1
3
9
5
6
7
2
9
10
11
1 '?
13
14
15
16
17
18
1.9
20
21
22
73
~q
25
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONRA.S CO?.?F.T
Regular Meeting (continued)
Tuesday, November 9, 1999
10:00 a.m.
Commissioners Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
PRESENT: H. A. "BUSTER" SALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL"' WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
LARRY GRIFFIN, Commissioner Pct. 9
AASENT: FP.EDERICK L. HENNEKE, Kerr County ,judge
JONATHAN LF.T7,, Commissioner Pct. 3

2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
to
11
12
13
1.4
15
16
17
18
19
70
21
22
23
29
25
On Tuesday, November 9, 1999, at 10:00 o'clock a.m., a
continuation of the regular meeting of the Kerr County
Commissioners Court was held in the Commissioners Courtroom,
Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville, Texa.=., and the folloon:ng
proceedings were had in open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
COMMISSIONER WILI.IAMS: Good morning. It's 10 a.m.
I'm Commissioner Rill Williams, substituting for Judge
Henneke. We'll reconvene the recessed Commissioners Court
meeting of November the 8th. I think we have three items of
business to wrap up this morning. One has to do with the
assessment of computer bids and what action, if any, we take.
That's Agenda Item 2.10. Commissioner C,riffin?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. As we go through
this, here is a copy for each of you of the cover letters
that went out with the bid packages. This letter contained
all the instructions that the bidders would have to qo by.
You'll notice that there were even underlined portions, and
we foot-stomped a couple of items in there, you know, "Make
sure your bid is complete." This is the typical kind of
cover letter that goes on those R.F.P.'s for technical kind
of programs, and so we had, I thought, some pretty good
instructions.
We got four responr-es back that we received yesterday
afternoon, and then last night I went through each of the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.-.
13
14
15
16
17
]8
19
20
21
~~
~~
29
25
~.
3
proposals and -- and, in detail, using a subjective/objective
scoring system, I scored each of the proposa]s in the areas
t_hst you see, to include responsiveness to the R.F.F., an
understanding of the requirement, the technical approach, the
systems maintenance and support, system flexibility and
upgradeabilit.y, whic},, of course, is important in computer
buys and these kind of numbers, and, last, a system cost far
hardware and installation.
We had two proposals that -- as I say, that were
excellent, two that I would -- I would grade lower, primarily
because of the responsiveness to the -- nonresponsiveness to
the R.F.P., with clear instructions on what to do and --
which I think Were clear instructions on what to do. Two of
the responses -- I didn't throw any proposals out; in my
mind, I went ahead and graded everything. Rut, f.or example,
there is one proposer who no-bid a very critical part of the
system. That's the one you see the asterisks by there. That
was a part -- so that was received as a partial bid, which
the instructions said were grounds for kicking the whole
proposal out. I didn't do that; I went ahead and scored it,
but that number is not included, because they didn't cost the
whole system.
COMMISSIONF.P. WIhT7AMS: And that's vital to what we
alant .
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It's vital to what we want.
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
7.2
23
29
25
So -- so, at any rate, you see t_he scores there. I've got
the packages here if you have any questions. As I say, two
of the proposals were excellent. And, of those two, it -- it
essentially came down to a cost competition. And, the lower
cost that met all of the requirements, and my recommendation
and motion is that we accept the proposal from Computer
Service Center, Inc., and enter into negotiations for a
completed agreement and package for those computers.
COMMISSIONER RALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONEF. WILI~IAMS: Motion made and seconded to
accept the bid as analyzed from Computer Service Center,
Inc., of Kerrville, Texas --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- for goods and services,
and enter into negotiations for contract to acquire new
computers. Discussion? All in favor, say "aye."
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Any opposed?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONEP. WILLIAMS: We will be in touch, then,
with -- you will, Commissioner Griffin, be in touch with
Computer Service Center, Tnc.?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. That's Item No. 1.
Item No. 2 is to complete the Commissioners' nominations fer
F
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
]. 3
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2?
29
25
the Master Planning Committee, and the one remaining
outstanding was for Commissioner Griffin.
COMMISSIONER GP.IFFIN: Yes, and I did contact my
nominee, he'd be very glad to serve. His name is Ronnie
Gebauer, a long-time resident of Kerr. County, very hig in the
horse world, both he and his kids. He competes nationally,
and has lust finished helping Wichita Falls in a national
competition and an upgrade of their facili*_y in Wichita
Falls, and -- where they did things like economic impact
studies, and he's got all of that data, you know, for hotel
rooms and restaurants and in-flows to the economy, so I think
-- I think Ronnie will be an excellent addition to the hoard
-- to the committee.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, you're placing a
nomination in the name of Ronnie Gebauer?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And, he is a resident of
Hunt or Ingram?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, he lives between Hunt
and Ingram; I think he's probably considered Hunt.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Does the Judge lust accept
those names? We didn't have to do an individual acY_ion on
thern, did we?
MS. SOVIL: No.
COMMISSIONF.P. WILLIAMS: Well, then, that completes
6
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
the appointments for the Master Planning Committee. And, I
would ask Thea if you would put together, for Commissioner
Letz and for me, a complete list of a7.7 the individuals who
have now been appointed to the Master Plan Committee with the
addresses and telephone numbers so that we can get to work.
Appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would like a copy too,
please.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, absolutely, everybody
gets a copy. All right. That's r_ompleted. That takes us,
then, to Item 3, which is the litigation matter and the
retention of counsel. You had some words on that?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. I got a phone call
just before we convened -- reconvened from David Motley, and
he had spoken with the law firm that we had talked about
yesterday. They have agreed to make all of the changes that
we had discussed and that the Judge had raised, in
particular, into the agreement, and redo that and correct
same misspellings and some other things that were picked up.
They agreed to do all of that, with the exception of the fax
charge on the dollar per page. That does include long
distance charges. Ii it's a local fax, they don't charge
anything. So, that -- that would be the only thing. As long
as -- I feel comfortable with that. And, what they will ego
is, the law firm will -- will fax directly to here a redo of
7
1.
7
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
1.1
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
ghat proposed agreement, and they'r_e going to take off -- by
he way, they're just going to make it a normal sort of legal
ervir_es agreement and not have all of us sign that thing.
t ~~rill he fixed for the Judge's signature and it will be
ike anything else that we do, enter to that kind of
greement with just the Judge's signature.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We don't -- not all the
ties to that suit have to sign it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All right. So, we'll need
motion, then, to retain the firm of Denton, McKamie, and
avarro to prepare ---
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, if I may, Aill, I
think maybe -- I just have a feeling we want to see that
proposal before we -- oh, and by the way, you had asked a
question yesterday about the -- what's the estimate. They do
make -- they will make a budget input to us before -- as a
part of the package, so that. they will. estimate what they
think that cost will be.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: They -- so it will be a part
of the package. But, I suspect that we're going to have to
see that before -- we may just have to call a -- depending nn
how fast we have to respond.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was going to --

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
1D
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
2D
21
22
23
24
25
MS. SOVIL: You need to respond as quickly as
Bible.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. We have -- the sense
of urgency has to do with the motion to enlarye our time to
respond to the Plaintiff's Original Compliant.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think that's already been
done, but -- let me try to make a motion in this manner. I
would make the motion that we approve entering into the
agreement, contingent upon Judge Henneke feeling comfortable
with signing that. In other words, if -- if, for some
reason, he doesn't sign it, we might need an emergency
session to readdress the thing, but I don't think -- I think
he will sign it. I'm just saying if he didn't, you know,
what do we do?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. Yeah, kind of
between a rock and a hard spot.
MS. SOVIL: We're sitting at almost eight days
before the Judge even comes back to even address the
situation. Se, in eight da;~s ---
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We- need to get sarnet}ting
before then.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner, let me offer
a suyyestion, then.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just kind of discussing
Q
1
Z
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
this loosely. Why don't we -- why don't we consider
retention of the law firm of Denton, McKamie, and Navarro for
the purposes of responding to -- to presenting before the
Court a Motion to Enlarge Time to Respond to the Plaintiff's
Original Complaint?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That will get us the first
piece done. If there's any -- if the Judge -- and authorize
County Judge to sign same. And, if there is any problem that
the Judge has going beyond this initial response to the court
-- or motion to the court, we can deal with it before we take
on the second phase.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do I have to restate all
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Y'all can get together
privately and do that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That makes sense, that -- we
need to go ahead and get that first motion filed.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Motion made and seconded to
retain the firm of Denton, McKamie, and Navarro for purposes
of presenting to the court a motion to enlarge the timeframe
10
7
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
7.0
21
22
23
29
25
in which to respond to the action filed against the County.
Any further discussion? All in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous -vote.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Any opposed?
(NO response.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. That completes
the Commissioners Court agenda for November B, 1999. This
Court is adjourned.
{Commissioners Court adjourned at 10:10 a.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 15th day of November,
1999.
JANNETT PIEPF.,R, Kerr County Clerk
Kathy A ik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
ORDER ND.6111
RWRRD HID FOR COMPUTERS/RELATED EG!UIPMENT
RND SERVICE/MAINTENANCE TO
COMPUTER SERVICE INC., N.ERRVILLE
Dn this the 9th day of November 1999, ~.ipon motion made by
Commissioner- Gr^iffin, seconded by Commissioner- Haldwin, the
Court unanimously by a vote of 3-0-fn, awar^ded the bid for^
computer^s and r-elated equipment and service/maintenance to
Comp~_iter^ Ser'vice Inc., of I',er^r^ville.
ORDER ND. '61 is
LEGRL SERVICES AGREEMENT
TO RETRIN l"HE FIRM OF
DENTON, MCI:RMIE, RND NRVRRRO
On this the 9th day of November- 1999, upon motion made 6y
Commissioner Let z, seconded by Commissioner' Griffin, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of ~-0-0, retaining the
fir^m of Denton, McKamie, and Navarro for purposes of
pr^esenting to the court a motion to extend the timefr•ame in
which to respond to the action filed against the County.