THE SPECTATOR: WASHINGTON COUNTY’S RESPONSES TO OUR QUESTIONS

  

KWHI has received Washington County's answers to a series of questions asked last week about various topics, including the EMS budget, the generator and perimeter fence projects at the Washington County Jail, the housing of inmates in other counties, and the recent commissioners court meeting to address the staff walkout in the tax assessor-collector's office.

The full answers provided by the county can be read below.

Washington County Responses to Spectator Questions
(Washington County's responses in bold)

• The generator project has been ongoing since the Big Freeze of February, 2021.  Since then, the County has had to pay for a temporary generator.  In July the Commissioners Court reported that the last needed part for the new generator is expected to arrive in October.  Since then, ground was broken on 8/7/23, and the site prepared for concrete on 8/15.  However, I understand that no one took out a city building permit for the job, and work has been halted.  Is the County still waiting for that permit to be approved over a month later?  Also, what date do you now expect the generator to be installed and operational?
  
  
  • You are correct, ground was broken on 8/7/2023 and the site was prepared for concrete on 8/15/2023.  Unfortunately, the contractor failed to apply for the city building permit, and therefore the work was halted.  The permit has since been applied for, and the permit was received on 9/25/2023.  Per the contractor, the project should be completed within 6-8 weeks, or around mid-November.

• In 2019 the Commissioners Court was presented with a quote of $115,694 from a local company to construct a perimeter fence with gates around the County Jail facility.  In November of 2022 the Commissioners Court approved and signed a contract for another company to construct a fence for $278,986 using ARPA funds.  The following month, the Commissioners Court voted to rescind that contract siting “buyers’ remorse”.  You said that after further thought, the county was not able to afford a fence for that amount of money.  Is it true that you chose instead to spend that ARPA money on the remote EMS stations in the County?  And, why is the fence project not included in your 2024 budget?
  
  
  • The Sheriff’s Office has approximately $2.9 million dollars allocated in ARPA funds for jail security cameras, the jail kitchen remodel, the generator, and the jail fence.  The fence was not a budgeted expense paid by property tax payers, because it is a planned ARPA fund expense.   
  • You are correct, in 2019 the Sheriff’s Office brought the Court the bid for a new perimeter fence at a cost of $115,964, however it was later decided by the Sheriff’s Office that the proposed fence bid did not meet their requirements. In 2022, the Sheriff’s Office presented the Court with a new bid for $278,986, which was both awarded and rescinded, because the Court felt that the cost was too high to justify at that time, and endeavored to complete the estimated $1.5 to $2 million dollar ARPA jail kitchen remodel prior to reconsiderations.
  • It is not true that ARPA money was spent on the remote EMS stations.  No ARPA funds have been used for the construction of any EMS station.  EMS Station 6 in Somerville is located on the Army Corps of Engineers property and has many of the same requirements as ARPA fund purchases.  Therefore, EMS engaged Grant Works, the County’s grant administrator, to help make sure the project meets all compliance standards. 
    
    
• In 2019, the EMS Department budget was $3,810,520 (13.7% of the total budget).  In your 2024 budget the EMS Department budget is $9,267,375 (20.6% of your total budget).  The projected transfer from the General Fund to EMS in 2024 is $2,468,375.  Your budget is projecting collections through the Air Ambulance program to total $3,500,000 in 2024, which would cover your budget expense of $3,388,816 for that department.  Yet through eight months of this year, you have collected only $1,293,311 of your budgeted revenue of $3,478,000.  That’s only 37% of the 2024 budget, so how can you project that you will collect $3.5 million in 2024?
  
  
  • Over the last 5 years, Washington County EMS has expanded the scope of services it provides to the constituents, which comes with additional staffing and inflationary adjustments.
  • You are correct that within the first 6 months of this calendar year, at the time of the printing/posting of the budget, EMS had collected and deposited $1.29 million dollars.  Currently EMS has collected $1.9 million dollars as of September, 2023, and is projecting to collect $3.1 million to $3.4 million dollars by the end of the 2023 budget cycle.  EMS keeps the court updated of current collections in their quarterly presentation.
  • EMS is projecting to collect $3.5 million dollars in 2024.  This number was arrived at by projecting the number of patient transports ($8,500/patient transport average), and projections calculated by the billing company.

• An independent auditor told the Commissioners Court last month that they need to turn around the increasing losses in the EMS Department.  Has anyone come up with a plan to do that?  If so, what is it?
  
  
  • The independent auditor also stated that the subsidy for EMS since 2021 “is headed in the right direction and is already trending down.”  He also reported that the recent increases in subsidies are representative across all of the counties he audits due to the healthcare pandemic.  The Washington County EMS is in the 4th year of a 5-year strategic plan.  The plan involved the addition of one full crew which were added over the last 2 budget cycles.  We feel with the staffing and fleet components realized there will be very minimal increases to expenses over several budget cycles as the revenue continues to increase with call volume.  History is the best indicator that the subsidy will continue to decrease as a result.  With the completion of the strategic plan mentioned above the reduction of the subsidy will occur in future years. 

• The County has been spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to house inmates in other counties due to a jailer shortage at our facility.  Do you have a plan to fill those positions, perhaps by offering higher salaries to jailers?
  
  
  • Washington County Human Resources, in collaboration with Washington County Jail administration, reported the hiring of ten Corrections Officers within the past nine months.  At this time, there is only one vacancy in the jail.
  • Unfortunately, the County has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars over the past three years as a result of the Texas Jail Commission’s ratio requirement for the number of Corrections Officers to inmates. However, the hundreds of thousands of dollars have mostly been covered by the unused salaries and benefits due to the Corrections Officers vacancies.
  • Currently, the County has three inmates that are housed in Waller County.  This was a decision made by the Sheriff’s Office in the best interest of the staff and inmates.
  • In an effort to address the staffing shortage, which was exacerbated by the COVID pandemic and law enforcement political contentions, and to increase the salaries to a competitive level, the Court authorized salary increases for all jail staff, effective July 2021.  In addition, the court approved further hourly rate incentives due to the necessary overtime that was affecting both the retention and morale of the jail staff.  Additionally, in September of 2022, the Commissioner’s Court authorized a minimum $2/hour pay increase for Corrections Officers, making their salaries competitive with Waller and surrounding counties.

• Why is there no video posted of the emergency County Commissioners Meeting in late August to address the walkout in the County Tax Assessor’s office?  That’s the same meeting in which the media were not notified.
  
  
  • In compliance with Texas Local Government Code 551.045, the County posted the meeting in the Courthouse and on the website.  Notice to the media is an additional courtesy that is extended; however, it is not required under the code.  Unfortunately, due to the emergent nature of the issue, the additional courtesy was overlooked.  At this time, only regularly scheduled meetings are video recorded.