c~RDER Nn. ~~e-r~~ RF~F'ROVRL OF RhM1ENllMEPJT "fD RF2CHITECTURRL CONTRRCT TO DECREE-SSE F'ROFESSIONRL LIRPILITY INSURRNCE On this the 13th, day of March, 1995, ~_ipon motion made by Commissioner Holekamp, seconded by Commissioner I_acitey, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-@-@, to accept the amendment to Rrchitectural Contract to decrease Professional Liability Insurance from S1,@@@,@@@.@@ t;o SS@@,@@@.@@ which is standard. COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA REQUEST PLEASE FURNISH ONE ORIGINAL AND FIVE COPIES OF THIS REQUEST AND DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COURT. MADE BY Robert A Denson OFFICE. CountyJudee MEETING DATE: March 13. 1995 TIME PREFERRED: SUBJECT: (PLEASE BE SPECIFIC) Consider and discuss Amendment to Architectural Contract to decrease Professional Liability Insurance from $1 000 000 00 to $500,000.00 which is standard. EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTED: (PLEASE STATE REASON) ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION IF PERSONNEL MATTER -NAME OF EMPLOYEE: NAME OF PERSON ADDRESSING THE COURT County Judge Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted in accordance with Title 5, Chapter 551 and 552, Government Code, is as follows: Meeting scheduled for Mondays. THIS REQUEST RECEIVED BY THIS REQUEST RECEIVED ON: 5:00 P.M. previous Tuesday. All Agenda Requests will be screened by the County Judge's Office to determine if adequate information has been prepared for the Court's formal consideration and action at time of Court Meetings. Your cooperation will be appreciated and contribute towards you request being addressed at the earliest opportunity See Agenda Request Rules Adopted by Commissioners' Court. hYaR D7 '9S 1©~33 DI STEFANOiSfaNTOPETRO ARCHITECTS P.1/3 j DI STEF,ANO / SANTOPETRO • ARCHITECTS, INC. ARCIETCEGTIJRE AIA PI,ANNWG FAX COVER L.E7TER ATTENTION Thea OFFICE / FIRM KERR CDUNTY COMMISSIONER'S COURT FAX # 210/257-6716 FROM : ANN DATE 3/7/95 TIME 9:30 a.m. TOTAL PAGES (including cover) 3 REMARKS Please have Commissioner Rolekamp call me after his review as I must notify our insurance carrier today regarding the amount of our policy. Thanks. IF THERE 1S A PROBLEM, PLEASE CALL OUR BUSINESS PHONE 953,9032 zsoo crrsrivesr aLVn. • svI'rs i ~w HOUSTON, rExAS •77012 ~i hWR ©? '95 10 33 DI STEFgNOiSgNTOPETRO gRCFiITECTS .tTsnah 7, 1995 P.2/3 DI STEFANO ! SANTOPETRO • ARCHITECTS, INC. ARCHiTECI'URE AiA PLANNING Hac. Robot A. Deruoq Count' Judgc Kerr County Comlmisvionas Coutt 700 Mein Stroet Koitville, Texas 78028 7tE PROFESSIONAL LIABILTI"Y INSURANCH Dear Iudge !)enscvs: When we aiB~OY negotiated our Contract wish dle County, we wero asked to increaw aur.profasionak liability (ermsa and omiaaiam) polity to S 1;000.000 from our normal Si00,000. The County a8sced to pay dse;~Hereswe in pranium for dais, and did. Enclosed is an invoiac for die additional premium for 1994 and iz i9 cbatSsd ak 55,.204.47, which i9 as per Connate. We did not bill the County for 1993 since rb wodt teak phtca that year. AhfiouR6 we are billing the County ae the Cantrsct amount, there have been lwo increaser in rho premium niece drat Lima. $ is oncc again time for ua to re-new the policy. and for 1991 is will be 57,871.25 sddiCnoal. We ca~ot continue ebalging the County the original premium which was in cRecc in 1992, and aslr than you consider either P$Ying ~ bisha Prmtium or allow us W retnra to our twsatal 5500,000 policy which will net soquhe env flsrther payments by the county for dlis saw now oa Please advise tls at your endiest wavenience. S;ocerelY. r `~( h A4. Santo > AIA ]MS/a! Encl. 230D QrYW84i'1tLVD.`SURS 1350 slotlSLON,'tY,7tM`7Tltt•7U/s53.9ec12 •PAX 7t379!]-9WI ~ 07 '95 1E1:34 DT STEFRNOiSRNTOPETRO RRCHTTECTS P, 3i3 INVOICE FOR COURT AGENDA/ACTION: TO: I{ERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT Hm. Itnbert A. Dcssos4 County Judga 700 Main Street Ktrrvilk, Tcxas 78028 FROM: DI STEFANO/SANTOPETROARCHITECTS, INC. 2500 CiryWest Blvd., Suite t350 Houston, Tcxas 77042-3020 DATE: Much 7, l995 RE: ADDTCTONAL PROFESSIONAL LIABiLTTY PREMIUM FOR 1994 Per Conuact, Owt>er shall ba rcspomibk Eor the payment of the pranium for ait coverage over flue hundred thousand cioila:s DUE ARCHITECT: 55,394 :47 CHRIS DI STEFAN ~~ dau L4W pFFICES McCALL, PARKHURST 7~ HORTON L.L.P. ~I~ NORTH HARW000 1225 ONE RIVERWALK PLACE 3100 ONE AMERICAN CENTER NINTH FLOOR SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78205-3503 AUSTIN. TEXAS 7B~01-3234 DALLAS, TEXAS X62066587 TElEPHON E'. zio 2zs-zepp TELEPHONE sl2 aTa 36os TELECriONE 2142202800 TE~ECOPV' 210225-2984 TELECOCr 512 a?2~OE?~ Tu ECOer' 2M 953-0?36 March 8, 1994 KERB COUNTY, TEXAS LIMITED TAX GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS SERIES 1994 DATED FE$RUARY 1,1994 IN THE AGGREGA"fE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $5.900,000 AS BOND COUNSEL FOR KERR COUNTY, TEXAS (the "Issuer"), we have examined into the legality and validity of the Bonds described above (the "Bonds"), which bear iuterest from February 1, 1994, until maturity or redemption, at the rates stated in the text of the Bonds, payable on February 15, 199 and semiannually on each August IS and February 15 thereafter, and maturing on February 15 in each of the years 1996 through 2012, and with the Bonds maturing on and after February 15, 2006 being subject to optional redemption prior to maturity, all in accordance with the terms and conditions stated in the text of the Bonds. WE HAVE EXAMINED the applicable and pertinent provisions of the Constitution and laws of the State of Texas and a transcript of certified proceedings of the Issuer and other pertinent instruments authorizing and relating to the issuance of the Bonds, including (i) the order authorizing the issuance of the Bonds (the "Order"), (ii) one of the executed Bonds (Bond Number R-1) and printer's specimens of Bonds to be authenticated and delivered in exchange for the Bonds, and (iii) the Issuer's No-Arbitrage Certificate, of even date herewith. BASED ON SAID EXAMINATION, IT IS OUR OPINION that the Bonds have been authorized, issued and delivered in accordance with law; that the Bonds constitute valid and legally binding general obligations of the Issuer in accordance with their terms except as the enforceability thereof may be limited by bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, mnratnrum, linuidation and other similar laws now nr h?rPaf±er nnaoted relating to creditors' rights generally; that the Issuer has the legal authority to issue the Bonds and to repay the Bonds; and that ad valorem tales sufficient to provide for the payment of the interest on and principal of the Bonds, as such interest comes due, and such principal matures, have been levied and ordered to be levied against all taxable property in the Issuer, and have been pledged for such payment, within the limits prescribed by law. IT IS FURTHER OUR OPINION, except as discussed below, that the interest on the Bonds is excludable from the gross income of the owners thereof for federal income tax purposes under the statutes, regulations, published rulings, and court decisions existing on the date of this opinion. We are fiu'lher of the opinion that the Bonds are not "private activity bonds" and that, accordingly, interest on the Bonds will not be included as an individual or corporate alternative minimum tax preference item under section 57(a)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"). In expressing the aforementioned opinions, we have relied on, and assume wmpliance by the Issuer with, certain representations and covenants regarding the use and investment of the proceeds of the Bonds. We call your attention to the fact that failure by the Issuer to comply with such representations and covenants may cause the interest on the Bonds to become includable in gross income retroactively to the date of issuance of the Bonds. WECALL YOURATTENTIONTD THE FACT that the interest on tax-exempt obligations, such as the Bonds, is (a) included in a corporation's alternative minimum taxable income for purposes of determining the alternative minimum tax and the environmental tax imposed on corporations by sections 55 and 59A of the Code; (b) subject to the branch profits tax imposed on foreign corporations by section 884 of the Code; and (c) included in the passive investment income of a subchapter S corporation and subject to the tax imposed by section 137 of the Code. EXCEPT AS STATED ABOVE, we express no opinion as to any otlrer federal, state or local tax consequences of acquiring, carrying, owning, or disposing of the Bonds. WEHAVEACTEDASROND COUNSEL for the Issuer for the sole pumose of rendering an opinion with respect to the legality and validity of the Bonds under the Constitution and laws of the State of Texas, and with respect to the excludability of the interest on the Bonds from gross income for federal income tax purposes, and for no other reason or purpose. We have not been requested to investigate or verify, and have not indepen- dently investigated or verified, arty records, data or other material relating to the financial condition or capabilities of the Issuer, and we have not assumed any responsibility with respect thereto. We have relied solely on certificates executed by officials of the Issuer as to the current outstanding indebtedness of, and assessed valuation of taxable property within, the Issuer. Respectfully, ~ c~ ~O„_,~..-off ~ ~~-~~-- ~- ~. ~