK UP, SO LONG AS IT OCCURS WITHIN THE SAME MEETING. MOTION'S ON THE FLOOR, SECOND HAS BEEN MADE. THAT'S THE PROCEDURAL. >> YES, I'M SORRY. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE POSTPONE THIS ITEM, 24I43 UNTIL OUR FIRST BUDGET MEETING OF OCTOBER. DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> YOU'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK, BUT YOU NEED TO VOTE ON THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER? >> YES. >> THEN ONCE THAT EITHER IF IT PASSES, THEN YOU CAN MAKE THE MOTION TO POSTPONE? >> JUSTIN, COULD YOU CALL THE ROLL PLEASE? >> YES, MA'AM. SO YOU'RE VOTING ON THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER? MR. ELLIOTT. MR. STOWERS? >> YES. >> MR. ROBINSON. >> NO. >> MS. GREEN? >> AYE. >> MS. MASSEY. >> AYE. >> MS. MCMULLEN. MS. LEWISON. >> NO. >> THAT ITEM HAS BEEN BROUGHT BACK UP. >> NOW, JUSTICE STOWERS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> THEN I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE POSTPONE THIS ITEM UNTIL OUR FIRST BUDGET MEETING IN OCTOBER OF 2024. >> SECOND. >> THE MOVED IMPROPERLY SECOND. I DON'T BELIEVE WE NEED ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT. JUSTIN, WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL PLEASE? >> MS. LEWISON. >> YES. >> MS. MCMULLEN. >> YES. >> MS. MASSEY. >> AYE. >> MS. GREEN. >> AYE. >> MR. ROBINSON. >> AYE. >> MR. STOWERS? >> YES. >> MR. ELLIOTT. >> ELLIOTT. [OVERLAPPING] >> YES. >> THAT ITEM WILL BE POSTPONED UNTIL YOUR FIRST SCHEDULED BUDGET MEETING, PROBABLY IN OCTOBER. >> WE'RE NOW DOWN TO I45. >> YES, MA'AM. ARE YOU READY? >> YES. WE CAN READ I45, PLEASE. >> 24I45, AMENDING ORDINANCE 23OR47, 2024 ANNUAL BUDGET PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS, TO UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE CERTAIN POSITIONS, TO ADD CERTAIN POSITIONS FOR VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS, EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 7TH, 2024, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. >> JUSTICE STOWERS YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE THIS ITEM. >> I45. >> SECOND. >> NO, YOU RULE. [BACKGROUND] [01:05:04] >> YOU ALREADY DID THAT PHIL. >> THIS IS I45. [OVERLAPPING] >> THIS IS THE POSITIONS. THIS IS 45, SO THIS IS THE NON-GENERAL FUND ZERO JUST FOR AN IMPACT. [OVERLAPPING] >> MAKE A MOTION, WE SEND THIS ITEM TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DUE PASS RECOMMENDATION. [OVERLAPPING] >> I THINK DO YOU NEED TO RESCIND YOUR. [OVERLAPPING] >> TECHNICALLY, RESCIND THE MOTION? [OVERLAPPING] >> I DIDN'T HAVE A SECOND. [OVERLAPPING] >> YES, YOU DID. [OVERLAPPING] >> PAUL IS EYE ON THE SPOT. [LAUGHTER] JUST SIMPLY RESCIND IT. >> PAUL. >> YES. >> VERY GOOD. MOTION IS RESCINDED. >> YEAH. >> NOW, JUST JUSTICE STOWERS, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. >> MAKE A MOTION THAT WE SEND THIS ITEM TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT WITH THE DUE PASS RECOMMENDATION. >> SECOND. >> SECOND. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECOND. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS IN REFERENCE TO I45? >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> JUSTICE STOWERS? >> YEAH. I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO POINT OUT HERE IS THAT THESE ARE NON-GENERAL FUNDS. THE TREASURER'S SALARY AND EXPENSE FUND, AS WELL AS THE COLLECTORS AND THE ROAD AND BRIDGE FUND, SO NO IMPACT ON THE GENERAL FUND. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. IF THERE'D BE NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, JUSTIN, WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE? >> MS. LEWISON. >> YES. >> MS. MCMULLEN. >> YES. >> MS. MASSEY. >> AYE. >> MR. KEITH. HE'S NOT HERE. MS. GREEN. >> AYE. >> MR. ROBINSON? >> AYE. >> MR. STOWERS. >> YES. >> MR. ELLIOTT. >> YES. >> WE HAVE SEVEN AYES, NO NAYS. >> THIS WILL GO TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT FOR FINAL APPROVAL. WE ARE NOW DOWN TO OUR LAST AND FINAL ORDINANCE. >> MS. MASSEY. >> YES. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> JUST REMINDING THIS BODY THAT AFTER THE FIRST ORDINANCE YOU PASSED, YOU HAVE $404,069 LEFT. IF YOU APPROVE EVERYTHING ON THIS, YOU'RE GOING TO BE SHORT BECAUSE THE ASK IS 548, SO YOU ALL NEED TO BE AWARE. YOU CAN'T DO EVERYTHING ON THERE. >> THANK YOU. JUSTIN, WOULD YOU READ I46, PLEASE OR AMY, THANK YOU. >> IT'S ALL RIGHT. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 23OR47 2024 ANNUAL BUDGET PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS TO UPGRADE AND OR ADD CERTAIN POSITIONS FOR THE SHERIFF'S ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT AND THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS DEPARTMENT. >> WELL, THERE'S ONE LIGHT ON. JUSTICE STOWERS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE THIS ORDINANCE. >> SECOND. [BACKGROUND] >> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECOND THAT WE TABLE THIS ORDINANCE. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS IN THERE, JUSTICE MCMULLEN? >> YES. GUIDE ME IF I AM OUT OF ORDER BUT I DO WANT TO DISCUSS THIS. I KNOW YOU WANTED TO TABLE IT. I NEED SOME CLARITY ON THIS ITEM BEFORE MAKING THAT DECISION. EXCUSE ME. I KNOW THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE UPGRADES HERE FOR SOME POSITIONS, AND WE'RE LOOKING AT EIGHT POSITIONS, AND THOSE POSITIONS ARE BEING REFERRED TO AS ENFORCEMENT. NO. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A NAME CHANGE IN THE POSITIONS AND I WOULD LIKE FOR THE SHERIFF TO COME UP IF THERE'S A COMMENT THAT HE HAS. I BELIEVE THERE WOULD BE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE EIGHT POSITIONS IN THAT IT WAS NOT PERHAPS REQUESTED BY HIM TO BEGIN WITH. SHERIFF HIGGINS. >> I'M SORRY, I STEPPED OUT OF THE ROOM. IS THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO TABLE? >> YES. IS THAT NON-DEBATABLE? >> THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO TABLE. THAT IS A DEBATABLE MOTION. >> IT IS? >> YOU WOULDN'T BE DISCUSSING THE MERITS OF THE ORDINANCE JUST YET. YOU WOULD BE DISCUSSING THE TABLING. >> THE TABLING, YEAH. >> NOW, THAT'S NOT REALLY CLEAR TO ME. WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT IS WHETHER OR NOT I WOULD WANT TO VOTE TO TABLE THIS AT THIS TIME AND I NEED SOME CLARITY ON THAT. >> JUST LIKE I SAID, I STEPPED OUT. I'M SORRY, SO THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO TABLE, [01:10:01] SO YOU'D BE DISCUSSING THE MERITS OF TABLING. >> THAT IS WHAT I'M DOING. >> PRETTY GOOD. >> THANK YOU. >> SORRY, I MISSED THAT. >> THANK YOU. AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT, COULD I ASK THE SHERIFF TO PLEASE STEP FORWARD? >> YOU HAVE A QUESTION, WHEN WE MAKE A COMMENT? >> YES. I'M WONDERING ABOUT KEEPING THE EIGHT ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS. >> I AM, OF COURSE, IN FAVOR, IF YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE ME EIGHT DEPUTIES FOR THE ENFORCEMENT SECTION, I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. MY CONCERN IS THAT HOW YOU'RE GIVING THESE POSITIONS. I HAVE ENFORCEMENT DEPUTIES AND DETENTION DEPUTIES. THE JOB DESCRIPTION THAT WAS WRITTEN AND SUBMITTED TO THIS BODY FOR A PATROL DEPUTY, WHICH WE DO NOT HAVE, I ASSIGN PEOPLE TO PATROL, OR I ASSIGN PEOPLE TO TRAINING, OR I ASSIGN PEOPLE TO CID. THE CID INVESTIGATOR DEPUTY POSITION, I DO NOT HAVE. I HAVE ENFORCEMENT DEPUTY POSITIONS THAT I ASSIGN TO CID. THESE JOB DESCRIPTIONS, ACCORDING TO WAY THIS IS SUPPOSED TO OPERATE, A SUPERVISOR OR THE ELECTED OFFICIAL WILL APPROVE THE JOB DESCRIPTION. I HAVE NOT APPROVED THE JOB DESCRIPTION. THIS IS NOT A REQUEST FROM ME. IT HINDERS MY ABILITY TO FUNCTION AS THE SHERIFF OF PULASKI COUNTY WHERE I CAN ASSIGN PEOPLE AS NEEDED. IF YOU CREATE THESE POSITIONS AS THEY ARE DESIGNATED, THEN A PATROL DEPUTY MUST BE IN PATROL ONLY, AND THEN WHEN I TRY TO MOVE THEM, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO SUBMIT DOCUMENTATION TO MOVE THEM TO ANOTHER AREA. THE CID POSITION IS AN UPGRADE. WE HAVE OTHER PEOPLE IN CID. THIS IS FOUR POSITIONS AT A HIGHER GRADE. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY EVERYBODY ELSE THAT SAME POSITION, THAT SAME SALARY. IF I HAVE A INVESTIGATOR, IF I HAVE A DEPUTY ASSIGNED TO INVESTIGATION, AND THEY HAVE A LIFE CHANGE SITUATION. WHEN YOU'RE IN CID, YOU ARE ON CALL 24 HOURS A DAY, AND IF THEY SAY, I CANNOT HANDLE THAT BECAUSE I HAVE A SICK WIFE, I HAVE A SICK CHILD AND I NEED TO GO TO PATROL, THEN THEY WILL GET A DOWNGRADE. ALL I'M ASKING THIS BODY TO DO, AND THIS IS WHAT I BROUGHT UP PREVIOUSLY, I APPRECIATE RECEIVING THE EIGHT POSITIONS, ALL I'M ASKING THIS BODY TO DO IS CHANGE THE TITLE BACK TO WHAT I HAVE, ENFORCEMENT DEPUTIES THAT I ASSIGN AS NEEDED. AS THE SHERIFF OF PULASKI COUNTY. I MAKE THE DECISION WHERE I ASSIGN MY PERSONNEL. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO NET. THAT SOUNDS TO ME TO BE A VERY LOGICAL REQUEST, AND AT THE SAME TIME, I DON'T KNOW WHO DID THIS, I GUESS THAT THIS ALSO CAME FROM PERSONNEL, WHICH I WOULD THINK DOES NOT REALLY HAVE THE LAW EXPERIENCE RATHER TO DETERMINE WHERE THE PEOPLE ARE ASSIGNED. [LAUGHTER] I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S CAUSING THE LACK OF COMMUNICATION. IT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE AN EFFORT TO RELINQUISH THE SHERIFF OF HIS AUTHORITY FOR WHATEVER REASON. SOME OF YOU MAY BE YAWNING AND MAY BE SLEEPY AT THIS TIME BUT AGAIN, AS I SAID, IT SOUNDS LIKE A VERY LOGICAL DISCUSSION OR DEBATE AND SO THERE HAS BEEN A LACK OF COMMUNICATION. AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME, I'M IN QUESTION ABOUT JUST EXACTLY HOW WE WANT TO HANDLE THIS. IN OTHER WORDS, MY QUESTION TO THE QUORUM COURT, IF I AM IN ORDER, DO WE WANT TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME, IN OTHER WORDS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A NAME CHANGE. ACTUALLY, THE CID DETECTIVE FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, WOULD BE MORE EXPENSE TO THE BUDGET. >> [INAUDIBLE] MOTION IS TO TABLE. >> CORRECT. >> YOU'RE OFF THE SUBJECT. >> WELL, I WOULD NEED FOR THE CHAIRMAN TO TELL ME THIS, THANK YOU SO MUCH, T HEN I WILL YIELD. YES. [01:15:03] >> THANK YOU. THERE IS A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO TABLE, AND I WON'T TALK BECAUSE I'M TO GET OFF AS WELL, SO WE'RE GOING TO STAY ON TRACK. JUSTICE GREEN, I'M SORRY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> I DIDN'T HAVE MY HAND UP. >> OH, YOU'RE LIGHT. >> I WANT TO GO HOME. >> IF THERE BE NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, JUSTIN, WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL. >> CALL THE ROLL. >> MR. ELLIOTT. >> AYE. [LAUGHTER] >> WE NEED SOME CLARITY AGAIN BECAUSE I DIDN'T REALLY QUITE GET TO FINISH. [OVERLAPPING] >> YOU'RE VOTING ON THE MOTION TO TABLE. >> WE DON'T NEED TO TABLE IT. MAYBE WE NEED TO JUST MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS. [BACKGROUND] >> HEY, GUYS. HEY. MR. ELLIOTT, YOU WERE AND AYE. MR. STOWERS? >> YES. >> MR. ROBINSON? > YES. >> MS. GREEN. >> NO. >> MR. KEITH IS NOT HERE. SORRY. MS. MASSEY. >> NO. >> MS. MCMULLEN? >> NO. >> MS. LEWISON. >> NO. >> ONE, 2, 3 AYES, FOUR NAYS. THE MOTION TO TABLE HAS FAILED. >> THIS ITEM IS BACK ON THE TABLE. NOW I'M GOING TO SAY THIS, WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO GIVE YOU. I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY WE'RE DEBATING ANY OF THIS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY. NOW, WHAT I AM WILLING, AND I CAN'T MAKE THAT MOTION, BUT WHAT I SUPPORT IS PROVIDING TWO POSITIONS, THE LIST IS HERE SOMEWHERE, THERE ARE TWO POSITIONS. >> FOYER SPECIALIST. >> THE FOYER SPECIALIST. >> QUARTERMASTER. >> AND THE QUARTERMASTER. THAT IS WHAT I SUPPORT. >> I GIVE YOU THE SECOND. >> CAN I MAKE THE MOTION? [BACKGROUND] >> NO. THE CHAIR [OVERLAPPING] CAN'T MAKE THE MOTION. >> I WAS JUST STATING THAT THAT'S WHAT I SUPPORT, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY FOR ANYTHING ELSE, REALLY. JUSTICE STOWERS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> YES, MA'AM. I'M GOING TO MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE DEPARTMENT 400 SHERIFF ENFORCEMENT, THE REQUEST FOR THE UPGRADE FOR THE FOYER SPECIALIST, AS WELL AS THE CREATION OF THE QUARTERMASTER. WHAT THAT WILL ALLOW IS THAT QUARTERMASTER WILL BE A CIVILIAN. WE'LL ALLOW TO FREE UP THE INDIVIDUAL WHO'S CURRENTLY FULFILLING THAT ROLE, WHO IS CERTIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT AND WILL FREE THEM UP TO BE ON THE STREET. AT THIS TIME, ALONG WITH THAT MOTION, THAT WE POSTPONE ANY ACTION ON THE REMAINDER OF THE DEPARTMENT 400 REQUEST, AND I WOULD ENTERTAIN A SECOND. >> SECOND. >> SECOND. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND IMPROPERLY SECOND. HE'S LISTED THE POSITIONS THAT ARE ON THE TABLE TO CONSIDER AT THIS TIME. >> TO BE CLEAR, ESSENTIALLY, YOU'RE VOTING TO ONLY CONSIDER THOSE TWO POSITIONS. >> THOSE TWO POSITIONS. >> IF THAT BE THE CASE THAT THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO POSITIONS IN THAT ORDINANCE THAT YOU'RE WILLING TO CONSIDER. >> YES. >> WOULD IT BE AMENDABLE FOR YOU ALL IF I JUST ADDED THOSE POSITIONS INTO THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE SO THAT YOU HAD ONE ORDINANCE THAT LISTED ALL THE PERSONNEL BECAUSE THIS ONE ESSENTIALLY IS MOOT IF THAT'S ALL YOU'RE GOING TO CONSIDER? >> THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO CONSIDER. DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON THAT? >> BASICALLY, IF YOU VOTE RIGHT NOW, YOU'RE VOTING TO APPROVE THOSE TWO POSITIONS AND ONLY THOSE TWO POSITIONS ON THAT PRESCRIBER ORDINANCE. THE MOTION YOU CALL THE ROLL. MS. LEWISON. >> YES. >> CAN I SPEAK TO YOU FOR A SECOND? >> MS. MCMULLEN. THE MOTION IS VOTE YES OR NO, LILLIE. [LAUGHTER] ONCE IT'S BEEN DONE, YOU CAN'T START DEBATE IN THE MIDDLE OF IT, SO YES OR NO? [OVERLAPPING] YES. NOT YOU. >> NO. >> OKAY. MS. MASSEY. >> AYE. >> MS. GREEN. >> I ABSTAIN. >> MR. ROBINSON. >> AYE. >> MR. STOWERS. >> YES. >> MR. ELLIOTT. [BACKGROUND] THAT'S IT. YOU'VE APPROVED THE TWO POSITIONS WHICH ARE AN UPGRADE OF THE PRECINCT CLERK AND THE QUARTERMASTER POSITION. [01:20:02] THOSE POSITIONS WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE, SO YOU'LL HAVE ONE PERSONNEL ORDINANCE. AND THAT CONCLUDES ALL THE ITEMS ON YOUR AGENDA. [BACKGROUND] THOSE WERE PART OF THAT ORDINANCE, MR. STOWERS. [BACKGROUND] >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS HOPING. I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST THAT IF YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO APPROVE TWO, APPROVE ONE FOR THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, AND ONE FOR THE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE. I THINK THAT WOULD BE FAIR. I WOULD ASK YOU TO AMEND THAT. >> WE ARE ACTUALLY DONE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE PROSECUTOR IF HE WOULD LIKE TO COME UP. WELL, THOSE POSITIONS THAT YOU ARE REQUESTING ARE REALLY STATE POSITIONS. JUST LIKE WE STATED TO THE PUBLIC DEFENDER YEARS AGO, I DIDN'T LIKE IT BECAUSE PUBLIC DEFENDER IS VERY DEAR TO ME. I THINK THAT MY CONSTITUENCY REALLY RELIES ON THAT, BUT WE FELT LIKE, "HEY, LOOK, I WAS OVERRULED." IS THE STATE POSITIONS, GO TO THE STATE, AND WE TURNED HIM DOWN, NOT ME PERSONALLY, BUT THE QUORUM COURT AS A BODY, TURNED HIM DOWN TWICE, AND SO WE STARTED GOING TO THE STATE. AND GUESS WHAT HE GOT THOSE POSITIONS THAT HE NEEDED. I'M GOING TO SUGGEST TO YOU TO DO THE SAME THING TO GO TO THE STATE. I KNOW THAT YOU NEEDED THESE POSITIONS, PETITION THE STATE. AND YOU MAY HAVE TO GO MORE THAN ONCE. YOU MAY ALREADY BE DOING THAT, BUT I WOULD SAY CONTINUE TO DO THAT. >> THESE ARE THE POSITIONS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AND THEY'VE BEEN WITHDRAWN? >> WELL, THEY WEREN'T APPROVED. THEY WERE APPROVED TO GO TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT FOR FINAL APPROVAL, AND THAT'S AND IT DIDN'T MAKE IT TO THE FULL QUORUM COURT. I DO APOLOGIZE. CAN I GET A MOTION TO ADJOURN? [BACKGROUND] EXCUSE ME. I DO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT. [Public Comment] MR. LARRY HICKS, CHAIR OF MAINTENANCE TRANSFER. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> THANK YOU, MADAM JUSTICE. MY NAME IS LARRY HICKS. I AM WITH THE LITTLE ROCK NAACP, AND I AM HERE ON BEHALF OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE THIS EVENING TO SHOW SUPPORT FOR THE SHERIFF'S POSITION IN TERMS OF THE EFFORTS THAT ARE BEING UNDERTAKEN BY THIS BODY IN ORDER TO TRY AND TAKE A DULY SECURED AND CERTIFIED BUNCH OF INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE WITH THE COUNTY FOR YEARS THAT HAVE BEEN SERVICING THE COUNTY JAIL. EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT THE COUNTY JAIL HAS BEEN IN A STATE OF DISARRAY FOR 20 YEARS OR MORE. IT IS NOT HIS FAULT. IT'S THE FAULT OF THOSE WHO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THESE PARTICULAR FACILITIES NEED UPGRADING. IT IS WITHOUT QUESTION THAT THEY NEED UPGRADING. I HASTEN TO SAY THAT MAYBE SOME WON'T SAY, BUT I WILL. THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THAT FACILITY LOOK LIKE ME. THAT'S NOT JUSTIFIABLE UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES AND SHOULD NOT BE. THEY NEEDED TO BE TREATED LIKE HUMANS, LIKE THE SHERIFF HAS BEEN DOING FOR YEARS ON IN. UNTIL THAT TAKES PLACE, WE WILL CONTINUE TO GO AROUND IN CIRCLES TIME AND AGAIN IN ORDER TO PROVIDE US WITH SOMETHING THAT IS PARAMOUNT IN OUR COUNTY, IN OUR CITY, AS IT RELATES TO HOW WE PROTECT OUR PEOPLE, AND THAT IS WITH SAFETY, AND NOTHING SHOULD SUPERSEDE THAT, AT ANY TIME IN ANY PLACE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. WE HAVE FRAN KELLY. >> GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. >> GOOD EVENING. >> MY NAME IS FRAN KELLY AND I'M HERE AS A CONCERNED CITIZEN OF PULASKI COUNTY. FIRST, I WANT TO SAY, THANK YOU SHERIFF FOR A JOB WELL DONE. THANK YOU FOR THE HARD WORK YOU AND YOUR TEAM DO FOR THIS COUNTY AND STATE EVERY DAY. I WANT TO SAY THAT I AM APPALLED AT THE RESOURCES THAT Y'ALL KEEP FAILING TO PROVIDE FOR THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT IN [01:25:04] ORDER FOR THEM TO DO THE JOB THAT'S EXPECTED OF THEM. I WANT TO ASK A QUESTION BECAUSE I REALLY WANT TO UNDERSTAND. SHERIFF, HOW MANY DEPUTIES SHOULD YOU HAVE TO WORK WITH? >> IN OUR RESEARCH WE'VE DONE, LOOKING AT THE DEPARTMENT AND PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE, IT'S 56 POSITIONS. I REQUESTED 26 WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU CAN ONLY PROVIDE WHAT'S NEEDED PERIODICALLY AND SO I KNOW WHAT THE FUTURE NEEDS FOR THIS COUNTY IS, AND WE'VE BEEN CHECKING OUT FOR THAT. >> SO HOW MANY SHORT ARE YOU? >> WELL, I NEED 50 POSITIONS. >> YOU NEED 50 POSITIONS. >> I REQUESTED 26 POSITIONS TWO YEARS AGO. >> HOW MANY OF THOSE DID YOU GET? >> ZERO. A STUDY WAS DONE. WE SPENT OVER $100,000 FOR A STUDY, AND IT RECOMMENDED 25 POSITIONS, AND I GOT ZERO. IN THE STUDY, IT SAYS 25, AND AFTER THAT STUDY, I REQUESTED TO COME TO THIS BODY AND PRESENT MY POSITION, AND THEY REFUSED ME TO COME SPEAK. >> HOW MANY DID YOU ASK FOR TONIGHT? >> THERE WAS EIGHT POSITIONS ON THE FOR TONIGHT. THE WAY THEY WERE CLASSIFYING THEM WAS INACCURATE. IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN JUST EIGHT DEPUTY POSITIONS FOR ENFORCEMENT. >> HOW MANY DID YOU ALL APPROVE FOR HIM TONIGHT? >> NONE. >> ZERO DEPUTIES. >> ZERO DEPUTIES. >> ZERO DEPUTIES. >> NOW, I MEAN, I APPRECIATE THAT I APPRECIATE THAT THE CONCERN. BUT I MEAN, I'VE BEEN HERE FOR MANY YEARS, AND THE COUNTY HADN'T GROWN. THE CRIME HADN'T GOTTEN ANY WORSE. >> HOLD ON JUST ONE MINUTE. IF WE HAVE HIRED HIM TO BE THE SHERIFF TO TAKE CARE OF THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND THE CONCERNS THERE, HIS EXPERTISE SHOULD SPEAK FOR HIM WHEN HE COMES BEFORE THIS BODY. >> WE NEED A TAX IN BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY FOR THAT. >> THEN WE AS THE COUNTY NEED TO PROVIDE THE RESOURCES FOR THE JOB THAT WE NEED DONE HERE JUST LIKE WE DO EVERY OTHER DEPARTMENT OF THIS COUNTY. AM I NOT RIGHT? IF WE ARE NOT DOING THAT, WE NEED TO CHANGE SOMETHING. WE NEED TO CUT SOMETHING SOMEWHERE, OR WE NEED TO ASK FOR MORE TAX DOLLARS, OR WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING TO PROVIDE FOR THE SHERIFF DEPARTMENT WHAT THEY NEED TO EFFECTIVELY DO THE JOB. >> GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY. >> NO, HONESTLY, I THINK SHE HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. THEY NEED MORE TAX DOLLARS. >> SOMETHING'S GOT TO BE DONE BECAUSE I'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE. I'VE BEEN HERE AT MEETINGS BEFORE FOR THIS SAME THING YEARS PAST, AND WE'RE STILL HERE. IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. >> IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT'S REMAINING. NOW, WE'RE OFF THE BOOKS. THERE'S NO ACTION CAN BE TAKEN. IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO GET WITH ME AND ADAM, TOMORROW MORNING WE'LL BE HAPPY TO DRAFT THAT HALF CENT SALES TAX. >> WELL, IT TAKES MONEY. >> IT WOULD BE ULTIMATELY VOTED UPON BY THE VOTERS, AND SHE'S RIGHT. THEY NEED MORE REVENUE,100%. MS. MCMULLEN, WILL YOU BE THE SPONSOR OF THAT HALF CENT SALES TAX TO SEND IT TO THE VOTERS OF PULASKI COUNTY TO GIVE ERIC HIGGINS WHAT HE NEEDS TO BUILD HIS VISION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT? WILL YOU DO THAT? WELL, MS. LEWISON, WILL YOU SUPPORT IT? BECAUSE I WILL DRAFT IT. >> EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. BEFORE, I VENTURED TO ANSWER YOU. I AM 100% FOR SOME CHANGES THAT ARE GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE. THE SHERIFF IS FIXING TO SPEAK NOW. HE CAME UP, AND I'M GOING TO RESPECT THAT. >> I'M GOING TO SAY THAT, A TAX IS NEEDED AND I HAVE SAID THAT. I WAS LOOKING TO PUT A COMMITTEE TOGETHER TO TALK ABOUT REACHING TO THE COMMUNITY AND TALK TO THEM ABOUT A TAX. WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE FOR THE PULASKI COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE? THERE'S A 2006 STUDY DONE BY ULR THAT RECOMMENDED A TAX FOR PUBLIC SAFETY. THAT WAS 2006. THAT WAS NEVER DONE, BUT BEFORE I PULL A COMMITTEE TOGETHER TO TALK ABOUT WHAT'S NEEDED FOR THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, I NEED TO FIND OUT WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE BUILDING. THAT'S WHY I MADE A REQUEST TO HAVE ENGINEERS LOOK AT THE BUILDING, BECAUSE I NEED TO KNOW, DO I NEED A BRAND NEW BUILDING OR JUST ADDITIONS TO THAT BUILDING? ALSO IN SUPPORTING OF THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE. THERE'S MORE TO IT. [01:30:01] WE NEED A TAX, ABSOLUTELY BUT THERE'S INFORMATION THAT WE NEED, AND I HOPE I GET THE SUPPORT BECAUSE I CAN'T PUSH A TAX. AS JUSTIN SAID, THE QUORUM COURT HAS TO PUSH A TAX, AND I WILL TELL YOU IF YOU'RE GOING TO PUSH A TAX, IT HAS TO BE SINGULARLY FOCUSED. I'VE LOOKED AT THE TAX ACCOUNTING HAS TRIED TO PASS OVER THE YEARS AND THERE'S TOO MANY THINGS ON IT. PUBLIC SAFETY IS NUMBER 1. WE NEED MORE SPACES IN THE JAIL, WE NEED RE ENTRY PROGRAMS IN THE JAIL, WE NEED MORE SPACES TO DO THAT. I NEED MORE DEPUTIES TO ADDRESS THE THINGS THAT ARE OUT THERE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE ONE LAST COMMENT, THAT, YOU PASSED THE ORDINANCE LAST WEEK SAYING ABOUT YOU SUPPORTING THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE ADDRESSING THE SPEEDING OR THE TRUCKS GOING IN COLLEGE STATION. YOU PASSED AN ORDINANCE SAYING, "WE SUPPORT THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE NEED TO DO THIS." WE'RE TRYING TO DO THIS. >> RESOLUTION. [BACKGROUND] >> WE DON'T HAVE THE STAFF TO PATROL OUR AREAS LIKE NEEDED. THAT'S WHY I NEED PEOPLE. I'M SERIOUS I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A SERIOUS CONVERSATION ABOUT ATTACKS, BUT YOU DON'T DO IT WITH THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE ONLY. YOU INVOLVE THE CITIZENS. YOU HAVE COMMUNITY MEETINGS FIRST, GET THEIR INVOLVEMENT TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THE TAX IS. >> WELL, YOU'VE BEEN HAVING MEETINGS WITH THE SHERIFF, SUPPER WITH THE SHERIFF. DID YOU NOT TALK ABOUT AT TAX IN THAT MEETING? I'M JUST SAYING. YOU DON'T KNOW FOR TWO YEARS. NO. WE HAVEN'T SAID NO. WE'RE SAYING YES NOW. WE'RE SAYING YES. YOU GET YES FROM ME. >> I GOT YES FROM YOU BUT THIS IS THE THING, AND I WANT TO SUPPORT. WE DO IT RIGHT. WE DON'T DO IT BEHIND THE SCENES. WE DO IT RIGHT. WE DO IT WITH THE COMMUNITY. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT BEHIND THE SCENES MEANS. I REALLY DON'T. >> I'D CUT IN RIGHT NOW. I'M SORRY. [OVERLAPPING] >> COMING FORWARD IS BEHIND THE SCENES. >> I THINK THAT WE NEED TO APPROACH THIS WITH A POSITIVE ATTITUDE. THAT IS, I'M NOT SEEING THAT RIGHT NOW, AND I MUST SAY THAT I HAVEN'T SEEN IT IN THE PAST, EITHER, BUT RIGHT NOW I AM IN FAVOR FOR DOING IT THE BEST WAY POSSIBLE. I THINK THAT WE DO NEED TO HAVE SOME COMMUNICATION. WE NEED TO COORDINATE. THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMEONE WHO KNOWS EXACTLY HOW TO DO THIS. IN OTHER WORDS, WE DON'T WANT TO DO IT WITHOUT THE SHERIFF, AND WE DON'T WANT TO DO IT WITHOUT YOU, JUSTIN. DONNA, WE DON'T REALLY WANT TO DO IT WITHOUT YOU, BUT IF YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO DO IT, WE CAN MOVE FORWARD. >> SURE YOU CAN. I NEVER SAID I'M NOT. YOU'RE PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH AND ALL OF THAT. >> I DIDN'T PUT ANY WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH. >> YOU SAID IF I'M NOT WILLING TO DO IT. [OVERLAPPING] THAT WAS NOT NEEDED. YOU DIDN'T NEED TO SAY THAT. >> ALL RIGHT. I APOLOGIZE IF YOU FOUND THAT TO BE OFFENSIVE. >> I'M SORRY. I THINK WE HAVE ONE MORE COMMENT. I DON'T KNOW. JUDGE GRIFFIN. I THINK WE HAVE ONE MORE COMMENT. I APOLOGIZE. >> MY NAME IS WENDELL GRIFFIN. I WOULD LIKE TO RESPECTFULLY SUGGEST THAT THIS EVENING BE A LEARNING MOMENT BECAUSE WE HAVE ALL BEEN WATCHING AND OVER THE PAST SEVERAL WEEKS OR MONTHS, THE COMMUNITY HAS REALIZED THAT THERE IS A RIFF BETWEEN THE QUORUM COURT, THE COUNTY JUDGE AND THE SHERIFF. [BACKGROUND] I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST SOMETHING. PEOPLE NEED TO STAY IN THEIR OWN LANES. [BACKGROUND] ONE PERSON WAS ELECTED SHERIFF, BY THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTY. THAT IS A CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICE. I WOULD LIKE TO RESPECTFULLY SUGGEST THAT THIS QUORUM COURT IS INVITING LITIGATION. I KNOW OF WHICH I SPEAK WHEN IT ENCROACHES ON THE OFFICIAL DUTIES OF A CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICER. READ THE CONSTITUTION. THE SHERIFF IS THE CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER FOR THE COUNTY, AND AS SUCH, IS ENTITLED TO NOT ONLY DEFERENCE REGARDING LAW ENFORCEMENT, BUT ALSO IS ENTITLED TO SELECT THE STAFF AND SUPERVISE THOSE PERSONS. [01:35:02] TOO MANY COOKS SPOIL A BROTH FOLKS, AND QUITE FRANKLY, THE SHERIFF SHOULDN'T LEGISLATE, AND QUORUM COURT MEMBERS SHOULDN'T DO LAW ENFORCEMENT. I THINK FOLKS NEED TO STAY IN THEIR LANES. NOW I'M GOING TO SAY THE LAST THING, AND YOU CAN BE MAD IF YOU WANT TO. QUITE FRANKLY, IF YOU WANT TO RUN FOR SHERIFF, RESIGN YOUR QUORUM COURT POSITION AND RUN. [APPLAUSE] IF YOU DON'T WANT TO RUN FOR SHERIFF, WORK WITH THE SHERIFF, BUT PLEASE DO NOT TRY TO MICROMANAGE THE SHERIFF, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T ELECT YOU TO BE SHERIFF. WE ELECTED ERIC HIGGINS TO BE SHERIFF. IF HE'S NOT DOING RIGHT, WE'LL FIRE HIM. HE DOESN'T WORK FOR YOU. HE WORKS FOR US [APPLAUSE] AND SO DO YOU. [LAUGHTER] * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.