/ ~_
REGULAR COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA
MONDAY SEPTEMBER 13, 1999, 9:00 A.M.
COUNTY COURTROOM
KERR COUNTY COURTHOUSE
I{ERRVILLE, TEXAS 78028
THIS NOTICE IS POSTED PURSUANT TO THE TEXAS OPEN
MEETINGS ACT. (TITLE 5, CHAPTER 551, GOVERNMENT CODE AND
TITLE 5, CHAPTER 552, GOVERNMENT CODE.)
This Commissioners' Court will hold a meeting at 9:00 A.M., Monday,
September 13, 1999, at the Kerr County Courthouse in the Commissioners'
Courtroom.
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
VISITORS INPUT
• Citizens wishing to speak on items NOT listed on the regular agenda, please fill
out form for consideration at this time. Citizens wishing to speak on items
LISTED on the regular agenda, please fill out request form for consideration
during discussion on that specific item. In order to expedite the flow of business
and to provide all citizens the opportunity to speak, the Judge may impose a
three (3) minute limitation on any person addressing the court.
COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS
• Commissioners and/or the County Judge may use this time to recognize
achievements of persons in their Precinct or to make comments on matters not
listed on the regular agenda.
I APPROVAL AGENDA:
1.1 Pay bills.
1.2 Budget Amendments. (County Auditor]
1.3 Late Bills. (County Auditor)
1.4 Read and Approve Minutes.
1.5 Approve and accept Monthly Reports.
~~,~ A.D. tY~
,µ~-~~ IIA/iR KERN C0 ^ ERK 1H~~~
A. t3ARBEE, Deputy
II
CONSIDERATION AGENDA: (Action may be taken on Items
listed below)
2.1 Consider and discuss proposed tax rate; take a record vote and
set public hearing on proposed tax rate for fiscal year
1999/2000. (County Judge)
10:00
2.2 Set Public Hearing for proposed Elected Officials Salaries for
fiscal year 1999/2000. (County Judge)
23 Set Public Hearing for proposed Budget for fiscal year
1999/2000. (County Judge)
2.4 Public Hearing on the proposed Ordinance Prohibiting Solid
Waste Disposal in Kerr County. (County Judge)
2.5 Consider and discuss adopting Ordinance Prohibiting Solid
Waste Disposal in Kerr County. (County Judge)
2.6 Consider and discuss Preliminary Plat of Whisper Ridge
Subdivision, Pct. 2, and Variance for number of lots for it be a
privately maintained County Lane. (Commissioner Pct. #2/Ken
Muller/Don VoelkeUCounty Engineer)
2.7 Consider and discuss Preliminary Plat of Dove Valley
Subdivision, Pct. 2. (Commissioner Pct. #2/Ken Muller/Don
VoelkeUCounty Engineer)
2.8 Consider and discuss Preliminary Replat of Numerous Lots of
Falling Water, Pct. 3. (Commissioner Pct. #3/Dale
Crenwelge/County Engineer)
2.9 Consider and discuss re-plat of Lot 2, Block 2, Busch Estates,
Pct. 4. (Commissioner Pct. #4/Charles Domingues/County
Engineer)
2.10 Consider and discuss Preliminary Plat of Buckhorn Lake Resort,
Pct. 4. (Commissioner Pct. #4/Charlie Diggs/County Engineer)
z
2.11 Consider and discuss improper underground utility cuts in
Kerrville South by Wiedenfeld Water Works. (Commissioner
Pct. #2/County Engineer)
2.12 Consider and discuss up-date on Commanche Trace
Development (Pct. #2) and anticipated platting/city annexation
process of Project Phase I. (Commissioner Pct. #2/Tom
MarrelUCounty Engineer)
2.13 Consider and discuss petition to allow the Shadow Ridge
Subdivision to conduct an election for the purpose of forming a
Special Road District. (Commissioner Pct. #2)
2.14 Consider and discuss Water Line Construction by Vlasek Pump
on Rustic Hill Road, Pct. 4. (Commissioner Pct. #4Bill
Vlasek/County Engineer)
2.15 Consider and discuss Order establishing Minimum Infrastructure
Requirements for Manufactured Home Rental Communities
pursuant to Section 232.007 of the Texas Local Government
Code and set a Public Hearing on same. (County Judge)
2.16 Consider and discuss job description for (1) Facilities Use and
Maintenance Supervisor; (2) Facilities Use and Maintenance
Assistant Supervisor; and (3) Fa~Cilities Use and Maintenance
Clerk. (Commissioner Pct. #2)
2.17 Consider and discuss request from Chili Appreciation Society,
Intl for use of Flat Rock Lake Park. (Commissioner Pct. #2)
2.18 Consider and discuss accepting Laurinda Boyd's letter of
resignation as the Reservations Agent for the Hill Country Youth
Exhibition Center. (Commissioner Yct. #3)
2.19 Consider and discuss reappointment of Dr. Sam Junkin to the
Hill Country Community MHMR Center Board of Trustees.
(County Judge)
3
2.20 Consider and discuss approval of the contract between the
Office of Court Administration and Kerr County and authorize
the County Judge to sign same. (County Judge)
2.21 Consider and discuss approval of the Kerr Central Appraisal
District 2000 Budget. (County Judge)
2.22 Consider and discuss Burn Ban pursuant to Subchapter Z,
Chapter 240, Local Government Code. (County Judge)
3:00 2.23 Consider and discuss appointment of Interim Sheriff to fill the
unexpired term. (County Judge)
CLOSED MEETING
A closed meeting will be held concerning the following subject(s):
III. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
This meeting is authorized by Title 5, Chapter 551, Government Code and
Title 5, Chapter 552, Government Code.
3.1 (551.071(1)(A)) Consultations tivith Attorney (County and
Civil Attomey)
3.2 (552.074(a)(1) Personnel Matter to deliberate the
appointment of a public official. (County Judge)
4
OPEN MEETING
An open meeting will be held concerning the following subject(s):
IV ACTION AGENDA:
4.1 Action as may be required on matters discussed in Executive
Session.
V INFORMATION AGENDA:
5.1 Reports from Commissioners.
5.2 Road and Bridge Monthly Report.
5.3 Maintenance Monthly Report.
5
,,..r	1
	2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~- 14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
.-.
s-
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.-~
`.
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
~,:z ~ ~,~-. as9 9rs
~C~.a~.~»u-.~sl~~ .zSg9c - 71w~~ - d6o/O 2
~,~. ~.e~-~ ac o.i
do o/z
,r LUai.w~.a~L~.~ a6b/3
I N D E X	
September 13, 1999 PAGE
2.lo~yy~Proposed tax rate	8
2.2dSgf.9Set public hearing, elected officials' salaries	10
2.3a75ggy/Set public hearing, proposed 1999/2000 budget	11
~~	
Preliminary plat - Whisper Ridge Subdivision
2.6 No'	28
S	
Preliminary plat - Dove Valley Subdivision
2.7 ~~~	29
2.8o1G0/6Preliminary replat - Falling Water Subdivision	32
2.91LO/] Replat of Lot 2, Block 9, Busch Estates	34
2.10a6°/BPreliminary plat - Buckhorn Lake Resort	38
2.9,76619 Public hearing - proposed Solid Waste ordinance	99
~	
Adoption of proposed Solid Waste ordinance
2.5	70
2.12N~Update on Commanche Trace Development	71
2.11A~ai.e..Improper utility cuts in Kerrville South	80
2.13Na~-Shadow Ridge special road district	85
2.19/1~~7ater line construction, Rustic Hill Rd.	103
2.19?6gitReappointment of Dr. Sam Junkin - MHMR Board	123
2.17~'Jp,~,~,Request from Chili Appreciation Society Int'1	129
2.15a~°j Order - Manufactured Home Rental Communities	130
2.18.IC°a~Accept resignation letter - Laurinda Boyd	193
2.16o16a~.3Job descriptions - Facilities Use ~ Maintenance	195
Contract with Office of Court Administration
2.20~p2'~	151
(
2.21,~'~pproval of KCAD 2000 budget	152
2.22~oa~urn ban	152
2.23 ~ Appointment of Interim Sheriff - unexpired term	169
1	
4.1a`~a Action taken on Executive Session matters	200
3
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
On Monday, September 13, 1999, at 9:00 a.m., the Regular
Session of Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the
Commissioners Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville,
Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE HENNEKE: Good morning. It's 9 o'clock on
Monday, September 13th, 1999. I'll call to order our regular
Commissioners Court meeting for this month. Commissioner
Baldwin, I believe you have the honors this morning.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, I do. If you would
rise for a word of prayer, please.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. At this time, anyone
wishing to speak on an item not listed on the regular agenda
who's filled out a form for consideration may come forward
and address the Court. Is there anyone in the audience who
would like to speak on an item not listed on the regular
agenda? Seeing none, we'll proceed to Commissioners'
Comments. Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sir, I have none.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good to be back, Judge.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Good to have you back.
Commissioner Lett?
4
.-
~_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two comments. First, I will be
meeting with representatives from L.C.R.A. tomorrow regarding
Flat Rock Park. They're coming down to see what we're doing
and kind of get an on-the-site review of where we're doing
things or about to do things. I've told them we haven't done
much yet, but we have a lot of materials on order and plans,
and I think King Cartwright, I believe, may be bringing
another individual with him, but that will be at 10 o'clock
in the morning. We're meeting here at my office and probably
going out to the court -- I mean out to the park.
And second, on Saturday morning, I had the privilege of
giving a talk to the Riverside Landowners Protection
Coalition, which is a property rights group. Turned out it
was probably one of the finest -- best talks we've had. Good
response, and I was very fortunate to be able to share the
speaking honors with Commissioner Dewhurst and Representative
Bob Turner, who was really -- I didn't expect either of them
to be there. I thought I was the only one going to be there,
and I was first and then they came on, and it was a good
visit. I think a lot of people learned a lot about the whole
Region J water process and Senate Bill 1.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Excellent, thank you. Commissioner
Griffin?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: First, I'd like to pass
along my thanks to the Road and Bridge department for a very
~~ i3 ~~~ 5
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

nice letter we got from tt ~y~~ LoY~e~~ ~~~ the Hunt School
regarding the painting of the crosswo~.__ the erecting of
signs there. They really liked the prompt response they qot.
Of course, that's one of the most important things we do, is
looking after our school zones, and I add my thanks also on
that. And, also, I'd like to note that it looks like the
country and the world got past the first Y2K crisis of
9-9-99. Some of those involved very, very old systems, so I
think at least everything's on track there. We're still
addressing Y2K problems in the County, but I think by the end
of the year we're going to be solid.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Good. I'd like to relay that we
received a very nice letter from Nueces County to the
Juvenile -- Kerr County Juvenile Detention Center thanking
them for their cooperation during the evacuation of some
juveniles from Corpus Christi to Kerr County as a result of
the hurricane scare down there recently. Very complimentary
letter. And, it's always nice to have other people recognize
what an excellent juvenile facility is operated here in Kerr
County.
Additionally, I want to point out what I think everyone
knows, which is that Leonard Odom and Truby Hardin were
invited to Bastrop County in August to address the
Commissioners Court in Bastrop County regarding the Unit Road
and Bridge system. Judge Montgomery and the Auditor from
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
6
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
	12
°'	13
`.	
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
,-.
Bastrop County made a visit to Kerr County specifically to
see our Unit Road and Bridge system and, as a result of that
visit, they invited Leonard and Truby back to Bastrop to
address them and assist them with the process of determining
whether or not to go from a precinct system to a unit system.
I think it is always worthy of note when other people around
the country recognize the excellent employees and departments
that we have here in Kerr County.
Before we proceed with the agenda, I'd like to recognize
-- I believe it's seven visitors from Russia whom we have
with us today. These are part of a -- a political
development program which is actually being administered, I
believe, by the United Methodist Church.
MR. WORDEN: And the Library of Congress.
JUDGE HENNEKE: And the Library of Congress. John,
do you want to come forward and just tell us a little bit
about the program and perhaps introduce our guests?
MR. WORDEN: Let me introduce David Shaw, who is
the coordinator for the local effort here to host these
families.
MR. SHAW: Thank you. This is part of a group of
2,000 Russian leaders who have been invited to the United
States, and we're happy to have them here in Kerrville for 10
days. They arrived last Thursday night, through next Sunday.
And they're studying our political and economic, social
7
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.--
~_
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
systems, just to learn more about us. The program was
conceived by James Billington, the Librarian of Congress.
The chief sponsors in the United States are the Russia
Initiative of the United Methodist Church and Rotary
International, and we line up the hosts and the itineraries
locally, and people from numerous walks of life in Russia
have been invited. We have college professors, leaders of
various non-goveznmental organizations dealing with the
Chernobyl refugees, with public housing in St. Petersburg,
with other small business concerns and various levels.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, David. Welcome.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Are you going to introduce them,
David?
MR. SHAW: Yes. Khalid Bashirov from Dagestan.
He's a professor of Management and Marketing at the State
University. And one of our interpreters, Olga Makhina. She
is an interpreter, and she's also a law school graduate and
working for an American law firm in Moscow. We have Nikolay
Kovalev -- Kovalev from St. Petersburg, who is chairman of a
non-governmental organization concerned with public housing
and improving housing conditions in St. Petersburg. we have
Elena Danilova, who is a graduate student at Moscow State
University and teacher there, and working on a dissertation
on intercultural translation. We have Vyacheslav Vasilyev
8
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
	12
	13
~, _	
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
from Pskov, who is -- works with the victims of the Chernobyl
disaster, head of an organization concerned with that. And,
we have Anastasia Bolshakova from St. Petersburg, and she's
one of our interpreters. And she also works, among other
things, at the Hermitage Museum. And we have Sergey
Tsarapkin from Nizhny Novgorod, who is a graduate in
economics and studying small business and various enterprises
of that nature.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Welcome.
(Applause.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: I will say that it is a -- it's
difficult under any circumstances to try to explain County
government, but to try to explain it to people in a foreign
language is a real trip. So, I thank you for your patience.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you figured that out,
would you explain it to me?
JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll talk about it later. With
the Court's indulgence, at this time I would like to pass
over the approval agenda so we can get to the tax matters, to
give our Tax Assessor/Collector additional time to make the
paper's deadline. So if there's no objection, we'll go
straight to Items 1, 2, and 3. We'll take up at this time on
the consideration agenda Item No. 2.1, which is to consider
and discuss the proposed tax rate, take a record vote on the
proposed tax rate, and set a public hearing on the proposed
9
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~_
12
13
19
15
16
17
la
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
tax rate for fiscal year 1999/2000.
As part of the budget which you all received were the
tax rates. I will announce them to the general public.
Proposed 1999/2000 tax rate for the General Fund is .2015.
Jury Fund is .0016. Fire Protection, .0058. Public Library,
.0219. Flood Control is zero. Indigent Health is .0175.
Contractual Obligation of the 1998 tax anticipation note,
.0291. Jail Bonds, 1994, .0285. Permanent Improvement,
.0132. Total M and 0 tax rates of .3191. Road and Bridge
operating tax rate, .0372. Total Road and Bridge, .0372.
Total County rate, .3513.
I'd point out to the audience and the people in Kerr
County that this tax rate, .3513, is essentially the same --
is the same tax rate that has been levied for five years.
I'd also point out to the public that of our surrounding
counties; that is, Kimble County, Gillespie County, Bandera
County, Kendall County, Real County, Medina County, and
Edwards County, Kerr County has the lowest tax rate of those
counties, with the exception of Gillespie County. And
Gillespie County is the only one of those taxing entities,
including Kerr County, which has raised its tax rate for the
coming fiscal year. So, I think we've done yeoman's work in
meeting our constitutional obligation of funding County
government at a level that's reasonable and in keeping with
our obligations to our basses, the taxpayers.
10
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~. .
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
Does anyone have any questions? If not, I'd entertain a
motion to approve those proposed tax rates and set a public
hearing at 1:30 on Tuesday, September 21st.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we set the proposed
tax rate at the levels announced, and that we set a public
hearing on proposed tax rate for Tuesday, September 21st, at
1:30 in the afternoon. Any further discussion? If not, this
takes a record vote. Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I vote aye.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Aye.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Aye.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Griffin?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Aye.
JUDGE HENNEKE: And the Judge votes aye. Motion
carries. Item No. 2 is set the public hearing for proposed
elected officials' salaries for fiscal year 1999/2000. It is
a requirement under the Constitution that any time we raise
an elected official's salary, be it by cost-of-living
adjustment or whatever, that we have a public hearing. It's
my suggestion that we set the public hearing on the elected
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
^	13
~.	
	14
	15
	16
	17
	18
	19
	20
	21
	22
	23
	24
	25
officials' salaries also at 1:30 on Tuesday, September 21st.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I so move.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Second by Commissioner Griffin that
we have a public hearing on the proposed elected officials'
salary increases at 1:30 on September 21st, 1999. Any
further discussion? This does not take a record vote. All
in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item No. 3 is to
set a public hearing for the proposed budget for fiscal year
1999/2000. We have already approved the proposed operating
budget, which is on file with the County Clerk. Again, I
propose to have a public hearing on Tuesday, September 21st,
1999, at 1:30 in the afternoon. Do I have a motion to that
effect?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Griffin,
seconded by Commissioner Letz, that we have a public hearing
on the proposed operating budget for Kerr County for fiscal
12
.-,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.-.
~. .
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
year 1999/2000, at 1:30 p.m. on Tuesday, September 21st. Any
further discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right
hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Thank you. Paula?
MS. RECTOR: Thank you, gentlemen.
JUDGE HENNEKE: You're welcome.
MS. RECTOR: I'm going to work.
JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, we will return to the
approval agenda. Next item on the agenda is to pay the
bills. Does anyone have any questions regarding the bills
that have been presented for payment by our Auditor, Mr.
Tomlinson?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't have any questions,
Judge, but do I have a concern. On page 16 -- and I'm sure
this is State money. Even though we say that it's not local
taxpayers' money, it really is, this State money being spent
here. And, the -- one, two -- third item down, for $715.50
for caps, jackets, and shirts. I understand there's nothing
I can do about that, but I -- but also -- but it does concern
me that we're spending that kind of taxpayers' money on
whatever all that is, caps, jackets, and shirts. That's all.
JUDGE HENNEKE: You're absolutely right,
13
.-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
`_
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
Commissioner, there's nothing we can do about it, but I have
it circled on my budget, as well.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, good. Let's do
something about it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We have to go talk to whichever
governor we have today.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would like for our
employees to have shirts and caps and chaps and spurs.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nice office-wear.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is it a nice office, but
it's not going to happen.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone else have any questions
regarding the bills? If not, do I have a motion to pay the
bills as presented and approved -- and recommended by the
Auditor?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE:
seconded by Commissioner
approved and recommended
discussion? If not, all
(The motion wa
JUDGE HENNEKE:
Moved by Commissioner Williams,
Baldwin, that we pay the bills as
by the Auditor. Any further
in favor, raise your right hand.
s carried by unanimous vote.)
All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Budget amendments.
14
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~_
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
Do we have any budget amendments?
MR. TOMLINSON: I think we do.
JUDGE HENNEKE: A few.
MR. TOMLINSON: Fourteen, to be exact.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Fourteen. Well, let's walk through
Budget Amendment No. 1 from the County Clerk.
MR. TOMLINSON: Actually, this is for the Elections
Department to transfer $942.85 from Judges and Clerks, $97.64
from Election Notices, $78 from Rental, and $78.66 from
Microfilm Processing. $627.92 goes into Election Supplies
and $569.23 into Ballot Expense.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that we approve Budget
Amendment No. 1 for the County Clerk. Any further
discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed same sign.
(No response.}
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Budget Amendment
No. 2, Justice of the Peace No. 3.
MR. TOMLINSON: We had a request from Judge Tench
to transfer $141.35 from Dockets and Forms to Lease Copier,
and $80 from Books, Publications, and Dues to Telephone.
15
~.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.-.
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second -- third.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we approve Budget
Amendment No. 2, Justice of the Peace No. 3. Any further
discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Number 3, Justice
of the Peace No. 9.
MR. TOMLINSON: Request from Judge Ragsdale,
Justice -- J.P. 9, to transfer $250 from Dockets and Forms to
Office Supplies.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Baldwin,
seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we approve Budget
Amendment Request No. 3 for Justice of the Peace No. 9. Any
further discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right
hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
16
.--._
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Number 9, Ag Barn
Facilities.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. This is a request from Glenn',
Holekamp to transfer $475.55 from Equipment and Repairs to
Capital Outlay. This is to purchase 40 folding tables.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
MR. TOMLINSON: I think it's from an auction in
that -- Ferris Rental.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'll second it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Williams,
seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we approve Budqet
Amendment No. 9 for the Ag Barn facility. Any further
discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Question. This is not
something that we're addressing in the -- in our budget?
We're buying -- trying to purchase chutes and chairs, and
this wasn't a part of all that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, this is in addition.
It's an opportunity to purchase, at a very reduced price,
good tables that were on auction at Ferris Rental, which is
closing down. Glenn selected the best of the best and we
went with that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further discussion? If not,
all in favor, raise your right hand.
17
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.-,
~. _
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
(The motion was carried by uananimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Number 5,
Courthouse and Related Buildings and Ag Barn Facilities.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. This is a request from Glenn
Holekamp also, to transfer $11,250 from the Maintenance
Superintendent line item, $5,000 to go into Repairs and
Maintenance, $6,250 into Jail Repairs and Maintenance.
$2,000 from Group Insurance, to transfer that into the
Supplies line item. $90.92 from Miscellaneous into
Telephone. 5950 out of Building and Grounds Maintenance in
Ag Barn to Trash Pickup at the Aq Barn.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Williams,
seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we approve Budget
Amendment No. 5, Courthouse and Related Buildings and Ag Barn
Facilities.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I do have a question, sorry.
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maintenance Superintendent.
Was -- is that a position we didn't fill? Is that why
there's --
18
~. .
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It was funded last year,
but was not filled the way -- in accordance with the budget,
so there was that surplus.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: This wasn't the whole period
that was budgeted for.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly. It will be filled
this year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. The -- that's fine.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further discussion? If not,
all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JllDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Number 6,
Commissioners Court.
MR. TOMLINSON: This is to transfer $100 from
Contingency into Notices, and it's for a notice for
employment fox Tax Office.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that we approve Budget
Amendment No. 6 for Commissioners Court. Any further
discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
19
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
^ 13
~_
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
^
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Number 7,
regarding 216th and 198th District Courts.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. For the 216th District
Court, this is a request to transfer $270.11 from Court
Transcripts to Office Supplies. For the 198th, it's 595.49
from Court Transcripts to Office Supplies.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'll second that, but with a,
question. Why are those balances running so high in the
unexpended area? I just -- I can't believe that we --
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's a line item that is -- if I
can respond, that is very -- very hard -- because you don't
know -- a transcript is basically if someone appeals --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- a decision. And, if someone
appeals, then the court reporter is required to prepare a
verbatim transcript, which becomes part of the appellate
record.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay, it's transcripts.
It's not the --
JUDGE HENNEKE: It's not the transcription.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It's not the transcribing,
zo
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
,.,
`- -
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
it's the transcript.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Another comment. The reason we
increased that a lot last year was because of the number of
capital murder trials we had, which are automatic appeals.
We assumed we'd have a have a higher than normal expenditure.
I don't know why we haven't spent that money. Probably be
rolled into next year's budget for those appeals.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I know we have a couple on line
already for next year. Moved by Commissioner Letz, seconded
by Commissioner Griffin, that we approve Budget Amendment No.
7, regarding 216th and 198th District Courts. Any further
discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Budget Amendment No. 8 for the
County Treasurer.
MR. TOMLINSON: I have a request from the Treasurer
to transfer $12 from Books, Publications, and Dues, $6.50
from Telephone, $26.90 from Capital Outlay, $9.03 from
Part-Time Salary to repair a check-signing machine in the
office.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, second
^
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
	12
^	13
~. _	
	19
	15
	16
	17
	18
	19
	20
	21
	22
	23
	24

^	25
zl
by Commissioner Baldwin, that we approve Budget Amendment
Request No. 8 for the County Treasurer. Any further
discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Budget Amendment No. 9 for Road and
Bridge Administration.
MR. TOMLINSON: This is this request to transfer
$400 from Notices to Utilities for the month of September.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Williams, that we approve Budget
Amendment Request No. 9 for Road and Bridge Administration.
Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your
right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carried. Budget Amendment
No. 10 for the Sheriff's Department.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. This is to transfer
$4,695.58 from Deputies Salaries to Secretary Salaries. And,
I don't understand why that happened, but we are -- we are
short of money in that line item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a mistake in the budget?
22
.-
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~. _
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. TOMLINSON: Just a budget calculation problem.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that we approve Budget
Amendment Request No. 10 for the Sheriff's Department. Any
further discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right
hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Budget Amendment
Request No. 11 for the County Jail.
MR. TOMLINSON: This is a request from Sheriff
Kaiser to transfer $6,893.17 from Jailers Salaries; $6,321.63
goes to Part-Time Salaries, and $95.80 to Indigent Care.
$9,065.91 from Nurses' Salaries; S975.74 goes to Overtime,
$9,065.91 to Prisoner Transfer expense, and $5,000 to
Prisoner Medical.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we approve Budget
Amendment No. 11 for the County Jail. Any discussion? If
not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
23
`_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Budget Amemdment
No. 12 for J.P. No. 2.
MR. TOMLINSON: This is a request from Judge Wright
to transfer $250 from her Part-Time Salary line item to
Telephone.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Williams,
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that we approve Budget
Amendment Request No. 12 for J.P. No. 2. Any further
discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Budget Amendment
No. 13 for the County Judge.
MR. TOMLINSON: This is a request from Judge
Henneke to transfer 5178.04 from Probate Seminar line item
and $115.58 from Part-Time Salary, totaling $293.19 for
Conferences.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
24
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.-.
~_
JUDGE HENNEKE:
seconded by Commissioner
Amendment Request No. 13
discussion? If not, all
(The motion wa
JUDGE HENNEKE:
Moved by Commissioner Letz,
Griffin, that we approve Budget
for the County Judge. Any
in favor, raise your right hand.
s carried by unanimous vote.)
All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Number 14, for
Department of Public Safety.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. This is a request from
D.P.S. to transfer $2.39 from Miscellaneous to Intoxilyzer
and Telephone line item.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Without reservation, I
second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Baldwin,
seconded by Commissioner Griffin, without reservation, that
we approve Budget Amendment No. 14 for Department of Public
Safety. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, raise
your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Number 15, County
Clerk.
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
`-
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
25
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. This is a request from the
County Clerk to transfer $398.35 from Computer Supplies to
Lease Copier.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Griffin,
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that we approve Budget
Amendment Request No. 15 for the County Clerk. Any further
discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, if I can make one brief
comment, going through these, being on the Court a couple
years, I think we're doing a better job this year. I think
all elected officials should be commended. There are fewer
-- even though we have a lot, there are fewer budget
amendments than we've had the last two years, and the amounts
are far less. I think we did a far better job of budgeting,
and I think they should all be recognized for doing it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: True.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A lot better job than in the
past.
MR. TOMLINSON: We've had as many as 25 and 30 per
~-.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~, _
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
.-.
26
meeting this time of year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Plus, the amounts are
frequently tens of thousands of dollars, as opposed to, you
know, $2.34 category.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Are there any further budget
amendments?
MR. TOMLINSON: No.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Are there any late bills?
MR. TOMLINSON: No.
JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, I'd entertain a
motion to waive reading and approve the minutes of previous
meetings.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, second
by Commissioner Williams, that we waive reading and and
approve minutes of previous meetings. Any further
discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item 1.5, approve and
accept monthly reports. Do I hear a motion to approve --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So move.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Do I have a second?
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
r
~.
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
z7
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Griffin,
seconded by Commissioner Letz, that we approve and accept
monthly reports as presented. Any further discussion? If
not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this time,
we'll return to the -- yes, sir?
MR. TOMLINSON: I did have a late bill. I was --
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right.
MR. TOMLINSON: -- reminded by the Treasurer that I
did. I didn't have it in my folder. So, I do have two. One
is for the $293.19 payable to Judge Henneke for reimbursement
for his conference expenses. I need a hand check for that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Griffin,
seconded by Commissioner Williams, that we authorize a hand
bill for 5293. Any further discussion? If not, all in
favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
za
~. .
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. And, the next one is to
Hill's Auction and Realty for the payment of the tables for
S1,980. It's -- we're requesting a hand check for that also.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Williams,
seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we authorize a hand
bill in that amount for the tables. Any further discussion?
If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Tommy. At this time, we
will start with Item No. 2.6, which is to consider and
discuss preliminary plat of Whisper Ridge Subdivision,
Precinct 2, and variance for a number of the lots.
Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll make this one easy,
Judge. We're applying for plats from the developer on
Whisper Ridge. It's -- I'm advised he's sold the entire
parcel and does not wish to pursue plat approval for
subdivision of that one. However, if you want to lump to the
next one --
.-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~.
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
29
JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll take up 2.7, then, which is
consider and discuss preliminary plat of Dove Valley
Subdivision, Precinct 2. Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Franklin, I thought this
was another one from -- from what's-his-name, from Mr. Deal,
but it's not.
MR. JOHNSTON: This is the one from Ken Muller out
of Boerne. He's not here yet, but --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
MR. JOHNSTON: -- it's basically a road off of
Highway 27. And, he's -- he's dedicating a right-of-way.
This is a private road, by the way, but he's dedicating an
80-foot right-of-way to where the lots begin, and they're on
a 60-foot right-of-way, to build a non-paved country lane
road. The lots -- all the lots being 16 -- 13 to 16 acres.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions?
MR. JOHNSTON: It meets all of our requirements for
preliminary plat. It will have the proper notices on the
final plat of private roads and all.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Muller just came in.
MR. JOHNSTON: Do you have any questions?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good timing, Mr. Muller.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question I had on the road.
What's the -- the roads are designated what, Frank?
MR. JOHNSTON: Country lane.
30
.-
`_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Paved or unpaved?
MR. JOHNSTON: Unpaved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Unpaved.
MR. JOHNSTON: There was eight lots under that
criteria, a max of eight lots.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is this the road I'm looking at
that was built originally?
MR. MULLER: No, the driveway's on the east side.
This is on the west.
MR. JOHNSTON: That little strip of land that's 100
foot wide, that goes -- the property in the back is where
that driveway is located.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, that's not the road --
this road has not been built yet?
MR. MULLER: No. No, it's all just wild trees.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wild trees. That other road's
located over here?
MR. JOHNSTON: Since you mentioned that, will these
lots have access to your driveway? ~
MR. MULLER: No.
MR. JOHNSTON: That's strictly the front?
MR. MULLER: Right. We are going to make the road
thicker and wider. In other words, the specifications call
for 9 inch and a 20-foot-wide road. We`re going to make it
6 inches and 22 feet wide.
31
I
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
,-~
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Looks good.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move preliminary plat
approval for Dove Valley Subdivision, Precinct 2.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
MR. JOHNSTON: I might mention one thing. On the
80-foot right-of-way, I think there is a row of trees. He
made that right-of-way intentionally larger to save those
trees, so there's room in there for the road and the trees.
That's why it's wider in the front part.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. Sounds good.
JUDGE HENNEKE: It's been moved by Commissioner
Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we approve
the preliminary plat of Dove Valley Subdivision, Precinct 2.
Any further questions? If not, all in favor, raise your
right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Thank you.
MR. MULLER: Thank you very much, Judge,
Commissioners. The -- just so you'll know, on that Whisper
Ridge piece, Dr. Deal and his wife purchased the back 250
acres. They have the old Stonleigh residence and they only
have 90 acres there on Stoneleigh Road and they wanted some
32
,~-,
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
more land, so we were able to work something out. That's why
we withdrew that one.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thanks for the explanation.
We didn't know why we did that. Thank you.
MR. MULLER: Thank you very much.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item No. 8, consider
the preliminary replat of numerous lots, Falling Water,
Precinct 3. Commissioner Letz.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll turn it over to Franklin
and Don Voelkel. I assume -- I see Don leaving. Don?
MR. JOHNSTON: This consists of the previous
replat, and they're marked up and colored so you kind of get
an idea what they're trying to do. They`re basically
dividing some existing lots into smaller lots, taking two and
making four and three, and there's numerous configurations
there on different parts of the subdivision. They`re still
substantial-sized lots, compared to our minimums. There is a
water system in place here, so they have water, and all the
lots are still three acres on up to five -- four or five
acres. There may be one that's about two and a half, but
most of them are larger.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only comment I would make is,
when I met with Mr. Crenwelge and Don Voelkel on this, a lot
of this is being to done to facilitate building sites. When
33
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
`_
13
14
15
16
17
1S
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
some of these lots were originally done, you couldn't build
on them, and this is going to -- also, some of the sizes,
they found these smaller tracts sell a little bit better.
MR. JOHNSTON: It's a very severe drop-off.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The only question I would have
is whether the water system will handle the additional lots,
and if there's --
MR. JOHNSTON: We usually require that letter from
T.N.R.C.C. about net increase in lots and whether or not the
water's adequate. I know there's one storage tank up there
in the back. I guess it's still there?
MR. CRENWELGE: Yeah. Yeah.
MR. JOHNSTON: Oh, there he is. There's one near
the back. Is that enough?
MR. CRENWELGE: I don't -- I talked to O.J.
earlier, and they had their staff look at it, and they had
enough water -- a lot more water than they needed out there.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Do they have the letter from
T.N.R.C.C. stating --
MR. JOHNSTON: For the final plat, we need a letter
to state --
MR. CRENWELGE: Okay, we can get that. Whatever.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That would be my only
statement. We need to make sure we have it for final plat,
that letter from T.N.R.C.C. Other than that, I make a motion
34
r
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
^ 13
`_
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to approve that preliminary replat.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that we approve the
preliminary replat of numerous lots of Falling Water
Subdivision, Precinct No. 3. Any further discussion? If
not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item is Item
No. 9, which is consider the revision of the replat of Lot 2,
Block 2, Busch Estates, Precinct 9. Commissioner Griffin.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Mr. Johnston?
MR. JOHNSTON: This is a subdivision that contains,
at the present time -- to start off with, five lots, and it's
been replatted. Now it has two lots, the large lot and a
smaller one, and he wants to subdivide that bigger lot into
two more lots to make a total of three.
MR. DOMINGUES: Well, I'm Charles Domingues. And,
it was originally done in two different lots. They were
proposing to do it in five lots, but when they came in for
final plat -- the preliminary had five lots. When they came
in foz final plat, they only had two lots, one 5-acre tract
and one water -- and .19-acre tract. And, now the person
35
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
`_
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that has purchased the big tract, the 5-acre tract, wants to
divide it into two, so one of them will be 2.2 and the other
one will be 3 -- 3-acre lot.
MR. JOHNSTON: Normally on these we have public
hearings for, you know, comments of other owners in the
subdivision. On this particular one, the only other owner
has agreed to the plat -- replat, so would that do away with
the need for a public hearing?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It will, in my mind.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes.
MR. JOHNSTON: I think he had a notarized letter
from -- there's a little confusion in the lot numbers, but he
was going by the old --
MR. DOMINGUES: They went by the preliminary plat
when they kind of wrote that thing.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Are these lots sufficiently large?
I mean, how is the wastewater treated out in that
subdivision? Do we have --
MR. JOHNSTON: Septic system.
MR. DOMINGUES: First of all, the lot that you're
looking at is the way that the preliminary plat was, in that
configuration. It's not near 5-acre tracts -- I mean five
lots now; it's just three lots.
MR. JOHNSTON: Smallest part will be 2.2, 3, but it
has a water system, so it's -- you know, meets all the
36
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.^
~ _
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
requirements for that.
MR. DOMINGUES: It has a water system. See, this
is what it looks like. This will be the Lot I that -- that
this man owns, and then he owned all of this. The 5-acre
tract, he's dividing it into this portion here, the 3 acres
where the house is, and then he wants to come divide this
piece off, which is 2, which fronts -- look at the road. You
drive up there. So, it's sufficiently large enough.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's under a water system?
MR. DOMINGUES: Yes, the water system is the water
system that connects the whole subdivision there. And, I
believe there's another one up here on that.
MR. JOHNSTON: Hills 'n Dales Subdivision.
MR. DOMINGUES: Right, Hills 'n Dales.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I presume we'd need the same letter
from T.N.R.C.C. about the ability of the water system to
handle the --
MR. JOHNSTON: Add an extra one yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There isn't 15 connections. I
thought there was a number of --
MR. JOHNSTON: How many total connections are on
that?
MR. DOMINGUES: I'm not sure, but if you include
all of the connections at Hills 'n Dales, there's more than
15.
37
~_
I
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. JOHNSTON: It's the same one that serves the
adjacent subdivision.
MR. DOMINGUES: Quite a few lots out there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree with the Judge, we need
the same letter.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Was that a motion,
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think what we can do -- I
would make a motion that we go ahead and approve the replat,
but before it's signed, we'll have to have the letter from
T.N.R.C.C.
MR. JOHNSTON: No, this is the preliminary. When
it comes back for final --
MR. DOMINGUES: Yeah, when it comes back for the
final.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Oh, okay. So, this is a
preliminary, anyway. Okay, good enough. I'll move that we
approve the preliminary plat.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Griffin,
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that we approve the
preliminary revision of the plat of Lot 2, Block 2, Busch
Estates. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor,
raise your right hand.
38
~.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
MR. DOMINGUES: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Next item on the agenda
is Item No. 11, I believe. It's -- or 10, consider the
preliminary plat of Buckhorn Lake Estates, Precinct No. 9.
Commissioner Griffin.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Mr. Johnston?
MR. JOHNSTON: Buckhorn. I don't see Charlie
Digges or the owner of Buckhorn Estates here. It's a -- this
is an R.V. parking area at the corner of highway --
Interstate 10 and Goat Creek Road. There are some -- they're
going to do it in phases. It's a project. There are some
lakes out there. They will have septic systems for the
disposal areas. I think Charlie Wiedenfeld is going to talk
to that, but he's not here yet.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I might mention, I did talk
with them. They've come up, I think, with a very good design
for a -- we're not -- without going into all the technical
details -- we just did enough on systems -- but it will be a
totally aerobic system with a great surge capacity. You
know, since a lot of times people, on Friday nights, come
into R.V. parks and dump their tanks at that point, that puts
39
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
r
~_
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
a real demand on a system. So, they've designed an
interlocking system that will take that large surge and still
be able to handle anything that they can -- they can foresee,
and then aerobically distribute the -- the wastewater. So, I
think it's a good design. I'm impressed.
MR. JOHNSTON: So far as the roads on the interior,
they're planning on putting in more than what we require in
the nature of -- like, 8 inches of base and hot mix asphalt
to handle the weight of these large R.V.'s that are size of
buses.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions of --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'll make a motion we
approve the preliminary plat.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Just a moment. We have had a
request from Herbie Witt to address us on this matter. Mr.
Witt, if you'd come forward at this time?
MR. WITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Question. Are the owners or
the engineer, neither, here?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I don't think so.
MR. JOHNSTON: They're not here.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Mr. Witt?
MR. WITT: My name's Herbie Witt. I'm a long-time
resident of Kerr County. We own property just north of this
proposed R.V. park. I've lived on this ranch for 59 years,
90
.~
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
..-
~-
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
been there ever since I was six years old. I guess my main
concern here is, I have read through -- looked through this
plat, I believe you call it, proposal, and there hasn't been
a flood study made that I am aware of. If it is, it's not
included in this. Like I say, I've lived out there for 54
years, and it appears that a lot of this housing and a lot of
the campsites are in what I would consider the floodplain.
We've had several floods. I was not here for '32. I was
here for '59, I was here for '78, and I was here three years
ago when we had 11 inches out there. The flood in '78 was 39
inches, if you can imagine 3 feet of water in this area.
Our -- we own 125 acres on the west side of Goat Creek
Road, and I would not build anything on 50 percent of our
property there. There are three creeks that come together
within two-tenths of a mile. There's a west branch of Goat
Creek, which heads up by the roadside park, which is 8 miles
west of Kerrville. The east branch of Goat Creek heads up to
Tierra Linda. There is another -- not really a creek. It's
called George's Hollow, but it runs and it comes right in on
this place, which is -- there's one of the lakes shown on
here. There's a tremendous amount of water comes down on a
5- and 6-inch rain. This clubhouse that they've built right
next to the dam, all that area down there floods.
Now, when I'm talking about flood, I'm not talking about
3 or 4 inches of water; I'm talking about 15, 20 feet of
41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~_
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
water. I would, personally, not feel comfortable not
mentioning this to the Court. It -- it's a dangerous thing.
We could see a loss of life. And, I don't know what else to
say about that. In Phase III, which is shown here, it's --
get back here -- probably not of much concern, but there is a
very large Indian mound -- excuse me -- right there
(indicating). When I was younger, 25, 30 years ago, I dug a
hole about 3 feet in diameter, 18 inches deep, and there's a
lot of artifacts there. It would be nice, if they intend to
destroy this, to pave it, if they'd let some archeological
society go in there and look this area over, see if they can,
you know, get something -- something there before they
actually destroy that. There is a clubhouse right there
(indicating) which I would anticipate would be probably under
6, 7 feet of water. Just doesn't seem like a good place to
build a building.
I don't have any more comments. If y'all would like to
ask me some questions, I -- I could pretty much tell you
about water levels out there, having lived out there so many
times. I have actually seen the creek dry, and not even rain
there at the ranch, but rained upstream, and a wall of water
come down. When I talk about a wall of water, I'm talking
about logs tumbling, brush, building up a dam ahead of it,
and then a slope of water behind it, which would be about 50,
75 yards back. Water would be about 10 feet deep. It comes
92
~-~-
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
instantaneously. When it rains, you got about 30 minutes to
get out of the way. This is just a 5-, 6-inch rain, and that
creek comes down. It takes it about three hours to subside
to the point where you can cross it. So --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anybody have any questions of
Mr. Witt?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have one of Franklin.
Were flood considerations taken -- flood matters taken into
consideration?
MR. JOHNSTON: Well, it will be, yes. The -- you
know, the preliminary plan comes in, and then the -- they do
the drainage study between the preliminary and the final.
So, this all will be addressed.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: In the sign-off sheet, they
have to submit six copies of plat and drainage study.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is -- are you finished,
Bill?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Franklin, I, you know, share
the concern. That was the first thing that concerned me
about this, is basically Mr. Witt's -- I wasn't as familiar
with Goat Creek as he obviously is, but, you know, that area
in Goat Creek is one of the worst flooding -- or flooding
waterways of the County.
MR. JOHNSTON: Mm-hmm.
93
.-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
~_
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I'm real concerned about,
you know, that drainage study, make sure that it's able to --
because that kind of a high-density potential use, especially
during times of the year when we're most prone to get large
floods, is a real concern, both on access in and out during
flood times and things of that nature.
MR. JOHNSTON: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, in addition to the flood
-- and I -- the septic system and how that is -- where it is
put and how it is put in, that needs to be a consideration
during the flood times. When a large flood does come, make
sure that system -- there's no chance of that system or that
-- you know, the waste getting into Goat Creek, itself. So,
that certainly goes into it. And, you know, I think another
part of this is that the amount of pavement that will go into
a facility like this is going to increase the stream flow
downstream, where we already have a lot of problems in Goat
Creek. I think something that we really just need to be
looking at is any -- or the more green areas that they can
keep in this development, the better it's going to help us
downstream to absorb water, because, obviously, the more
concrete we have, the worse it makes it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My only comment is the --
I'm surprised my colleague here from Comfort has any
awareness at all of Goat Creek. Glad to hear that. And, I
49
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
12
~_
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
think -- I think the message that needs to go back -- and
that may be the owner sitting over there; I don't know, but
-- or that could be him there. But, the message needs to go
back that we -- we will watch this very, very closely because
of the floodplain -- and, of course, that's U.G.R.A. -- and
the septic tank or the septic program they're putting in out
there. That would be watched very, very closely.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have one other question.
You talk about the flooding and your experience in living out
there. What timeframe does it take for it to build up really
bad in this -- an hour? Hour and a half?
MR. WITT: Thirty minutes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which then leads to, you
know, the ingress and egress, particularly egress of the big
rigs, trailers, and so forth, how quickly they can get out of
there if they're compelled to do so.
MR. WITT: They won't, I can guarantee you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You'll have a big metal
pile at the end of the stream.
MR. WITT: There's -- there's seven bridges at Goat
Creek and I-10. There's two access bridges, four -- four,
five -- there's four -- there's five bridges over the creek.
The actual interstate was not closed; the access bridges to
the interstate from Goat Creek were -- were closed. There
was water over those bridges. The -- if y'all have ever been
95
..-.
`_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
out on Goat Creek Road, there was 3 feet of water going
underneath the I-10 overpass. Steve -- Stevens used to be a
Texaco dealer here. His son was trying to get home and drove
his car off in it, and his car washed through the interstate,
or underneath the overpass.
JUDGE HENNEKE: What are you talking about, Mr.
Witt? Are you talking about -- what event are you talking
about?
MR. WITT: I'm talking about -- this is the '78
flood, I'm sorry. '78 flood, I'm sorry.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay.
MR. WITT: The water had left the normal creek bed
and gat over into Goat Creek Road where Goat Creek Road goes
under the I-10 bridges. I -- honestly, I have never seen
that much water in my life. I hope I never see it again, but
it happened. A lot of this area, let me show you -- well,
you've got a map there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Topo map?
MR. WITT: See where I'm -- let me look at this.
I'm more familiar with this.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. JOHNSTON: Possibly, we should postpone the
preliminary and do the -- maybe approve the concept and then
do a detailed study before we get into, you know, preliminary
plat approval, to see if this is a viable --
96
..-.
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I have no problem with that,
but I've got one concern. The objectiveness, it seems to me,
we're sort of tossing out the window here. It's either in
the 100-year floodplain or it's not. The study is going to
show that.
MR. JOHNSTON: Right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If it's not in the 100-year
floodplain, then we have no reason to restrict flood issues
based on somebody's recollection of what happened in any
flood year. If we're going to base our decision on people's
recollection of what things were like and how bad it was,
then we need to go totally to that system and throw the
objective system out. In other words, this is what we have
the U.G.R.A. do. This is what the drainage study ought to
determine. If it's in the 100-year floodplain, we're not
going to approve it, period. If it's not in the 100-year
floodplain, there's probably no reason not to.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They haven't done the study
yet.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's true. But, given -- given
the magnitude of the concerns that are expressed, I think it
might be prudent not to actually approve the preliminary plat
at this time.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I don't argue that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Subject to -- approve the concept
97
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
_~
~_
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
and ask them to do quite a bit more drainage work as part of
the preliminary plat process.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We can probably just require
a drainage study, as Franklin is suggesting, to be a part of
the preliminary plat approval process, and that -- I don't
have any problem with that. But, I -- I would hate to see it
-- because we have turned this around the other way against
other folks that I know of and said, because it's in the
100-year floodplain, you're in violation, and that's it,
period. So, we can't very well, you know, turn around and
say, well, we -- because those people have that problem, they
say that they have never seen water in their 50-something
years on the property, they've never seen water. Well, they
are in violation. So, we can't have it both ways.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I agree with that, except
that when you get further from the Guadalupe Street, the
floodplain maps become less and less accurate, or even in
existence. Like, on my property, I have areas that certainly
should never be developed, but they're not on no FEMA map in
the world, because they're not -- they've just never been
mapped, so -- a large portion of this county has never been
mapped. So, I think the areas that they have mapped, we need
to use it, but the areas that they haven't mapped --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Oh, yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- there's other criteria we
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
...
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
98
have to use.
MR. JOHNSTON: That's why the developers have to go
actually do the detailed study on this site, to provide that
information.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. I make a motion that
we accept this concept plan and that we require the drainage
study be done before the they approve the preliminary plat.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My only -- I agree 100
percent with what you're saying right now, except for the --
my question is, the way the agenda is laid out, that it's
actually considering preliminary plat. It doesn't have
anything to do with concept, although sometimes concept and
preliminary are first cousins, and I would go along with it
there.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, we can just also table
it until we have the drainage study.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Before we approve the
preliminary plat. So, I would move that we table it.
Essentially, the same thing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Griffin,
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that we table Agenda Item
No. 10. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, raise
your right hand.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
,..-
~_
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
99
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Mr. Witt.
MR. WITT: Thank you, Judge.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Franklin. At this time,
we're going to recess this meeting of the Commissioners Court
and take up Agenda Item No. 4, which is a public hearing on
the proposed ordinance prohibiting solid waste disposal in
Kerr County.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed
at 10:02 a.m., and a public hearing was held in
open court, as follows:)
PUBLIC HEARING
JUDGE HENNEKE: This is an item that was brought to
the Court initially back in early August. There's been some
suggestions made, particularly by Commissioner Letz, which
we've addressed in the revised ordinance. This ordinance has
been published for two weeks in the newspaper, in accordance
with the legal requirements. We'xe here today to conduct a
public hearing on the proposed ordinance. We did receive a
letter from Jim Dower which is supportive of the County's
efforts to control illegal dumping and any new solid waste
disposal sites, but raised issues regarding transfer stations
in various locations, compost facility, and how this
ordinance will fit into the AACOG regional plan for solid
so
~.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
r-
waste disposal. Mr. Laughlin, are you here to speak on
behalf of the City?
MR. LAUGHLIN: Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE HENNEKE: This is Kevin Laughlin, City of
Kerrville Attorney.
MR. LAUGHLIN: Thank you, Your Honor, Court. I
appreciate the opportunity to come here today and, of course,
as a City, you know, we want to work jointly with the County
on a lot of things. Taking care of illegal dumping upstream
in tributaries and other areas of the county is certainly
something we applaud and would like to see happen. However,
in reading the ordinance as it was presented and as it was
published, I'm a little concerned that it may have some
unintended implications with respect to the City landfill
operations, which the county benefits from by -- by virtue of
-- of the way we've -- the City has operated landfill fees a
number of years.
In essence, it's not clear, in reading the provision of
the law that authorizes the County to adopt this ordinance,
whether or not it would actually preempt the City from
obtaining future permits for landfills as the existing
landfill ends its life and is closed by the City. This could,
create a potential dilemma for both the City and the County, ~I
with respect to the disposal of solid waste under those kind
of permitted applications. I've been speaking with the folks
51
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
~--
~. _
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
in General Counsel's office at T.M.L. I've got a call in to
the folks -- Local Government Assistance Office at T.N.R.C.C.
to review some of the amendments that were done to -- I
believe it's Section 362 point -- maybe 369.012, under which
this ordinance is being proposed.
What I'd like to propose for the Court is, you know, go
ahead and, obviously, proceed with your public hearing, as
required under the law, but I believe City staff would like
to sit down with interested Commissioners and kind of work
through some of these -- and discuss some of these potential
implications as to the City's operation. As noted, transfer
stations axe also a -- a solid waste -- considered to be a
solid waste disposal site under the Solid Waste Act, which
would require a T.N.R.C.C. permit. If we close our landfill
at some future date and are unable to open another one
somewhere, there's going to have to be a transfer station
opened to move Solid Waste out of Kerr County to some other
location.
Now, obviously, these transfer -- you know, the cost of
solid waste disposal, as we generally understand it, you
know, in a legal sense, would have to be borne, obviously, by
residents in this county, both city and county. And, so,
there may be some future cost implications, depending on
where some future transfer site might be located, whether it
be in Kerr County ox some other county on the way to San
52
,^-
~. _
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
Antonio or some other location, if that's ultimately the end
site for disposal. So, we'd like to, at this point,
respectfully request that the Court, as I said, take
comments, but defer any actual action on this today until we
can address some of the -- some language that may accomplish
what I am assuming is the goal of -- of the Court, and that
is limiting unauthorized landfills and -- you know, without
having the same kind of implications on future -- possibly
either City or County operations. I'll be glad to answer any
questions, if --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You said you had phone calls
in to T.N.R.C.C. and your City
JUDGE HENNEKE: T.M.L.
MR. LAUGHLIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, there was two -- you
had phone calls in to two people?
MR. LAUGHLIN: Right. Well, actually, I've spoken
with Monty Aikers with T.M.L. He is General Counsel for --
for T.M.L., or heads their Legal Division. And, the -- the
statute -- there's only presently -- or there -- in
discussing matters with, actually, I guess, our consultants,
it's my understanding there are only about two other counties
presently that have a similar type ordinance in the state,
and it's caused some problems with respect to landfills. I
think, though, in those cases, the -- the landfills that some
53
~..
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.-.
~. _
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
of the cities or counties were aiming at were privately owned
and operated, and not owned by a governmental entity. And,
it's created some consternation.
The question I've posed to the T.N.R.C.C. is whether or
not passing such an ordinance would actually preempt the
T.N.R.C.C. from granting an additional permit to the City.
It's not -- it appears that -- that the statute actually
reads that way, as 1t was amended effective September 1st,
but it's not -- I'm not sure yet if that's the intent -- if
that's T.N.R.C.C.'s understanding, because if that is, then
that does create quite a dilemma for the City, not
necessarily for the short-term, but -- but primarily for
long-term solid waste planning in the county.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, the way I see it, Mr.
Laughlin -- and being the City Attorney, if you have problems
with it, I think that we probably need to sit down and visit.
However, this group here is not one -- I mean, we don't have
first readings and second readings and third readings. We
like to get things done over here. And, this document's been
waiting for public review for how long?
JUDGE HENNEKE: It's been in the paper for two
consecutive weeks. It was sent -- a copy of this document,
before slight revisions were made, was sent to the City on
August the 5th.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: August 5th.
59
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
..-.
~_
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: Has it been taken up by the City
MR. LAUGHLIN: No, it has not.
JUDGE HENNEKE: So, this is not -- you've not been
directed by the City Council to come here?
MR. LAUGHLIN: No, I'm coming over here as staff,
on pressing concerns of City. No, I've not been directed
here by the City Council.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would certainly be willing
to, you know, set up a timeframe to have a visit with them
and listen to concerns, but I don't think that this should be
-- just lay it out there forever and ever. We take care of
business here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:
there's a window of opportunity.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN:
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:
is it not?
JUDGE HENNEKE:
window of opportunity on
my understanding from the
with the people who wrote
who would like to have it
particular point of view
prohibition on additional
It can't be, because
November?
By the end of this month,
I believe that, yes, there is a
=nactinq such a prohibition. It's
Legislature -- and I tend to deal
the law instead of the lobbyists
interpreted in favor of their
-- that this is intended as a
landfills, but it can always be
55
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~_
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
amended. And, what this really does it gives the County a
voice in the location of any future landfill sites.
Without such an ordinance, all we would get would be
notice of a public hearing on a proposed landfill site,
whether it be by the City or by a private individual. With
this ordinance, my understanding is that they would have to
come to us and get us to amend this ordinance to specifically
approve an additional landfill site before they could make
application to T.N.R.C.C., which puts the County in the
position of playing in the area of land use for landfill
purposes.
Now, I don't want to get the County involved in land
use, generically. I don't want to get into that thicket.
But, I think for things such as landfills, which, as we all
know, can have a very detrimental effect on the health and
safety, economic welfare of the citizens, I do think it's
appropriate for the County to be a major player in those
types of decisions.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I have a question, Judge,
particularly if you've talked with some of the people who
drafted the legislation. If the purpose of the legislation
was not as you just said, what in the world was the intent of
it? Does anybody know?
JUDGE HENNEKE: And, again --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It seems to me that could be
56
`_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
the only intent of that legislation.
JUDGE HENNEKE: As Commissioner Baldwin pointed
out, it has a short window in which we can enact this type of
an ordinance, after which we don't have the ability to
further prohibit landfills in the county.
COMMISSIONER LET2: Judge, my question is, can we
amend -- I mean, with the window of opportunity, is there
something that we -- magic words we have to put in
generically in an ordinance that we can strengthen later or
or weaken later, or is it -- I mean, what do you have to have
done by the magic date?
JUDGE HENNEKE: In order to prohibit landfills in
the County, you have to have a prohibition, which is what we
have. But, the statute specifically says that you have to
exempt from the prohibition any existing landfills, which
we've obviously done, or any sites for future landfills which
you want to go ahead and exempt. Now, I don't want to get
into that future landfill or transfer station or other
consideration. What we've done here is we've described the
current landfill.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: The legal description that's on
file here in the County, exempted that and prohibited
everything else. That doesn't mean that if we needed to do
another landfill and everyone agreed upon it, we couldn't
57
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~_
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
come back to this ordinance and lift the prohibition for that
specific geographic area.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, I have -- I -- okay, two
questions. One is something I picked up at the conference in
Austin, and maybe designating this -- the existing landfill
satisfies this. But, they seemed to imply to me, at one of
the conferences I was at, that we had to designate a spot
kind of for future at the same time. And, I'm not sure if
that's correct or not, so I think I'm -- I'd like to get a
verification on what exactly we have to designate, because
they -- that's a very crucial part of the ordinance, as I
understood it in the conference.
The other part of it is, when I read it again -- and I
don't mean -- you know, but property rights are a concern to
me, as most of y'all know. As I read this, we are -- I don't
see that this is allowing any of the -- what we call -- the
new word for junkyards, whatever they're called these days,
can't exist in this county any more. We have them all over
the county. Every one of them has old cars, and automobiles
are specifically -- it says they have to -- you can't have
automobiles in a junkyard or out -- you can't have abandoned
automobiles anywhere in the county, other than a landfill.
And, you know, I don't think that's our intent.
I don't see anything else as -- I mean, pretty much, it
says if it's solid waste, it's got to be in a landfill, with
58
r
~. _
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
a few exemptions, being municipal waste and some agricultural
waste. So, I'm concerned about numerous businesses around
the county, and it --- some of them, I guess, in the city,
but those that are in the county that may have -- you know,
like garages, for example, that frequently have parts and
other things on their property. And, to me, this is saying
that these people have to clean that spot up and take it to
the landfill. I'm not sure that I'm in favor of doing that.
And then, on the agricultural -- and the Judge put in
exactly the language that I suggested, but after I reread it,
I'm not sure I like it yet. "Produced by ordinary
agricultural activities." I'm not sure what that means,
again, because -- you know, for example, most ranches have
workshops for vehicles, and I don't think that's ag, but it's
-- it's incidental to ag, but it's not ag. And, I don't know
-- if you got into a lawsuit situation, I don't know if, you
know, debris from welding and -- and old parts and things of
that nature out on someone's private property constitutes
solid waste and would have to be, you know, then transported
from that private property to a landfill. And, I'm thinking
if -- you know, as I read it, that probably is covered right
now, and I think that is too restrictive and infringes on
property rights and personal rights, for that matter. So,
those are my comments.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other public comments?
59
~. _
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. LAUGHLIN: I lust want to -- so, if I'm hearing
the Court correctly, or at least a number of members of the
Court correctly, in essence, what the Court is seeking to do
is adopt an ordinance that could very well have veto
authority over the City seeking a T.N.R.C.C. solid waste
permit for a future landfill site?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, veto power is a rather harsh
term. Let's say we want to be involved, but history in the
past has not been that.
MR. LAUGHLIN: But, by virtue of passing this
ordinance and not exempting the City from the ordinance -- at
least City T.N.R.C.C.-developed permits, this Court does have
a potential for vetoing a -- a city Permit or application.
And, I just want to make sure I understand so I can report
accurately back to the City Council if that's intent of this
Court.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't think the intention
is to veto, no.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: The intention of the
legislation is that the County be involved in the process of
determining where and if landfills will exist, and I think
that's the only intent. And, I see that as the intent of
this ordinance, as well. And, perhaps we can tweak it and
make it better; that's what public hearings are for. But --
MR. LAUGHLIN: Which would include areas within the
60
.-.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
S
9
10
11
12
~.
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
city limits of Kerrville or Ingram.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I personally would have no problem
with exempting areas within the --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: City limits.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- city limits of any incorporated
municipality. If you all want to go into the city of
Kerrville and put a landfill in, go right ahead.
MR. LAUGHLIN: Well, it happens that -- well, I
mean, the 97-acre site that's described in this ordinance, in
effect, is only part of a total of about a 900-acre tract,
some of which we could use for land application of certain
types of solid waste after it's been composted and things
like that. And -- and, so, it -- you know, presently, all of
that land is in the city limits, so we're talking about
potentially -- you know, currently, we've got -- of course,
we've got the soccer fields under lease, but, I mean, there
are a number of areas where we could use recycled type of
solid waste to -- basically, we could use processes to
lengthen the life of our landfill, if we're allowed to use
those processes and use them within property owned by the
City, and within the city limits, if need be.
So, I mean, that would give -- I think, Judge, that
would probably give us some substantial relief from the
concerns of this ordinance, if we did include
municipally-owned -- or exclude municipally-owned property
61
.-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~--
`_
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
located within the incorporated Limits of a city as areas
where it would be permitted. Obviously, we -- you know,
again, we've got to go and obtain T.N.R.C.C. permits for any
standards in that regard. Those standards are quite tough.
And, particularly in this part of the world where you have,
you know, water tables that are not that deep and you've got
a lot of tributaries; we've got to meet a lot of testing
standards, a lot of well testing standards and all this kind
of thing to do anything in the solid waste area. So --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Laughlin, is the land
you've just described as being owned by the City of Kerrville
-- is it contiguous to the existing landfill?
MR. LAUGHLIN: Yes, it is. It's kind of that --
it's kind of that area that encompasses not only the closed
landfill, but the active landfills, the water -- the sewer
treatment plant, and the -- what we call the old City Farm,
basically.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The City acquired it,
obviously, with a long-range view toward it being a phase of
existing landfill?
MR. LAUGHLIN: You're asking me a question about
some history that I'm not aware of, but I assume that that's
probably the case, yes. The original, I think, part of the ~
the farm was originally for land application of effluent from ~,
the sewer treatment plant. But, in any case, it was -- it
62
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.._
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
was intended to handle the solid and liquid waste from the
city. That was the intent.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other public comments? Sir?
MR. SERMIDA: My concern coming here today was
because of what Mr. Letz said.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Your name, please?
MR. SERMIDA: My name is George Sermida. I've been
a Kerrville resident since 1980. My concern was the caption
that you -- in the notice of automobiles, which I am
presently the proprietor of the old Pieper Auto Salvage
property. I've taken it over as of the 1st of this month.
That was my -- my question was, will this pertain to the auto
salvage business as it generates solid waste, recyclable
materials?
JUDGE HENNEKE: It appears it would.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's my problem, is we're
basically putting every one of those out of business, or
making them illegal in the county. And, you know, things a
lot smaller than that that aren't -- not truly businesses.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I think my answer to that would be,
there's no retroactive provision in this. It's prospective,
not retroactive. Anyone who's currently in that status would
be able to remain in that status. There is another bill that
passed which gives the County authority to regulate
nuisances, and that's something that we'll take up at a
63
.-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
different time.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We passed a -- several years
ago, an ordinance, you know, governing salvage yards or --
but -- and that -- you know, and that is -- there's a
grandfather provision in that, but there -- I'm just -- you
know, I'm just very concerned about -- you know, that the
language is very specific and it's making illegal a lot of
things that many of us -- many members on this Court, and
certainly members in the community, are doing right now.
And, I think that -- I'm not sure that -- well, I don't -- I
will not vote for it the way it is, I'll tell you right now.
I think it's too restrictive.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, you have to keep in mind that
this is the law, the way it is now, and all we're doing is
putting a County prohibition on landfill sites. The
prohibition on landfill sites already exists. We're not
creating new law here. This language, except for the part we
added, the request for ag, is verbatim from the statute. So,
if those activities are illegal, they're illegal, regardless
of whether we pass this ordinance or not. All this ordinance
relates to is to future landfill sites within the county.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's an area that I don't
know, but i cannot imagine there's State law that says an old
car on my property is illegal. That's what this says to me.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, your interpretation of this
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
"~ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
64
ordinance is interpreting State law, because this language is
verbatim from the law. So, if your interpretation of this
ordinance is that way, then your interpretation of State law
has to be the same way.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Like I say, I'm in an area that
I don't know. The way I read it -- and I just read it as a
lay person -- it says I can't have an old car in my yard or
anywhere on my property, and that I have a problem with. I
mean, if I'm, you know, convinced otherwise, I'll change my
view, but --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you talking about
abandoned -- where it says "abandoned automobile"?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it's defining solid
waste, and under solid waste -- that's what we're outlawing,
is solid waste. If you go down to B, it defines municipal
solid waste, and then says it includes rubbish, ashes, street
cleaning, dead animals, abandoned automobiles. Well, that's
what is defined as solid waste, is, you know, dead animals
and automobiles and -- you know, those are just two things
that jump out at me, you know.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you something --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't understand.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's not landfill. That's
-- see, what we're restricting here are landfills. You got
to read the "WHEREAS's".
.~
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
,.-~
~_
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
65
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It says, "It is further
ordained that the disposal of solid waste is prohibited in
all other areas of Kerr County." It doesn't talk about
landfill. It says solid waste cannot be disposed of anywhere
except the city landfill.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner Letz, take a
deep breath. When it says "abandoned automobiles," I see
your concern there, but the one right before it, dead animals
-- you know, you've processed animals at your ranch.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And he has a nice facility
down there where he -- and they kill -- and those animals are
dead. Does that mean that you can't go ahead and cut them up
and put them in the freezer? Or do you have to haul them to
the landfill? Do you read that that way?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. All those bones have to
get hauled off.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, god.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what it says. I mean,
it says "solid waste," and then solid waste is defined in
half a page, and dead animals are part of solid waste. You
know, and from a business -- you know, if it was a dead
animal that came out of your house, that's exempted, you
know, under the -- wherever that exemption is for household
-- you could have a household dead animal, but if you're in
.-..
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
"~ 13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
,--.
66
the business of -- as I am during hunting season, of
processing game, it says dead animals have to go to the
landfill, 'cause it's not -- it's a business; it's not, you
know, residential and it's not agricultural in the normal
sense of the term ag. So, that's where I -- you know, the
way I read it.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If you have a suggestion of
language that you --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Do you have some more comments?
MR. SERMIDA: I just need to find out -- I can
understand where you guys are going with this, as far as
landfill, quote, unquote, strictly landfill. But, when it
gets to the part about the automobiles, that's right in the
middle of my business, and that's why I was concerned about
the situation. And, like you picked up on it, that's the
same way I had interpreted it also. But, if it's only just
strictly for the -- for the future landfill sites, I got
nothing more to say. But, if it doesn't infringe upon my --
upon my opportunity of advancement, then I got nothing more
to say.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any more comments from the public?
Thank you, sir.
MR. SERMIDA:
JUDGE HENNEKE:
tweaking it to put --
Thanks.
I don't have a problem with
67
~~
~_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: You know, like, not more than three
abandoned automobiles, or, you know -- I'd have a little
concern about the dead animals, because, you know, let's take
a -- let's take an unlikely -- let's say there's an outbreak
of brucellosis; somebody has 50 cows that have to be
destroyed because they have brucellosis. I really don't want
him digging a pit and burying them on his land.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think the City wants
them in their landfill, either.
JUDGE HENNEKE: They don't have a choice.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think there's a better
option.
JUDGE HENNEKE: They don't have a choice.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably just, in that
situation, get the U.S.D.A. to pick a spot and probably burn
them on the person's property.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That may be, but what I want to say
is if we could play with numbers, we could address that, but
we have to be careful about that, because we don't want to
create a situation where we're setting ourselves up to -- to
damage people around.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. What we're trying to
do -- I'm not trying to stop the ordinance, that process.
I'm just concerned -- you know, and the area that needs the
68
.~
~.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
tweaking -- to me, it's probably easier -- is that "It is
further ordained and ordered that disposal of solid waste is
prohibited..." That's the part that we need to work on a
little bit.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I've got --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know how you -- and,
you know, I'm not a wordsmith enough to figure out exactly
what -- I don't know how to change the language. I just know
that when I read this, I'm very concerned about what we're
saying.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I think I would rather have
the prohibition be absolute, and fool with the definitions.
I mean, we I think we adequately addressed the household and
the ag. Now we need to talk about --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Salvage or --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- abandoned automobiles
retained on your own property and not for resale or for -- or
for -- you know, commercial purposes. If we want to talk
about disposal of -- of animal parts after they've been -- we
can tweak the definitions and come to the same place if we
want to work towards that end. But, I think what we have to
have is the absolute prohibition.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Without; the absolute prohibition,
then we get into, well, this is an exception and this is not.
e
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.-,
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
69
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree with that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd like for to us
consider, also, defining the area where solid waste disposal
is not prohibited, which in this case is the definition on
the description of the land of the existing landfill. It
might be beneficial to think in terms of describing that
property that the City currently owns contiguous to it.
They probably wouldn't have acquired it if they hadn't been
looking down -- down ahead in time for when this landfill was
completed, so I --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Is it all in the city
limits?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Is it all within the city
limits?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe Mr. Laughlin said
it is within --
MR. LAUGHLIN: I believe it all is, yes.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Again, I don't have a problem with
some definition which adds to the area that's not prohibited
land currently owned by the City of Kerrville which is
contiguous to --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Existing landfill.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- existing landfill. The property
that's described, I don't have a problem with that, although
70
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
~_
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
,.-.
it'd be interesting to see the headlines in the papers
tomorrow, where it says "City Plans to Take AYSO Soccer
Fields for Landfill Expansion." I don't -- I don't want to
see those --
MR. LAUGHLIN: Not in my career.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't want to see us have to
check the transcript. If there's no public -- further public
comment, let's close the public hearing.
(The public hearing was concluded at 10:30 a.m.,
and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was
reopened.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll reconvene Commissioners Court
and take up the next item, which is to consider the proposed
ordinance. And, I would dust say that what I'm hearing is
that perhaps what we want to do is to table this, give us a
chance to work on the language regarding contiguous land, as
well as the language regarding automobiles and dead animal
issues, and bring it back at the next Commissioners Court
meeting, at which time I believe we do need to have a vote on
this issue in order to meet our window.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I will so move that we do
that, and with the understanding that at the September 27th
meeting, we'll -- we will have a vote on this ordinance.
And, that's lust so that everybody who is involved in the
process knows that if they want to tweak the language of this
71
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~_
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
County ordinance, that they've got to get that to us in time
enough to incorporate it and to get the language incorporated
so that we can have a vote on the 27th of September, 1999,
and not drag this out beyond that period.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I second that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hear, hear.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Griffin,
seconded by Commissioner Williams, that we table
consideration of the proposed ordinance until the September
27th, 1999, Special Commissioners Court meeting. Any further
discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, the Court will take a
15-minute recess. We'll reconvene at 10 minutes till 11:00.
Thank you.
(Recess taken from 10:35 a.m. to 10:50 a.m.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Court will now reconvene. It's
10:50 on Monday, September 13th. At the request of
Commissioner Williams, if there's no objection, we'll skip
over 2.11 for now and take up 2.12, which is consider and
discuss the update on Commanche Trace Development and
anticipated platting and the annexation process of project,
Phase I.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
.. ~2
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. I've
invited one of the developer/partners, Mr. Tom Morrell, to be
here and make his presentation. Thinqs are getting ready to
happen out there at Commanche Trace. And, for the benefit of
those who are unfamiliar, this is another one of those very
important projects taking place in Kerr County, which I think
ultimately the County and the City will be very, very proud
of when it's completed. We haven't heard from the Commanche
Trace folks with respect to where they are in their project,
and I invited Mr. Morrell to be here this morning. And I
think, without further ado, Tom, if you'd to be good as to
enlighten us?
MR. MORRELL: Sure. Thank you. Thank you for
inviting me. I apologize if I should have been here more
frequently. It's almost a year ago, I think, since we were
here, and then everything started. I'm going to give you a
real brief update of where we are, and then I'm sure there'll
be some questions, and I outlined things. There might be
some questions on the technical annexation processes that are
contemplated, and I'm glad Kevin happened to be here this
morning and could answer those questions.
As I think y'all know, we -- we've finalized and signed
and approved the development agreement with the City in
January of this year. Since then, we have completed our golf
course design, the construction drawings, which has been
73

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
about -- that's about a 6- to 8-month job gust to do that.
We have completed preliminary plat drawings for Phase I,
which we were planning to submit to the City staff this week
for their review. I'm actually going to Austin right after
this meeting to finish the preliminary plat work with the
engineering firm.
We have our golf course contractor on-site as of this
morning. I lust met him, actually. The superintendent has
moved to Kerrville, and they will be bringing their equipment
in and start actual grading this week on the golf course.
The golf course schedule, then, would be rough grading
through the winter, irrigation installations in December,
January, February. We will seed the golf course in March,
April, May. We'd have about a four-month growing period.
This is all an ideal schedule, obviously; you know, it rains
when it's supposed to rain, it doesn't rain 20 inches when
it's not supposed to rain 20 inches at a time. It will grow
into next summer, opening of the golf course in fall of 2000.
As fax as the Phase I of the subdivision, we would hope
to have final plat prepared on that. Assuming we get -- it
gets through, our preliminary plat would be here in the next
30 days. We'll have final plat probably prepared and
submitted to the City in December, and we plan on starting
construction of the subdivision in January of 2000. Phase I
would have about a 10-month construction period, from January ~
79
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
through approximately October of 2000. We would hope to
deliver lots to builders and individuals next summer, shortly
prior to the opening of the golf course.
And, that's really kind of a quick timeline schedule
where we are, construction-wise. And, I've got, actually,
the -- the pretty picture of the preliminary plat that's
going to be filed, if you would like to see that. I'd --
maybe it would be easier to set it out on your table --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sure.
MR. MORRELL: -- since this is the only one I've
got.
(Plat laid on Commissioners Court bench.)
MR. MORRELL: A quick walk-through of that. I
think most of you are somewhat familiar with the ranch. This
is Highway 173, existing entrance to the ranch. We'll be
improving and modifying the entrance. We come in this
existing main road. The platted lots here show about 300
lots. We'll preliminary plat this whole thing. This is
about 950 acres, I believe -- no, 529 acres, excuse me. But,
they will come in and final plat only sections of these.
We'll do about 130 lots initially for the final plat, which
is in -- in accordance with the City Development Agreement,
that we have a -- file a minimum number of 130 lots in our
initial final plat.
That includes the entire 18-hole golf course, obviously,
75
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
a driving range. It does not include the existing offir_e
building. We're planning on -- on remodeling that building,
which we'll start on here in a couple months. That building
will house our sales and marketing center, our temporary golf
shop, and operations, and a health and fitness facility for
the community. That's primarily it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tom, does this 529.75 acres
go all the way through to Turtle Creek on their side?
MR. MORRELL: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or is it short of --
MR. MORRELL: It's way short of it. As a matter of
fact, it's really about half the property. The property's
1,132 acres. So, go in going to -- from north to south, this
would be approximately half of it, Commissioner, and then
we'd have another 600 acres between here and Turtle Creek
Highway.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Does this take
into consideration the additional 350 acres you recently
purchased --
MR. MORRELL:
COMMISSIONER
Development Corp.?
MR. MORRELL:
COMMISSIONER
MR. MORRELL:
No.
WILLIAMS: -- from the Riverhill
Does not.
WILLIAMS: Does not.
We're not including that at this
76
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
time. That 50 acres is right here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. What is the total
single-family -- number of single-family units anticipated
when it's all developed?
MR. MORRELL: When it's all done? I think in the
City Development Agreement we have -- I don't have that
concept plan with me, but I believe it's approximately 1,200
units as contemplated, up to 1,200 units to be done.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And, this phase represents
how many?
MR. MORRELL: Well, in total lots, I think there's
about 350 or something, but, as I said, we'll only final plat
probably 130. Then we'll continue moving forward on final
plat basis, really, as the market tells us.
JUDGE HENNEKE: And, your arrangement with the City
is that as you plat things, they -- that area will be
annexed?
MR. MORRELL: Correct.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Smashing.
MR. MORRELL: Correct.
JUDGE HENNEKE: And, so, is it your intent only to
develop the roads and the infrastructure for this portion
that you're going to have annexed at a time?
MR. MORRELL: Yes.
JUDGE HENNEKE: So, if you're only going to -- the
77
~..
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
initial plat is only through, you know, here, you're not
going to run the road all over --
MR. MORRELL: We're going to build the road --
initial main road will be built here.
JUDGE HENNEKE: And, that's going to be all part of
the -- all that will all be property that will be annexed by
the City?
MR. MORREI,L: Yes, I believe so.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Is that your understanding,
Kevin?
MR. LAUGHLIN: Yes, sir.
MR. MORRELL: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: 'Cause I believe you understand
that if you develop areas that are not within the city
limits, then lust the County platting --
MR. MORRELL: Yes.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- requirements must be satisfied.
MR. MORRELL: Yes.
MR. LAUGHLIN: And, as I understand it -- or as I
know, the entire property now is in the E.T.J. of the city at
this time.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, but if it's in the E.T.J., it
still has to satisfy the County platting --
MR. MORRELL: Right, I agree.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- requirements, as well as the
78
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
City.
COMMISSIONER
everything that's in c.
MR. MORRELL:
COMMISSIONER
MR. MORRELL:
COMMISSIONER
LETZ:
~lor on
Corre
LETZ:
-- of
LETZ:
So, the initial plat will be
this one? The initial?
.t, with the exception of --
Of the conference --
the conference.
But, all -- I'm lust -- I
guess --
MR. MORREI,L: No, excuse me, that's not true. Just
what's colored in this -- like, for example, this section is
not. Okay? Everything that you see that's platted, and/or
the golf course, is in the initial preliminary plat. There's
some areas not. There is -- this is the only area right here
that this was -- this is future lots and whatnot. But, it's
not platted right now. Not going to be platted right now.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But, the entirety of the
golf course is in the E.T.J. and is part of the Phase I?
MR. MORRELL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Wonderful.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Looks great.
MR. MORRELL: Yeah, we're excited. It's been a
long time, as you guys know, to get it to here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, I guess, a question to
Kevin. There's -- I mean, the City is obligated -- if the
79
.-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
~-.
City approves the preliminary plat, the City is then
obligated to annex? I mean, there's no scenario can happen
where, all of a sudden, this thing is not annexed and the
County -- all of a sudden, it's County property?
MR. LAUGHLIN: That's the deal we struck. Yes.
Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just want to make sure
there's no way that we're going to end up with this thing
getting through without being platted, without being in the
County.
MR. LAUGHLIN: That was one of the easier terms of
the development agreement to decide, actually.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And, the City brings its
utilities to the -- in effect, the entrance to Commanche
Trace, as we know it today?
MR. LAUGHLIN: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And describes them there.
MR. LAUGHLIN: In fact, basically, we've been
waiting till they're prepared to file their preliminary plat
before we actually go out to bid. We've already got the
plans and specs ready to go. The funding's in place, and as
soon as -- as soon as the preliminary plat application is
filed, we're prepared to go out to bid.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Looks like a great project.
MR. MORRELL: Thank you.
80
.-~
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
it's ha
forever
really,
a quick
ground.
COMMISSIONER
?pened so quick
for you, but -
MR. MORRELL:
so it`s been -
period of time
LETZ:
Ly. I
well,
- which
to get
I'm really excited to see that
snow a year may sound like
we started a year before that,
is a normal -- actually, it is
a project like this off the
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Very fast.
MR. MORRELL: You can spend five to ten years on
something like this.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Looks good.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tom, thank you for taking
your time. Appreciate it.
MR. MORRELL: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Appreciate it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Let`s go back to Item No.
2.11 and pick that one up, which is consider and discuss
improper underground utility cuts in Kerrville South by
Wiedenfeld Waterworks. Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I had a -- a note from the
County Engineer with regard to some -- what we believed to be
improper cuts and fills for water lines by Wiedenfeld
Waterworks. I'm not sure, Buster, whether it's -- I think
it's right on the line between your precinct and mine.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Take it away, Bill; we have
81
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
faith in you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You can handle it. Anyway,
the County Engineer wrote Mr. Wiedenfeld a letter. And, with
that introduction, tell us about it, Franklin.
MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah. He'd received a -- Charlie
Wiedenfeld received a variance to ovr cutting depth rule,
changing it from 36 to 32 inches. And, while we did a check
where -- especially where -- across the ditch, it was
actually 32 inches in the roadway, but as it crossed the
lower area in the ditch, it was not to that depth. I mean,
it was down to 29-inch range. I had a meeting with him last
week on that, and he agreed to -- as he went through a rock
layer about yea-thick, that it was soft underneath; he could
have done it deeper, but he's going to concrete it in to the
top of that rock layer to protect it from our maintenance.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, what I found
interesting about this, I think, was your subsequent
discussion with me that revealed that the equipment and the
ability to cut to the depth required without the necessity of
a variance could have been accomplished.
MR. JOHNSTON: I think it could have been.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Therefore, there wasn't any
need for a variance. And, I think that really suggests to me
that we should be pretty specific and pretty careful about
variances in the future, because they may not necessarily be
82
1 ~ required.
~-
~.
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. JOHNSTON: This was -- a co-contractor on the
lob was actually digging the trenches, and when I was out
there I was asking about his machine. He said, yeah, it
could have done it, I think, deeper than what they were
digging.
COMMISSIONER LET2: I think Bill is right on this,
and I think we just need to be careful. We did this variance
because of the hard rock that he encountered on the surface.
No one knows how deep that rock's going to go. If that rock
would have gone down, the -- the variance that was proposed
turned out to be a ledge that was 12 inches thick. Once you
cut through that, there's no reason not to do it. We need to
tighten up.
MR. JOHNSTON: Probably 6, 8 inches I think. In
the future, probably, if they want a variance, they need to
make those test holes, prove that the rock is actually solid
all the way down.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's a good idea.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I went out to the site, I
took a look at it. I don't know if you saw it or not, but I
took a look at it, and it seemed to me that cut -- that we
require a saw cut. Is that correct, you know, that we
require a saw cut?
MR. JOHNSTON: That's correct.
83
•-
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It looked to me like it was
pretty darn ragged, and though it might not be have been --
MR. JOHNSTON: It wasn't sawed that deep.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Another thing, I think,
about --
MR. JOHNSTON: I don't know if Charlie's here or
not, but he didn't do that. It was patched subsequently i
without having it cut. Rather than -- we left it, rather
than digging it back up and probably needing maintenance.
We should have. Also, the proper signage was not in place,
which I went over with him on that. They had, like, signs
painted on cardboard and that type of thing, and I told them
we won't allow that again.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Was there a timeframe for him
correcting this?
MR. JOHNSTON: He only had five days to do it all.
I think it drug out for a couple weeks. It's already done.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Has he gone back and dug it to the
proper depth? You said it wasn't deep enough going under the
ditches?
MR. JOHNSTON: Didn't have the proper coverage, but
he -- he's concreted all into the property -- to the property
line -- or not -- to the edge of the right-of-way.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's another way of
solving the problem, I think.
84
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~. _
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. JOHNSTON: That's kind of an after-the-fact way
of solving it. Our concern is maintenance equipment cutting
his water line.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the reason for the
depth of the ditch.
MR. JOHNSTON: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The depth of his ditch is to
get it down deep enough so that we can come along with
tractors and maintain it without disturbing --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's right, which is a
major problem in this county. And then him coming along and
fixing the problem by pouring concrete on top of that is --
that's just totally unacceptable. That is just so
unacceptable to me.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Doesn't -- I mean, doesn't the
concrete make the maintenance worse? I mean, you know, we
can't clean the ditch. It would seem to me --
MR. JOHNSTON: I don't think it's piled up. I
think it's where it was before, where the rock was here and
they cut it. They just made it flush, so it's no worse than
it was before.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not a fan of variances,
anyway. I think that we need to be -- I agree with the
Commissioner here. We need to be extremely careful granting
any kind of variance in the beginning. And then, once we
85

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
.-.
grant a variance and the guy doesn't even live up to it, to
our variance, then -- I mean, what are you asking us to do
here? I want to vote on something. I want to say no to this
guy, I can tell you that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I don't think
we're --
MR. JOHNSTON: I was going to ask you to -- you
know, to enforce the thing, but he's already agreed to do all
this stuff. So --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He got away with it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He's taken some remedial
action. We wanted the Court to know about it. We wanted the
Court to know that this may not have been -- in our
willingness to help somebody provide water to a development
out there, we may have jumped the gun a little bit, and next
time we'll take a harder look at it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We could ask the Judge to send
him a letter and slap his hand.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think Franklin did that.
In fact, in his correspondence -- but it has been remediated;
is that correct?
MR. JOHNSTON: At this point.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: So, there's no action necessary on
Item No. 11. We've done 12. Let's proceed to 13. Consider
86
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
~-
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
r.
and discuss petition to allow the Shadow Ridge Subdivision to
conduct an election for the purpose of forming a special road
district. Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. Let me
pass these out. We have discussed Shadow Ridge in the past,
and brought to the Court's attention the terrible condition
of those roads out there, which were built by a developer
back in the '80's prior to the County having established some
-- some guidelines by which they -- standards by which they
are to be built. We've also talked about what the County can
and cannot do with respect to patching roads on an emergency-
type basis. Which leads us to, then, how do we -- how do we
participate or help these folks participate in correcting the
situation that obviously needs to be corrected?
I met with the residents -- a good number of the
residents of Shadow Ridge Estates here in the court -- court
quarters a couple weeks ago -- about three weeks ago, I
guess, and explained to them what the options were in terms
of the County's participation and how we could correct the
situation, hopefully, once and fox all. Would those folks
who are out here from the Shadow Ridge Estates lust stand up
so the Court can identify you as being here today in support
of this particular motion?
(Shadow Ridge residents stood.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you very much,
a7
~-
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
lz
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
appreciate it. There may be a spokesman or two, and we'll
get to that. The Court previously set a standard by which
these matters are addressed. First of all, Commissioner
Griffin prepared a very concise memorandum on general steps
for organizing a special road district and how that's done.
All of the folks who live in Shadow Ridge have been made
aware of that and been made aware of the meeting and so
forth. I asked the Road and Bridge Department to take a look
at these particular roads, which are identified for you, and
tell what the cost of the -- and Road and Bridge identifies
the cost as being somewhere around 551,000.
If we follow the same formula which this Court
established for the last road district -- special road
district that it formed, the numbers are on Page 2 of the
handout I gave you this morning. Taking the $51,000 total
cost -- and in the past the Court agreed to allow formation
of a road district on the basis of one-third homeowners'
participation -- property owners' participation and
two-thirds County participation. In this particular case,
the amount that would be required of the homeowners would be
about 517,000 total, and the County's portion of the project
would be about 539,000, for 551,000 total.
The cash required to begin the project would be
one-third of the one-third, which equates to about S5,600,
$5,700, the balance of which will be placed on -- on their --
ea
--
`_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
if they approve a road district by ballot, the remainder
would be placed on their tax bills for -- for amortization.
In this case, about 13 years. To pay it back would be --
would take about 13 years, and I think our limit in the past
is 15 years, I believe. Anyhow, that's what this is all
about. And, these folks are here today to ask the Court to
approve the election and setting up a special road district.
Is there anybody here from Shadow Ridge who would like
to address the Court? Linda Sue?
MS. CARRANZA: My name is Linda Sue Carranza, and
I'm really pleased to have the opportunity to be here and
stand in front of the Shadow Ridge community. We have been
trying -- I guess folks before I have purchased property
there, they have been living with roads with so many ditches,
and it's just -- every time it rains, they've tried to patch
it, they try come back and redo it again, and it's just -- it
remains the same all the time. So, we appreciate
Commissioner Bill Williams to have taken steps to help us see
about this project and -- and I know a lot of us are very
upset about what has happened in the past with the roads, and
my mother has been there since 1986, so we're really glad
that this is taking place. we appreciate you very much.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Everybody would understand
that, if the Court approves your request, a ballot -- an
actual ballot, an election, would take place? That all we'rel~
89
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~-
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
doing is setting the wheels in motion for an election to take
place?
MS. CARRANZA: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And all the property owners
in Shadow Ridge, which we have identified -- you have the
list of names and property owners and the whole business; we
know who`s who. A majority of those folks would have to vote
in the affirmative to establish a special road district. I'd
like everybody to completely understand that.
MS. CARRANZA: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And, if that happens, we
know we have a deal, and the conditions or the terms of it
will be outlined in the ballots, so you know what you're
voting on, exactly what the conditions would be that you're
agreeing to accept or voting to reject.
MS. CARRANZA: Everyone received a letter.
Everyone that has signed has agreed to everything that --
that's been asked for.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, that's our presentation
on Shadow Ridge for today. I guess if there's --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: To Larry. I think -- didn't
you do a road district since Witt Road? Didn't you do one?
90
•--
`_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No. We've got one that's
working. That is up in -- still trying to figure out a way
to finance it, up in Ingram Lake Estates. And, the problem
there is that my reading of the law was -- and, as reflected
in the handout that Bill's talking about, is that the County
can't bring a private road to County standards with County
funds. Now, if we're going to change that, I'm going to have
to go back and redo Ingram Lake Estates, because -- and we're
talking -- they're a much larger project than here. If the
homeowners only have to pay a third, in Ingram Lake Estates
-- help me here.
MR. ODOM: Hundred twenty-two thousand-some-odd
dollars was for that. You take a third, that"s 90 -- that
leaves $80,000. And --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You'd have an $80,000 cost.
MR. ODOM: That's in our reserves.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We also have another one
that we've already approved, where the homeowners came up
with 100 percent of a public road to be brought to County
standards. In fact, we're going to be talking about another
issue on that one later today. So, this would set a -- it
would set a tremendous precedent, if we are to take the prior
model -- and I know what Bill's talking about, and we spoke
briefly about it before, but this is a great departure from
the way the law reads and the way we have done business in
91
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
	12
~--	13
`.	
	19
	15
	16
	17
	18
	19
	20
	21
	22
	23
	29
	25
the past, if the County is going to pick up two-thirds of the
cost of roads that will be -- are to be brought to County
standards, and then take it into the system for maintenance.
That's just a -- that's a different deal.
And, I'm not necessarily against it. I think we -- I
know we asked for one opinion on this before, but I think
maybe we -- we've got to look at the legality of using
appropriated -- or using general funds -- or road funds --
I'll get it right in a minute. Using road funds to -- to
improve private roads to County standards. I'm just -- and I
certainly think the road ought to be -- if there's a way to
do it, the road ought to be improved; I'm not against that.
I'm talking about the -- purely on the legal side.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just want to get a
clarification from Road and Bridge. This is the model, what
we're proposing here? What we're proposing here is the model
that they used on Witt Road?
MR. ODOM: Road and Bridge doesn't have a model,
Commissioner. The previous -- the previous Court before
y'all came in set that. Whether it was legal or not is
something else, and I think that should be looked into.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, going back to the Witt
Road one, and -- and, obviously, the last Court started that.
I don't know -- I don't even remember when it was finished.
We never asked for a legal opinion at that point; it was just
92
---
~-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
kind of done because it had been done before, we thought.
And, there was a -- quite a bit of disagreement on the Court
at that time as to whether this should be 100 percent paid
for by the landowners or 100 percent paid for by the County.
It was a very divergent view, and it was a compromise
finally. After, you know, being worn down on the Court, it
ended up with that one-third, two-thirds. I don't think, you
know, it sets a precedent. Maybe it did, but it was kind of
done just to be done with it at the time, to be honest. And,
it was -- you know, knowing that we have to look at each one
in the future, so I don't think it was done with the
intention of being a County precedent, though it may, you
know, now be looked at that way. It was just decided as --
isn't that pretty accurate?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's very accurate.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it was at the
insistence of the Commissioner of Precinct 2 at the time that
-- you know, that the County put up some of the money, and we
did.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Two-thirds.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two-thirds.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe this lady would
like to speak.
93
.-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~-.
`_
MS. LOVE: I'd like to speak to the Court. My name
is Marjorie Love. My husband and I have lived on 103 Ridge
Hallow Lane since '83, and we've been paying this Road and
Bridge tax since then. And, I want you to know how much of a
hardship it was to pay them taxes. We had to put -- sell our
trailer one time in order to pay them. And, I don't feel
like it's fair that we keep on paying these taxes, and I'd be
happy if the Commissioner would just send me a damn road
grader up there where I can get to my house. And, you guys
can sit there and argue all day. We need our roads fixed,
and the best solution that I see that you guys could come up
with is get Lehmann and Monroe by the butt that left you in
this kind of fix and us in this kind of fix. You know, it's
not fair for one subdivision to get it and another one do
without, but we've been doing without long enough. We need a
tractor to get up to our driveway, and that's the truth. If
you don't believe me, you can follow me out there in my
little station wagon. And, when it rains, forget it. We
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
can't even get up there.
And, I'm going to ask another question.
spend $51,000 on our road if everybody votes
and you guys say, "Well, I guess it's a good
have what they need." What are are we going
$51,000? Are we going to get another postag
JUDGE HENNEKE: Ma'am, you need to
We're going to
and says okay,
day to let them
get for our
e-size road?
understand that
94
`_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
~-.
-- that the road that you're referring to is not a County-
maintained road.
MS. LOVE: Why isn't it? I know it's not.
JUDGE HENNEKE: 'Cause it never --
MS. LOVE: That's what I've been told since '83.
JUDGE HENNEKE: It was never offered for County
Maintenance, never accepted for County maintenance.
MS. LOVE: Why didn't Lehmann and Monroe bring it
up to standards to where it would be --
JUDGE HENNEKE: We can't answer that. You'd have
to ask Mr. Lehmann and Mr. Monroe.
MS. LOVE: Oh, I have. I've asked him. I've asked
him.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Under the law --
MS. LOVE: Z know him personally.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Under the law, the County may not
expend taxpayers' monies on roads that have not been accepted
for County maintenance.
MS. LOVE: Well, then, give us our money back that
we've been paying taxes.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, everyone pays taxes --
MS. LOVE: Yes, sir, I understand that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- in the county to maintain the
roads that have been accepted for County maintenance. We all
pay --
95
,-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MS. LOVE: I understand that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- all pay those taxes for
everybody's road that is under the County maintenance.
MS.LOVE: Because if we had the money that we`ve
already paid in Road and Bridge, we could have our roads
paved. I understand where you're coming from. I've talked
to each and every one two or three times, been put on hold --
JUDGE HENNEKE: What we're talking about today is a
mechanism whereby the County can accept the road for County
maintenance, and the homeowners will bear all --
MS. LOVE: Well, I am begging you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: The homeowners will bear all or a
portion of the cost of bringing that road up to County
maintenance -- up to County standards.
MS. LOVE: Yes, sir.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Once it is up to County standards
and is accepted by the County for maintenance, then it will
become part of the general County Road Maintenance program.
MS. LOVE: May I ask you another question? There
was roads out there when we moved in there in '83.
Ridgecrest went all up at the hill, and Shadow -- Shadow
Ridge. Them roads had postage-size pavement on them already,
and why weren't they up to standards then?
JUDGE HENNEKE: We're not --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's way the developer put
96

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
them in, ma'am. And, that's the problem.
MS. LOVE: Well, they ain't much different than
them that was already there, than Val Verde North that the
County says it's all right.
MR. ODOM: The Commissioners Court, on Val Verde
North, that was all a private subdivision. The statute says
you can take the through road, so, apparently, the Court,
before I ever got here, took Val Verde North; it became
County maintenance. Not the roads off to the side, but the
through road was -- was Val Verde North, so that's the reason
the County's doing Val Verde North. We're not doing whatever
-- Ridge Shadow or the rest of them.
MS. LOVE: We're not even there.
MR. ODOM: Well, I'm not here to argue, but to
inform the Court that, basically, we took -- Val Verde North
was accepted by the Court. That was on our road list.
That's been maintained. That's even been upgraded, and so
it's a good road. Now, you know, the roads off to the side
-- previous, before this Court, the Court did take, I think,
$1,000 or $1,200 or something like that, and we went in --
Buster, you were here at that time, and Jonathan. And, so,
we did the maintenance on that road, one road. And, we asked
for the rest of the roads, and the Court said, "No, one
road."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It wasn't maintenance, as
97
•--
~.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
such. It was repair of
MR. ODOM: It wasn't maintenance. All we did was
take the potholes that were formed in there, because the
road's old and it's oxidized and, you know, there's not a lot
of drainage on the thing. So, it just came out over -- must
be since the '60's or the late '70's -- I don't remember when
that subdivision was put in, but that's -- that's the
history. That's the only reason the County's in there. The
Court accepted the through road, which was Val Verde North,
and it never accepted the rest of them.
MS. LOVE: Yeah, I know. I've heard this
discussion all before.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. And, then, the
previous patching was done by the Court on the basis of an
emergency order.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's where we picked up
this discussion for where we go in the future. The Court had
indicated that the County Attorney's opinion precluded us
from doing the same thing that had been done in the past.
So, what we have in front of you is a model by which this
Court has acted in the past to get this job done. To get St
done. I think the lady makes a valid point. They paid Road
and Bridge taxes for the maintenance and development of
maintenance of roads all over the county. And, in this
98
.-.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
particular case, the ones that are not being maintained are
the ones that are closest to their homes, and I think that
it's something we should take a hard look at based on the
formula that we established as a Court -- or the previous
Court established to accommodate these things.
The previous Court said the homeowners had to have
participation, and they set a number. Well, i wasn't privy
to the internal debate about how the number was struck, but
they set a number, and the number was that it was
unreasonable to consider that that group of homeowners out in
the western part of the county, any more than this group of
homeowners, could pay the entire cost. And, in the previous
case on Witt Road, it was almost $100,000; it absolutely
could not have happened and it couldn't have been amortized
over the length of time that was required. The same approach
-- the same situation applies here. It is not physically
possible or economically possible for this group of
homeowners to be able to foot the bill for $51,000. Some of
them will struggle to pick up their piece of the $17,000,
which is one-third. And, so, I -- I think that it's a
legitimate basis by which we can move.
MS. LOVE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner Williams, I'm
in agreement with you, up to the point where, am I going to
get arrested?
99
•~-
~_
1
2 flowers.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
it
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll always bring you
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, it's cake that I want.
But, if it's against the law, it's against law.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We don't know that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: And I think that's where we are. I
don't think there's any objection to the model. I mean, this
is clearly -- the only question is, to what extent are the
homeowners required to incur expenses to bring it up to
County standards? At which time the County will take over
the maintenance, if we so decide and the homeowners so
decide, and I think that's the issue that we have to put very
clearly and distinctly to the County Attorney, to be governed
by his --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We can give him a specific
case now, not a generic one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'd like to get an opinion
from the County Attorney on what we can and can't do. I
would -- and don't get me wrong. I'm not -- I'm not against
anybody getting their road paved. It's just that I'm not
willing to go to jail.
MS. LOVE: Well, I'm willing to go to jail to get
my damn road paved. I am.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: But, I'm serious when I say
100
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~-
that I think we need to operate within the law. We can't
lust ignore State law, and, at the same time, I'd like to see
everybody get their road paved, at least paved road. But, I
think we -- here is a specific case that we can give to the
County Attorney and ask for an opinion, and I think we need
to do that. And, we can do that. Should get a quick
response to it, too.
JUDGE HENNEKE: My suggestion would be that we
table this until the next meeting, and we'll have an answer
by then.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hear, hear.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Another -- I agree with that,
and I think, also -- I mean, Larry's working on several, and
we're going to have these come online agaitt. If this is
going to be our policy, this one-third, two-thirds formula,
we're going to need to look at the budget, because we don't
have the money budgeted. We're talking about a tremendous --
I mean, a huge --
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. ODOM: Huge.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: pr
half a million dollars impact on
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN:
COMMISSIONER LETZ: --
it for every person that wants a
upgraded. And, what's to say --
~bably, you know, easily have
our budget, because --
Yes.
if we do this, we have to do
County road -- a road
if you go out to the western
101
•--
~.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
...
part of the county, there's a lot of people that have long,
long, basically, driveways, and say, Hey, for one-third of
the cost, I can get a paved road to my front door.
MS. LOVE: Now you're getting ridiculous.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, it's a residence. We have
to look at that, how we're going to -- we need to develop a
policy as to what we're going to do and how we're going to do
it, because we -- as I've been on it -- well, this Court has
addressed, what, five of these? Four of these so far? In
the last two years, we did one, I think. And, I think the
word is going to get out that we're going to do this, and we
just need to have a policy so we don't act arbitrarily to one
subdivision versus another subdivision.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'd like to know if what
we're doing is within the law, and if we can, then we'll pave
everything.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, if we're going to go
back to the County Attorney for an opinion, which I have no
objection to -- just like Commissioner Baldwin, I don't
particularly care to look from inside of the bars out as the
road grader is leaving the premises. I want to -- I want
more definitive -- from the County Attorney, a more
definitive opinion than the last one we received on this
topic.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
.-.
i
9
F
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~~
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
102
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I want to know specifically
what the law says we can or cannot do. It's only fair that
the taxpayers who do support the County Road and Bridge
system understand what the law is that we're -- that we're
obligated to interpret and administer. And, that has to be
the basis upon which we do these things, because we can't be
all over the lot doing it in one end of the county and not
doing it on the -- or doing it to one subdivision and not
another, if they happen to be side-by-side.
JUDGE HENNEKE: If we can, we'll sit down and --
and draft the request and get it down to the County Attorney.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: And, we'll get very -- you know,
very specific.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Basically, to say that if -- if a
group of homeowners who are currently serviced by a road that
is not up to County maintenance wish to form a road district
and bring that road up to County standards and have it
accepted for County Maintenance, what latitude does the Court
have in using any County funds to pay for that upgrade?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. And, I think, for
those folks who came here today specifically for the purpose
of listening to these deliberations, they should know this
will be back on the agenda two weeks from today and we will
.-.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
~_
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
103
have that opinion from the County Attorney.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll have that opinion. And,
again, understand that none of us are opposed to the concept.
If you want us just to vote on the idea of a road district
today, I'm ready to vote on it. What we can't tell you today
is how the costs are going to be shared. That's what we have
to get a definitive answer on, so we can tell you how the
costs are going to be shared. I think all of us are in favor
of your road district and improving the road. Again, the
only issue is how do we divide up the costs of that initial
upgrade to County standards? Okay. All right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you for being here.
Thank you for your participation, and we'll see you in two
weeks.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I will remind all of you that our
meeting in two weeks is an evening meeting. It will start at
6:30 on Monday, September 27th.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you for being here.
MS. LOVE: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item No. 14, which is
to consider water line construction by Vlasek Pump on Rustic
Hills Road, Precinct 9. Commissioner Griffin.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. The County's interest
in this is a road issue, going -- it obviously gets over onto
the water side, as well. And, I would like to get Franklin
109
,~-
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
to introduce the subject and why we're here.
MR. JOHNSTON: As you recall, there was a Court
Order issued, 25868, in May of 1999, to pave Rustic Hills
from the intersection of Rock House Road to the end of the
dedicated right-of-way. I think that was a result of the
landowners picking up the tab for that project.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah, 100 percent.
MR. JOHNSTON: A hundred percent. As part of our
preparatory work on project clearing and all, we found a
water line that was installed down the centerline of the
road. And, before any road work can proceed from here, we
need to -- to address this and have the water line moved to
the proper portion of the right-of-way. So, that's why we're
out here on this.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That -- and you sent that
letter to Mr. Vlasek on the 17th of August. It's in the
packets.
MR. JOHNSTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And then Bill, Mr. Vlasek,
has asked to address the Court on the issue. So, we're ready
to hear from him.
MR. VLASEK: Well, the water line's been there for
20 years, and I didn't put it in. If they want to make a
County road out of it, I think they should move the water
line. It's very expensive; it's all rock up there. It would
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~.
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
105
be all rock ditch. With the road costs; it would be around
2,900 -- it's 2,100 feet, i think, approximately. You're
talking about $18,000 worth of work.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Bill, my reading of the --
of the deeds and all indicate that that was a -- was a -- as
part of the the subdivision, was a County road from the time
it was subdivided. It wasn't paved, but it was -- in fact,
there was a note from then Commissioner Guthrie --
MR. VLASEK: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- that said that that road
would be paved when the residential development warrants.
And, it said road built to County specifications. So, I -- I
don't think there's an issue that there wasn't a County road
there. I think the road was part of the subdivision.
MR. VLASEK: I don't know how that reads. I just
know that whoever put the line in was probably the
homeowners. I never put it in; somebody put it in and just
hooked up to the system. The road going to the right, to
Rock House Road, that does the same thing. They have two of
them at the middle of the road there, and it's also the
middle of the road going down the hill. That's the only one
I hooked up to, but we completed the system, the one going
down the hill. Later on, after I completed the system -- and
it was months later, I don't know -- somebody just hooked up
to the system as they built houses.
,..
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
,rte
~_
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
106
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So, you're saying the
homeowners laid those lines down the middle of the road?
MR. VLASEK: I cannot find out who did. I talked
to Reggie and he said
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'm sorry to interrupt you,
but who put in the meters?
MR. VLASEK: They did. They put in their own
meters. They had their plumbers -- whoever did it, they just
done it. They -- the road is -- it says right here it should
have been to the -- you know, to the -- on the edge of the
road. It didn't say about a specific easement, but it says
right in there that it should have been on the edge of the
road. But, whoever put it in put it right down the center of
the road 'cause it was the easiest thing to do just to get
water at the time.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So, there's several joints
in this road that people just kept adding onto it? Is that
what --
MR. VLASEK: I don't know if that's the way it
happened or not. I really don't know, 'cause I had nothing
to do with anybody that put in their -- their pipes up on
top. I know that McCormick made him a ditch, one of the
houses he was building, and then Mr. Bullock -- Charles
Bullock, I think he dug his own ditch all the way on the
other side. I don't know who done this one here. They -- a
	
	1
	2
	3
	4
	5
	6
	7
	S
	9
	10
	11
`.
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
107
lot of them, they dug it with a jackhammer or they just went
through the hardest rock and covered some of it with -- with
fill and different things like that. There was no standards.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I find it hard to believe
that whoever owned that water system would let people put in
their own meters and did that at the time. That just --
MS. VLASEK: No, had no control over it. I talked
to Reggie about it a few days ago, and he couldn't -- he
couldn't remember, either, who put in the lines.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a question. Refresh my
memory as to -- I mean, obviously, something happened in May
of this year that caused us to pass an order saying that road
needed to be paved. Why did the County do that?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Just as -- as the -- as the
book says -- you know, this relates a little bit to our
previous agenda item. This is a County road, and, in fact,
we have that recorded note from Commissioner Guthrie that
said that it wouldn't be paved until it was brought to County
standards when the development warranted and so on. The
homeowners came to me and said, "We'd like to pave the road."
I said, "Okay, fine. You'll have to -- you'll have to bring
it to County standards at your expense, 100 percent, and
we'll pick it up. If that's the case, if the Court approves
it by Court Order, then we'll take it into the system."
That's exactly what that Court Order was that Franklin
,~-~
...
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.-,
~. _
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
108
referred to, May 29th of this year. We said, "Yeah, if the
homeowners bring it to County standards, we'll take it into
the system," and so on. So, we went out and paved it. When
we started doing clearing -- some clearing this year, 'cause
this -- actually, the paving probably couldn't take place
until the next budget year, but they started some clearing,
and they hit the water line, I think, three times, as I
recall.
MR. ODOM: At least twice.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: At least twice, because it's
right down the center of the right-of-way. And, it's about
6 inches deep in places.
MR. ODOM: Oh, it's showing in some places.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: In some places the water
line, the main, is actually showing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the road is currently in
our County road system?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It's a County road, but it's
not paved. It was not paved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it's now -- currently,
right now, it is -- it's a County road, County-maintained?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No, because we have a Court
Order that says as soon as -- as soon as the -- because the
money will be fn escrow in this case, because we're doing it
through our contractor.
109
.-.
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
,.-
COMMISSIONER LET2: Right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. As soon as the
money's in escrow, the paving part of all this is going to
take place, the basing and double penetration and all that
sort of thing, standards -- you know, to our County
standards. But, the water line -- the water main was
discovered in the clearing process, that there it is, and so
the process to this point has been the fact that we sent a
letter to Mr. Vlasek saying, "Hey, you own the water system.
Move the main so we can pave the road." And, that's
shortening this up a lot. There's been a lot of discussion.
MR. ODOM: May I try and help Jonathan's part of
the -- this is not like Commissioner Williams and the
previous deal. This is a situation where you already have a
Court Order from 1968 or something like that, that said that
this road would be a County-maintained road when the
population got to that point. They never said what the
population was, because there was one place or two places
there, and probably over the last nine years, since we've
been here, that there's been some building that's going on
since I've been here. I know this house has been built. So,
the situation is, what is that -- you know, what is that
number? I don't know. That's for the Court to determine.
And, the other point is -- is that we came to the -- the
people came to the Court. Mr. Griffin brought it to y'all.
110
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.-,
~_
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
Y'all voted and said that if they put up $19,000, $20,000,
something like that, and they put it in escrow, that this
will be part of it. Now, part of this is -- and we sent a
letter that said by October, that this would be clear.
That's what we've done. That's the reason we're out there
and it's being cleared, so that when the fiscal year starts
and this money is supposed to be in place, we can start
reconstruction.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right.
MR. ODOM: That's where we're at. So, we've got a
water line out there, and it's in the way. It shouldn't be
there. It shouldn't have been there before; it should have
been back off the right-of-way.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess the reason I'm asking
this -- I mean, in my mind, it's kind of like "buyer beware."
And, it almost seems to me that this is -- we agreed to take
this and do this, and it's our fault -- it's our problem now.
I mean, you know, I don't know how you can pin it off on the
utility company.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, except for the fact
that the water main was put there in violation of rules that
existed back then, and it's certainly not in accordance with
the rules we have now.
MR. ~IL.ASEK: All the roads that's paved over there
now has water lines in the center. Japonica Hills has the
111
r-,-
~. _
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
same thing. They're all in the center of the road.
MR. ODOM: I'm sure they are. No doubt in my mind
about that, Bill.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think I'm with you.
MR. VLASEK: You know, I didn't -- I didn't put it
there. I don't know who put it there. The homeowners put it
there, you know, and there's no way I can pay for it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, what we're saying is
the County's going to pay for the movement of a water line?
MR. ODOM: No, no, no.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We haven't said that yet.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Haven't said that yet.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Nobody's suggesting that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Isn't that what's floating
by me?
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's
suggested, but that's not what's
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I
it seems that if it's our road -
know how else you can -- I don't
what's been, perhaps,
been said.
Well, proposed.
suggested it because, I mean,
- I mean, I don't -- I don't
know who else would pay for
it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which leads me to ask
another question. In the amount of money that the
Commissioner advised these people would be the cost to pave
112
.--.
~ -
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
their road, is the cost for taking up and putting down the
water line in the proper position included in that cost?
And, if so, who's going to -- if not, is the County going to
bear that cost?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No.
MR. VLASEK: No.
JUDGE HENNEKE: There's three sources for moving
this water line fund. There's the County.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One.
JUDGE HENNEKE: There are the homeowners.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Two.
JUDGE HENNEKE: There's the owner of the line.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Three.
JUDGE HENNEKE: The line is in the road
inappropriately.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm hearing this gentleman
say the homeowners can't afford that cost.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's not --
MR. VLASEK: Not the homeowners.
JUDGE HENNEKE: The water company.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The water company can't afford
the cost.
MR. VLASEK: Why did the County accept the road
with the line in the middle in the first place?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Because the County never accepted
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.-.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
113
the road.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I suspect the line wasn't
there.
MR. VLASEK: I don't know what -- it was put in
shortly after the water system was completed. 'Cause we --
we went -- when I got hold of the system, there was a well
there and a storage tank. We built a pump house, put in
booster pumps, and we hooked up everything downhill. And,
then the people on Rock House Road started hooking up to it
and then, eventually, these people hooked up to it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: It -- if it's the County's
responsibility to take care of the water line, I don't think
we're going to move it. We're lust going to take it out.
MR. VLASEK: Well, that --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Then there won't be a water line.
MR. VLASEK: That's the other thing I can do; I can
decertify the line, but it will take me six months to do it
through T.N.R.C.C.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Then how are you going to service
the people who are serviced off of that line?
MR. VLASEK: They'll have to figure that out for
themselves, whether they want to rebuild the line or put in
their own system.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: But, I would -- I would
,~--
119
,...
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
point out, Bill, that there is a document here that you've
signed that says you will provide water to these lot owners
in perpetuity, which means forever.
MR. VLASEK: That's fine. But, in the meantime, I
didn't -- that's not a line that I put in. They put it in
theirselves. I've discussed it with T.N.R.C.C. and
everything. They had -- they got ways to go. They could go
with a surcharge, but the surcharge -- there's 30 customers
there. Just a small system, it's really nothing to the whole
system. We charge $15 for the first 3,000 gallons. That's
$950 a month, it's just nothing there. We can do a
surcharge, but it would apply to all 30 people, and a lot of
people wouldn't like it because they'd have to pay for it
within a 12-month period. Or we could -- or just the people
on this -- you know, without a surcharge, the only thing I
can do is decertify the line.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, I talked to Dan Smith
at T.N.R.C.C. about decertification, which his office is
responsible for. He tells me that the only way that
T.N.R.C.C. will decertify all or part of a system is with an
application and, obviously, a lot of hearings and all that
kind of thing, that --
MR. VLASEK: That's right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And that, generally
speaking, the only way that they will approve
.-,
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
	12
'	13
	
	19
	15
	16
	17
	18
	19
	20
	21
	22
	23
	29
	25
115
decertifications is with 100 percent approval of all of those
customers who are being served. I have a suspicion that not
-- you can't get all of those landowners on that portion of
the road to agree to decertification. You can't do it. I
mean, I'm not saying that -- you wouldn't be the decertifying
agency. T.N.R.C.C. would have to decertify.
MR. VLASEK: That's right. But, if you talked to
Dan Smith, Dan didn't know that much about it. He referred
me to Vera Poe, and she's with the Texas Rural Water
Association, and she's the technical adviser fox this. And,
she looked into it and said this is the way the do it.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Unfortunately, Ms. Poe is
not a part of T.N.R.C.C. any longer.
MR. VLASEK: She's not. She --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Dan Smith told me that she's
a very knowledgeable person, but she speaks for the Texas
Rural Water Association and not for the T.N.R.C.C.
MR. VLASEK: That's right, but they hire her to
come help us. They're helping us out on other things right
now, and she's --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's okay, I'm not meaning
to argue with you on that point. It's dust that T.N.R.C.C.,
for a decertification, has a process, is all I'm saying.
They've got a process.
MR. VLASEK: That's why it would take six months to
,.-~
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
,--,
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
116
probably do this.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And it wouldn't necessarily
be approved. The decertification wouldn't necessarily be
approved by T.N.R.C.C.. It's not just throwing in the fact
that you would like to have the water line decertified.
MR. VLASEK: Well, it's just real simple. There's
no money in this system. The system hasn't got any money,
and nobody's going to pay -- you know, how would I pay the --
to put in $18,000 worth of water line?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Mr. Vlasek, all I'm telling
you is what -- is what the T.N.R.C.C. guy told me, and he
said --
MR. VLASEK: Okay.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- said that if there is --
that it can be put into receivership, in which case they take
over the line -- the system. They would take over this line,
would take over the system. That it can be put into
receivership, they can take over the system, and they will
contract with somebody to operate it until they can sell the
system. So, I mean, that's where we are. I'm trying to --
MR. VLASEK: Well, if somebody wants this little
system, they can have it for $18,000, that's for sure.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What I mean is -- is that --
is that where we are here is between the T.N.R.C.C., the
water company owner, and the County in providing a road. Our
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
,.-.
~.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
117
only dog in this hunt is putting -- is getting a paved road
in.
MR. VLASEK: Right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And we're not trying to tell
you how to run the business or anything, but we do -- we do
have rules that say where water mains have to be. And, it
says very clearly in all of the deed stuff that I've got that
the only thing that the owner or the landowners are
responsible for is from their property line to any structure.
MR. VLASEK: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And, that's very -- very
clearly stated in two on three of these documents. So, I
don't know where we go from here, frankly. It's a -- it`s a
tough one, but I don't think that the County, prima facie,
should have to pay for a water line that's in a bad position,
in the wrong position, outside of the rules that existed in
1978, and outside of the rules that exist today.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The same goes along with
fences, high line wires, et cetera, et cetera, that we have
removed fences, have moved fences and rebuilt fences, and the
County's paid for those things many times. But, it's -- to
me, it's exactly the same thing. I agree with you, but I
also see Mr. Vlasek's side. He inherited the thing, you
know. It wasn't -- I mean, it wasn't his doing.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You might want to clarify
118
~.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
that. Bill, you put in the original system, sold it, and
then got it back again, right?
MR. VLASEK: Right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Something like that.
MR. VLASEK: I put in the system and I had lots --
I had about 15, 20 lots downhill that I sold. That's the
reason I put it in for, and I put it in for those lots. And,
as people wanted water, they just started hooking up to
everything over there, and I had no control over it. I
didn't sell them no meters, I didn't make no meter hookups.
They had the right to hook up to it; that's what they did.
They put it in that I own the place. Well, it's the only
place they could put it; there wasn't many rock saws in those
days. You can't dig a -- you couldn't dig four inches over
there. That's -- it's all rock right on top of the ground.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The reason I said what I did is
-- going back to just what Buster said about fences. It's
the same thing as a fence. If we go along a current County
road that has -- on Lane Valley or any -- just thousands of
them around the county -- fences right on the road, and we
have to go in there and clean, I mean -- well, I guess our
practice is that we will help pay or pay for 100 percent of
the cost of moving that fence. Now, we may have the legal
right to go in there and remove them, because we have access;
we need to get to the property. But, from a public policy
119
,~-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
.-,
standpoint, this Court has chosen not to go just tear down
fences.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This, to me, is the same thing.
I mean, we somehow ended up with this road. It's in the
County system. We agreed to the final steps of that. I
guess the process is happening right now. This was something
that was unknown.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No. No, I wouldn't say
that. Sorry to interrupt you, but it's always been a County
road.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, the maintenance of it.
The maintenance of it is coming into -- and something is --
you know, that was unknown when we did made that decision in
May. Now there's a water line in the middle of the road, and
it was not contemplated for anyone to pay for it. Going back
in time, if we would have known this in May, we would have
required the landowners to pay for it, I think, but we didn't
know it, or someone would pay for it other than us, you know.
You know, I don't I mean -- I don't know --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Is it common practice today
for homeowners to put in their own meters?
MR. VLASEK: No. No, they can't. I mean,
T.N.R.C.C. -- you know, they're over everything now. In
those days it was different, and it wasn't an approved
120
.-,
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~_
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
system. When they done that, the system hadn't even been
approved; it was just there. You know, we didn't get a
C.C.N. on it until about '83, I think, something like that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I will say this is a real
important thing to remember when we're doing our next
discussion on accepting roads, as to what happens if
something else is uncovered in that right-of-way that we
don't know about at the time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: May I suggest that we tack
this issue onto your note to the County Attorney, and ask him
about this, also?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You want to delay the
answer coming back? Is that what you're asking?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No. No, let's leave that as
a separate issue. Let me -- if I may, let me approach the
County Attorney on this one separately, get the reading, and
come back at our next Court meeting, which is before the end
of the fiscal year, with a possible solution, compromise or
otherwise.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I think -- I would hope we could
come to a compromise on this. I mean, I will say, in my
opinion, Mr. Vlasek, the water company that operates the line
is legally liable for moving the line, period. I think
there's no question about that. But, the property owner who
puts a fence illegally on a County right-of-way is -- is
121
,-.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
r
~.
22
23
29
25
,--
legally responsible for moving that fence, as well.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So, maybe --
JUDGE HENNEKE: I would hope that maybe we could --
the parties could sit down and negotiate something and we
could come back with a compromise solution in two weeks.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And get a final commitment
from -- or a firm definition from the County Attorney so that
we can, from this point on, live by the law.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Let's don't mix that with --
12 I here.
13
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine. That's fine.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm listening carefully
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We don't want to mix this
one with that.
19
15
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, we don't. But, this is
a correlation --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: There is some correlation,
because -- but I can do that separately, and I'll work it
16
17
directly with the
COMMISSIONER LETZ: When you're talking to the
County Attorney, I think it would be helpful, if it doesn't
get too broad, if we go to fences and other things that we
are -- historically, we have, you know, split 50 percent of
the cost to get the land, or trade out the land for fences
or, you know, do whatever we need to to get these roads in
18
19
20
21
122
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~_
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
better shape. And, we need to find out if we can do that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I think, legally, we have the
ability to trade out -- if you're talking about the County
taking money and moving someone's private fence off of County
right-of-way onto the edge of their property, I think we have
no legal problem.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we've always --
whenever we do, we trade off. You give us the land --
MR. ODOM: Quid pro quo.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah. We take the
right-of-way out a little or back a little bit, and we'll
move -- if you give us the right-of-way, we'll move the
fence.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand all that.
This is a little bit different. We're talking about using
County funds to move a private water line.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which, to me, then sets the
correlation to the Shadow Ridge thing in terms of the issue
that you raised.
JUDGE HENNEKE: They do get intertwined.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'll do that, though. And,
Bill, I'll get back with you and --
MR. VLASEK: Okay.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- see what we can work out,
123
.-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~^"~ 13
~.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
and talk to --
MR. VLASEK: There is probably a couple hundred
feet of road there that's got a bluff on one side and a
drop-off on the other side, that you wouldn't be able to have
an easement anyway, so some of that would have to be changed
anyway.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Bill.
MR. VLASEK: Okay. Thanks a lot.
JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, I'm going to suggest
that we take a luncheon recess.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll reconvene at 1:30.
(Luncheon recess taken from 11:50 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: It's 1:30 on Monday, September
13th, 1999. We'll reconvene this regular meeting of the
Commissioners Court. I don't see Commissioner Letz. We'll
do some more routine items until such time as he returns.
Let's take up Item 2.19, consider and discuss reappointment
of Dr. Sam Junkin on the Hill Country M.H.M.R. Center Board
of Trustees. Dr. Junkin was originally appointed by the
previous Court in 1997. His term expires this September. He
has indicated his willingness to be reappointed. Dr. Junkin
has done yeoman work in helping get that organization off the
ground, and I think it would be definitely in our interest to
129
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
...
~_
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
have him continue as a member of the Board of the Hill
Country Community M.H.M.R. Center. Does anyone have any
questions?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we appoint Dr.
Junkin -- reappoint -- to the M.H.M.R. Board.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Baldwin,
seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court reappoint
Dr. Sam Junkin to the Hill Country Community M.H.M.R. Center
Board of Trustees. Any further discussion? If not, all in
favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, can we take up 2.17?
Mr. Beuchler has been sitting through the Court session all
morning, and his is a very simple question.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We certainly can. The Court will
take up 2.17, which is consider and discuss request from
Chili Appreciation Society International for use of Flat Rock
Lake Park.
MR. BEUCHLER: I really enjoyed it. I like -- very
rarely do I get to come down and listen to what I've listened
to this morning, and -- and to see justice at work and oux
125
~.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
money -- tax money being well spent. That's great.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know if you can
consider it justice, though.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I thought it's more like
making sausage.
MR. BEUCHLER: I would just like to thank y'all for
giving us the opportunity to have Flat Rock Lake for our
cook-off. We had a very successful cook-off. We had plenty
of toilet facilities, we had tents. We had -- B.F.I. donated
all the trash things, that after it was over, it was all
cleaned up; had no complaints that I was aware of. We had no
problems with security. We had no incidents. We gave
several hundred dollars to the Peace -- the Peace Officers'
Association for their funds that they see as necessary. We
would like to have it again. We would like to have it next
year in July, July the 1st.
I'm just -- you know, I'm coming to thank y'all for
this, but I'm letting you know ahead of time that we would
like to do it again July the 1st of next year, one being that
it's going to be bigger. We're going to add barbecue in
conjunction with the chili cook-off, plus we're going to have
some entertainment. We're going to make a family day out of
it. So, I just would like to ask y'all if that -- if that
would be all right with y'all. And, I also read in the paper
that y'all are getting ready to do some, maybe, upgrading of
126
,~
.-.
1 some facil
2 restrooms.
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
..-.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We are, and I think -- I
can't speak for the Court in terms of the use of it again,
although nobody objected in the past, and your report is well
received. We may need to see where we are in terms of the
things we're doing down there, so that you don't interfere
with us and we don't interfere with you.
MR. BEUCHLER: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: While we're not that far
along yet, we are going to be doing that.
MR. BEUCHLER: Yes, sir. But, anyway I just wanted
to let y'all know that we thank y'all, and to tentatively get
this on for next year, 'cause it will -- for this one here.
And, we're having one in October at the County Fair, and it's
the second annual at the County Fair. And, we had a real
good reception last year, and we're going to have a bigger
one this year. We just want to make this a second annual
like this. That way we have one two times a year, at
different times of the year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. BEUCHLER: And, we really appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So, we'll see you back,
what, after the first of the year sometime, maybe, to firm up
the request so we can act on it?
127
~_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. BEUCHLER: The date will stay the same, but I
can come back to firm it up, like -- I would like to state,
we -- we put this out in three publications of the magazine.
That goes out all over the United States. It's an
international --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right.
MR. BEUCHLER: And we'd like to get it out six
months in advance so people can plan. They have a calendar
of events that they plan.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I was just saying, so we
don't -- so you and we don't let it fall through the cracks,
just come back.
MR. BEUCHLER: I'll come back in six --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Maybe early January or so, to make
sure we've got it on the books.
MR. BEUCHLER: Okay, appreciate it. Well, let me
ask, while I'm here. If some of the cooks just -- you know,
this one that we're having at the Kerr County Fair, we have
all that parking area up there at the parking lot. If some
of them would desire to go down there in October, say, after
the cook-off and take their motor homes down there -- they
wouldn't be doing any cooking. Maybe just go down and spend
the night on the river one night while they're here? A lot
of them are from Dallas and Houston and, you know, instead of
staying up there with all of that stuff going on, they could
128
~-
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-- before they leave Sunday, maybe they could go down there
and spend one night on the river?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't -- I don't know if
there's any major objection. The problem is that -- is that
there's a curfew prohibiting overnight -- unless the Court
specifically --
MR. BEUCHLER: That's why I was asking.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let's sets that aside for
now.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN We ought to address that at
the same time --
JUDGE HENNEKE: He's talking about this one in
October.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Oh, October?
MR. BEUCHLER: I'm talking about --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Talking about fall.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I -- is this -- didn't
we do that last year?
COMMIS3IONER GRIFFIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, we did. We had Carl
here thank us for what we did.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- didn't we allow them
to stay --
MR. BEUCHLER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- last year?
129

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. BEUCHLER: It was real successful.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There wasn't any problem. We
allowed y'all to go down the river and spend the night.
MR. BEUCHLER: Yeah. They was there for three
nights.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, I remember that we --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We did.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think it was a problem
last time. I dust think we need to advise the Sheriff's
Department.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's the date?
MR. BEUCHLER: The date's October the 8th, 9th and
10th.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's talking about -- it's a
little bit different. He's talking about after the party's
over.
MR. BEUCHLER: At the fairground.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, you're talking about
the night of the 10th or the night of the 11th?
MR. BEUCHLER: Maybe the 9th and the 10th.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why don't I put it on the
agenda for next time? It's not on the agenda properly to
take action on it today, but I'll put it on for next time.
MR. BEUCHLER: Okay. This is really not -- I lust
brought this up. That wasn't my reason for coming. The
130
~. _
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1T
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
reason for coming was to get it for next July. That's the
reason for coming. So, I just throw that out there. But, we
appreciate it. Everybody had a good time, and --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, sir.
MR. BEUCHLER: See you again.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you much.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I guess I'd like to ask Glenn, did
y'all have any trouble after them --
MR. HOLEKAMP: None.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Cleaned up7 Very nicely done?
MR. HOLEKAMP: As far as we were concerned. We had
no problems.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Good. Okay, let's go back to 2.15,
then, which is consider and discuss order establishing
minimum infrastructure requirement for manufactured home
rental communities pursuant to Section 232.007 of the Texas
Health and Government Code, and set a public hearing on the
same. This is an item I put on. House -- Senate Bill No.
712, passed by the recent Legislature, gave to counties the
ability to establish minimum infrastructure standards for
manufactured home rental communities. A number of counties
around the state have had some major problems with
substandard development of manufactured home rental
communities, and Senator Wentworth, along with Representative
Turner and other rural representatives, have given to
131
~. _
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
counties the ability, by order, to establish minimum
infrastructure standards for manufactured home rental
communities.
The proposed order that's in your packets is something I
worked on. To the extent possible, it tracks the language of
the legislation. Also, to the extent possible, it makes
reference and incorporates the current subdivision provisions
with regard to drainage and roads, so we don't have to
reinvent the wheel on that. I sent this to both Franklin and
David and asked for their comments. Franklin, in particular,
has asked for another couple weeks within which to look at
it. I think that's entirely appropriate. What I'd like to
do with this today is take, obviously, any comments anybody
has, set it for a public hearing on the 27th, and we can work
on it same more and sit down with Franklin and David and --
and get some further input as to how we might appropriately
go ahead and -- and provide this protection to the County, if
that's what the Court wants to do.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question, Judge.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is there any way around
this -- I'm looking at definitions, number one. Is there any
way around this business of -- that these regulations will
apply to subdivided space "offered for rent or lease, for a
term of less than 60 months without a purchase option..."?
132
.-.
'- -
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
To me, that is a glaring loophole.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, it is a glaring loophole,
but, unfortunately, it's a glaring loophole contained in the
legislation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, you're telling me
there's no way around it7
JUDGE HENNEKE: Basically. I mean, even if we --
even if we decided on the issue, the law says that it's
something that's offered for -- for less than 60 months,
so --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What sections was that,
Bill?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Definition of manufactured housing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Section 2 A {1).
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Page 2.
MR. JOHNSTON: If we, basically, have questions
about it, would this be an appropriate time to do it? Or in
a workshop?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Hold up lust a second. Let's see
if anybody else on the Court has anything they want to --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Only comment I had was, I
appreciate your putting the language in there, the
development plan shall include a letter from U.G.R.A. and
O.S.S.F. Regarding O.S.S.F., that's an absolute must, and
you put it in there and I appreciate that.
133
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~_
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A comment on this. This is ',
obviously going to become part of the Subdivision Rules, but I~,
this is a matter the Judge and I talked about getting
something on the books now, because it appears, after the
Legislature, we have to change our Subdivision Rules quite a
bit, and trying to get all that done -- so, this -- you know,
it depends on how quick we get that ready to come back to the
Court if, you know, we work on both of them simultaneously.
And -- but, the idea would be that this -- once this language
is perfected, it will become one of the sections in our
regular Subdivision Rules. And, you know, from the
standpoint of getting it onto -- setting a public hearing and
proceeding, I think it's adequate. A little wordsmithing is
needed here or there, I think.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Franklin?
MR. JOHNSTON: I was -- that leads into one of my
questions. I have a little packet here, in case all these
numbers are hard to read. What you just said, in particular,
Part B of 232.007, I don't -- I think it's still in effect.
It was in the previous Local Government Code. They amended
A and they added several sections after B, C through H, but B
says, "a manufactured home rental community is not a
subdivision." And, Sections 232.001 and -- through 232.006
does not apply to these communities. So, how does this
affect -- we refer to our Subdivision Rules, and they say it
134
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
r
~. _
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
is not a subdivision. How do we resolve that?
JUDGE HENNEKE: That might just take a -- take a
little bit of wordsmithing. I mean, the concept, which I
think you understand, is, rather than duplicate any order of
the requirements of -- for drainage and roads, the
subdivision plan is incorporated in the --
MR. JOHNSTON: 'Cause roads, in particular, it --
you know, we refer to a whole gamut of road -- different
types and widths and specifications which one would apply to
what they call minimum standards.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I mean, I think this --
I think that's what we need. We need to figure out how to
get the two to work together. It might be changing the
section or the way the Subdivision Rules are done, or making
this as a -- and have this as a -- basically, a separate
document, but compiled at the same time and referred only to
certain sections of the Subdivision Rules. Kind of, you
know, trying to get them to work together.
MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what -- you know.'
MR. JOHNSTON: 'Cause if there is something we have
to, you know, come up with rules and enforce without
something to base that on, it's just kind of arbitrary just
to say you've got to do this. Like, our Subdivision Rules
are based on, I think, the first three subsections of this
135
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
r
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
chapter. It's a whole book. So, we need to have something
to fall back on to show them, "This is what you have to do."
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But, I mean --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, like --
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm not sure I agree with that
"arbitrary." I don't -- you know, if these are arbitrary,
then our Subdivision Rules are arbitrary.
MR. JOHNSTON: Oh, they're the same for everyone,
though.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yeah.
MR. JOHNSTON: And you just have --
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's what the law is.
MR. JOHNSTON: You hand them the little thing, they
know what to expect.
JUDGE HENNEKE: The law says that you can't
establish more stringent requirements than you currently
have.
MR. JOHNSTON: Right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. So, I don't see where
arbitrary comes into play.
MR. JOHNSTON: Well, what I meant, without a rule
just before this, you know, when we give them the Subdivision
Rules, then they'll say it's not a subdivision.
MR. ODOM: This is B. It falls under B.
MR. JOHNSTON: So, if we have a little booklet
136
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
.-.
~_
or something, and say, "This is what we consider the
minimum standards," that way we can have that kind of as a
separate --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You could make that an
attachment to the ordinance, say, and extract it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Depends on how you put the
Subdivision Rules together.
MR. JOHNSTON: Or we can have a separate section.
It can be in the same booklet, but something --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That can be worked out.
MR. JOHNSTON: Anyway, that's kind of the general
scope of the questions I came up with in one day. I just got
it last Friday. So -- 'cause it refers to the County
Engineer kind of doing all this stuff, and even in your order
it refers to the County Engineer issuing the certificate, but
in the law it says that the Court will do that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That would have to be corrected; no
question about that.
MR. ODOM: And several penalties.
COMMISSIONER LETZ:
is a good one about the E.T.J.
MR. JOHNSTON: Okay.
But, I mean, your second point
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A little thing that -- that,
sure as anything, if we don't have it spelled out, that's
what -- the first question, we're going to come up right in
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
137
...
~_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
.-.
the gray area.
MR. JOHNSTON: "Outside of municipality," I don't
know if that's the city limits or the end of the E.T.J. It's
not real clear.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So --
JUDGE HENNEKE: We can look at that; that's no
problem.
MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah.
MR. ODOM: Well, the other one -- what was that on
civil penalties, right there?
MR. JOHNSTON: Oh, yeah, about the legal -- civil
and criminal penalties. We don't have that in our
Subdivision Rules, but that seems like that's a bigger hammer
on this than there is on the Subdivision Rules.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Again, that's something we'll have
to be cognizant of. That's what we're here for, is to get
this thing -- I think it is something we need to do, but we
need to do it right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I think that this is
basically all right.
MR. ODOM: It really is. I mean, what you've
formulated was really good, but it left some questions, and
-- and the catcher, when we looked at it, was B, and that --
I see where you're coming from, but I -- you know, we lust
want to clarify to make sure that somebody doesn't go under
138
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2-B -- you know, we're saying 2-A, and then the rest of it,
we want to clarify. You know, has the law superseded that?
I mean, are they going to change 2-B or --
JUDGE HENNEKE: The answer is yes.
MR. ODOM: But, is 2-8 added to that? Supposed to
be added? It said it amended only those, Judge, amended 2-A
and then 2-C on down through H, and it left B alone. The
only thing that was amended was 2-A and --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Mm-hmm.
MR. ODOM: -- that needs to make a change for the
better on the thing, and it didn't change 2-B.
JUDGE HENNEKE: What it says is a manufactured home
rental community is not a subdivision, so it would have --
doesn't have to be platted.
MR. JOHNSTON: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE HENNEKE: But, it does -- the Court does have
the ability to set minimum infrastructure standards.
MR. JOHNSTON: Right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: It's not a subdivision, since it
doesn't have to be platted. What they have to do --
MR. JOHNSTON: So, this development plan takes the
place of a subdivision?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. The development plan, as
I understand it -- the intent, anyway -- the development plan
replaces the plats. I mean, the development plan is unique
139

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
to manufactured homes, and subdivisions get platted.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's -- but you have the same
-- you know, most of the rest of the standards can be the
same. In fact, they have to be the same. They can't be
worse.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Can't be worse --
MR. JOHNSTON: Can't be worse.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- minimum requirements than
subdivisions. They're jumping back and forth.
MR. JOHNSTON: Logically, it should be the same
standards. But, what my question is is whether you can refer
them to the subdivision book, rather than having a separate
book and saying, "This is" --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, you change the name of
the subdivision book to Subdivision and Manufactured Home
Book.
MR. JOHNSTON: Right. We ought to just decide that
ahead of time.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Eventually, we'll do that, but what
we're trying to do now is put these in place before we do the
global look at the Subdivision Rules we all know.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Manufactured Homes Book.
MR. JOHNSTON: Last, but not least, as this gets to
be a real prevalent thing around, you know, the County, and
140
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
^ 13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
~-.
since the County Engineer does all these additional duties of
the County Engineer --
COMMISSIONER LET2: You're not getting any more
money.
MR. JOHNSTON: 'Cause my time now is spent to the
That's something we'll have to look
MR. ODOM: If he doesn't know, I sure don't know.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, actually, as I recall
from the Legislative Conference, this applies to adding one
or more -- whatever you call them -- spots for a manufactured
homes in existing subdivisions. There's no grandfather --
everything is grandfathered as-is, but as soon as they go to
add one more -- one more slot, then there -- a new slot falls
under this.
JUDGE HENNEKE: And the hammer is that a utility
cannot provide service to the community -- or an additional
rental space unless they have the Certificate of Compliance.
MR. JOHNSTON: That's a good point.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's the hammer.
MR. ODOM: That's the hammer.
JUDGE HENNEKE: If we pass this order, it goes out
to KPUB and the the City, Lone Star Gas, and all the private
water companies, and they can't hook anybody up unless the
141
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
owner or developer comes to them with a Certificate of
Compliance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That grandfather clause is
pretty -- very restrictive.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On this.
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Set a hearing? Two weeks?
JUDGE HENNEKE: We need to.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Set a hearing for two weeks
from today, did you say?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Shall we set a hearing for 7:30 on
the --
MS. SOVIL: You need to maybe think about four
weeks, so you can have two weeks to get the language, 'cause
you're going to have to publish it in the paper. You're
going to have to have some time to publish.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, the statute says you have to
publish notice of a public hearing.
MS. SOVIL: Well, you can't file it -- you can't
put it as a matter of record today, so how are they going to
come in and look at it7
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, Fred.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, what's the first meeting in
October?
142
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.~-
`_
MS. SOVIL: I think it's October the 12th,
something like that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's take a look, 'cause
that's the real --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Ten o'clock on October 12th?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Are we sure that's the date?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: October 11, which, on my
calendar, shows to be a holiday. Have it on the next day,
which will be the 12th.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay.
So, Tuesday, the 12th.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The real Columbus Day.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Do we have a motion to that effect?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Griffin,
seconded by Commissioner Letz, that we hold a public hearing
on the proposed order establishing minimum infrastructure
standards for manufactured homes in Kerr County for Tuesday,
October the 12th, at 10 o'clock a.m. Any further discussion?
MR. SOVIL: State Hospital.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll have to move State Hospital.
Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your
right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
143
,-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
~_
I1
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Okay, why don't we
take up 18 before 16?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably should.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Why don't we take up item 2.18
first, which is consider and discuss accepting from Laurinda
Boyd her letter of resignation as Reservations Agent for the
Hill Country Youth Exhibition Center. Commissioner Letz.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the letter I received
from Laurinda is pretty self-explanatory. "Effective
September 1, I'm submitting my letter of resignation." we
need to accept it. Glenn, I'll just ask you, 'cause I don't
know the answer to this. Is there -- is she working and
doing it at all right now, or if she has ceased working, are
you doing it as of September 1, or what is -- what's the
status? I'm asking the question because -- regarding pay.
If she's not doing it any more, we need to cut off the pay --
well, as of September -- well, I guess we've already paid her
for September 1, but immediately -- you know, but if she's
doing it, I want to pay her for what's she's doing.
MR. HOLEKAMP: First question, is she still doing
it? No, sir. Are we doing it? We're -- we're trying to do
it. We're in the transition of getting the information from
her, the files and that sort of thing, as we speak. We're
144

1
2
working closely with her, trying to get this information, and
she is cooperating very well and I think it will work out
3 ~ very well.
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tell the Court who "we" is.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Mike Smart, myself, and we -- we
hired a clerk part-time right now to get her feet wet,
so-to-speak, to learn how to do the contracts and the
agreements, and she's also answering the phone.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, that's --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move we accept the letter of
resignation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I believe the Treasurer's office has
been --
MS. NEMEC: We didn't pay her this time around.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Williams, that we accept the letter
of resignation of Laurinda Boyd for scheduling at the Hill
Country Youth Exhibition Center. Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let's be a little more
explicit. We're not accepting her resignation for her other
capacity, just fox the reservation of the Hill Country Youth
Exhibition --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Right, reservation.
199
r
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
working closely with her, trying to get this information, and
she is cooperating very well and I think it will work out
very well.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tell the Court who "we" is.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Mike Smart, myself, and we -- we
hired a clerk part-time right now to get her feet wet,
so-to-speak, to learn how to do the contracts and the
agreements, and she's also answering the phone.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, that's --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move we accept the letter of
resignation.
COMMISIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I believe the Treasurer's office has
been --
MS. NEMEC: We didn't pay her this time around.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Williams, that we accept the letter
of resignation of Laurinda Boyd for scheduling at the Hill
Country Youth Exhibition Center. Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let's be a little more
explicit. We're not accepting her resignation for her other
capacity, just for the reservation of the Hill Country Youth
Exhibition --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Right, reservation.
195
~.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right, that's what the
letter says.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Any further discussion?
If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Let's then take up
Item 2.16, I believe, which is consider and discuss job
descriptions for, one, Facilities Use and Maintenance
Supervisor; two, Facilities Use and Maintenance Assistant
Supervisor; and, three, Facilities Use and Maintenance Clerk.
Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is back on the agenda
because it's now timely to do so. This is the job
description which we have developed, and we'll comment and
hopefully approve, embodying the responsibilities of the
Facilities Use and Maintenance Administrator, the Assistant
Administrator, and a separate one, the clerk. One other
caveat, I think. While the body of the job description for
the Assistant is the same as it is for the Maintenance
Administrator, the second-in-command is nonexempt, and you
should be aware of that. However, you're not -- we did not
include a separate one here for him -- yeah, we did. Yes, we
did. So, it's a nonexempt. Just be aware of that.
196
r~
~.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. SOVIL: Don't you think you ought to think
about that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon me?
MS. SOVIL: Making him exempt?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We were told we can't.
MS. NEMEC: He doesn't qualify.
MS. SOVIL: Why? He's not --
MS. NEMEC: He doesn't hire, he doesn't do budget.
He -- he's a working supervisor, isn't he?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or discussion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move approval of the job
descriptions for the Facilities Supervisor -- Facilities Use
and Maintenance Assistant -- Assistant Administrator, and the
Maintenance Clerk, moving all three of them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll second, but I have a
question.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Williams,
seconded by Commissioner Letz, that we approve the job
description for the Facilities Use and Maintenance
Supervisor, Facilities Use and Maintenance Assistant
Administrator, and the Facilities Use and Maintenance Clerk.
Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the second page of the job
description for the Supervisor, the first line is,
"Administer scheduling contracts and fees for use of all
197
'~ 1
2
3
9
5
6
7
S
9
10
11
12
.-.
~. _
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
County facilities by the public." I'm questioning the word
"all." And, I'm thinking of the Ag Extension Office.
They're going to still do their own scheduling?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my understanding.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And is this just covered under
the -- you're going to administer it? You're going to
administer it for them to do it? I just don't want it to be
a conflict of -- you know, as to who's doing what.
MR. HOLEKAMP: No, as far as that, the -- excuse
me, I'm sorry. As far as I'm concerned, I think they're
going to continue. The only thing is -- is I'm asking and
trying to require them to give us a schedule so we can clean
it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. HOLEKAMP: We're unable to know what's going on
there. And that's been the big problem all along, is not
knowing how the building's being used, and then a group comes
in and they can't understand why it's dirty.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. HOLEKAMP: And then it becomes my fault.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the way you're wording it,
"administer scheduling," that means, basically, you're
delegating that to them to do, to keep you informed.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Oh, yeah, because there's no way --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The booking of their
148
~. _
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
facility, like he said, we -- we really need to know what's
going on over there.
MR. HOLEKAMP: That's where it's fell down,
is we're unable to know what's going on in that particular
building. And, one thing that the chili fellow was
saying --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just a second, Glenn. Let's
don't leave that quite yet.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: About the Ag facility, I
think there needs to be a directive from this Court asking
them to please provide a schedule to -- if not, it's going to
be this stuff just back and forth, back and forth, year after
year after year after year. I think that we need to give
them some kind of directive. It wouldn't be as strong as a
Court order, but a strong request to please provide the --
whatever the hell Glenn is these days -- Facility Use and
Maintenance Administrator with a monthly schedule of events.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I'd prefer weekly, if we could,
because it's --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, whatever.
MR. HOLEKAMP: We're right across the -- you know,
it'd be real easy to give us a weekly calendar.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, would you write them
a letter or --
199

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Like you say, it would be
appropriate to load the County Judge in the cannon, and put
the --
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'd be happy to send a letter to
Eddie requesting that they provide Glenn with a weekly
calendar of events schedule for the Ag Extension Office.
MR. HOLEKAMP: You know, I really don't think it --
with 4-H and home demonstration meetings, that sort of thing,
which is coordinated between either Laurinda, Eddie, or Janie
Squire, it wouldn't be very difficult for those people to
then call me also. So, really, it would be natural for them
to -- to actually book it, if you want to use that word, of
that -- that meeting area there. It would be gust another
phone call. But, it sure would be nice if we knew, so we
knew --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- what to clean for.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All you have to do is copy the
calendar. They have a calendar.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Oh, yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Easy thing for them to do.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sorry to interrupt you. Are
we down to cooking chili now?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, let me cook chili. No, on the
dates -- like this Chili International, do you want us to
150
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
„-
19
~.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
keep the calendar on functions like that at the park also?
Like, July 1 of 2000? Is that going to be one -- I know
that's not a facility, but it is a -- it is property.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that -- I mean, under
the way we're going, that you need to keep it on everything,
including the garage sale we had on the courthouse square,
all that. And, it needs to come into the Court, or at least
certainly into this office so it can be available for all of
us to look at. I don't know that we each need a copy of it,
but I think that it should be everything, and I think that --
you know, the park, Ag Barn, Ag Extension Office, this
building and this grounds. I think everything should be --
you know, who's using what, and if there are, like, you know,
one or two people that will be using it. It may be
different, but anytime there's an organized -- like Union
Church, whatever. But, I think it ought to, and I think
that, you know, if have you a clerk or -- you have a
part-time clerk right now who's going to be a full --
MR. HOLEKAMP: She starts full-time Wednesday.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wednesday. That -- I mean,
it's pretty easy to keep track of all those on calendars, on
computers. I mean --
literate.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just have to be computer
151
"' 1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.-,
~_
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. HOLEKAMP: It would be real easy, yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The only thing remaining is
for you and I to finish our work on fees and contract items
and so forth.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: It's been moved and seconded that
we we approve the job descriptions. Any further discussion?
If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion. carries. We've done 18.
We've done 19. Item No. 20, consider and discuss approval of
contract between the Office of Court Administration and Kerr
County, and authorize County Judge to sign the same.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Baldwin,
seconded by Commissioner Letz, that we approve the contract
between the Office of the Court Administration and Kerr
County and authorize County Judge to sign same. Any further
discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
152
,~-~
~-
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Did we do 2.18 while I was
gone?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Some of us are committed
enough to be here on time. Some. of us need to be committed.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I can do that, too.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're in the right place.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Item No. 21 is consider and discuss
approval of the Kerr Central Appraisal District 2000 budget.
You all have a copy of the budget and correspondence in your
packets.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we approve.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Baldwin,
seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we approve the Kerr
County -- Kerr Central Appraisal District for the year 2000.
Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your
right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item is
consider and discuss the burn ban, pursuant to Subchapter Z,
153
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
Chapter 240, Local Government Code. By way of introduction,
I'll say this is part of the new burn ban procedure, and we
are able to adopt the burn ban for up to 90 days. We can do
that either based on the Texas Forest Service determination
of whether drought exists, or we can make our own
determination that drought conditions exist within the
county. As of September the 10th, the Texas Forest Service
was showing Kerr County in a drought condition. They'll also
-- by the way, the way I understand it, it authorizes us to
lift the burn ban at such time as the Forest Service
determines we are no longer in a drought condition. And,
it's my understanding that if we declare the burn ban based
on the Forest Service's analysis, we can lift the burn ban
without further action of court once that announcement is
made, and that's how we proposed it today. I really don't
have any strong feelings about doing it either way. This
happens to be the simplest way.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think that is exactly the
way we ought to do it, 'cause that makes it -- that's the
beauty of this bill, was that it gives you an objective
system to go by, but when you -- when you get wet enough that
the objective system says you're out of it, then you can just
stop the burn ban right then.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What triggers that? Do you
come into Commissioners Court and vote to --
154
/'~
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- to disband it?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think we can do it -- I
think the Judge can announce it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: As long as we say we're not
going to -- we can do it for up to 90 days. We can invoke
the ban for up to 90 days. If the system says that we are
out of the drought condition, then we can have it as part of
the provision that we're making in invoking the ban, when it
comes out of there, burn ban's off. If we -- I would just --
to clarify, in the event that, for some reason, the Texas
Forest Service falls down on its job and we've had two inches
or three inches of rain, county-wide, and it's obvious that
the burn ban ought to be off, we can come back in on our own
and take the burn ban off, but we have to vote to do that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, assuming the Texas
Forest Service does its job, how frequently do they notify us
of changes?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: This is posted on the
Internet about every three days. It looks like they are
adding sensors as they go along.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Their goal -- when I talked
with the guys over there, their goal is to eventually have it
where this is almost a real-time system, so that there's no
155
., 1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~-.
19
'- -
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
lag. But, right now, I think they're updating it about every
two to three days, but it gets updated, like, three times a
week or something of that sort.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's based on amounts of
rain?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It's the Keech-Byrum Drought
Index, the K.B.D.I.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And don't you forget it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I'll remember it.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It is a very -- it's a very
detailed, complex model that has mostly to do with soil
moisture, I am told, and -- but that it does measure
humidity. Amounts of rain falling in a particular area will
affect it immediately. In other words, it will affect the
index immediately if you get two inches of rain in a certain
area; that will affect the index. But, as this goes on and
on, what they're doing is they're adding sensors that are
sort of the like some aviation stuff, that are automatic, so
that they read those out all the time. And, eventually, they
hope to have it almost where it's real-time, where it will
lust be updated based on today's condition.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I know the U.G.R.A. had
these rain gauges, sensors, whatever you want to call them,
all over the county. Is it something similar to that? I
156
.-. 1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~--
~. _
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
don't see how that would work, because it would have to be --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you're talking about soil
moisture, it would have to be something on the ground.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think it's about three
levels of technology, about, above that old system you're
talking about that U.G.R.A. had, battery-powered and --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At a very minimum, three
levels.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah, that was not much of a
system. I think this is way beyond that. This is
solar-powered so that you don't have to worry about battery
conditions and that kind of thing, and it's -- and it's read
out by cellphone connection, you know, through cellphone kind
of connections. It's a very complex technology, but very
good. Objective, too, and that's the reason the Legislature
decided to go to this system, trying to get a little more
objectivity.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's -- I mean, it's
good. It's a good tool to go by. I'll reserve my final
judgment on it until after we've gone through it for a year
or so. A lot of these things tend to, I don't know, be
cumbersome for the County. You know, if we're in a drought,
we need to keep the burn ban in. And, the winter -- one of
my concerns on this -- it may satisfy all these problems.
157
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~-.
~_
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
When winter comes, a lot of times we're dry during January,
February, and it's also a time you need to be doing a lot of
prescribed burning. I don't have a real problem with that
index if it tells me that we can do rangeland burning,
coastal field burning when it's dry in December, like it
always is supposed to be. You know, I think that there may
be a way to allow for prescribed burns, burn bans and things
of that nature, but that's in the future we can worry about
that.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think if you go back and
look at the Keech-Byrum Index seriously, I think -- and, by
the way, on that -- on hindsight, where that thing is, you've
got history.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If you go back and look, I
think you'll see that, if anything, this is a little more
liberal in allowing burning than -- than the sort of
arbitrary system that we've used in the past.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The other question I have is
regarding -- does Section F, which -- the section does not
apply to outdoor burning activities. It lists three things;
firefighting training, public utility gas pipelines, and then
harvesting crops. I'm not real :sure how you harvest crops
with fire.
MS. SOVIL: Sugar cane.
•'-
158
.-. 1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
r
~. _
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's right out of the --
that is the bill.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question comes in and comes
to me -- or to my mind because I had a call last Friday about
a guy who's having -- some youth organization wanted to have
a little campfire, and our old bill said it could be in a
container for burning trash, primarily. We're not allowing
for any kind of container burning of trash in this, or
barbecue pits either, for that matter, in this, because it's
not one of the things listed. You can do three specific
items: firefighting, public utilities, and harvesting ag.
Anything other than that outdoor burning is illegal.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Isn't that -- I thought that
part of it that you're talking about, containerized burning,
is on that -- in our Court order that puts the ban in. We
still have to have a Court order.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, this isn't the -- this is
the legislation here? I'm sorry..
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought this was a Court
order.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So, we can put in the Court
order that -- I think that's normally where we would put
that --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're right.
,•-
159
"_" 1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
r
~.
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- is in a Court order.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is lust the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, didn't you put together
a new draft of a Court order that we would use? I thought I
saw one.
JUDGE HENNEKE: There's a resolution in your
packets -- or the order. There's an order in the packet.
It should be at the very beginning of this section, before
the bill.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: So, what we can do is we can tinker
with this order to allow --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Our using containers.
JUDGE HENNEKE: What do you mean by "containers"?
Are you talking about 55-gallon drums, burning their --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Burning trash. That's what
was allowed in the -- under the old system.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We didn't define "container,"
and this individual called the Sheriff and the Sheriff
referred them to me. And, we finally agreed that he -- I
mean, to let him put a bunch of .rocks and tin around a little
area, have a little fire for kids to roast wienies. I said
that was okay, in my mind. But -- I mean, but we didn't
define "container" previously, either, and it might have been
-- I don't know if we need to be that specific or not.
160
•`-
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
"Container" implies something relatively small; that's the
intent.
MS. SOVIL: Didn't they say "enclosed container"?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, I think enclosed
container.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Of course, you could cut the
top out of an 18-wheel trailer and have an enclosed
container, pretty good fire.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Did you say a "closed
container"?
MS. SOVIL: Enclosed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Enclosed. If you close it, it
won't last very long; be a real short fire. Whatever our
current language is, I think it's sufficient. I don't think
we need to try to define a container. I think common sense
-- there's some leeway for that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. But -- we'll have to add
that to this order, but we can do that. We can, perhaps,
adopt the order with the understanding we'll add language
permitting barbecues and fires in contained -- in
self-contained, enclosed containers.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
(Discussion off the record.}
JUDGE HENNEKE: We're getting a little far afield
here. Any further discussion?
161
"-' 1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.-..
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: One question. The new law
says we can put these things in for 90 days. Do we routinely
want to go ahead and go for the max and then take it off when
the index says we can or when we decide to come in and vote
it out? Or do we want to go for some period shorter -- it
just says up to 90 days. We can do 30 days or whatever, line
it up with Court dates so that -- when it's convenient,
toward the end of the period and whatever. That's just a --
JUDGE HENNEKE: To me, since it comes off
automatically if we use use the Forest Service Index or we
can take it off by Order, it doesn't make any sense to me not
to go the max, because that prevents us from having to have
further involvement if we need to when it expires.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Prolonged.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How does this Order that
we're talking about tie to -- well, we already have an
existing burn ban in effect.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Will this be an automatic
replacement of that?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Extending it for 90 days?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN:
All right. So moved.
Second.
r
162
-' 1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.-,
'- -
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Williams,
seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we adopt an order
restricting outdoor burning, based on the Texas Forest
Service determination that drought conditions exist within
the county, as amended to permit outdoor burning for purposes
of barbecuing or burning in enclosed containers. Any further
discussion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can, if conditions
warrant, lift this at any time -- you can lift it?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I can lift it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or we can lift it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I can lift it if the Forest Service
says drought conditions no longer exist within the county.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or we can --
JUDGE HENNEKE: We can lift it by meeting and
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
making that determinat
COMMISSIONER
on the same way, too.
Service says we're not
collective judgment is
long as we convene and
like we did in the old
COMMISSIONER
ion.
GRIFFIN: By the way, we can put them
If we think -- even if the Forest
in a drought condition, but our
that we should have a burn ban, as
vote on it, we can still do it, just
days.
WILLIAMS: Okay.
163
,~-~
~. .
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Actually, this is giving us
a lot more flexibility without cramping our style any if we
wanted to revert to -- any time we want to revert to the old
way of doing it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further discussion? If not,
all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'll note that this is effective
immediately, and it does supersede, but extend the current
burn ban, so there is no lapse of the existing burn ban. Do
we have anything else to take up today?
COMMIS3IONER BALDWIN: Can't imagine what it would
be.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll stand in recess until
3 o'clock, until we'll take up the appointment of the
Interim Sheriff.
(Discussion off the record.)
(Recess taken from 2:15 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: It's 3 o'clock on Monday, September
13th, 1999. We'll call back into session this regular County
Commissioners Court. There appears to be a remaining item on
the agenda which has engendered some issue. Tell the ticket-
164
.-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~. _
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
taker outside to charge the same amount for standing room as
to people who actually get a seat.
At this time, we'll take up Item No. 23, which is
consider and discuss appointment of the Interim Kerr County
Sheriff. The procedure we're going to follow this morning is
we're going to give each of the announced applicants five
minutes to make any presentation they wish to make, and
respond to questions for up to an additional five minutes.
After that, we'll go into Executive Session. The Court will
discuss among itself the applications. If there is a
decision to be made, we will return to open session and the
decision will be made at that time. We'll return to open
session in any event, but any decision to be made will be
made in open session.
I want to emphasize to everyone here that we're here for
the purpose of choosing an Interim Sheriff. It is not the
intent of this Court to any in any way affect or influence
the ultimate determination of who will be elected Sheriff by
the voters in the year 2000. The expectation of an Interim
Sheriff is that they will perform the duty fully and
faithfully, but they will keep in mind the fact that they are
an interim, and conduct themselves accordingly. For example,
we all know that the Kerr County elections have been largely
concluded at the end of the primary season in March. In the
event that there is no contested race for Sheriff in the
165
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
`_
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
November 2000 election, it would certainly be my expectation
that the Interim Sheriff, if that person was not a person who
was going to be elected Sheriff in November, would resign as
soon as the primaries were concluded for the purpose of
allowing the individual who is more than likely going to
become Sheriff to be named Interim and to participate fully
in the budget negotiations which qo on in the summertime,
which are an extremely important part of any elected
official's responsibilities to the citizens of Kerr County.
It is, of course, only an expectation, but I point it out to
you as an example of how an Interim Sheriff differs from an
elected Sheriff.
At this time, unless any of the Commissioners have
anything they'd like to offer, we will move directly to the
presentations by the applicants. It's my intent to go
through them alphabetically, which is as fair as I can do.
Does anyone have anything they wish to offer at this time?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I do not at this
time, but I would later on.
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. We all will be given an
opportunity to speak when the time comes. So, if there's no
further ado, we'll call upon Mr. Dallas Bingley to come
forward and speak to us for no more than five minutes, and
respond to questions. Before you start, Mr. Bingley, let me
lust restate again that we are not accepting public comments
166
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
•--
~_
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
at this proceeding. I think all -- each member of the Court
has had adequate opportunity to listen to the wishes of the
-- of the citizens as to how this process should proceed.
So, thank you for your application, Mr. Bingley, and welcome.
MR. BINGLEY: Thank you fox providing me with the
opportunity to put myself before you for Interim Sheriff. I
believe that I'm the most qualified candidate for the
position, based on my experience and education. That
experience isn't just in police work, but I've had a great
deal of investigative background as a detective and as a
sergeant of detectives. Investigative background and
supervisory background. When I was preparing to retire from
Houston Police Department, I was a Sergeant of Detectives in
the Major Offenders.
And, thinking about what I would do afterwards, I got
into private business. I had a security company, providing
security officers to one bank and then, ultimately, seven
banks. I also went to work for a computer company selling
computer hardware graphics and became a supervisor, and then
president of that company. So, I dealt with private industry
and making profit and understanding that there weren't
unlimited resources, as some street officers sometimes think.
In addition to those things, I have some experience in
corrections. I went to work for Corrections Corporation of
America, which is a private correctional institution, at a
167
~-'^
~-
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
facility with nearly 900 beds, went to work there as a
correctional officer and was ultimately promoted to
lieutenant. During any given shift, I'd be responsible for
the operation of that facility. And, that was a private
business who housed prisoners and made money, made
exceptional profit. I watched their stock skyrocket. I have
some keen insight into the operations of a correction
facility, in addition to all my experience as a police
officer.

And I think, finally, I believe that I'm the most
qualified person because I have no desire to be a politician.
I see this as an opportunity to provide my experience to the
taxpayers and the Commissioners Court, help run the Sheriff's
Department in an interim position, understanding that I'm not
going to be the permanent Sheriff. I will be there to
operate the Sheriff's Department during that period of time
until the individual is elected; then I would be there to
assist them in taking over the operation of the department,
and would hope to remain there in a management position.
That's my desires and experience. Questions?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Does any member of the Couzt have
any questions far Mr. Bingley? You're currently employed
where, Mr. Bingley?
MR. BINGLEY: At the Gillespie County Sheriff's
Department. I'm a deputy there. I'm their Crime Prevention
168
`_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
Officer, I'm Public Information Officer, and I've just
recently gotten involved in Crimestoppers and will be
Crimestopper Coordinator when the current Coordinator
retires, if I don't get the position.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why did you leave Kerr
County as a deputy sheriff in the past?
MR. BINGLEY: I wanted to get back out on the
street, and I didn't see that opportunity here. I went to
Gillespie County as a part-time deputy, found a position on
the task force paying $10,000, $12,000 more than I was making
there, and went to work for the task force. Stayed there
until D.D.A. pulled out, took about an $8,000 pay cut, and so
I decided to go back the Gillespie County as a deputy. And,
I'm happy there. The problem with Gillespie County is that
it's just a small department and not -- there's not a great
deal of upward mobility, or even lateral movement. And, this
would certainly -- if I don't get to remain here -- if I were
to get the position and then didn't get to stay in a
management position, it would certainly good look good on my
resume to seek another management position elsewhere.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When you were with
Corrections Corporation of America -- is that the correct
name?
MR. BINGLEY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Were you just in a
169
"' 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~. _
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
management position, or did you have some hands-on experience
in a jail facility?
MR. BINGLEY: It is a jail facility, and I began as
a correctional officer, you know, doing what any correctional
officer does. Same -- basically the same thing that they do
here, taking care of the inmates, move them around, and all
of those functions. And, then I was promoted to lieutenant,
and supervised those correctional officers and ran the
facility. But, I definitely had hands-on.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions of Mr. Bingley?
Thank you, sir.
MR. BINGLEY: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We appreciate it. The next
applicant is Michael Bishop. Mr. Bishop, will you come
forward, sir?
MR. BISHOP: Afternoon. My name is Mike Bishop,
and y'all have my resume and my application. Since you do
have that information, what I'd like to cover are some of my
expectations and goals and what I'd like to accomplish in the
next year. I made a copy for the Commissioners, because I
know I can't remember what I did 30 minutes ago.
(Handed document to Commissioners.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
MR. BISHOP: Thank y'all again for getting me out
170
,.-.
~.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of the air today; it was pretty rough up there. Basically, I
have several years of law enforcement experience. Also some
in the jail, when I was forced to do that, basically. I have
several hundred hours of education and training, both in law
enforcement-related fields: aviation, search and rescue,
recovery, a lot of different aspects involving law
enforcement. Basically, since you have my background, I want
to talk about how I'd like to change the department, or my
expectations and goals, from my experience here in Kerr
County in a couple other departments.
I think there needs to be a substantial reduction in the
personnel -- or the turnover of personnel. I've listed a few
different ways I intend to try to accomplish those goals.
Basically, employees need to be given a sense of job security
for themselves and their families. It's hard to get good
employees if they don't think they're going to have a job the
next week. That's pretty basic. Employees basically need to
be trained in the correct methods and procedures for doing
their lobs. Just because somebody makes a mistake in doing
their job, they don't need to be terminated for it.
We need to encourage some teamwork in this department.
Everybody needs to work together to accomplish a goal,
eliminate a lot of things that have been going on. And, we
need to have mutual trust; I mean, between officers and,
basically, employees. They need to all work together to
171
~..
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
accomplish one goal. We need to establish a solid working
relationship with all the agencies in Kerr County. We can do
that also by providing information and support to those
departments. We need to open the doors for all elements,
including trust, communication, understanding rules,
responsibilities, et cetera.
All the other agencies need to work as a team to better
serve the -- the citizens and the visitors of Kerr County.
We need to promote interdepartmental training between the
departments so we can all work together, use each other's
resources and the experience of the other departments. We
need to work with the Commissioners Court to utilize the
taxpayers' dollars in the most efficient way possible.
Y'all are the experts in the budget. Y'all have been
doing it for years; some of you, a lot of years. There's
nobody in this room that's worked the budget like that
before, or could be expected to blindly. I don't see a
problem with communicating with y'all in figuring out how we
can make the budget work, and making it work with the budget.
The Sheriff's Department in Kerr County is not a C.I.A.
operation, nothing top-secret. It's all open to the public,
and it should be. My tax dollars pay fox it; so do yours.
And, frankly, I want to know where it's going. I don't make
enough of it, and I want to know where it's going.
We need to increase and establish training for the
17z
--~
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
employees. Like I mentioned before, the multi-department
training. We need to use instructors from inside and outside
the department, bringing them here, training the people here.
We can also promote in-house training and act as host to
other departments.
I think, in Kerr County, we need to increase the patrol
deputies on the street. For as many years as I can remember,
there's always been an east, a west, and a central. Three
deputies in Kerr County at one time is not enough. We need
to figure out a way to change it around a little bit, put
more people on the street. I think we can do that also by
increasing and supporting the reserve program. And, a
reserve program is an easy thing to implement; there's plenty
of people out there that want to do that. That increases
manpower and presence, and it doesn't add to anybody's
budget. We need to use personnel and their time effectively.
Also, for the jail, we need to establish a work program
for the inmates. I don't see a reason why inmates can't go
out and pick up trash on the side of our highways. I'm tired
of driving down 173, 16, 91, and finding trash everywhere.
It doesn't cost any more to pay a jailer to be out on the
highway than it does to sit in the jail. We need to use
employee -- or, excuse me, inmates to clean up and do the
routine maintenance around the County; County equipment,
painting, clean-up, anything. And, they can do the same
173
`_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
thing around the detention facility.
It doesn't take anybody with any intelligence or a
college degree to clean and maintain and keep our jail
facility and County facilities clean. We don't need to be
spending money washing and cleaning cars; that's part of what
the inmates should be doing. I don't mean the ones that are
escape risks or problems to the public. I mean the ones that
are in there for simple offenses that are doing their time,
and they can be out on a detail and earning their keep in the
jail. That's all I have. Questions?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Mr. Bishop. Any
questions for Mr. Bishop?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: None.
JUDGE HENNEKE: The question I have, it looks from
your resume, Mr. Bishop, like you've been essentially out of
law enforcement since about 1999.
MR. BISHOP: Yes, sir.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Is that correct? What have you
done to keep current in what's going on in law enforcement
during that time?
MR. BISHOP: Basically, through the paper and
through the association I have with other officers in the
county.
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right.
MR. BISHOP: It's a pretty tight-knit group;
179
`_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
la
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
everybody sticks together. I know a lot of guys are still
here from the police department. And unfortunately not the
same one from the Sheriff's Department. Will I do
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question. In your
letter to Commissioners, the last paragraph says, "I do not
at this time wish to run fox the office of Sheriff." In the
vernacular of the world, that's called hedging your bet. You
want to expound on that a little bit?
MR. BISHOP: I really haven't determined whether I
would want to be a full-time Sheriff or run for the office
and keep it for four years. I have a pretty good job now. I
do enjoy it. I get paid to fly brand-new, half-million
dollar airplanes. It's not all bad. But, I do enjoy law
enforcement; I enjoy the camaraderie that normally is
associated with law enforcement, and I'd like to be part of
it. And, my employer has given me the go-ahead and the okay
to pursue this. If something changes in the future, then,
obviously, one would have to lose, 'cause it can't be done at
the same time.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is an ambitious agenda
that you put forth, in terms of your expectations and goals.
It's conceivable that you couldn't accomplish all that in the
interim period of time. I mean --
MR. BISHOP: You're correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In which case, you might
175
`_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
want to continue.
MR. BISHOP: Never know. I can't make that
determination yet.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions for Mr.
Bishop? Thank you, sir.
MR. BISHOP: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Our next candidate will be Joe
Davis.
MR. DAVIS: Good afternoon. I have prepared a
statement to make to the Court, and at the end of my
statement I will furnish each of you with copies of it so you
can use it, if necessary. I understand that the purpose of
my appearance here today is to share with the Court the
reasons why you should appoint me as the Interim Sheriff of
Kerr County to serve until January 2001. I feel very
strongly that this Court should appoint the person with the
highest level of qualifications to serve the County in this
transitional period, and that in order to properly inform the
Court of my qualifications, I will recite the following in
order to give you the most accurate information with which to
work.
My resume is attached to a document that Z provided to
you earlier. However, I will emphasize that I have studied
business administration, police administration, and criminal
justice at a number of universities in Texas. I'm a graduate
176
,~'~
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of the Texas Department Public Safety Recruit School, and
have completed over 1,900 hours of advanced training in
subjects ranging from narcotics, criminal investigation, swat
team training, and hostage negotiation, to human relations,
child abuse, and family violence specialty schools. I am
certified by the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement
Standards and Education, and I'm eligible for a Master's
Certificate; that is the highest level of police
certification available in the state of Texas.
I have over 30 years of law enforcement experience with
one of the most recognized law enforcement agencies in this
state and the nation. I was a Texas Ranger for 29 years of
my career, in which 13 of those years was serving here in
Kerr County. Prior to being a Texas Ranger, I was a Texas
highway patrolman for five years, and an intelligence agent
for one year. I've received the Department of Public Safety
Director's Citation, the Sons of the American Revolution
Commendation Medal, American Legion Law Enforcement Officer
of the Year, and numerous letters of commendation from Texas
citizens, local and County officials, Senators,
Representatives, and governors.
You must have effective law enforcement to provide
safety and security to the citizens of Kerr County. This
requires years of experience in the field to effectively
oversee this specialized skill. Cooperation and coordination
177
.~~.
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
with other law enforcement agencies is an absolute necessity.
I have that skill and experience. The Court must provide an
administrator with significant business skills in order to
evaluate a growing budget and a dynamic and fluid team of
professionals. That person must be able to coordinate
distinctly different areas, including jail administration,
field law enforcement, and public relations. I have these
abilities.
The Sheriff must be able to determine a budget from a
business perspective, looking for methods to cut costs,
maximize efficiency, determine sources for low-cost, quality
suppliers, and dovetail all these things within the budget
provided by the Court. I have this ability. Neither I, nor
any other person, can tell what I will do over the next 15
months. I cannot tell you what areas will be in need of
renovation or renewal. I cannot, in five minutes today,
describe for you how the Sheriff's office will or will not
change under my leadership.
What I will do is pledge to this Court and to the
citizens of Kerr County to put my 30 years of experience in
law enforcement and business education to work for this
County. I will pledge to build a department structure based
on ethics, integrity, loyalty, dedication to the County and
to each other, and a spirit of teamwork for the benefit of
our citizens. My mission will be to protect the life,
17a
T
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
liberty, and pursuit of happiness to all Kerr County
citizens. I'm open for questions.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Mr. Davis. Are there
any questions? Mr. Davis, I'll ask you the same question I
asked Mr. Bishop. Your resume indicates that you have not
been active in the law enforcement area since approximately
1993. What have you done to remain current in law
enforcement in the intervening five or six years?
MR. DAVIS: Well, I am active, even though I'm
retired. I currently hold a Special Ranger commission.
You're required to keep updated your firearms qualification,
and also keep updated with the present laws passed by the

Legislature.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, I do have one. Mr.
Davis, you cite that you are -- you cited in your resume and
you stated that you're eligible fox a Master's Certificate.
Reading other resumes, I note some of the candidates state
they do hold a Master's Certificate. Can you distinguish for
me eligibility and what's required to finish and so forth, or
what's the process?
MR. DAVIS: Yes, I will. I have my advanced
certificate. The only thing I have to do is to apply for my
Master's, and it's based on your years and service, which I
haven't applied for. I could have received it approximately
179
T
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
six or seven years ago. I lust haven't applied for it, which
I intend to do.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions of Mx. Davis?
If not, thank you, sir.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Our next applicant is Mr. Jack

Franklin. Mr. Franklin?
MR. FRANKLIN: Gentlemen, thank you for the
opportunity to be here. I've been in this Court a few times,
but on a different matter. The qualifications that are given
here by the eight people are vastly different. My
qualifications, if you will call them that, are a strong
business background. I have done retail, I've done
marketing, I've done oil and gas exploration, I've done event
management, I've owned and operated real estate, and on and
on and on in the business background. I've also taken the
State-required mediation training to do mediation, which I
feel could be a very large benefit in some of the things that
might be required of the Sheriff in this interim period. Let
me say that I have absolutely no intention of running far the
lob of Sheriff, and I would fully expect to resign at the end
of the primary should there only be one candidate. That
would not be -- you wouldn't have to ask that.
The other thing that I've done is event management for
180
~_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Promise Keepers, which sounds, in its sense -- how would you
put it? It's not exactly like law enforcement, but it's very
much like crowd control and mass hysteria at the same time.
When you have 70,000 men in a football stadium for a very
brief period of time, you have to do a lot of things very
quickly, make decisions in-flight. You have very large
budgets, million-and-a-half-dollar budget for a weekend. So,
we had to do a lot of things that I think would lend itself
to helping me if there were ever an emergency situation, in
particular, and I would rely on that. The size of the force
of the Sheriff's Department, the size of the budget of the
Sheriff's Department, calls for an administrator. It calls
for a law enforcement officer also, but it calls for an
administrator. My qualifications are in the administration
part of this.
Let me assure you of a couple of things. You can trust
my judgment. I don't make hasty decisions. I can make a
very quick decision if it's needed, but I don't make hasty
decisions. And, I know when to not make a decision and to
defer to others. I think those two things might be
beneficial. In the next 17 days, you will have a new Sheriff
in Kerr County. If you were to select me today, tomorrow I
would start to learn very quickly a lot about the operations,
personnel, and the budget of the Sheriff's Department. In 17
days, I would stand before you a much more educated person in
181

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
,.-~
that aspect. Not that I can learn law enforcement,
gentlemen; I'm not saying that.
The two items that I have, I think, discovered that
would be my first priorities as an Interim Sheriif would be,
first of all, the under-utilization of the Kerr County Jail.
We have a very nice facility. We have a very large amount of
money expended there and we have expenses to operate it, and
I think it could be utilized better. I have some ideas on
how that could happen. But, without additional details, I
don't think it would be even prudent to make them at this
point. And, the second thing would be employee turnover, and
I think that was addressed by someone else.
I don't know why the turnover has been high in this
county. I know very little about the Sheriff's Department,
and I think that might be my strongest asset. I don't have
any preconceived ideas about people or policies. I know
there's a problem, and I know how to look for problems and to
solve them. It wouldn't serve any purpose to criticize
what's gone on in the past, or the people or the personnel --
the policies. It would help us all to focus on the future
and what we can do to change it in a positive manner. That
would be my focus.
The real question and the real alternative that I could
offer to the Court would be that you would see me as a
consultant. I would be a Sheriff, yes. You have to have a
182
.~--
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Sheriff. But, I would take the job with the understanding
that the actions that I did would be with the advice and
consent of the Court. That's not the usual way, but I
understand that. My job would be to evaluate, to come to you
with recommendations, to sit down and discuss these matters,
come to an agreement, and go back and implement. I think
that could work.
To make this type of arrangement, two things would have
to happen. The persons that are the heads of departments
would have to be empowered to do their job, and trust them
and let them do it. Selection of replacements would have to
be careful. But, the real -- the important person in this
whole thing would the Chief Deputy. I would have to be
willing to, in essence, give most of my authority to that
Chief Deputy, who would have to be selected with wisdom.
I would be willing to do that. I can promise you that my
actions would bring honor to the job, and that I would
require that of the employees. Thank you for your time.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Any questions of Mr.
Franklin?

COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. So, you would see --
if you were the Interim Sheriff, you would sort of see a
blend of -- of two functions, sort of the administrative and
business side, and the Chief Deputy would be primarily
responsible for the law enforcement side?
183
,.-~
~_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. FRANKLIN: It's the only way it can function,
yes.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone else? Thank you Mr.
Franklin.
MR. FRANKLIN: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Appreciate it. Next applicant is
James Allen Hicks.
MR. MYERS: That's Hicks.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We thought you had a
bodyguard there for a minute.
MR. HICKS: I also want to start out thanking y'all
for the opportunity to be considered for this position. I
also want to make a public announcement that I have no
intention to seek the election of Sheriff. I have other
goals that I'm striving for, and the Interim Sheriff position
would allow me to further my experience, and hopefully have
that goal one of these days come true. What I can do is tell
you that I'm not a politician. I can't stand up here and
serenade you with a lot of fancy words and phrases. What I
do offer this Court and the citizens of Kerr County is a
hardworking, dedicated, conscientious law enforcement officer
that has the knowledge and hands-on experience in
administration to run this department until the citizens
choose who they do want for Sheriff.
189
,~-,
`_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
I've been an administrator for the Sheriff's Department
for approximately three years. For the last six months, the
Sheriff has given me the full authority to make decisions at
the Sheriff's Department. I've learned a great deal, and
feel with all confidence that I can fulfill this term. If
appointed, and the time comes that the citizens have chosen
the person they want for Sheriff, I'll gladly step down and
gladly assist that person to make an easy transition. If
appointed, I will strive to work with Commissioners Court and
not against it, and I'll strive to improve the relationship
with local agencies and the media, also. That's been a
problem in the past.
I come to you today with the support of 75 Sheriff's
Department families who've expressed to me their fears and
concerns. All the employees that came to me have said the
same thing. They do not want to go through two
administration changes. They feel that the best thing for
the department is to continue on with the way we're going,
which we have a great department. You know, we have a good
-- a lot of good things going our way. With that in mind, I
leave the decision with you. I'm not going to stand up here
and make a whole lot of promises; everybody knows what I'm
about and who I am, and I know whatever decision y'all make
will be the right one in your awn minds, and I'll accept
that. Thank you.
185
~_
1
2 questions?
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Mr. Hicks. Any
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mr. Hicks, in my visiting
around town, seeking counsel, there were a couple of things
that had popped up, and that is our jail situation and our
chief jailer situation, which I think is one of the most
important things that we do in this County.
MR. HICKS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, presently, your wife is
the Administrator over there?
MR. HICKS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would your relationship --
not your relationship with your wife, but your relationship
with the 7ai1 situation, would that -- how would that --
would it affect one another in any way if you became the
C.E.O. of the Sheriff's office?
MR. HICKS: No, sir. Pam and I have worked ten
years in law enforcement together side-by-side. We
complement each other. There's never been a problem. The
past two years, I've been the Chief Deputy for the Sheriff's
Department, and I have been her supervisor for two years.
There's never been a problem that came up that we couldn't
work out on a business relationship. We don't take our
business home, and we don't bring our home to the business.
So, no, sir there's no problem with that whatsoever.
r-
186
r-~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Hicks, you said lust a
moment ago that the employees in the department who are
supportive of your candidacy for Interim Sherrif do so in the
hopes that they will not have to go through two
administration changes?
MR. HICKS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that a correct summary
of what you said?
MR. HICKS: Yes, sir, it is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm trying not to conclude,
then, that you mean that everything is -- everything is lust
copacetic and that there would be no changes. What are you
trying to say?
MR. HICKS: No, sir, there will be a few internal
changes. There will be minor -- I've got a belief that I can
cut down in the employee turnover rate by implementing a few
new things; again, minor. For example, the schedule
changing, getting the personnel home with their families
more, bringing in-house training so that the whole gets
trained instead of lust a selected few, therefore driving
morale up, I would hope, and keep it up and have less
turnover. That would be my -- my goal for the -- whatever
the term would be in the Sheriff's Department.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
187
`_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
it
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have any questions.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Mr. Hicks.
MR. HICKS: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Next applicant is William R. Rusty
Hierholzer.
MR. HIERHOLZER: I also have prepared a statement
fox the Court, for each Commissioner. I, too, as everybody
else, would like to thank y'all for the opportunity to talk
to you today. I'm not going to repeat everything that's in
my resume, but I would like to highlight a few of those areas
that I feel make me the best qualified. I want to begin with
issues of management and administration.
We all recognize that even though the public generally
views the work of a law enforcement agency to be primarily
"catching the bad guys," and there is certainly a large
component of that to be done, it is equally important that
the department be run in such a way that the officers who are
charged with the responsibility of keeping those guys off the
street also have the equipment, training, and facilities to
get the job done. If they don't, expensive lawsuits to the
County could be incurred.
And then, while doing this -- managing all of this could
be a real challenge, especially when you try and do it within
the budget constraints that the County has to operate, it
could take practically a miracle. I'm not going to stand
188
`-
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
here and tell you that I'm a miracle worker, but I will tell
you that I have the most experience and training in this area
of all the applicants, much of it specific to Kerr County.
And, I will commit to you right now that, if appointed, I'll
do my best to increase the training levels in the Sheriff's
Department, reduce turnover, and improve morale so that Kerr
County will have one of best run law enforcement agencies in
the Hill Country, and I think I can do this within the same
budget constraints that are historically placed upon this
office. Furthermore, my experience and training in jail
liability issues will allow me to identify these areas and
correct those situations, hopefully, before any liability is
incurred.
,'^ .
Just to give you a couple of examples of how I'll do
this, I know several local prosecutors and other law
enforcement instructors on a state and local level who would
be willing to provide training sessions to the Kerr County
deputies at no expense to the County. Offering this kind of
training here in Kerr County, taught by highly qualified
instructors, could save the County thousands of dollars.
I also urge the Court to consider the budget for the Jail,
which runs approximately about $1.5 million a year. When
this facility was built, it was sold to the public as a
facility that would serve the needs of Kerr County, but would
also afford us the opportunity to receive income from other
189
.-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
counties when we house their prisoners. I've established
good relationships with several sheriff's departments in the
region and all over the state, and many of them axe willing
to house some of their prisoners in this 7ai1 if I'm Sheriff.
By my estimation, given our current average fail population,
I'd estimate Kerr County could bring in right at a half
million dollars in additional revenue each year from these
agreements. This would substantially offset the previously
mentioned budget, ox even the 7ai1 debt that we have.
Most of you know that I'm a career law enforcement
officer. I'm 40 years old and have been a certified peace
officer in Kerx County for almost half of my life. I have
worked for the three prior Kerr County Sheriffs. I hold an
advanced certificate in law enforcement, and I participated
in over 1,200 hours of schools and training, including the
National FBI Academy.
Just to touch on some of my other law enforcement
experience, I'm on the Board of Directors for the Hill
Country Crisis Council and received the Governor's Award for
Crime Victim's Assistance, as well as being involved in the
Kids Advocacy Place, a facility for assisting in the
investigation of child abuse cases. I have participated in
thousands of investigations, some of the more notable being
lead investigator in the triple homicide in Kerr County in
1992, and also participating in the notorious Geniene Jones
190

~.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
and the Slave Ranch cases.
A unique aspect of my experience will be -- or which
will also assist me in being Sheriff of Kerr County is that
I've had experience at all levels in the criminal process,
from the initial investigation through the trial of a case,
and even up to the appellate courts. I'm also a
court-accepted expert in blood spatter interpretation, crime
scene reconstruction, and fingerprint comparison.
A final area that I believe is crucial to good
management of this office is community relations. By this, I
refer not only to improving the relationship between the
Sheriff's Office and the media, but also improving the
relationship between that office and other departments within
the County. Some of this can be accomplished by working with
the Court to bring the Sheriff's' office under the same
computer umbrella as the rest of the county is. Were are all
public servants, and my mission will be to make the entire
Sheriff's Office more responsive to our employers, the
citizens of Kerr County.
In conclusion, I simply want to say that, even though
you have a difficult job before you, deciding between a
number of worthy applicants, I believe my experience in law
enforcement, management, and administration make me uniquely
qualified for the position of Kerr County Sheriff. I have
spent most of my adult life serving Kerr County in some
191
~.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
capacity in law enforcement, so I'm well-equipped to deal
with the practical side of how Kerr County operates. I have
already established good relationships with other departments
and agencies with which I would be working, and therefore
have a head start on bringing the Kerr County Sheriff's
office into the 21st century. And, I would like to continue
to serve the citizens of Kerr County as their Sheriff. I
want to thank you for the opportunity to the share those
qualifications with you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Mr. Hierholzer. Do we
have any questions for Mr. Hierholzer?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: None.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I have a question. I'd like for
you to detail for me your administrative experience.
MR. HIERHOLZER: My administrative experience. I
was the Chief Investigator with the Sheriff's Office for the
last several years that I was there. My administrative
experience in the jail comes from being one of the coauthors
of the first jail policy manual written out there when the
Sheriff first -- when the current Sheriff first took office.
I filled in as Jail Administrator every time there was an
opening after she took office, and I was, in a number of
those years, the direct supervisor to the current
administrator.
192
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~-.
~_
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. If there are no further
questions, thank you, Mr. Hierholzer.
MR. HIERHOLZER: Thank you, sir.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Next applicant is Thomas Mock. Mr.
Mock?
r
MR. MOCK: Gentlemen, I'd like to thank you for the
opportunity to participate in this process. I know this is a
difficult process. It's also unique that, in fact, we are
not going through an election cycle, but a -- a picking or --
an appointment is what I'm looking for. I -- you have my
resume before you. I'm not going to belabor it. I stand
before you as a candidate who has both supervisorial and
managerial experience. I have the certificates from the
Boards that I can produce. I come uniquely qualified. I'm
an educator as well as an administrator.
I'd like to touch on a few things, though, as I see this
process. One is, being that it's an appointment, unlike an
election process where personalities and organizations and
money take a play, appointment is based basically on
criteria. Those criteria can be valued, they can be
assessed, they can be handled and looked at. The absence of
any or all of these specifics isn't necessarily a detriment
to a candidate. However, I think it shows the applicant's
personal commitment in readying himself for a position if he
has those various attributes, education, experience, and the
193
.-
~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
positions held in the past.
The education exposes an applicant to various and new
concepts, which breaks him away from the traditional and
allows him to pursue avenues that can be innovative and
creative without, in fact, holding him back or being
inhibitive in any way. The department and the community
benefit from these new approaches. I'm very well aware of
and have taught and participated in such new innovative
programs as community policing. I have been involved with,
and through the school which I now teach at, San Antonio
College, the T.D.C.J. program -- which is Texas Department of
Justice -- alcohol and chemical dependency programs. I would
like to bring that to our correctional facility and see if we
can implement it.
We have many programs that, in fact, we can bring forth,
that we can produce. I think some of them -- it's been
touched upon -- we can make the jail, itself, a money-making
operation. It does not have to run in the red. I have never
dealt with a jail, per se, but I have those around me who
have, and they assure me that it can be done with bringing in
both the federal inmates, as well as the additional county
inmates in the surrounding area.
The applicants -- I'd also like to apply for, which is
my specialty, grants and applications, both at the state and
the federal level. They're out there; they're available for
199
~.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
specific programs to be used and addressed, which alleviates
the cost and burden to the County, itself, and it's spread
out over a much broader tax base. I don't have anything more
to say. If you have any questions, I'd be more than happy to
answer them.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Mr. Mock. Are there any
questions of this applicant?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have none.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I've got one.
MR. MOCK: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'm just curious, what --
what kind of course materials are offered in the San Antonio
College curriculum in this area in law enforcement?
MR. MOCK: Well, you can actually -- you can get
certified. You're ultimately certified through it. You can
go either the academic route, or you can go through the --
which is a separate and apart, but we use the same
instructors, per se.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I see.
MR. MOCK: Through the academy.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions? If not, thank
you, sir.

MR. MOCK: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Final applicant is Mr. Mark Myers.
195
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
•--
~_
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. MYERS: Everything they said. All right. Good
afternoon, gentlemen. I would not want to be in your
position right now. There's a difficult determination to be
made today. I've had a lot of time to prayerfully consider
my decision to apply for the Interim Sheriff position. And,
in doing so, I've come to these conclusions: An effective
Interim Sheriff requires a diverse background, which I have
narrowed down to four major areas: familiarity with Kerr
County and its citizens, fiscal responsibility, education,
and experience.
Kerr County offers a distinct challenge in the way of
people and terrain. In my six years as a resident, peace
officer, and businessman within the area, I've gained a vast
familiarity with Kerr County and its citizens. I may be a
newcomer by some standards, but make no mistake; Kerr County
is my home and the home of my children. I have a strong
sense of commitment to my community and an obligation to
serve with honor and diligence.
My familiarity goes further. I have an effective law
enforcement -- I have -- pardon me. I have already
established years of rapport with all the area law
enforcement agencies. Effective law enforcement begins with
interagency cooperation and effective communication. Fiscal
responsibility is also a factor which must be considered.
The Sheriff has an enormous responsibility to the taxpayers
196
.-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
.~'-
~-
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
of Kerr County. This is a domain which cannot be learned
with all the law enforcement experience and police schools in
the world. My knowledge necessarily comes from experience as
a businessman and as an elder within my church. I have built
two successful businesses from their inception. As an
ordained elder and trustee at my church, I am trusted with a
budget in six figures. To say that I have experience in
dealing with budgets would be an understatement. The budget
of the Sheriff's Department belongs to the taxpayers, and I
will always be mindful of that.
A professor once told me that education is a shortcut
for experience. I hold a Bachelor of Science degree in law
enforcement and police science from Sam Houston State
University. I received my academy training at the Houston
Community College Police Academy, and I've completed
college-level training in leadership, police administration,
police community relations, correctional management, criminal
law, and criminal trial procedures. Additionally, I've
completed all the education requirements for my advanced
peace officer certification, and am currently awaiting that
upgrade from TCLEOSE.
In addition to my formal education, I have gained the
wisdom of the streets and experience necessary for effective
leadership. I have seven years cumulative law enforcement
experience, five years in Kerr County and two years in the
197
.-.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
•--
~_
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
Houston area. I've received numerous commendations from
citizens and my respective departments for outstanding
service. I'm a problem solver. I'm a good communicator. I
have an enormous amount of experience in working with people
in a positive manner, and have made a good living in the
service industry doing so.
As if this were not enough for you to consider, at the
top of your decision-making process is the controversy of
choosing a candidate or a non-candidate. I am of the opinion
that the position of Interim Sheriff should be filled with a
declared non-candidate. I, like most, feel that to do
otherwise would give anyone considering candidacy an unfair
political advantage and would, in my estimation, constitute
an endorsement by the Court in the upcoming election.
However, I could be biased. I will not run for the office of
Sheriff if I am appointed. Further, you have it in writing
with my cover letter. And, I will tell you now, I will step
down -- should the Sheriff-elect be an unopposed race in the
November election, I will step down after the primaries to
insure that the new Sheriff can make a smooth transition and
can get involved with the budget process.
I will be fair, honest, compassionate, and professional.
I will maintain the highest level of integrity within the
department and in my personal life. I will keep an open door
of communication with this Court and the citizens I serve.
198
....
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~. .
Finally, I will work closely with the Sheriff-elect to insure
a smooth transition when he or she is sworn in. My goal is
to maintain a department that the Sherift-elect will be proud
to receive. I thank you for your time and consideration, and
I look forward to serving.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Mr. Myers. Does anyone
have any questions for this applicant?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Correctional
management.
MR. MYERS: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Could you tell us a little
more about that, please?
MR. MYERS: Basically, the course -- the courses
that I took in correctional management dealt with issues of
legal aspects of correctional management, reducing liability
within jails, prisons, et cetera, and also management of
personnel in those facilities.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN:
MR. MYERS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN:
practical --
In a classroom-type --
-- situation? There was no
MR. MYERS: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Myers, you cite in your
resume three years years of experience as a Kerr County
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
199
,~-~
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
~-
`_
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
deputy Sheriff.
MR. MYERS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: With numerous commendations
for outstanding service. What years did you serve, and why
did you leave?
MR. MYERS: I served from 1993 to 1996, and I don't
believe that it's any secret why I left. There were some
differences in opinion about the management styles and
techniques that were occurring at that time, and rather than
cause trouble or -- or be a sour apple, I decided, rather, to
pursue my business on the side further. I was also at a
point with my business that I needed to make a decision, as
well.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No questions.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No, sir.
JUDGE HENNEKE: No further questions? Thank you,
Mr. Myers.
MR. MYERS: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I do have one question for one
of them that I forgot to ask. Is that all right?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone have any objection if
Commissioner Letz asks a question?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question is to Joe Davis.
200
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Joe, I visited with you earlier, and you had -- you stated
that you had not decided if you were going to run for Sheriff
in the upcoming election.
MR. DAVIS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you still -- you still have
not made a decision in that matter?
MR. DAVIS: No. I can honestly say -- and I want
to be honest with the Court -- I have not made that decision.
I haven't thought that far down the line, to be honest with
you. I'm looking at the interim right now, and taking one
step at a time.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else? At this time, the
Court will go into Executive Session to discuss the personnel
matter that's before us. At the conclusion of the Executive
Session, we will reconvene in open session, and if there is a
decision to be made, that decision will be made at that time
in open session. So, if you all will excuse us, when the
room has been cleared, we'll continue.
(Discussion off the record.)
(The open session was closed at approximately
4 p.m., and an Executive Session was held, the
transcript of which is contained in a separate
document.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: It's 9:30 p.m. on Monday, September
zol
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
13th, 1999. Commissioners Court of Kerr County, Texas is
back into open session to consider the appointment of an
Interim Kerr County Sheriff. Do I have a motion to consider?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. You'll make a
motion?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes, I'll make a motion.
And, this is probably one of the most important things we do
as a Court, is when we have to act on behalf of all the
people of the County. And, that's what they elect us to do.
It's a representative form of government. And, I would like
to place the name in nomination for -- make the motion that
we select Charlie Hicks as the Interim Sheriff to fill the
unexpired term of Sheriff Kaiser.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I second that motion.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Griffin,
seconded by Commissioner Williams, that the Commissioners
Court appoint Charlie Hicks to serve as Interim Sheriff of
Kerr County for the -- until the -- for the unexpired term of
the current Sheriff, Frances Kaiser. Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to make one
comment, Judge, if you'd allow me, please. We have an
incredible group of men that have come forward to express
their wishes to serve this County, and I say thank you to
every one of you. There are many, many counties around the
zoz
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
,--
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
state of Texas that would love to have the problem that we're
having right now. Thank you very much. That's all I have to
say.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd like to comment just a
second. I think -- I think the interim appointment is of
such importance to the people of Kerr County that they
deserve to have a little insight into our thought processes.
I can only speak for my own. I would echo, at the outset,
what Commissioner Baldwin said about the quality of the
people who have applied. Extraordinary. Extraordinary
amount of competence and ability displayed, ability --
acquired ability, in terms of law enforcement, and that's
what the people of this county deserve.
I think there are two things -- two things, in my mind,
that are important. One thing that's important is that the
law enforcement agency continue to serve the people of Kerr
County at the highest possible level of efficiency over the
next few months. I think it's extremely important, to me,
that the people of Kerr County have the opportunity to judge
each and every one of you who are candidates on the basis of ~I
your qualifications. You duke it out and you tell those good
people why you are the one to serve the next four years for
them in the chief law enforcement capacity for this county.
I'm not doing anything differently today than I did when
we talked about what resumes to accept or not accept. We
203

~_
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
accepted everybody's. But, I personally have a problem
giving, if you will, if you'll excuse this, the "Good
Housekeeping seal of approval" to a candidate. And, in
effect, the Commissioners Court does that if we -- if we
would choose a candidate. But, that's secondary. I really
want the department to run effectively and efficiently and
provide quality law enforcement over the next several months,
and I want those of you who are candidates to get out there
and tell the good people of Kerr County why you should be the
next Sheriff.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Basically, I think, I just echo
what both Buster and Commissioner Williams have said. I
think we were very fortunate to have these tremendous
candidates. They're qualified. I think Charlie is certainly
qualified, very well-qualified, to run the department in the
interim. We do have an election coming up, the primary in
March, and I think it's up to the voters of the county to
look at those individuals that choose to be candidates and
make a decision at that time. I think that there is no
question that if we did choose a candidate, it would have an
impact to some degree in that process. And, we were ',
fortunate have an individual who was not a candidate who is
certainly very well-qualified to run the department, and I'm
in support of Charlie. I think he'll do a good job.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'd like to say that I think
209
~~
~-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
that my first choice in all of this was to hold a special
election, and probably there's some people who probably
wonder why we didn't. It's because the Constitution of the
State of Texas does not allow it. And, I don't know why, but
it doesn't. And, allowing, you know, the people to exercise
their choice in March, and perhaps Apxil, again, I think is
the way to do that. And then, of course, in November, they
will have a chance to vote in the general election if -- if
there is opposition. But, I just think this is a -- it's a
good choice for the County. I think we're going to be behind
the Interim Sheriff. We're going to be foursquare behind
whoever is elected next year. And, we think this is going to
work out well for all of us.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further discussion? If not,
all in favor of appointing Charlie Hicks as Interim Sheriff
of Kerr County, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Congratulations,
Mr. Hicks.
(Applause.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: If there's no other business to
come before this honorable Commissioners Court, we stand
.-~
adjourned. Thank you.
205
~.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
(Commissioners Court was adjourned at 4:35 p.m.)
STATE OF TEXAS I
COUNTY OF KERB I
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as
County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County,
Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 23rd day of September,
1999.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
BY: ~~~- ~L1/)'ufC
Kathy B ik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
URVEFa raU. c599c
I'RU4'USED TFiX RRl"E/RE CU RD VUIE
SE'1"'I"TNG F'U1NLiC HERF't1NU UN F'RUPOSED '1'RX Rfal-E
FCIR FISCRL YE4~R i993;~k~~t~
Un this the lath day of September 199':), upon motion made by
Commise>ioner Let r, seconded by Commissioner Uriffin, the Coi-irt
~-tnanimously approved by a vote of 4-~-Q~, setting the P~_iblic
Heetriny on I-'r•oposed lax Rate for 1-fiscal Year 1999ic~04'~ for
T~-iesday, September c1, 1399 at 1:34' p. m. The 1-~raposed 'I"ax
Rate Record vote was as follows: Commissioner Haldwin-yes;;
Commissioner Williams-yc~s~ Cortnnissioner f~rif'Fi.n-yesY
Commissioner Letz--yesq anti Coy-inty J~-idye (1=-red Henneke)--yes.
UFtUI_R NU.~599
f='U13LIC FiL:f-1RINU F='UR F='RUF'USED
ELECI'Gll OFF"ICIRLS SFaLRFdIES
FUR F ISCAI_ YEfaF2 1999/rU~L~
Un this the 1:]th day of SepL-em6er• 15399, ~.rpon motion mrade by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissiioner Griffin, the
C:oi_n•t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-a, setting
P~_rblic Hearing for proposed Elected Ufficic~ls Salaries for
Fiscal Year 1999/c04~~ for Tuesday, September c1, 1999 at
ic~0 p. in.
oRnF=R Nn. ,_s~~~4
F'UPL:[C HERF2TNG f=C7R F'ROF'C15E_[? BUDGE"f
FOR FISCRL 4'ERR 1999tL4"'~4'~0
On this thr_~ iath day oi= F~eF:rC.ember 1"539, ~_ipon mot;ior~ made by
Commissioner V.^iffin, sr"conded by Commissioner Let z, the Coi"rr~t
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-m, setting the hiearing
for the [='roposed F~"ic:lgei; for Fiscal l~'ear• 1999/E00N for• Tuesday,
5ept-ember cl, 1':)99 at 1:C~ p. m.

oHDEr~ rla. ~:;'~'
CLFaIMS 41Mll ACCOUPJTS
On this tl-ie i3th day o'f September 1339, came to be considered
by the G~ur'°t the various claims and accounts against Kerr
County and 'the various Commissioners' precincts, which said
Claims and Recounts are 10-General Hand for X84,838.48;
11-Jury Fi_md for S3, 186. 18; 14--Fir-e F='rotection Fund for
S6, •5~. Q~~; 15-Road & 8ridye F~_md for'• S38, 888. 18; 19-F'ubl is
Libr-ar-y Fund for• 886,80'8. i6; C•-JllVeil].le State Aid Fund for
Sc,913.87; r4-"traffic Safety F'~_uid for $580.4:'.; c7-Juvenile
Intensive Program--State Aid F~.md fur 8497.76; 50-Indigent
E-lealth Care for 8 3, 498.06; 70--F='ermanent Improvement for•
815,387.75; 7E,--Juvenile Detention E=acility Fund fUY• S1IJ.c:J;
81--District Rdministr•ation Fund for- 81,798.50; 8~-State
Funded-'816th District flttorney F"und for• 8681.71; 86--State
Funded--c:l6th District p'r•obaF.iarr F"und fnr 89,4'81.67; and
87--5'tate Funded-Community Corrections F~_md for• 81,851.38.
('T'OTAL ALL FUh~IIiS-8.:1 j, J~C~J. GJ)
lJpon motion made try L'ommissioner Williams, seconded by
Commissioner Raldwi.n, the Court ~_manimously appr^oved by a
vote of 4-0-0, payment of said Claims and Accounts as
recommended by the L'ount•y Auditor.
ORDER NO. :_'5996
BUDGET AMENDMENT
COUNTY Cl_ERF:
On this the 13th day of Septc>mbcar i'799, ~_ipon motion made by
Commissioner Letz-, seconded by Commissioner Paldwin, tl-ie
Coy-~r°t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, transi'erring
'b 942. 85 from Line Item No. 10-402-i08 Election
Judges/Clerks
b97.64 from Line Item No. 10-402-430 Election Notices
3.'78.00 from Line Item No. 10-402--460 Rental
~78.6E; from Line Item No. 10-40~r--4i3 Microfilm Processing
TO'1-ACING 31, 197. 15 to 1-WO Line Items No. 10-40'2-330 Election
Si_ipplies and Line Item No. 10-40"r_'-210 Ballot EH peilSe.
URllER NU. c5557
NUDGE"f RMENDMEN~
JUST"ICE OF l"HE pEHCE! #3
On thi_, t-he a~tl-i day of September 1,999, i_~pon motion made by
Commissioner Leta, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, the
Court unanimously approved by a vot',e of 4-0-0, transferring
58N.S0 from Line Item No. 1~-457-31'5 Naoks--F'i_iblications-llues
to Line Item No. 10-457--4c0 Telephone and transferring 5141.35
fi°om Line Ttem No, iN-f+5"r--31c llackd,ts K Forms to Line Item Na.
10-457-461 Lease Cnpier.
UF2DER N0. 259~(j
BUDGET' AMENDMENT
JUS'1-ICE Of= "fHE F'EACE #4
Un this the 1[,th day of September 1`99, upon motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Griffin,
the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-~D,
transferring ~c50.0~ from Lirie Item No. 1~-458--G1'~ DocF<ets 8
Forms to I_irie Item IVa. 10-45(3-'310 Ufl=ire ;;applies.
ORDER IVO. ~'5~399
RLJUGET RI+7ENllh'IEN-t
RO Etf~RN FRCILITIES
^n this the 1?,th day of September 1`3519, i.ipon motion made by
Commissioner Williams9 ser_onded by Commissioner Grii'fin~
the Coi.ir~t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0,
transferring ~47S.~E; from Line Item No. 1~-E6E-456 Equipment
Repairs to Line Item No. 1~--F,G6--;~'70 Capital O~-it lay.
ORDER IVO. c6000
PUllGE'T' AMENDMENT
COURTHOUSE R RELRTE:D PUILDINGS
AG N[aRN F(aCILI"PIES
(7n this the 13t1r da•y of September 1393, upon motion made by
Commis=_;ioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin,
the Ca~ar•t unanimo~.rsTy approved by a vote of 4-0-0,
transi=err~iny `G11,~'S0.00 i=r,om Line Item No. 10-510-104
Maintenance S~_iperintendent to "fWO Lane Ttems - E6,'c50.00 to
Line Item No. 10--510-451 .7ai1 Repairs R Maintenance and
X5,000.00 to Line :[tem No. 10510--450 Rep~_iirs R Maaintenance.
1'r~ansferriny 'bc,000.00 from Line Item Mo. 10-510--[=0c Group
Insurance tli Line ]:tem No. ].0-51V_i-350 5~_rppi.ies and $90.Hc f=rom
Line Item No. 10--666--4539 Misr_ellaneoi_is to Line Item No.
10-666-4c:0 Telephone and transferring X950.00 from Line Item
No. i0--6L"6-450 P~_iildiny R Ground Main'tenanr_e to Line Item No.
10-66f-4Qi0 Trash pic[u_i[;.
ORDER NU. c'6f~~1
BUDGET RMENUMEN"f
CUIrIMISSIUNERS' COURT
On this the 13th day of Septemt:~er 1999, ~-upon motion made by
Commissioner Let<., seconded by Commissioner Haldwin,
tt-ie Court- unanimously approved by a vote of 4-~-~D,
transferring ~i.N0.~4'~ from Line Item No. 1N-4N1-S71 Contingency
to Line Item No. 10-4~1-43f~ Notices.
URUER NU. ~600c
BUDGET AMENDMENT'
X161"H DISTRICT COUR"f
136TH DTS7'RICT CUUR"F
On this tl-ie 13th day of September 1`:399, ~"ipun motion made by
Commissioner L.etz, seconded by Conun:is!s:ioner Griffin,
the Co~_tr~t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0,
transfer•r-ing ~1rEi.~r:3 from Line Item No. 10--436-%+97 Coy"rr•t
'fl-anscripts tm Line Item No. 10-436--310 Dffi.ce S~_~pplies and
~~70.11 from Line Item No. 10-~r3~;--497 Coy"rr•t Transcripts to
Line Item Na. 10--k35-310 Uffice Supplies.
ORI)E:12 NO. c60N3
RUD~EI AME'NOMF_IV-f
COUNTY l-F2~RSURER
On this the 13th day of September 199:), ~.apon motion made by
Cummi.ssioner Let-~r seconded by Commissioner RaJ.dw~in~ the
Coy-art unanimoi_rsly approved by a vote of 4-~-Q~r transferring
#9.~3 from Line Item No. 10-497-108 Fart-time Salary
ffi~E,.AQi from L. i.rie Item No. 1~-491-5'7~ Capital Outlay
X6.5`, from Line Item No. 1~--497-4O~t "telephone
21c.k'~0 from Line Item No. 10-~r97-315 Rooks--F'~_~blicat ions--
ll~-ies
"TOTALING X53.98 lO Lind Item Nn. 1N--497-45Ei Machine Repair.
Uf2DEFt IVCI. c'60~4
BUDGET RNIENDMENT
120RD & BRIDGE
-RI)MIfJISTRA7'I(7N-UNIT SYSTEM
Un this the i:Jth day oi' September 1999, i.ipon motion made by
Commissioner Let.:, seconded by Commissioner Williams,
the Co~ar't unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-Qi,
transferring `b400.00 from Line Item Nn. 1~-6N0--4:;~T Notices to
Line Item No. 15-6~~--4~+V~ Uti:Lities.
ORDER I~IU. ~64'f05
FUDGE:"f RIhEIVDMENT
SHERIFF'S DEF'RRTMEhJI-
On this the i~th clay of September 1'199, ~-ipon motion made by
Commissioner LeL-w, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin,
the Co~_ir-t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-~,
transferring '14,F,45.SB f'1^om Line Item IVo. 10-560--104 Dep~-sties
Salary to Line Item IVo. 10-560--105 Secr'~etar-y S'alrary.

ORDER NU. 260~f
BUDVFT' RMENDMEN-f
CUUIV"fY JRIL
On this the 13th day caf September 1'~`l9, ul:x~n motion made by
Commissioner Let_, seconded by Commissioner t~rif~i'i.n, the
Court unanimously appr^oved by a vote of 4-~D-0, transferring
3`:3,N65.91 Prom Line Item No, 10--51'c-iN6 N~_{rses
36,843, 17 from Line Item No. 1~Z~-S1C--1~4 Jailer Salaries
TOTRLING 315, 9~9. N8 TO 'f'fiESE LINE T'T'EMS
3S,r~~tJ.N~ to Line Item No, irZ~-Sic:-3,33 [='r^isoner• Medical
34,N6S.9i. to L-ine Ttem No. ikt-Sic:-63S F'r•isoner- Transfer
347.74 to Line I{;em IVo. i0-S1.~'-7.1'c_' Over't:ime
36,:~~'.7..E~~~ 'to Line Ttem No. ].0--S1~-iL'~8 Part--time Sa1ar-y
34S.8N to L-ine Item IVo. 10-51.-.3:?:6 Indigent Care
URDER MU. c6UN7
E~UllGE"f RMENDMEN'7
JUSTICE Ur- THE F'EACE #
Un this the i3th day of September i799, upon motion madF_~ by
Commissioner^ Williams, seconded b•y Commissioner Paldwi.n, the
Co~_~rt unanimously appr^oved by a vote of 4-0-Qi, transferring
'6_`J0.47N from Line Item No. i~-4UG-14'~El Fart-time Salary to Line
Item No. i~-4`iG-42U~ l"elephone.
URUER NU. X6008
PUI)GET RMENll~IEN I
CUUNI"`f JUT?CiE
Un this the Toth day of September 1993, ~_rpon motion made by
Commissinner~• L_etz, >ec:onded by Cnmmissiuner (3rifi=in, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, transfer~riny
Si1~. i~ frnm tine :[t;em No. 14'x--400-108 Fart-timea Salary and
5178.04 from Line Item No. 14'x-4c6-486 ~'robzrte Seminar 1"Ul"t=1LINGi
5:~9~. 19 to Line item No. ]. k7-r+i2~0--~+8;5 Conferences.
nHUtH Na. ~~@@~
BUDGET RMENllMENT
DEF'RR1"MENT OC= F'UI~i_IC SR~ETY
Un this the 13th day of E3eptember i.933~ ~"upon motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin' seconded by Commissioner Griffin, the
Co~_ir-t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-@-@~ transferring
3•x.34 from Line Item No. iV~-`~8@-sr99 Miscellaneo~_~s to Line Item
IVo. 1@-58@-4"cc@ Intoxil.yzer• Telephone.

ORliER IVC1. cE~U1V~
NUDGL ]- RIhENllMEN"I'
L'C1UN'I'Y CLERK
Cin this the 13th day of September 19J9, ~_ipon mo~tiun made by
Commissioner Griffin, seconded by Commissioner L;~~~].dwin, the
Cu~_u^t ~_inanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, transfer'~ring
S3G8.35 from Line Item No. 1~-4N3-`iE6 Comp~_iter Supplies {:o
Line Item Nil. ].V~---443-4E;1 Lease Copier.
UF2DER IVU, r6N7.1
LH°f E: PILL
REINPUf2SEh1ENT/F'UST I_EGISLFlI'IVL CONFERENCE EXF'CNSES
t- RE:_li HLNNEKE
On this the 1~F.h day of September 1`.39'3, ~_ipon motion made 6y
Commissioner griffin, seconded by Commissioner- 6Jilliams,
the Co~_rr~t ~_manimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to pay late
bill and iss~_ie handcheclt to Fred Her~neke in the amount of


UI;llER NU. cE,07.'
Lfl7E }.+I L.L..
HILL'S flUUTIUN R t2ERL.`I"Y
On this the 13th day oi' Sepk:ember 199`39 ~_ipr.~n m~ation made by
Curnmissior7er Wi11i.ams9 ser.:onded by Commissioner Griffin' the
Co~.irt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to pay late
bill and issue tlfdlldC'heCt( 't;0 Hi ].l''s Ffi_iction R Reality in the
.amo~.~nt of tl, 3©~.4'~~~. ffor 4U, each 8' fold:iny tables)

DRIIER ND. ~'_E01~
R4'F'RDVE: 'ID ACCEI='l M1NIJ"fES
AIVD WAIVE READiN[i
Dn tl-ris the i~th day of September 1.9539, ~..rpon niot:ion made by
Commis=_inner t_etz, seconded by Commissioner Williams,
thie faa~.ir't fananimor_fsly approved by a vote of 4-~D-0, to
accept anrJ Wa1Ve reading of-' t;l-re f'ol.lowi.ny Mar"~lltesy Special
Session Cumrnissi.oners" Co~_rrt, Wednesday, August 4, 1999 -
1::~~ p. m. ; Rc.g~.flar Session Commissioners" Co~_rrt, Monday,
A~_rg~_fst 9, 1999 - 9:f~0 a. m. ; Special Emergency Session
Commission era" Co~.fr't, Th~_fr•sday, Ai_fgi_fst 1c', :1.99`:) - 11:ND a. m. ;
Special Session Commissioners" Co~.art, Monday, R~,ry~_fat ....3, 199'3
- 9: CC a. m. ; and Spea:ial Session Commissinr~er•s" Co~_rr•t, Mondaiy,
Ai_rg~_rst SN, 1999 - 9: N0 a. m.

ORDER MO. c6~1~+
RPF='ROVE F-11VD RCCEF'T MCINTI-ILY REPORTS
On tI-ii.s the i.3th day of Se pteRlbeT' 1999, came to be considered
by tkre Court the vario,_FS monthly reports of Kerr County and
Precinct Officials i=or N.err• Co,.mty. Upon motion made by
CommissionF~r Gri.ff:in, secznnded by f_;amm:issxaner L._etz" the C;o~_irt
,_manimously approved by a vote of 4-QF-0" that said reports be
accep{:ed avid filed with the Co,-Fnty Clerk for f,-Ft,-rre a~-Fdito
JP #3 -- Robert L. Tench
State Fees Report - Moni;h ol= f-1,-tg,-~st 1399
SP kk4 -- William E. RagsrJale
State F"ees Report - Month of O~-rg,-ist 1999
JF' #'~ -- Dawn Wr-'ight
S{:ate Fees Report -- Monttr of R,-~g,_FSt 1933
Kerr L'o,-mt;y Sher"lff"5 1Jep~ar•tment '-
.-., f=rances R. Kaiser
Ci.vi1 Report - fl,_Fg,.FSt 1399
Kei^r Co,-Fn{;y Sheriff" s Depai"{: rfleilt "-
F~'rances Ga. Y,a~i+aer
Monthly Report '-- J,_Fly i999
Co,-Fnty C1erF< -- J'annctt F='ieper
F'~-Ends collected -- F='robaitian 01'fice
,1,-i--ci'-3'-l thr,.x ,2,f3- i-7 _539
Upper G,-Fadal,-Fpe River R,-tthurity
t*lanthly Reports - R,_rg~..FSt 1999
.!F' #i - V<~nce R. Elliott
State Fees Re part - q,-Fg,_FSt 1333
Co,-mty Clerk -- Jannett F='ieper
Fees - trust F,-End Report
Mantl-, ending A,_Fy,-FSt 1399
Co,arrL-y Clerk - Jannct;t Pieper
Fees -- Genes^al F,_Fnd
htonth ending R,_Fg,-FSt 13'i)9
f~o,_rnty Clerk - J~_ir,nett Pieper-'
~"` Fines :imposed and collected
and J,_Fdgement5 1"C'i'IdeT'F'd in tl-re Co,_uity Co,.rrt
Mar,tk'~ ending R,_Fg,ast 19Si9
^ Cui_mty Clerl< -- Jannett F='iepei•
Trust Fund - f4or-rhhly Report
Ending the moist day of` Auyiast 1999
Co~.mty Clerk - Stinnett F-'leper
F~ttnds collected for F=h~'ob;ation Office
Period of ..7-221-99 thri_i ihti-17-'=39
Ro~_td n ~ar'idye
hlonthly Report -- f-li.iyi_i=_st 1999
~-
.i-•,
;F'E RO'.'E (Rf_1_..IIvIIIJi-Ill' F'L(1; [;1 J('V6_ `Jfi'.I_IcY
Ufl '1; 1"i 'iS '~;{lE 13th day o~F Sc•pte~n ,.=., ~... 1. ~~~`:39y ~_tpt.-rn mo~:ion madF_~ .y
Comm:>5101'iE,~Y` L'~:LL ~ 131f4,y ",P.CO11t1f341 lay ~,GfiUiil2S" 1Cii7•,.1" lJr'1'I'`':`li'y {';-C
i.:i;:;~_trt ~-manimuusly approved by a vote of 4-0-0, L-{-~e 1='r~:•i.inii ;:_~ry
flat, ul` A:)octi 'v'caa ey 1r3~_uiti.i.v:i.sii:ill.
i^
URDEFt NG. 'U64?~1E
F'REL..:fhCENRFtY FtFa'LRI 1-fdL_LaN6 WFafER
On this ttre ith day of fie pt ember 19`53, ~_rpon motion made by
L.ommiss,iorrer I_.eF:=, ssecorrded by Cc;mmis!:=goner iialdw>n, the Go~.rrt
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-Qr-0, the F'r•eliminar•y
heplat of 1=alliny Wa't el".
__~
DF2DER NCB. c601.7
REVISICIIV F"'LA'f, I_0'f c:, PL.OCK :. SUSCH ES'fF-1lES
On this i;he 13th day of September 139, ~_ipnn motion mode 6y
Commiss:i.oner HriFf:iri, 'seconded by Comrci:issioner Baldwin, the
Co~.irt unanimously approved 6y a vote of 4-Q~-0, tl-ie hevision oi''
F='lat, Lott c, Rlocltc, L~~asch Latattes.
ORDER IVU. E6N1B
PRELIMINAR'v f='Lil't BUCFCHURN LRi:E RESUR'f
Un this the 1~;th day of September 1993, ~_ipon motion made by
Commissioner (griffin, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the
Co~.rrt: unanimously voted 4-Q-Q~, to table this agenda item.
,..'~
-~
OftDEFt IV(_i. ~6@]. S3
RDOp"f ORDIh~if-1hdCE fr'F20HIL~I-fING 50CTll WFa~fk= DISf~OSFaL.
IN KERB COUIVI'Y
Ors this the l;;th day of 5eptember• 1'~95~, i_ipon motion made by
CUIIIm1s510il BF' 6T'1'F'h :Ln, sieCOn CIBd 6y Commissioner Will iain s, tt~ie
Co~_irt ~_manimously approved by a vote of 4-@-@, tabling
consider~_it:ion af' t;he proposed ordinance: until the E~eptemher
c7tl-~, 199`i, SFrecia7. Commissioners' Coi_irt Meeting.
ORDER NU. cE~cO
RERF'F'0IN'TMENT OF DR. SRM JUNN,IN
T"O THG HILL COUNT"RY COMMUNITY MHMR CEIVI-ER
EIURRD UF' TRUSTEES
Un this the 1~th day ofi September 1999, upon motion made by
. --_.: :.::.:, - --- ~': - Win` -
-_... ...-__--••-~ -----._::. >=_ti::u cu :_u...::~~l uitEk' nr,tT?its,
the Court unanimously approved by a vnte of 4-0-~:
reappointing Dr•. Sam Dunkin, to the Hiil Co~:r:try ~~--._-.__;
MHMR Center t_+oard of l'rustees and ai_ithorize the Co~.inty Dudye
to sign Roar•d Rppointment Form.
UI',DEft NU. 26U21
SL-( 4'='UEILIC I-IL.ARINU
I=UR E:S'1"RI3l_TSHING MININUIh INFRRS'TRUCTUf?C R[:(?UIftEMENI"S
FUR M~1NU(-"RC'R.JRED HUNS ft~NTRL CUhdh1UNITIES
Un this the 13th dc.y of September 1997, ~_ipon muti.an made 6y
Commissioner- Griffin, seconded by Commiss:i.uner Let z, the
C'oi.~rt i_uianimo~asly approved by a vote of 4-0-N, setting a
P~.iblic I-iet?.r•i.ny on the pruposE:d U1"(:ieY^ eFt~_;hli~~,hir~y miiiim~_un
irri'r~istruct~ar'cz ~:>tanrlards for mane-rFactur~ed homes in Kerr County
for 1'~_iesday, Octol3er the 12th, at i~ o'clock a. m.
ClfdDFR IVG. ~(,~
RCCEF'"f LAURINDR NCIYD'v t_F-f"fER OF- FdESIGNRTICIN
RS l"HL: F?L-''SERVAL-I(7NS AGENT
FOR "fHE HILL CCIUNTRY YCII.ITH EXHIExI PION CENTER
Cln this the i.3th day oi' Sept ernt,er• 1999, ~.rpnn mai::ion made by
Gammiss:ioner• Let: z, SiBCfaildE?d by Commissioner Willi<uns, the
C"o~_n^'~ unanimously approved by a vote of 4-m-0, acr.~eptiny
L_a~_irincl~i 13oyd's :Let~te.r- oi' resignation c~;s the Fdeservat-ions
Agent: for the F-li:L:L Co~_intry Youth E>chib:iti.on Center.

RE'P'ROVE t:E=1t F2 CEP•ITRRL F~F'F'RRISHL DIS'fF2IC`C crn2i2i L~UliGEf
Ors this th-~e 1~th day ofi September i993~ ~..ipon moti.cn made by
Co~tunis~s:i.nner }3aidw:i.n9 serznnded by Cnmm:issioner` C=;ritfin, the
Co~..ii•t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-~~ the I;er•r~
Central Rppraisal Uistri.ct F"i.,cal Year c:GryN~ B~..idyet.
UF2UE1~ NU. E6~._6
ORDER RE=a"ERIC"fI~IG UU"fl)C1UR f3URNINi
On tF~is the lUth day of Sel:~temt:rer• 199'x, ~_rpon moCion made by
Camm:issioner Williams, sec_orrder.J by Commissioner GriFfin, thre
Co~.u^t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, «dopting tt~e
order L,arrni.rry a1.1 o~_rtdaor bi_rr•niny in the ~anincor-porated area
of the c_o~_rnty for _~3N days from tyre date of zadop~tion o~F this
Order-, ~_rnless L-he restri.cti.ons ar^e terminated eal"17.e'r' based on
a rleterminat;ion made try the -texas 1="or-est ~3er•vi+-.~e or the
C o i_n•• t .
/'~
UIDE:R Nt:J, cEi ~[7~_7
RF'F'OihIFMErd-F' OF l:N'I`ERIhi SHERIFF=
( 7"U FILL l"I-IE UNEXF'IIRED l"ERM)
Uri this tF~e 13t1_~ day oi= September i`~3`79 ~"upon motion made by
Comrtii.ssi.i~ner• U~°ii`Pin, secondt_~d t,y Comm:i'ssi.oner' Williams, the
Cup"n•t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-Q-Q~~ c=,ppointiny
James Fallen F-lic4ts (Charlie) to fill thr_~ ~_inexpired term of
Coy"mty Sheriff.
Uf?DEF2 NU. ~GOc„
AF='PROVE SC7R DC:SC:RIF=''PIONS FOR
f=ACIL.I'1"IE5 USE f3ND MAIhJI'ENRNCE SUPERVISOR
F-RCIL.I`t'IES USE AND MAINIENRNCE f1S5ISTANT SUF-~LRVJ:SOR
FRCILiTIES USE AhlD MAIIV'I'I_:IVf-aNCE: (~LERK
On this thr-; 13th day of Se pte~mber 15399, ~_ipon mot;iurr madr;~ by
i~ommissioner 4Jill:iams, s~=conded by Comrnitss:itiner• Let z, tl-~e
Co~_irt ~_~nanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-~, the job
descr-iptior'is as presen't,ed for the F~_~cilities Use and
Mai.ntEnance S~,.ipervisor, tI°ie I''aE:rilities Use and Maintenance
Ass:isC-ant S~_iperv:isor" and the 1=acili.ties Use and Maintenance
L1erk.
UftiiF 1-; NU. c:6N~:~r
F1F'F'RUVF CUPdTRf1CT L~ETWE.EN
TFIE UFF=ICE. OF COURT (-aDMINISfF24iT1UIV i-1tdU I:ERt'. CUUNI"Y'
On this the 1,th day of September 7.`:35)3, i_tpon motion made by.
Commissioner-~ flaldwin, seconded by Commissioner- Letz~
tt-~e Co~_rrt ~"rrucxni.mo~_,s1y af:rpr°rrved by a vote of 4--Q~--O, the
Cnntr-act hetweerr the Uffiice of Co,..rr•t Fadmini=tratiorr ar-,d Kerr
Co,"arty and si_rthrri::ed the Co,"mty ,]'~..rdye to s:iyn same.