1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Regular Session 10 Tuesday, October 10, 2000 11 9:00 a.m. 12 Commissioners' Courtroom 13 Kerr County Courthouse 14 Kerrville, Texas 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 PRESENT: FREDERICK L. HENNEKE, Kerr County Judge H. A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 24 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 25 LARRY GRIFFIN, Commissioner Pct. 4 2 1 I N D E X October 10, 2000 PAGE 2 --- Visitor's input (Paul Siemers) 3 3 --- Commissioners' Comments 5 --- Approval agenda 7 4 2.1 Appointment to 911 Board to fill expired term 22 5 2.2 Burn Ban 25 2.3 Revised Kerr County On-Site Sewage Disposal 6 Order, set public hearing for same 26 2.4 Road signage for county roads 30 7 2.5 Road easement-Rock Ridge Road, 200' frontage variance-Lots 61, 62 & 63, Glen Oaks No. 4 35 8 2.6 Approve road name changes 42 2.7 Final replat, Lots 33, 34, 41-47, Falling Water 44 9 2.8 Final replat, Lots 116-112, 123B, 123C, 136, 138, 139, & 141, Falling Water Subdivision 46 10 2.9 Final replat, Lots 64, 65, 90, 91, Falling Water 48 2.12 Open bids for gasoline for Sheriff's Dept. 49 11 2.10 Concept plan - Western Hills Subdivision 51 2.11 Construction of Courthouse Square parking 62 12 2.28 Legal description of county lakes 69 2.29 Approve court order establishing no-wake zones, 13 set public hearing 73 2.13 Award or reject gasoline bids, Sheriff's Dept. 75 14 2.14 Purchase laptop computer, 198th District Court 77 2.15 Engagement letter from Pressler-Thompson & Co. 82 15 2.16 Acceptance of LLEBG grant 85 2.33 Presentation, Texas Parks & Wildlife Indoor- 16 Outdoor Recreation Center Grants 88 2.17 Appoint Central Counting Station Manager/Judge 17 and Tabulating Supervisor per Election Code 102 2.18 Approve cost for copy of 2000/2001 budget 102 18 2.19 Discuss ADCR Plan, authorize Judge to sign 106 2.20 Request to appoint Brad Alford as Deputy 19 Constable, Precinct 1 107 2.21 Request for equipment, Constable Pct. 2 112 20 2.22 Request to fund equipment from 1999/2000 funds 112 2.23 Open House for District Courtrooms 119 21 2.24 Adoption of Conflict of Interest rules for Designated Representative 125 22 2.25 Service Contract-Drug Offender Education Prog. 127 2.26 11th Amendment & Extension of City/County Fire 23 Fighting Agreement, authorize Judge to sign 127 2.32 Temporary road closure, Hermann Sons Road 128 24 2.27 IHR "panic" alarm system for courthouse 130 2.30 Manufactured Home Rental Community section of 25 Subdivision Rules & Regs 137 2.31 Water Availability section, Subdivision Rules 150 3 1 On Tuesday, October 10, 2000, at 9 o'clock a.m., a 2 regular meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was 3 held in the Commissioners Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, 4 Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in 5 open court: 6 P R O C E E D I N G S 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: It is 9 o'clock on Tuesday, 8 October 10th, Year 2000. We will call to order this regular 9 Commissioners Court meeting. Commissioner Griffin, I 10 believe you're up this morning. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. Please stand. 12 (Moment of silence and pledge of allegiance.) 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. At this time, any 14 citizen wishing to address the Court on an item not listed 15 on the regular agenda may do so. Is there anyone who wishes 16 to address the Court on an item not listed on the regular 17 agenda? Mr. Siemers? 18 MR. SIEMERS: So many things I -- Paul 19 Siemers, HC-1, Box 156N, Hunt. So many things I'd like to 20 talk about, but this morning I'm here as a representative of 21 the Sane Water Policy Coalition. You have a copy of the 22 letter I'm going to read. This is addressed to Judge 23 Henneke and the Commissioners Court. By way of this letter, 24 the Sane Order Policy Coalition is informing you of our 25 ongoing petition drive. The petition, a copy of which is 4 1 attached, is asking you -- asking that you participate in 2 and establish a moratorium on the development of golf 3 courses in Kerrville, Kerr County, under -- until a water 4 supply base master plan is implemented. The Sane Water 5 Policy Coalition began as seven individuals concerned about 6 the way unbridled development and growth is negatively 7 affecting the quality of life in Kerrville and Kerr County. 8 Our immediate concern is on proliferation of golf courses 9 and their disproportionate use of water. We believe that 10 since we live in a semi-arid region that has been designated 11 a priority groundwater management area, and three golf 12 courses already exist in Kerrville, use of up to a million 13 gallons of water a day for a fourth would constitute water 14 abuse. We believe that the Kerrville City Council, Kerr 15 County Commissioners Court, and the Headwaters Underground 16 Water Conservation District, collectively, do have the 17 authority and responsibility to assure that development and 18 growth are consistent with available resources. By working 19 together, you can prevent the abuse of our most precious 20 resource. As of today, over 1,500 people have signed the 21 petition to save the water. Signed, Paul Siemers, spokesman 22 for the Sane Water Policy Coalition. Thank you. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Is there anyone 24 else who would like to address the Court on an item not 25 listed on the regular agenda? Seeing none, we'll turn to 5 1 the Commissioners' comments, and let's start with 2 Commissioner Griffin. 3 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Just it's so good to 4 see all the rain. It was still raining when I left Hunt 5 this morning, and my rain gauge had almost 4 inches in it. 6 So, it's just a great thing. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Absolutely. Commissioner 8 Baldwin? 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just wanted to echo 10 Commissioner Griffin's comments, that we see on the 11 television where the aquifer has risen 3 feet, and they're 12 expecting another 1 to 2 feet rise, and I know that just 13 really angers the liberals. They don't have -- they have 14 nothing to whine about, nothing to gripe about now. So -- 15 that's all. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Williams? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm like the rest of 18 you guys. I'm much thankful for the rain we got. After 19 all, those folks in Precinct 2 want to burn, get rid of 20 their -- 21 (Discussion off the record.) 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Letz? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I really don't have any 24 comments either, other than echo the same, and I'm glad to 25 say for once, the eastern part of the county had more than 6 1 the west had. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Outstanding. Two or three 3 things I have to mention. First of all, thanks to everyone 4 for their assistance with the Volunteer Fire Appreciation 5 Dinner, which was last Friday. We had a very fine turnout; 6 we had over 300 people there. The support from the 7 community was overwhelming, which is what you expect from a 8 community such as Kerr County. To date, the donations to be 9 distributed amongst the volunteer fire departments exceeds 10 $66,000, and those will be distributed tomorrow. So, a very 11 fine turnout on behalf of the community in support of the 12 people who helped put out the extremely dangerous fires we 13 had around Labor Day. 14 Also, I'd like to recognize Steve and Linda 15 Ables, who were named as Baylor parents of the year last 16 weekend at Baylor University, an honor well-deserved. And 17 also, I'd like to recognize Judge Ables for having been 18 named the outstanding criminal law judge in the state of 19 Texas by the State Bar of Texas Criminal Law Section. So, 20 congratulations to Judge Ables, and to Steve and Linda on 21 their well-earned honors. Without any further comments -- 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A question. On the 23 distribution of the fire money, is that equally? 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Some of the gifts have been 25 earmarked, as was the one from the Sheriff's brother. Some 7 1 of them have simply come in to be distributed among the -- 2 the 20 volunteer fire departments that participated in the 3 effort. So, they won't be distributed necessarily equally, 4 but generically those will come out about the same. So -- 5 and then we still look forward to the opportunity to seek 6 reimbursement from FEMA, because it was declared a federal 7 disaster -- federal fire. Okay. Moving right along, let's 8 go to the approval agenda. Mr. Auditor, do we have any 9 bills to pay? 10 MR. TOMLINSON: As always we do. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone have any 12 questions or comments regarding the bills as presented by 13 Tommy Tomlinson? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, go ahead, please, 17 Commissioner. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you so much. 19 Page 6 and Page 1. I want -- we want to talk about the 20 Express News, but I want to get over to something kind of 21 serious, dear to my heart. Page 6, the very bottom item 22 there, Terry Fischer, $900. This is the Child Service 23 Board -- Welfare Service Board. And, in the years that I 24 have dealt with this board and their function, I have never 25 seen a bill this large, and when I saw the $900, one of my 8 1 little alarms went off. And, through the Auditor's office 2 and the Treasurer's office and County Attorney's office, we 3 have researched the thing out. 4 And, to me, what it is, is the -- the bill is 5 for the needs of the child. And, the Child Service Board 6 money -- the county money that goes there is to be paid for 7 items that are -- the needs after federal and state money is 8 depleted. And we don't have a specific list of things 9 that they pay for. We just kind of, you know, look at each 10 case as we've gone down the line through the years. But, 11 this particular one is for therapy sessions for a child, and 12 the state and federal money offers a certain level of 13 therapy, but this particular person chose not to go that 14 route and to seek out special -- a special therapist. Same 15 thing with dental work; there's some dental work in here 16 that they chose not to go in a regular dental way, but chose 17 out a specialist with dental. There's an automobile -- some 18 automobile insurance, and it kind of goes on and on. And, I 19 just -- I just believe that these items are outside the 20 scope of county money. 21 I am not in favor of paying this particular 22 bill. And, what I would like to do -- the County 23 Attorney -- there he is -- and I have been visiting, and 24 what I would like to do is get permission from the 25 Commissioners Court to work on the contract with the Child 9 1 Welfare Board and see if we can't sit down and actually put 2 in the contract specific items that -- that the County 3 will -- will pay for. And, as you know, they have a 4 turnover over there in that board occasionally, and it's 5 hard to find people to serve on these boards and that kind 6 of thing, so it's -- you know, they have a new board in 7 there, and I don't -- you know, this is their first time 8 out, and they just never have been through the kind of thing 9 before. And, I -- but I think it's -- I think we need to 10 spell it out specifically, what this County will pay for. 11 Mr. Attorney, would you like to come forth? Or fifth? 12 MR. LUCAS: The Child Welfare Code authorizes 13 counties to set up a Child Services Welfare Board, which all 14 of you know. Furthermore, it says that certain monies can 15 come out of the General Fund or from any other fund in order 16 to fund the Welfare Board. So, that's the basis where we 17 need to start in all of this. However, there's good law 18 that's been around for a number of years. In fact, the 19 leading case is actually from 1951, and it's what all 20 counties follow, and I -- essentially, I'll just read this 21 one sentence that measures it all up. "Expenditure of 22 public funds is jealously guarded by the Constitution, and a 23 Commissioners Court has no authority to make any gratuitous 24 grant of funds or to the use of public credit for the 25 benefit of an individual." 10 1 And, of course, the specific constitutional 2 provision that they're speaking of is Article 3, Section 52. 3 It's certainly something different when we have funds that 4 go for, I think, what Mr. Baldwin is speaking to, that are 5 specifically set forth in the contract between the Board and 6 the County, that can be applied to everyone, rather than a 7 specific sum going to some individual. And that's 8 essentially what we have in this case, and I believe the 9 Commissioner articulated that perfectly from where we are 10 and where you guys need to go from here. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, I'd like to hold 13 out that bill and go from there. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else? 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. On Page 1, 16 San Antonio Express News. I just -- through the years, we 17 have brought this up numerous times, that there are certain 18 areas in the county that -- that should -- the County should 19 be paying for newspapers, and certain areas that should not, 20 and I just have a question on this one. I remember last 21 meeting, we decided not to pay for the subscription of the 22 Kerrville Daily Times for one of the J.P.'s, and I'm 23 wondering if this one falls under the same guidelines or 24 what. 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I thought we did 11 1 approve -- didn't we approve that for the J.P. because of 2 notices? 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: No, we didn't. 4 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Oh, okay. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This -- I think it goes 6 to -- you know, maybe we haven't been real clear on what our 7 policy should be on that, but this one -- incidentally, for 8 the public, this is under Commissioners Court where this 9 came up. I think Barbara has looked at this issue and has 10 -- you know, certainly has a printout that I looked at of 11 how many copies of various papers we're getting; mainly the 12 Mountain Sun, Daily Times, and Express News. And there are 13 a lot of issues going out in the county, and I really don't 14 think, other than maybe two general copies for the 15 courthouse -- and one, I think, should be in 16 Jannett's office, probably more than anybody else, because 17 she has to keep track of the notices. I don't know that we 18 need any of them. I mean, I really think it's more of a 19 personal -- you know, if someone wants to buy the paper, 20 that's fine, but I don't think the taxpayers should pay for 21 it. I can't imagine any reason we should buy the Express 22 News, unless there's a notice being published and we need to 23 get a copy of that one notice. And the Mountain Sun, I 24 think we should have two copies of that or whatever we 25 figure the correct number is, but I just don't think that 12 1 it's appropriate for us to spend money on newspapers. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I would have to take 3 exception. Kerr County's not an island, and I use the 4 Express News heavily to keep track of what's going on in the 5 counties around us, so -- Bandera and Kendall and Kimble and 6 Comal and -- and San Antonio, areas which have a direct 7 effect on what happens here in Kerr County, and I personally 8 do not feel that the expenditure of $163 a year is excessive 9 for the ability to stay informed as to what goes on. There 10 is a reporter from the Express News who regularly reports on 11 Kerr County; Steve McCormick, he's up here a lot. I don't 12 think it's unreasonable for to us keep track of what's going 13 on in the counties surrounding us, and also how our own 14 county is being reported in the major newspaper in this 15 area. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, you say $163, 17 but -- Barbara, what is the total of all those papers that 18 the County's taking for all three subscriptions county-wide? 19 MS. NEMEC: In a 2-year period, it's over 20 $2,000. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So it's not an 22 insignificant amount of money. Were talking about a lot of 23 money the County is spending on newspapers, you know. And I 24 wouldn't have a problem -- maybe we do need to get a 25 courthouse copy of the Express News, but to have them -- you 13 1 know, as many as we're getting, I think, is just -- you 2 know, I think it's unnecessary. 3 MS. NEMEC: As far as the public notices 4 and -- and things like that, when you put a notice in the 5 paper, if you request a tear sheet to be sent with your 6 bill, the newspaper will do that. So, if -- if any elected 7 official needs to see what's been in the paper, they will 8 send that with their bill. In most cases, they do it 9 anyway. 10 MS. PIEPER: But I have a rebuttal to that, 11 because it has happened to us. When it needs to be put in 12 the newspaper on a specific date, we need to look at the 13 paper on that date, because it has not appeared. And -- and 14 that will give us the next Saturday or next Sunday to 15 republish that, to call the publisher and -- and say, "Hey, 16 guess what? Our ad is not in there like it should be." Or 17 our public notice. So, we have to look at the paper the day 18 that it's supposed to be out. 19 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think that's -- we 20 need to actually look at the paper as printed. 21 MS. PIEPER: Right. Because that -- 22 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: In a legal sense. 23 MS. PIEPER: -- there was one public notice 24 that was for Commissioners Court that somehow, because of 25 changeover in personnel, employees at the newspaper, our 14 1 public notice failed to get in on the day it was supposed 2 to. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't think the 4 issue is whether we should subscribe or not. The question 5 is probably how many copies do we need to take care of our 6 needs? Certainly, Commissioners Court should have one. The 7 Clerk's office should have one. Maybe somebody else should 8 have one. But if we're having excessive copies or copies in 9 every other office, maybe we ought to take a look at how 10 many we're subscribing to. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, I -- I would go 12 along with the Judge. If the Judge has a requirement for 13 the -- for good information that he gets from the paper -- 14 and it's there for the rest of -- of the people in the 15 Commissioners Court area to look at, of course. I would go 16 along with this expenditure, with the -- and with the 17 proviso that maybe we need to just look at all of the -- if 18 you could bring us back the list of all of the subscriptions 19 to newspapers that we have, then we can make, as a policy 20 decision, maybe at the next session, sort of how many should 21 we have and how should they be distributed and so on. But, 22 I wouldn't take this one off the bill paying. I would leave 23 it. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Barbara, you can run 25 that list and target -- identify those departments? 15 1 MS. NEMEC: Sure. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll agree with the 3 Judge. On the issue of looking at surrounding counties, 4 particularly relating to Mr. Siemers' letter here on 5 moratoriums, I noticed in the San Antonio Express News that 6 Comal County has a moratorium on development. How they do 7 that, I have -- haven't figured it out quite yet, 'cause I 8 called them and asked them, and they have been unable to 9 tell me. But, of -- but I simply go over to the cafe next 10 door and eat lunch and read their free newspaper. And they 11 have three copies lying there all the time. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have a problem 13 with it -- I mean, with this one. I mean, if -- you know, 14 if there is some value in having it. I just think we need 15 to look at the overall issue. I think it's a lot of money 16 we're spending, and I'm not sure, you know, who the right 17 people are. I think it's an issue that we've not been 18 consistent on, and we're not being consistent right now. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, that's the end 20 of my questions. At this moment. 21 MS. NEMEC: I remember a couple of years 22 Commissioner Letz had me quit getting the Wall Street 23 Journal. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just don't like 25 newspapers. 16 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oops. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone else have any 3 comments? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, I had a question on 5 Page 6. And maybe -- Page 7. And maybe I've just never 6 noticed this before, which is probably the case. Under 7 County-Sponsored Activities -- 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I noticed that, too. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Generally, I thought we 10 gave the -- the entities a lump sum and then they paid 11 disbursements, but this appears like we're paying -- we're 12 paying the individual bills, it looks like, for the 13 Historical Committee -- or Commission. 14 MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, we're paying him 15 individually for reimbursement. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We pay -- I mean, 17 traditionally, how we -- do we pay the actual bills when 18 they come in? Or -- 19 MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, mm-hmm. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the one I had a 21 question on is -- I think the specific one is the H & F 22 Trophies, plaques and engraving for past chairman. I was 23 wondering if you knew what that -- I mean, we've had -- I 24 just have a problem -- I mean, I don't see why we should pay 25 for that, unless it's something -- unless it's not 17 1 accurately described as a past chairman plaque. 2 MR. TOMLINSON: I don't remember. 3 (Discussion off the record.) 4 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I also see that that 5 -- that 10-by-8 cast bronze plaque probably -- that's a 6 pretty whopping charge for one trophy and engraving. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would imagine that's 8 for some building; I can see a building plaque coming to 9 that. But, it's just the past chairman plaque; that's the 10 one that jumped out at me as the -- the description. 11 MR. TOMLINSON: It doesn't describe it in 12 the -- well, it just says it's a 16-by-8 cast bronze plaque. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 16-by-8? 14 MR. TOMLINSON: It's signed by General 15 Schellhase. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Which one are you 17 dealing with there? 18 MR. TOMLINSON: $258, the one -- 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. 20 MR. TOMLINSON: 117791. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How about the next one, 22 the -- 792? That's one I had a question on. 23 MR. TOMLINSON: It's for seven, so $24.50 24 each. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: For seven plaques? 18 1 MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. And that's also 2 signed -- and it is actually addressed to the Commission. 3 It's not -- not an individual. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you feel like this 5 is budgeted money and we're just simply paying the bill? 6 MR. TOMLINSON: We typically pay bills for 7 Historical Commission. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll go -- 9 MR. TOMLINSON: We typically pay bills 10 submitted by the Historical Commission; that's authorized by 11 the chairman. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, okay. That 13 answered my question. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any others? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move we pay the 16 bills. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: As amended? 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As amended. 19 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Holding that one? 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, holding that one 21 Commissioner Baldwin mentioned. 22 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 24 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we approve 25 the bills, except for the $900 for Mr. Fisher under the 19 1 Child Service Board. Before we vote, though, I've raised an 2 issue on Page 2 with Tommy on Friday. Did you have a chance 3 to look into that? 4 MR. TOMLINSON: No, I haven't. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which one? 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: The court reporting -- 7 special court reporting services. After you've had a chance 8 to look into that, let's get together. Any further comments 9 or questions? 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You want those pulled 11 out? 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: No. No, not at this time. 13 (Discussion off the record.) 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or 15 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 16 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 18 (No response.) 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Okay. 20 Budget Amendment No. 1 regarding the Court Collections 21 Department. 22 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. This is an amendment 23 for -- for the budget Year 2000-2001. It was an oversight. 24 The $6,000 that was paid to this department by -- for 25 services by their Adult Probation Department was not 20 1 included in the -- in the original budget. What -- what's 2 being requested is -- is amounts totaling $6,000 to be 3 included in -- in the line items on -- on the amendment. 4 The other side of that would be the increase in -- in the 5 revenues of $6,000 dollars. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions or comments? 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It comes from the 8 Adult Probation? 9 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that's the same 11 thing as community supervision and correction? 12 MR. TOMLINSON: Same thing, yes. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 14 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 16 seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we approve Budget 17 Amendment Request Number 1 for the Kerr County Collection 18 Department. Any further comments or questions? If not, all 19 in favor, raise your right hand. 20 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 22 (No response.) 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Any late 24 bills today? 25 MR. TOMLINSON: I have one, from Stoddard 21 1 Construction. It's for $113,031.90. This is being 2 encumbered to last year. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Has it been approved by 4 Mr. Longnecker and Mr. Walker? 5 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, I have their signature 6 on this bill. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 10 seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that we approve payment of 11 the late bill payable to Stoddard Construction Company out 12 of last year's funds. Any further questions or comments? 13 If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 14 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 16 (No response.) 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this 18 time, I would entertain a motion to waive reading and 19 approve the minutes of the special emergency Commissioners 20 Court meeting on Tuesday, September 5th, the Kerr County 21 Commissioners Court special session on Tuesday, 22 September 5th, Kerr County Commissioners regular court 23 session on Monday, September 11th, Kerr County Commissioners 24 Court and U.G.R.A. Board of Directors joint meeting on 25 Wednesday, September 13th, Kerr County Commissioners Court 22 1 special session on Tuesday, September 19th, and the Kerr 2 County Commissioners Court special session on Monday, 3 September 25th. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 5 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 7 seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we waive reading and 8 approve the minutes as recited. Any further questions or 9 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. We 14 apparently do not have any monthly reports to accept at this 15 meeting, so let's move to the consideration agenda. Item 1 16 is consider and discuss appointment for 911 Board to fill 17 the expired term of Dave Ballard, effective October 1st, 18 Year 2000. Commissioner Griffin. 19 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. As I'm sure 20 everybody is aware, in the rush of business, we had a term 21 on the 911 Board expire. This was the seat that was -- 22 initially we had appointed Gloria -- the Court had appointed 23 Gloria Anderson to. She moved away. We appointed David 24 Walker to fill that board position. He moved away. And 25 then, just recently, we appointed Dave Ballard, and that 23 1 term technically expired on September 30th, so we -- we need 2 a replacement. And, I want to make the motion that we 3 reappoint Dave Ballard of Hunt for the term that would run 4 from October -- well, actually, it would run from today. Am 5 I technically correct on that? It would run from this date 6 to 9/30/02. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a 2-year 8 term, so it'd go back to the 1st. 9 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah, right. Okay. 10 So, it's the 1st of October. First of October to the 30th 11 of September of 2002. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 14 Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that we appoint 15 Dave Ballard of Hunt to serve on the 911 Board for a term to 16 expire on September 30th, the Year 2002. Mr. Ballard, 17 you're in the audience. Would you come forward and 18 introduce yourself and -- 19 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I would like to 20 introduce David Ballard to the Court. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good morning. If he's 22 got anything to say, now's the time. 23 MR. BALLARD: Any questions? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you going to move? 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Don't move. 24 1 MR. BALLARD: No, I'm not going to move. I'm 2 staying here. I'm not campaigning for this job, but I'd be 3 glad to help the 911 people achieve their goals. And that's 4 about all I have to say. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: There's been a lot of 6 discussion about the pace of the addressing. Do you have 7 any comments that you would share with the Court about how 8 you think that can be addressed? 9 MR. BALLARD: Having been -- served on the 10 board for six weeks, three of those weeks I was on vacation, 11 I haven't quite put my arms around it yet. But, we're 12 going -- in fact, at 10 o'clock -- to begin off-line 13 discussions on that subject and how to keep score, how to 14 build a work plan, and how to communicate, and overall 15 improvement of the -- of the 911 guys. And, I think we've 16 got the talent, but I think we could spruce it up a little 17 bit. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Good. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sounds good to me. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone else have any 21 questions of Mr. Ballard? 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a comment. 23 Mr. Ballard, thank you very much for serving our community. 24 I've heard nothing but good things about you. 25 MR. BALLARD: I hope it continues. 25 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, me too. Of 2 course, it's all been from Larry, but -- 3 MR. BALLARD: And I have one other comment. 4 If there is a comment to be made about the performance, 5 please let us know. We don't want to read about it. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fair. 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Thank you. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Mr. Ballard. Any 9 further questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise 10 your right hand. 11 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 13 (No response.) 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Thank you, 15 sir. Next item is Item Number 2, consider and discuss the 16 burn ban, which would expire on its own, I believe, on 17 October the 17th. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move we rescind the 19 burn ban until further notice. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 22 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, that the Court 23 rescind the burn ban until further notice. Anyone have any 24 questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your 25 right hand. 26 1 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 3 (No response.) 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number 5 3, consider and discuss revised Kerr County order on On-Site 6 Sewage Disposal and set public hearing for same. 7 Commissioner Griffin. 8 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Judge, a little change 9 in what we had originally intended here, in that we had 10 intended to -- or hoped to be able to have a -- a new rule 11 drafted that could be accepted by the Court and set a public 12 hearing. However, in doing some research, what I did was 13 went back to the source, back to T.N.R.C.C., and downloaded 14 off the internet a complete package that each of the 15 Commissioners now have in your possession. This -- this 16 particular version of the T.N.R.C.C. rule has all of the 17 updates that are current. Our current -- our previous 18 document that we had on file here in the Court was lacking a 19 few paragraphs, but some of them are rather key, and so 20 these are -- this package that you now have is the complete, 21 up-to-date, T.N.R.C.C. rule. 22 And, in going through it in some detail, it 23 occurred to me that this -- it is a very complicated 24 document in one sense, and that is that it refers back and 25 forth. You have to put the whole picture together to see 27 1 what the T.N.R.C.C. was driving at in the rule. For 2 example, it talks about how to calculate the area required 3 for drain fields, and it says so much -- there's a formula 4 that you go by, depending on the type of soil that the drain 5 field is going in. But then it says -- there's another 6 little area where it says that that area must be twice as 7 large -- the area that you actually put it in must be twice 8 as large as the area required by the formula for the 9 requirement, so you have to read this very carefully. And, 10 what I wanted to suggest that we do is that -- and I know 11 it's not real good bedtime reading, but I suggest that we -- 12 we, the Commissioners, really go through this, ask questions 13 of each other. I'll be glad to try to help where I can, 14 because I have gone through it in some detail just recently, 15 but let's review this and really understand it before we try 16 to draft a rule for the Court -- for the County, because we 17 need to know what we are departing from before we depart 18 therefrom. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And I would hope that 21 we can really make a study of this; perhaps as early as the 22 next court session, we may try to go for a draft. If we're 23 not ready, I would suggest that we wait until we are, and 24 let's get this -- and if we have to schedule a workshop to 25 discuss some of the nuances of how this all lashes together 28 1 and how it refers back and forth, I think we ought to do 2 that, but we need to get it right as we can, obviously. 3 And, so, I would hope that we would just go study this 4 document and really understand it, and then proceed with the 5 draft of our order. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sounds like a good idea. 7 I'd almost really like to propose that we do a workshop on 8 this, and basically do the Subdivision Rules at the same 9 time at that workshop, 'cause they're very related -- 10 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- from a development 12 standpoint. And I think we're -- you know, one of the 13 difficulties in the large document is to get to where you 14 can just focus on one document. I know we have two chapters 15 of the Subdivision Rules on the agenda today. I broke them 16 out that way so we can -- we could try to focus on two 17 issues. Every time we get the whole document before us, we 18 go off in a hundred different directions. But, I think a 19 workshop -- if I can get direction on these two items that I 20 have later on, we can probably do a workshop on both of them 21 in, you know, maybe an afternoon and really be able to 22 devote time to go through it, you know -- 23 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I agree. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- section by section. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with you, 29 1 Commissioner. It's not good bedtime reading. It's not even 2 good daytime reading. And I hope we can get past this 3 argument that the Judge had with T.N.R.C.C. people about 4 what a "designated representative" is, because it's pretty 5 clear it's an individual, as the Judge said it was, but the 6 T.N.R.C.C. didn't think so. And there's some other things. 7 I think Commissioner Baldwin just highlighted one that I 8 highlighted too, in terms of the population of the county in 9 relation to the -- the authority for permitting and -- and 10 maintaining the aerobic system. Where are we in that? You 11 know, are we 40,000 or under, or are we 40,000 and above? 12 And how do we do that? 'Cause that does affect a lot of 13 people and how we treat that particular issue. I think we 14 ought to have a workshop. 15 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I would just point 16 out, by the way, their definition of what an individual is 17 is in here, and it is a single, living, human being. So, I 18 would like to argue with T.N.R.C.C. what an individual is, 19 based on their definition. A single -- a single, living, 20 human being. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Is it the consensus of the 22 Court that we have the workshop at next regularly scheduled 23 meeting? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Which will be the 23rd, in 30 1 the afternoon, of both the O.S.S.F. order and Subdivision 2 Rules? 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That would be fine with 4 me. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. 6 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved -- it 7 requires a motion? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just do it. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Just schedule it as part of 10 our regular agenda. Okay. Next item is Item Number 4, 11 consider and discuss road signage for county roads. 12 Commissioner Baldwin. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You remember a couple 14 of meetings ago, the problem of colors of signs for private 15 roads and public roads came up, and there was a -- I don't 16 remember. Seemed like Commissioner Letz brought in that the 17 local resident engineer for TexDOT stated that we could not 18 use red signs for the -- for private roads, and you assigned 19 me the task of finding out what -- what is and what ain't. 20 And, as you see enclosed in your packet here is a note from 21 Mr. Modisett -- that's an aide for Representative 22 Hilderbran -- which says that he's right, we can't use red 23 signs on state right-of-ways. So, I'm -- I'm just going to 24 suggest that -- you know, it's obvious we can't use them. 25 We have -- I don't know how many we have up at this time. I 31 1 know that we have invested some money in that, and how all 2 this happened I don't -- I don't know, but I don't want to 3 reflect back on that. I just want to pick up the ball and 4 go from here on. And would I think that what we would do is 5 that, when a sign gets damaged, that we would replace it 6 with a correct colored sign, whatever that color might be. 7 I prefer burnt orange, but -- 8 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I don't. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I know. Can we land 10 with green over here at the Judge? 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Green. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: I like red, myself. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, it's difficult, 14 because there's not many sign colors we can use. We can't 15 use blue, green, red, brown, yellow, or white, 'cause those 16 are all reserved for TexDOT -- various types of signs. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Sounds like maroon's 18 the only one left. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Blue and gold would 20 work. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The option that we can 22 use is one of those above signs with the stripe on them to 23 make it look different, or -- you know, but that is -- 24 doesn't -- looks kind of confusing, and it's hard to tell 25 the difference between a -- a stripe peels off and, to me, 32 1 opens up another bunch of problems by putting the red stripe 2 on the sign. So, you -- I wish we could, you know, come up 3 with another sign that we can use -- another color. The 4 only two colors I can think of, really, are orange and 5 maroon. Makes no difference. 6 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Half-and-half? 7 MR. JOHNSTON: I think orange is taken. 8 That's a construction -- 9 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Do you have any 10 suggestions from your experience, Franklin, on a color that 11 we can use that might work? 12 MR. JOHNSTON: Not really. Orange, I think, 13 is a construction color, so you can't use it. So -- 14 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Good. 15 MR. JOHNSTON: I'd look at purple. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Franklin, have you talked 17 to any other -- I mean, certainly, the -- it's come up in a 18 number of other counties, 'cause everyone has private roads. 19 MR. JOHNSTON: I drove to Austin last week 20 for their County Engineer meeting. I noticed Blanco and 21 Travis County used red signs on the rural route, Gillespie 22 County. So, it's common use. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, they're all in 24 the Austin district. We're in San Antonio, and they're in 25 Austin. And on here it says, "It is unclear why the Austin 33 1 District allows that to happen." But -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But our people won't -- 3 our district won't allow it, so -- 4 MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah, our district won't. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We have a problem. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think green and 7 gold is a good compromise. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: I would suggest that the Road 9 and Bridge come up with a solution. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's something we need to 11 do quickly, because this is in both the 911 Rules and 12 Subdivision Rules. 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we can't -- you know, 15 where it says that, we have to come up with an answer. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Ask the Road and Bridge 17 Department to bring back a recommendation at our -- at our 18 October 23rd meeting as to the -- 19 MR. JOHNSTON: Does anyone know where the 20 custom of green for the county roads and blue for city 21 streets comes from? Is there any statute or anything on 22 that? 23 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think it's in the 24 state -- whatever they call that thing. I think it's in the 25 state book. 34 1 MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah. 2 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I know I've seen it 3 somewhere. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's in the same book 5 that y'all use, yes. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: TexDOT -- I mean, I think 7 Kendall County uses brown. But brown, I know, are for park 8 signs, as I recall, or something like that. Maybe brown 9 will work. I mean, maybe it's not -- the state may let us 10 use brown, even if it is for parks. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We might coordinate 12 that with TexDOT to see what TexDOT says about it, too. And 13 maybe ask them why is it our district don't allow red, while 14 Austin does? That's -- we ask the question of the TexDOT 15 people. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree that Road and 17 Bridge needs to come back at that at a later time, but I 18 think we need to come to some kind of agreement today of how 19 we replace those. And I think that the only time you 20 replace them is when they've been torn down or knocked down 21 or whatever. 22 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: As required. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We don't want to go 24 out there and just, blanket, change things. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. 35 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see a bunch of heads 2 nodding, okay. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else? Okay. Next 4 item is Item Number 5, consider road easement for Rock Ridge 5 Road and a variance to 200-lot -- 200-foot lot frontage on 6 Lots 61, 62, and part of 63 in Glen Oaks Subdivision Number 7 4. Mr. Johnston. 8 MR. JOHNSTON: I think you have a little plat 9 in front of you on that. Two and a half platted lots that 10 they want to replat into two lots, 1.08 acres and 1 acre. 11 The 1.08 has the 200 foot of frontage. The other 1-acre lot 12 has 139 foot. And we also found that Rock Ridge Road -- 13 which is a platted County road, it's been in existence for 14 at least 25 years that I know of, that I've driven on it -- 15 is actually outside of the road right-of-way. That 16 encroaches slightly on the property of the lot with 17 1.08 acres. We have a prescriptive easement, but if we 18 grant a variance, it might look better in the future to have 19 a written easement for that existing road on that property. 20 I think the owners are probably here today. They might have 21 some comments on that. But, that's -- that was the 22 observation I had as far as this replat is concerned. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Ms. LeMeilleur, are you here 24 representing the owners? 25 MS. LeMEILLEUR: Yes, Your Honor. 36 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Would you like to make some 2 comments? 3 MS. LeMEILLEUR: Yes, thank you. My name is 4 Lynn LeMeilleur, and I am here on behalf of John Wiley 5 Wilkerson and Linda Wilkerson, who are the property owners. 6 The purpose of the initial letter to Mr. Baldwin was to get 7 the feel of the Commission on the request for the 200-foot 8 minimum frontage requirement before the owners went further 9 with the surveyor and additional plat work. We do believe 10 that this variance would not impact development in any way 11 adversely. The owners presently own two and a half lots. 12 This, effectively, would turn it into two lots. The purpose 13 of doing so is that Mrs. Wilkerson's mother is an older 14 woman. She'd like to be able to be near her daughter, and 15 they would be selling the additional lot to her so that she 16 could build a home on it. 17 The exact configuration of that lot is still 18 a little uncertain, simply because the Wilkersons have done 19 some landscaping on the property, and they would -- they may 20 need to change the alignment a little bit before the 21 preliminary plat is submitted for the Court's approval. 22 With regard to the road, the Wilkersons were not aware of 23 the encroachment until they bought the property, and then 24 the survey showed that the road encroached on their 25 property. Their request was that the road not encroach on 37 1 their property, as you can understand. This does limit the 2 use of the property. It inhibits any way to put a driveway 3 to the house so that cars entering their home can get off 4 the road. So, we would prefer not to have the road on their 5 property. If that's a requirement by the Court, we would 6 want to look -- consult the different utility companies that 7 have an easement over that same area to make sure that they 8 would not require additional easements from our client. 9 They're already pretty limited as far as their front yard 10 space. We don't want any additional easements required of 11 them in order to grant an easement to the County. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you help me on the 13 plat as to where the road is and where the -- the -- I mean, 14 where -- which is the road and which is the -- 15 MR. JOHNSTON: This -- this is Paraport. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Paraport is the actual 17 road? 18 MR. JOHNSTON: The dotted line, I think, is 19 the platted right-of-way -- the platted easement. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I mean, we're talking 21 about right there. Does that little curved piece encroach? 22 MS. LeMEILLEUR: Yes. 23 MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah, right. 24 MS. LeMEILLEUR: I think it's about 9 feet 25 from the measurement at its widest point, 9.1 feet into 38 1 their property. 2 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's -- this dotted 3 line also represents utility easement. 4 MS. LeMEILLEUR: Correct. 5 MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah. That's, apparently, 6 10-foot, 'cause that's the road within that. 7 MS. LeMEILLEUR: Yes, correct. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that actually road 9 encroachment or easement encroachment? 10 MS. LeMEILLEUR: I think there's actually 11 asphalt, is the way it's described. 12 MR. JOHNSTON: The road. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: From the variance 14 standpoint, I don't have a real problem with it. I mean, on 15 the -- the frontage issue. These are on community water? 16 MS. LeMEILLEUR: Yes. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The -- and I agree, I 18 don't have any problem with granting the variance from the 19 200-foot, but from -- granting the variance for 200 feet on 20 the frontage of Lot 62 -- 61, 62, and 63, but you're going 21 to combine -- did you not say that there were going to be 22 some combinations of lots? Take two lots and put them 23 together as one? 24 MS. LeMEILLEUR: I think that -- 25 MR. JOHNSTON: It may not be obvious on 39 1 there, the little line that shows the demarcation. This is 2 the existing property line, that -- this will be the new 3 line right there, making that one -- 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is 1 acre? 5 MR. JOHNSTON: That's correct. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And this is 1.08? 7 MR. JOHNSTON: She said they might have -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're not granting a 9 variance on three different lots? 10 MR. JOHNSTON: No, two lots. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, two lots. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Lot 63 disappears. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So it would be 61 and 14 62? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Franklin, is it 16 possible to correct this road encroachment or is it not 17 possible? 18 MR. JOHNSTON: Well, I think it would be 19 difficult. It was built that -- it was built that way by 20 the developer, and it was existing when the house was built. 21 I think it's on a hill. I think it's on a rock outcropping. 22 They built around it instead of going through it. I think 23 the road's been in that position since the beginning, before 24 any development was made. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, also, on the -- 40 1 Franklin, isn't it standard that we would call it Lot 62A, 2 since we're changing different than the original? Or do you 3 leave it Lot 62 under the revised plat? 4 MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah. He doesn't give -- he 5 doesn't give a numbering scheme. I would think he would 6 designate 61A and 62A or something. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Different than the 8 original platted -- 9 MS. LeMEILLEUR: Right. And I -- having 10 spoken to the surveyor, he anticipates that he would come 11 back with a preliminary plat that would designate, you know, 12 the lot numbers and -- but he had just not wanted to go to 13 that step until we had a sense of where we were on the 14 variance. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And it's a 16 little -- the reason for the variance, just for the record, 17 is that -- the intent of that is to prevent flag lots, and 18 this is clearly not a flag lot, so I have no problem with 19 the variance. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just have more of a 21 question. Ms. LeMeilleur, what is the size of Lot 63 that's 22 going to be folded into the other? 23 MS. LeMEILLEUR: It would appear that it's 24 about 75 feet wide and 200 feet long. 25 MR. JOHNSTON: Mm-hmm, looks like it. 41 1 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think the way we've 2 got it crafted, though, as I understand the way this is 3 written, I think what we'd have to do is craft a motion that 4 says we would approve the variance, with the proviso that 5 Lot 62 -- what are now Lots 62 and 63 are combined into one 6 acre lot. Is that correct? 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, we typically don't take 8 action on variances until we have an actual document to 9 approve. 10 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right, okay. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: What I would suggest is that 12 we agree that it's the sense of the Court that the variance, 13 if properly presented, would be granted; however, it's also 14 the sense of the Court that the road needs to remain where 15 it is. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with that, and 17 also agree with granting the variance. 18 MR. JOHNSTON: Would they show a -- or give a 19 note that there's a granted easement for that road? Or 20 leave it the way it -- the way it is? 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: I think we'd want an 22 easement. 23 MR. JOHNSTON: Okay. 24 MS. LeMEILLEUR: An easement, as opposed to 25 just a prescriptive right? 42 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes. 2 MS. LeMEILLEUR: Is that the sense of the 3 Court? 4 MR. JOHNSTON: I can't speak to utilities, 5 but it wouldn't change anything from what it is now, as far 6 as the County's concerned. Just the road would be on legal 7 property. 8 MS. LeMEILLEUR: And we'll inquire of the 9 utility companies to see if that creates any additional 10 burden on the property. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, Lynn. 13 MS. LeMEILLEUR: Thank you. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item Number 6, 15 consider and approve road name changes from privately 16 maintained roads in Precincts 1 and 4, in accordance with 17 the 911 guidelines. Commissioners Griffin and Baldwin. 18 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, there are 19 several names that have been processed. These are all 20 privately maintained roads; there's no public roads 21 involved, and I would move that the list as presented be -- 22 be approved. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 25 Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court 43 1 approve road name changes for privately maintained roads in 2 Precinct 1 and Precinct 4, in accordance with the list 3 presented. Any questions or comments? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Question. 5 Commissioner, what happens with this now? 6 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It goes back to Truby, 7 who databases, gets the name changes into our database. She 8 passes that back to 911 for inclusion on the map, and -- 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then it stays 10 there, and it's -- we're through shifting things back and 11 forth to each other? 12 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. The process 13 now is that these requests first come -- that's the reason 14 you see Truby's name on here. They first come to her. She 15 puts it into the -- we are maintaining the database at Road 16 and Bridge that has the request in it. When it's approved, 17 it goes back the opposite way, goes back to 911 to reflect 18 the name change was approved by the Court. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that 911 guidelines? 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No, there's nothing 21 that says how that gets done, so we -- we have established 22 that as the process. And, it seems to be working very well 23 at this point on those requests we get up that we've 24 approved similarly. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or 44 1 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 2 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 4 (No response.) 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number 6 7, consider the final replat of Lots Number 33, 34, and 41 7 through 47 of Falling Water Subdivision, Precinct 3. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll just turn this over 9 to Franklin. I see Dale Crenwelge's in the audience if we 10 have any questions. 11 MR. JOHNSTON: I think you have a copy of the 12 plat. Basically, it's a revision of plat. You have before 13 and after. The new roads have not been constructed yet. He 14 is -- has a letter in the packet that says he has retained 15 an engineering firm to do the design, and put up a Letter of 16 Credit for the actual construction costs, Security Bank. 17 Only -- I have two comments. One is the -- one of the 18 owners was supposed to come to town to sign the mylar, and 19 he -- he apparently didn't come this weekend, and they sent 20 it to him and it hasn't been returned yet. We don't have 21 the mylar on this one back. It's in the mail. 22 MR. CRENWELGE: Yeah, it's being Federal 23 Express delivered this morning. 24 MR. JOHNSTON: And the other comment is, it 25 may have something to do with the Subdivision Rules, 'cause 45 1 it's kind of vague. When we do a final plat and the actual 2 construction is not complete and they have a Letter of 3 Credit, if there's a design -- if they do the drainage and 4 the road design, if they need some drainage easement or some 5 other notation on the final plat and the plat's already been 6 filed, that we handle that, but do they have to go back and 7 do a revision of plat when that's completed? Or -- 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And my -- Franklin and I 9 talked about this before, and my answer would be yes, you 10 would. But I think that it's a -- instead, we allow Letters 11 of Credit. We would clearly obtain this to allow the 12 situation to go forward. If something comes up during the 13 construction of the road, they put the road in and that 14 requires something to be revised, it would have to be 15 revised if there's an actual change to the -- if the 16 drainage causes a change in the plat. I think that's -- the 17 likelihood of that happening probably in any subdivision is 18 pretty small, and I think in this subdivision, likewise, 19 very, very small. I don't think there's any -- 20 MR. JOHNSTON: I wouldn't anticipate 21 anything, so it should be whatever -- 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And there's no drainage 23 easements I'm aware of in this subdivision right now, and I 24 wouldn't think that these new roads would necessitate some. 25 So, you -- but the answer would be yes, you would have to if 46 1 the drainage necessitated some kind of revision. But, I'll 2 make a -- well, without the mylar here -- 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: We can approve the final 4 plat, subject to presentation of the mylar with all the 5 signatures. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion that we 7 approve the final replat of Lots 33, 34, and 41 through 47 8 of Falling Water Subdivision. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 11 seconded by Commissioner Williams, that the Court approve 12 the final replat of Lots Number 33, 34, and 41 through 47 of 13 Falling Water Subdivision in Precinct 3. Any further 14 questions or comments? If not, all in favor raise your 15 right hand. 16 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 18 (No response.) 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item Number 8, 20 consider the final replat of Lots number 116 through 122, 21 123B, 123C, 136, 138, 139, and 141 of Falling Water, 22 Precinct Number 3. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Franklin? 24 MR. JOHNSTON: This is the same situation as 25 the previous one, just a different location. They're 47 1 resubdividing some lots, and they're adding a couple roads. 2 Again, a Letter of Credit will cover this construction also. 3 I think the -- that mylar is here, so we're ready to go on 4 it. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions or comments? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're not going to 7 have any problem with this Antler Falls and Antler Hill, are 8 we? I'm glad the name "Antler" is in there. We're heading 9 in the right direction. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 911 approved those. 11 MR. JOHNSTON: I think 911 signed off. 12 MR. CRENWELGE: Those are original names back 13 about three years ago. They approved those names about 14 three years ago. 15 MR. JOHNSTON: Road name hasn't changed. 16 MR. CRENWELGE: Road hasn't changed. 17 (Discussion off the record.) 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion we 19 approve the final replat of Lots 116 through 112, 123B, 20 123C, 136, 138, 139, and 141 of Falling Water Subdivision. 21 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 23 second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court approve the 24 final replat of Lots number 116 through 122, 123B, 123C, 25 136, 138, 139, and 141 of Falling Water Subdivision in 48 1 Precinct 3. Any further questions or comments? If not, all 2 in favor, raise your right hand. 3 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 5 (No response.) 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Then we'll 7 take up Item Number 9, which is consider the final replat of 8 Lots Number 64, 65, 90, and 91 of Falling Water Subdivision, 9 Precinct 3. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Franklin? One more time. 11 MR. JOHNSTON: I think this one's even 12 easier. This one is basically a minor replat. It's 13 combining two lots -- actually, four lots into two lots. No 14 new road construction. Recommend approval. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion to 16 approve the final replat of Lots 64, 65, and 90 and 91 of 17 Falling Water, Precinct 3. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 20 seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve the 21 final replat of Lots Number 64, 65, 90, and 91 of Falling 22 Water Subdivision. Any further questions or comments? If 23 not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 24 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 49 1 Motion carries. At this time, we're going to go to Item 2 Number 12, since it was posted for 10 o'clock, which is the 3 bids for gasoline for the coming year for the Sheriff's 4 Department. The bids are laid on the table in front of me. 5 It appears that we have three bids, and we'll now open them. 6 (Opening bid.) 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: First bid is from Maxey 8 Energy Company here in Kerrville. The bid is fixed price 9 for fuel by invoice to the County at average laid-in cost 10 plus .0695. Laid-in cost includes product cost, freight, 11 taxes, and other government fees. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What was the plus, 13 how much? 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Plus .0695. 15 (Discussion off the record.) 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: The next invoice is from West 17 Texas Gas, Inc. Fixed margin is -- there is no fixed profit 18 margin. The volume discount is .02 per gallon off retail 19 price. 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: How much? 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: .02 per gallon off retail 22 price. And I'm going to think that's probably 2 cents. 23 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Off retail price. The fuel 25 sites in Kerr County are Kerrville Exxon at I-10 and 16, 50 1 Phillips Food Mart, Town and Country on Sidney Baker, 2 Memorial Boulevard, and Junction Highway. 3 (Excessive construction noise.) 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Didn't we ask them to 5 hold off on that? 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: And the final packet, if we 7 can get inside it to know who it's from -- final package is 8 from Mini-Mart. Fixed profit margin, .07. Seven cents. It 9 says, "See Exhibit 5 for complete breakdown of bid." And 10 this is all available at the Mini-Marts located throughout 11 Kerr County. At this time, I'd entertain a motion to accept 12 the bids and refer them to the Sheriff's Department for 13 evaluation and report. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 17 seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that Commissioners Court 18 accept the three bids for gasoline for the Sheriff's 19 Department and refer them to the Sheriff's Department for 20 evaluation and representation to the Commissioners Court. 21 Sheriff, do you think you all will be able to come back to 22 us today, or -- 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Probably so. They're 24 pretty specific. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. 51 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sheriff Hierholzer, 2 are all three of these -- I mean, do you have 24-hour 3 availability? 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's what's all 5 questioned in these bid packs. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you know? 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Mini-Mart has some. 8 Okay, there's a couple of places that are 24 hours. Maxey 9 Energy has some. And Town and Country, of course, has the 10 other ones. They're part of that West Texas, so there 11 should be. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll return to the regular 14 agenda order and take up Item Number 10, which is consider 15 the concept plan for Western Hills Subdivision, City of 16 Ingram ETJ, Precinct 4. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: This was just faxed to 18 us from U.G.R.A. That applies to this package. I haven't 19 read it. 20 (Discussion off the record.) 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Franklin, what do you want to 22 tell us about this? 23 MR. JOHNSTON: Well, this came in; it's a 24 subdivision behind Greenwood Forest, some 200-plus lots, 25 small acreage. Acreage sizes aren't on here. Is there 52 1 anyone here from -- I think the engineer is here to probably 2 answer more specific questions. 3 MR. SENULIS: Greg Senulis with Cude 4 Engineers. I think it's pretty straightforward. We've been 5 working real close with U.G.R.A. and City of Kerrville to 6 try to provide sewer for this development, but I think 7 everything else is pretty standard. It's private streets, 8 nothing -- nothing very unusual about it. It's very similar 9 in lot sizes to Greenwood Forest, which is adjacent to it. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Looks like -- 11 MR. JOHNSTON: All depends on being able to 12 hook up to sewer. I've talked to Tim Dolan at the City, and 13 he really wasn't aware of it at first. And, he said he 14 would have to get approval from P & Z, and they haven't 15 taken any action. 16 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, I think that's 17 what the essence of this -- of this letter is. 18 MR. JOHNSTON: I see. 19 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We just had faxed to 20 us, and I haven't had a chance to look at it in detail, but 21 apparently Ron Patterson has reacted favorably to the 22 plan -- to the idea. It would still have to be run through 23 all of the City wickets, but -- 24 MR. JOHNSTON: Mm-hmm. 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- the idea would be 53 1 to hook into the city sewer system down both sides from this 2 subdivision, past Greenwood Forest, which may ultimately 3 allow some hookup there, because -- 4 MR. SENULIS: Right, that's the plan. 5 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- the developer has 6 agreed to run oversize lines, more than they would require, 7 from this subdivision down to the Kerrville wastewater 8 hookup. 9 MR. SENULIS: Right, which would alleviate 10 some of the original problems and would give them an 11 opportunity to do that. 12 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Give Greenwood Forest 13 an opportunity to tie to this system. 14 MR. JOHNSTON: All the way down to the 15 existing line in the highway? 16 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. 17 MR. JOHNSTON: Is that line large enough? 18 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: According to the City, 19 it is. 20 MR. JOHNSTON: Okay. It was designated for 21 City of Ingram or high school at Ingram? 22 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right, but this is 23 what Patterson will go -- we're talking concept. 24 MR. JOHNSTON: Right. 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: At this point, it 54 1 would still require that it be run through the -- as I said 2 earlier, back through the City and make sure that all that 3 is still doable and could be -- 4 MR. SENULIS: Right. We just need an 5 approval so we can move on to the next step so we can do 6 that. 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We're not talking 8 preliminary plat even yet; we're talking concept. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is this manufactured 10 home or manufactured housing? What is it? What type of 11 housing? 12 MR. SENULIS: Developer's here. Yes, it is 13 manufactured homes. If you have any questions of him -- 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just want to know 15 the type, that's all. 16 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And there is Aqua 17 Source -- Aqua Source water? 18 MR. SENULIS: Right. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is Aqua Source 20 involved -- to what extent, if you know, is Aqua Source 21 involved with U.G.R.A. in this project? I keep hearing 22 things. I'm just curious as to what you know about it. 23 MR. SENULIS: They're the water provider. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Aside from that. I'm 25 talking about wastewater. 55 1 MR. SENULIS: I don't know. My deal has been 2 with U.G.R.A. 3 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No, the whole -- no, 4 there would be no reason to have Aqua Source involved in the 5 wastewater side of this project. They would provide water. 6 But the whole concept is to have a hookup to the Kerrville 7 wastewater system. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which means somebody 9 has to acquire the line. If it's sized properly, comes in 10 from the Ingram school, or put in a new line. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: This developer would 12 have to hook into the line that's already there. 13 MR. SENULIS: Along 27. 14 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Along Highway 27. 15 It's already there. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know that. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: But this developer 18 would have to hook in. 19 MR. SENULIS: To get to that. 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: To get to it. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't see why 22 U.G.R.A. is involved in it, anyway. I mean, I can't see 23 that. Maybe they are, but -- 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, the issue is that City 25 of Kerrville takes the position they cannot sell wastewater 56 1 services outside the city of Kerrville to anything other 2 than another governmental entity, so there has to be a 3 government entity that happens to comes between the private 4 developer and the City of Kerrville. 5 MR. SENULIS: And that's U.G.R.A.'s position. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's where Number 4 7 comes into play, Commissioner. Somebody has to acquire -- 8 acquire or get permission to use the line that was put in by 9 the Ingram Independent School District. 10 MR. SENULIS: Right. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: To do that. Lease it 12 or acquire it or whatever. 13 MR. SENULIS: Or whatever. 14 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So, they're still 15 negotiating. 16 MR. SENULIS: Yeah. That's why this is a 17 concept plan. We just need to find out if -- 18 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. 19 MR. SENULIS: -- you know, where we go from 20 here. 21 MR. JOHNSTON: These lot sizes, I would say 22 that they're the same as Greenwood Forest, but they don't 23 meet our current standard for size; they need a variance for 24 smaller size, right? 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, you'll have to ask. 57 1 MR. JOHNSTON: New Subdivision Rules address 2 that somewhat, but the existing rules don't. 3 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What are the lot 4 sizes? 5 MR. SENULIS: They're in the neighborhood of 6 90 by 150, 145. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: About what, 8 three-quarters of an acre? Half an acre? 9 MR. BALLARD: Half an acre. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: What is the -- is Aqua Source 11 going to build a treatment plant for the water? Or are we 12 going to -- where are they going to provide the water from? 13 MR. SENULIS: Those details haven't been 14 worked out yet. This is just a concept. 15 MR. JOHNSTON: And the streets are private, I 16 understand. 17 MR. SENULIS: Right. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, that's -- to me, 19 it seems odd to want private streets, because -- 20 particularly density. They're going to be -- the roads are 21 going to have to meet our current standards, which are 22 pretty large -- or, I mean, all these are going to be 23 local -- 24 MR. JOHNSTON: Curb and gutter streets? 25 MR. SENULIS: Curb and gutter streets. 58 1 MR. JOHNSTON: Hot mix? 2 MR. SENULIS: Yes. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: It appears from your concept 4 plan here that the principal ingress and egress is Red Oak 5 Lane, and I question whether that's -- that road is 6 currently configured as substantial enough to handle the 7 traffic that would be created by the additional -- 8 MR. SENULIS: Well, really, the principal 9 entrance is off of Skyline. There's three entrances. All 10 three sub-outs would be utilized. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Kind of goes along 12 that -- 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Skyview? 14 MR. SENULIS: Yeah, Skyview. 15 MR. JOHNSTON: That's where you have divided 16 the -- 17 MR. SENULIS: That's right. That's where we 18 have a median and entrance sign and that type of thing. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I would make the same 20 statement. 21 MR. SENULIS: That's why there's three 22 entrances, so that they'll all -- depends on what section 23 you live in as to where you would typically enter. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's -- the 25 Judge's point is well-taken, is that we need -- the County 59 1 needs to look at the -- 2 MR. JOHNSTON: The streets, material streets. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Get in there to see how 4 it's going to affect the other existing roads in this area. 5 And the other thing is that this is a -- you know, if you're 6 here later, you'll hear it then, that the current -- our new 7 Subdivision Rules are looking at putting a limit on the 8 number of lots in a subdivision unless you go on surface 9 water. So, with this density, I think it's -- my opinion is 10 that -- I don't know, really, the concept, but I think there 11 may be some requirement that Aqua Source has some surface 12 source, whether it's through the city or somewhere else, 13 because I think we probably will have water availability 14 adopted, which will later -- will actually be independent of 15 our Subdivision Rules, prior to the -- this coming back to 16 us. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: This project will 18 require a water availability study. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Under our current rules, 20 it doesn't right now, but I think that's what I'm really 21 saying, is that the -- in talking with County Attorney's 22 office this morning, the recommendation is that we -- and 23 the way the statute's written, we're going to adopt water 24 availability standards independent of the Subdivision Rules. 25 It will be like O.S.S.F. rules, will be a separate document, 60 1 and then we'll just incorporate that into the Subdivision 2 Rules. And I think that's on the agenda today. And, I 3 would suspect after today we will know that and will 4 probably do the final draft, set the public hearing within 5 the next 30 days for the water availability. So, I'm just 6 saying that that's -- there will be a requirement that 7 there's going to be some surface water to go with this kind 8 of density. 9 MR. SENULIS: We will have to do a water 10 availability study. 11 MR. JOHNSTON: Another feature in this 12 terrain, engineering feature, will be that it's hard to tell 13 in this dry weather we've been having, but that area is 14 subject to being kind of a seepage area. 15 MR. SENULIS: And we've already got a soil 16 testing report to do a pavement design section for us, 17 because we are aware of that already. So, a soils -- soils 18 report's already prepared to do pavement design, so it 19 won't -- won't just come from a standard; it will come from 20 a technical manual. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the -- because of the 22 density, I imagine the drainage study needs to be a little 23 bit more detailed. 24 MR. SENULIS: Pretty detailed. 25 MR. JOHNSTON: Right. 61 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay? 2 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I don't have a problem 3 making a motion to approve the concept plan. There's a lot 4 of work to be done -- 5 MR. SENULIS: Lot of work to be done. 6 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- before we can 7 probably get to a preliminary plat, even, for the Court's 8 consideration. But I'll make that motion that we approve 9 the concept plan. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 12 Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that we approve 13 the concept plan for Western Hills Subdivision, Precinct 4, 14 in the City of Ingram ETJ. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only question I have is, 16 which rules is the -- is this going to go under? By 17 accepting the concept plan at this point, is it the -- 18 grandfathered under the old rules, or are they going to be 19 subject to the new rules? 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: I believe the way the 21 Subdivision Rules -- 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's preliminary. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: -- read is that when the plat 24 for the preliminary is granted, it's subject to the 25 requirements of that at that time. Preliminary plat. 62 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just want to make that 2 clear, so that everyone's aware it will likely be subject to 3 the new rules. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Did we vote on that? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or 7 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 8 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 10 (No response.) 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item 12 we'll take up is Item Number 11, consider and discuss 13 construction of two parking areas, courthouse annex, and 14 resurfacing interior roadway of the courthouse square. 15 Commissioner Williams. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is a repeat of 17 the item we brought to Court earlier, Judge, talking about 18 providing some additional parking and to recondition the 19 interior roadway and courthouse square. Road and Bridge 20 Department has provided us a memorandum which outlines or 21 details some of the costs to do this. It's not as much, I 22 think, as we originally thought it might be. So, 23 Mr. Johnston, do you want to help me out here and address 24 this topic? They're talking about the funds to be paid from 25 Special Projects. And the only one that's been identified 63 1 thus far is one in Precinct 2, so we need to talk about 2 whether there are some other possibilities to go along with 3 that. But, go ahead, Franklin. 4 MR. JOHNSTON: We broke this down into three 5 areas, like we were talking about last meeting. There's a 6 small parking lot, a larger over here -- a larger parking 7 lot over here, and then sealing the existing parking lot 8 around the building, with figures that are broken down. We 9 have those. On the large parking lot, I've never seen any 10 design or layout; all I've seen is a little sketch, and that 11 was -- I think the way it was drawn may not be adequate to 12 get cars in and out properly. So, I -- if -- you know, I 13 guess the Court would need to direct us to design that thing 14 or make sure it works if it's actual pull-in parking and off 15 -- off of the other parking lot; it's not just a drive-in 16 thing. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm not sure where 18 this sketch originated, whether it -- apparently, it didn't 19 originate with you, so it must have originally -- 20 MR. JOHNSTON: No, I've never seen it. No 21 one's ever asked me to do the -- 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Either Mr. Odom, 23 Mr. Holekamp, or a combination of the two. That's the only 24 one I've seen so far. 25 MR. JOHNSTON: It didn't originate from me. 64 1 And, as far as the Special Projects, I think that's up to 2 you as to how the Court wants to address that; that we have, 3 you know, a new budget in Special Projects sitting there. 4 It can be -- they're designated. Now, I'm sure they can 5 be -- alternatives can be made on what to do. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One alternative I talked 7 to Commissioner Williams about briefly is that, with the 8 configuration of the precincts, the front half of the 9 parking lot's in Precinct 1, which qualifies it for the 10 Schreiner Trust, is another option. But this half is in 11 Precinct 3, which is not qualified. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think that's 13 incorrect, big time. You're off four and a half blocks. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How was -- I thought the 15 courthouse was split, as I understand it. 16 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Used to be, but it's 17 not any more. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not any more. Stay 19 out of the Schreiner fund. 20 (Laughter.) 21 MR. JOHNSTON: It's all in 2, right? Sorry, 22 Bill. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All in 3. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's farm-to-market, 25 doesn't have anything to do with parking for district court. 65 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It does seem odd that 2 all roads don't lead to the courthouse. Thank you, 3 Jonathan. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Surely we have to have 5 some kind of plan. 6 MR. JOHNSTON: If so, I haven't seen it. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Going to park straight 8 in? Going to parallel park? 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There was -- as he 10 said, Commissioner, there was a drawing, and it should have 11 been here, but it's not, which I believe Mr. Odom probably 12 did an original drawing and Mr. Holekamp participated to 13 some extent and outlined, I think, the ability to create an 14 additional 21 spots out front. But that's not going to be 15 the final plan, because it -- that entailed taking out one 16 huge tree, which nobody wants to do, and so we need to have 17 a re -- redrawing of that. The one on the backside is 18 pretty simple, straight-in parking along the concrete 19 retaining wall back here. So, we need to redesign the front 20 to make sure we don't overdo in terms of coming in and going 21 out, and I would hope that the Court would request you to do 22 that. 23 MR. JOHNSTON: To have a working lot -- 24 that's an entrance and an exit -- there's certain geometric 25 patterns you have to go by to get cars to be able to park 66 1 and move and get in and out. I don't think that was taken 2 into consideration on that other plan. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: May not have been. 4 MR. JOHNSTON: The number of cars may not be 5 correct. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Probably isn't. It's 7 probably going to be somewhere around 18, as opposed to 21. 8 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: As a planning number, 9 though, this bottom line is about right? 10 MR. JOHNSTON: I think these numbers are 11 about right for Road and Bridge to do them. We'll have to 12 do it on a weekend. That's when the overtime comes in, 13 but -- 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, from what we 15 need, the next step would be -- I mean, these are -- I think 16 we can find that amount in Special Projects, so I think we 17 really need to go back to negotiate with Stoddard as to how 18 much our credit's going to be, because I think we can afford 19 to get this done. The next step is to get a credit on this 20 area over here, so they don't have to reclaim it. And, to 21 me, I think it's probably about $19,000. I would like to -- 22 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, and I would also 23 suggest -- there's two things we need to do. Number one, 24 the Stoddard credit; number two is a detailed design that 25 meets all of the -- 67 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 2 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- requirements for 3 turning radiuses -- turning radii and all that, and bring 4 that back with credit, and somewhere we might find the money 5 in Special Projects, and we -- and I think we can make short 6 order of it. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: See if we can move it 8 along. I would move that we instruct Road and Bridge 9 Department to design the two parking lots and present back a 10 detailed plan for that, and to investigate the possibility 11 of potential credit from Stoddard for not putting the 12 courthouse grounds back the way they found them. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Who's going to do that? 14 The Judge? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think the Judge 16 might do the second part. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yeah. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner, you said 19 that -- 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- you wanted to 22 direct the Road and Bridge Department. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Design. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would -- wouldn't you 25 specifically say the County Engineer? 68 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The County Engineer, 2 who heads up the Road and Bridge Department. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good project for him. 4 We need the name -- his name. 5 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The County Engineer, 7 whose name is Franklin Johnston, who heads up the Road and 8 Bridge Department. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 10 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that the County 11 Engineer, Mr. Franklin Johnston, who heads up the Road and 12 Bridge Department, be requested to prepare plans for the 13 parking lots described in the memo dated October 2nd from 14 Mr. Odom; and, further, that the County Judge be requested 15 to obtain from Stoddard the amount of the credit for not 16 restoring the west side of the courthouse lawn. Any further 17 questions or comments? 18 MR. JOHNSTON: I think Mr. Williams or 19 someone will need to show us exactly where -- where you want 20 it and what trees not to cut down. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Holekamp and I 22 will get with you and -- 23 MR. JOHNSTON: Okay. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- we'll talk it out. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or 69 1 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 2 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 4 (No response.) 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this 6 time, let's take our mid-morning break. When the Court 7 returns, we're going to take up Item 28, no-wake zones, at 8 the request of Commissioner Griffin. 9 (Recess taken from 10:25 a.m. to 10:40 a.m.) 10 - - - - - - - - - - 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll now call back to order 12 this regular Commissioners Court session. As I announced 13 before the break, the next item we're going to take up is 14 Item Number 28, consider and discuss a legal description of 15 Ingram Lake, Flat Rock Lake, and Center Point Lake, for 16 inclusion in the order establishing no-wake zones. 17 Commissioner Williams. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At this time, we have 19 some maps, thanks to Commissioner Griffin's efforts with 20 911. And I think, from these maps, we can arrive at a legal 21 discussion -- description of where these lakes are and what 22 we hope to accomplish in them. Larry, do you want to pick 23 it up at this point? 24 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. First, I'd like 25 to -- I would like to thank T. Sandlin and 911 for 70 1 generating these maps for us. These are -- they have the 2 best database available for doing this kind of thing. You 3 can see that there is a scale that they laid out that has 4 the distances from the dam to each location. Those are 5 total distances, by the way. I'd also like to thank Travis 6 Lucas, our Assistant County Attorney, for doing a lot of 7 good work on coming up with the language for the -- for the 8 Court. He's taken information from these maps and tried to 9 legally describe where it is that -- that we're imposing a 10 no-wake zone. With that, I think we probably need to look 11 at -- at the draft order, along with the -- along with the 12 maps, and I think you can see -- you can see what -- how 13 those fit together. I would -- I did catch one thing, 14 Travis. I don't know whether -- it's probably -- and it's a 15 real nitpick, but we probably want to say on those legal 16 descriptions from the dam "upstream" to a point in that, so 17 that we remove any ambiguity of someone thinking that we 18 were trying to make a no-wake zone downstream of a dam. 19 MR. LUCAS: That's fine. 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I would add that word, 21 "upstream," just to be sure. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In each case? Or 23 just on -- yeah, in each case. 24 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah. Just say 25 "upstream" from the dam. Where you are describing the lake 71 1 as from the dam to a point, you would say "upstream to a 2 point," so that nobody would misinterpret that. It's 3 obvious by the way it's worded, I think, that that's the 4 case. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone have any -- 6 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And, obviously, what 7 we'd have to do is, if the Court wants to accept this, we'd 8 have to set a public hearing for this. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone have any questions 11 about the legal descriptions? Either from the maps or from 12 the written description in the draft order? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Looks good. I think 14 they're clear, easy to define. The maps are good, and 15 there's footage citations, as well. 16 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think our Sheriff 17 has a question. 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I haven't seen your 19 maps or your legal descriptions. I was visiting with one of 20 the Parks and Wildlife game wardens the other day, and he 21 said if the County adopts this or something, it also has to 22 be sent in to the State Parks and Wildlife office and 23 approved by them. 24 MR. LUCAS: That's right, yeah. Just as my 25 memo reflected originally. 72 1 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. 2 MR. LUCAS: Yeah, that would be the last 3 thing that we do. 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Is that the last thing? 5 Okay. I didn't know if it needed to be done before it was 6 adopted. 7 MR. LUCAS: That's the final step. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would be done 9 after final adoption; is that correct, Travis? 10 MR. LUCAS: Right. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: After a public 12 hearing. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do we have a motion to adopt 14 the legal descriptions of Ingram Lake, Flat Rock Lake, and 15 Center Point Lake for including in this order establishing 16 no-wake zones? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I so move, Judge. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 20 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, that the Court 21 adopt the legal descriptions of Ingram Lake, Flat Rock Lake, 22 and Center Point Lake for inclusion in the order 23 establishing no-wake zones. Any further questions or 24 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 73 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 2 (No response.) 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item is 4 Item Number 29, which is consider and discuss adoption of a 5 court order -- that should be, actually, approval of court 6 order establishing no-wake zones on Ingram Lake, Flat Rock 7 Lake, and Center Point Lake, as amended, and set a date for 8 a public hearing on the approved order. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As Commissioner 10 Griffin said, this is the court order that County Attorney 11 drafted, and there may be a couple minor tweaks in it 12 regarding "upstream" in the definition. But, with those and 13 any -- anything else that comes from this discussion, Judge, 14 I would move that we approve this draft and order -- set a 15 public hearing date for -- what's the next date, 16 Commissioner? 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The 23rd we have two 18 already. You want to do it in November? 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What do you think, 20 Judge? 21 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: This is one where 22 Travis had suggested that we err on the long side. 23 MR. LUCAS: Yeah, that's right. 24 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Have a long time for 25 public review. Maybe we want to go -- not the next session. 74 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It looks like the 2 13th. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Set a public hearing 4 date for November 13, and order published -- 5 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: At 10 a.m.? 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 10 a.m. 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 9 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court 10 approve the draft court order establishing no-wake zones on 11 Ingram Lake, Flat Rock Lake, and Center Point Lake, and set 12 a date for public hearing on such approved court order for 13 November 13th at 10 o'clock a.m., during the Commissioners 14 Court meeting. Any questions or comments? If not, all in 15 favor, raise your right hand. 16 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 18 (No response.) 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 20 MS. SOVIL: Judge, you might want to discuss 21 how you want to handle the draft and when you want 22 publishing, et cetera. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Mr. Lucas? 24 MR. LUCAS: I'll draft that tomorrow and hand 25 it to you tomorrow, and also the County Clerk, so she can go 75 1 ahead and put it on file. We'll have a good, long while for 2 that to be there for the public to view. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: And then, Jannett, you'll 4 take care of having it published? 5 MS. PIEPER: Yes, sir. 6 MR. LUCAS: We've already talked about it. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. 8 (Discussion off the record.) 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Sheriff, do you have a 10 recommendation for us on the -- 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir. Yes, I do. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. We'll then call Item 13 Number 13, which is consider and discuss awarding bids for 14 Sheriff's Office. Do you have a recommendation, Sheriff? 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: In these three bids, one 16 of them is where we currently fuel up our vehicles, which 17 does give us a number of locations, I guess five in 18 Kerrville, 24-hour service. But what their difference is, 19 they didn't give a fixed profit margin. They gave a 2-cent 20 discount off retail. That is Town and Country, or actually 21 fuel and gas card, West Texas Gas. The other two, one being 22 Mini-Mart or Diamond Shamrock, gives a fixed 7-cent profit 23 margin, or a 7-cent profit margin of what their cost is. 24 The last one, being Maxey Energy, gives a .695 profit 25 margin. When I -- I called one of them a while ago and 76 1 said, "Well, this 2 cents off retail" -- I was kind of 2 wondering about what the difference was in it other than a 3 profit margin of .695. When I called a while ago, at 4 today's prices -- and it does change daily -- the 2 cents 5 off profit or off retail, with -- without taxes, which is 6 what we'd be exempt from, at today's prices would cost us 7 $1.05 a gallon. The .695 profit margin, at today's prices, 8 would cost us .96 and 81 -- or .9681 a gallon. That's -- I 9 think the 96 cents is definitely better when you look at 10 that, which would be Maxey Energy Company, which would give 11 us a 24-hour fuel service at the island on Schreiner Street, 12 a backup 24-hour service at the Exxon at I-10, and a backup 13 service on Junction Highway, the Exxon, between 6 a.m. and 14 8 p.m. So, even though it doesn't give the total different 15 places Town and Country does, the profit margin is so much 16 greater that the cost, I think, depending on prices and 17 everything, would still be a lot better for the County to 18 deal with Maxey Energy. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion we 20 accept the recommendation of the Sheriff and award the 21 contract to Maxey Energy at .0695 profit margin. 22 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 24 seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court -- that the 25 Court accept the bid for fuel for the Sheriff's Department 77 1 to Maxey Energy at a fixed profit margin of .0695. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My only question is, 3 is the Sheriff now going to have to have a subscription to 4 San Antonio Express News to keep up with gas prices? 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't have one at the 6 office and I don't have one at the house. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How about the 8 Kiplinger letter? 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't intend to. If I 10 can get a copy of that -- I didn't make one earlier -- so 11 that I can contact them and start working on our gas cards, 12 'cause they do give us the individual cards. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good job, Sheriff. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further relevant comments 15 or questions? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 16 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 18 (No response.) 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item on 20 the regular agenda, Item Number 14, consider the purchase of 21 a laptop computer from 1999/2000 funds, an amendment to the 22 1999/2000 Capital Outlay budget. Do we have anybody here to 23 speak to that? 24 MR. TOMLINSON: I think there's a letter with 25 it from -- from the District Judge. I think that's -- 78 1 that's the explanation of it. I'm just here to answer 2 questions if you have any. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How are we -- how 4 would you charge back to a budget that is no longer? 5 MR. TOMLINSON: About three-fourths of those 6 bills that you approved today were last year's bills. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, that money is 8 still just kind of hanging out there in thin air? 9 MR. TOMLINSON: We're -- we're under the 10 modified accrual basis, the County. We -- if you have a 11 bill that's -- that's dated prior to the end of the fiscal 12 year, we encumber it back to -- 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand that. 14 Okay. Was this a budgeted item in -- 15 MR. TOMLINSON: No, it was not. That's why 16 the budget amendment part of it's in there. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm opposed. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Was it a request in this 19 year's budget? 20 MR. TOMLINSON: It's a request for '99/2000. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, did -- 22 MR. TOMLINSON: No. No, it was not. No. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The letter suggests 24 it's already been purchased. 25 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, it has. 79 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They're asking for 2 reimbursement? 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm really opposed to 4 it now. 5 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I think the -- the 6 person that -- that purchased it is willing to pay for it. 7 I mean, she's willing to pay for it. It's just that she's 8 asking that it be reimbursed. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd be more in favor of 10 doing a budget amendment for next year if they want to 11 transfer money for the current year. I mean, I think 12 they're going about it wrong procedurally. 13 MR. TOMLINSON: The invoice was dated in 14 September. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I know, but the 16 Court hadn't looked at it in September. 17 MR. TOMLINSON: Doesn't matter. I mean, 18 you're going to get bills all the way through November that 19 you haven't looked at that are going to be paid back in -- 20 in '99/2000. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Those bills are for items 22 that were budgeted. I think what Commissioner Letz is 23 saying is that the purchase of this item was not brought to 24 the Court's attention during the relevant budget year. If 25 we were to approve this, this would then be County property; 80 1 is that correct? 2 MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: And it would be used 4 exclusively -- 5 MR. TOMLINSON: It's to be left -- according 6 to the letter -- the letter, I think, intends that it be 7 left here in this -- in the office for -- at her office. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do you think it would cut 10 down on the number for special court reporting? 11 MR. TOMLINSON: I have no idea. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- my other 13 comment is that I think it goes completely, you know, 14 against us trying to buy computers centrally, too. I mean, 15 it's -- it's going -- this is not the way we do business or 16 want to do business. I guess we're doing it 'cause we 17 already bought it, but like I said, I don't have a problem, 18 if they need the computer, to have them do a budget 19 amendment for this year, and if they have funds available, 20 you know, do a budget amendment. But, I mean, I don't see 21 this is a whole lot different -- well, this is even -- no, I 22 won't even go there. 23 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, it -- it is a 24 case where there is a reimbursement, and the Court was not 25 brought into it until the new fiscal year, so from the 81 1 County point of view, I would rather see it come out of the 2 current year's budget. I mean, it's the same monies. It 3 just -- it's just that it comes out of one budget or the 4 other. I mean, it's coming out of the same big pot. We 5 either reduce the surplus in '99/2000 by this amount, or 6 we -- or we reprogram money that's in the current year's 7 budget. And I think, from an accounting sense, it makes 8 more sense to me -- I'm agreeing with what you're saying, 9 that it come out of this year's budget. I mean, that's not 10 a big difference. I mean, the computer's there, and there's 11 no reason it couldn't be paid for out of -- with a budget 12 amendment on the current budget, rather than last year's. 13 MR. TOMLINSON: The problem is, I think from 14 their standpoint, is that they don't know if they have any 15 funds available in the new year or not. 16 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Do they have any 17 Capital Outlay budget? 18 MR. TOMLINSON: No. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Even with that, I 20 would -- you know, I would -- I mean, if they need the 21 computer, which I presume they feel they do, I'd rather have 22 it come out of the current year's budget and take the money 23 out of one of their other line items. We'll have something, 24 more than likely, in Special Trials or somewhere, 'cause we 25 budgeted a large sum 'cause we don't know what to expect 82 1 this year. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with that. 3 And there's three of us. 4 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's fine. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Four. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Four. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: I do -- you know, it appears 8 to me that there's not -- not sentiment in favor of approval 9 of this line item, so I believe we'll simply let it die for 10 lack of a second, with the understanding that if the 198th 11 District Court wants to come back for funds out of this 12 year's budget, that it would probably be more favorably 13 received. Is that an accurate -- 14 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think it dies from 16 lack of a motion. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: You're right, Commissioner 18 Baldwin. Okay. Item Number 15, consider and discuss 19 engagement letter from Pressler, Thompson and Company for 20 the 1999/2000 audit. Tommy, do you have anything to add on 21 this one? 22 (Mr. Tomlinson shook his head.) 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: It appears that they've gone 24 up about $2,000, for their -- their "not to exceed" price. 25 Is that about right? 83 1 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I don't -- 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: The price is $19,750, and I 3 think we paid them 17 -- 4 MR. TOMLINSON: Part of that is for Adult 5 Probation. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Oh. 7 MR. TOMLINSON: They -- they do an audit -- 8 separate audit for them, as well as a separate audit for -- 9 for Juvenile. So, part of that total amount would be 10 allocated to -- to Adult Probation. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. 12 MR. TOMLINSON: And it's likely that they -- 13 that they did go up some in the total. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved, that we 15 accept it. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 18 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court 19 accept the engagement letter from Pressler, Thompson and 20 Company for the 1999/2000 audit. Any further questions or 21 comments? Tommy, how long has Pressler Thompson been doing 22 our audit? 23 MR. TOMLINSON: Seems like it's about four or 24 five years. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: We may want to consider 84 1 getting new proposals for this next year. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there any -- 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: I have no objection to the 4 services; they perform excellent services. It's always been 5 just my opinion that you're better served if you change your 6 auditor periodically, or at least go out for -- 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I wonder if there's any 8 requirement for to us switch every so often. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't believe there is. 10 Barbara? 11 MS. NEMEC: I just want to say that because 12 they've been with us for five years, the time that it takes 13 away from the elected officials is tremendous. I mean, 14 they -- they come in and they know exactly what they're 15 looking for now. To go with a new audit firm would really 16 put a big imposition on all the elected officials, I think, 17 'cause every time you start with a new audit firm, they -- 18 it's like learning from the bottom up. So, that's just 19 something y'all might want to take -- I understand what 20 you're saying, but -- 21 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's the reason. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: The purpose of an audit is to 23 take a fresh look at how the funds should be handled, so I 24 think that's something that we should put in the back of our 25 minds and take up perhaps next year. 85 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the same thing 2 with the insurance coverage; we need to take another look at 3 that. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yeah. Okay. Any further 5 questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your 6 right hand. 7 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 9 (No response.) 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 11 (Discussion off the record.) 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item we'll take up is 13 Item Number 16, consider and discuss acceptance of the 2000 14 LLEBG grant. Mr. Graham. 15 MR. GRAHAM: The Sheriff's Department has 16 applied to the Bureau of Justice again this year for the 17 2000 grant. We have been awarded that, pending decision by 18 Commissioners Court. The amount of the grant is $11,321. 19 It does call for a local match of $1,258. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: And what's the source of the 21 local match? 22 MR. GRAHAM: It would be through the 23 Commissioners Court, or -- 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do you have a -- a specific 25 source of the funds? 86 1 MR. GRAHAM: No, sir, we do not. 2 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We need a budget 3 amendment then, right? 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: We need to know where the 5 local match is coming from. 6 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Got to know where it's 7 coming from. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you go over this 9 grant again, what -- what it's for? 10 MR. GRAHAM: It's the same one that we've 11 applied for every year. Last year it was $15,727. They 12 decrease annually. As far as the expenditure of the money, 13 it's whatever's, you know, deemed necessary at the time. It 14 -- right now we're looking at equipment for the officers. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How did we match it 16 last year? 17 MR. GRAHAM: I believe through Commissioners 18 Court. I believe. 19 MS. SOVIL: Budget amendment. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Budget amendment? 21 MS. SOVIL: Budgeted sums. 22 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It was budgeted for 23 that? 24 MS. SOVIL: No, sir. We just used funds that 25 we were going to use for other things and called it a match. 87 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I'm strongly in favor 2 of the grant, but we need to identify the source of the 3 match. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I would think 5 that -- usually these grants are some sort of in-kind -- a 6 lot of times it's not just a dollar amount that you have to 7 do. And, I mean, if we can -- if it's going to go into 8 equipment, maybe we can use some of the equipment budget 9 that we already have to apply towards the grants. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would have been 11 my thought, yeah. Take the match out of the equipment line 12 item. 13 MR. GRAHAM: I don't see a problem with that. 14 That would be -- that would be the logical -- 15 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's what it will go 16 for primarily, right? 17 MR. GRAHAM: Yes, sir. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that 19 we accept the 2000 LLEBG grant, and that the local match of 20 $1,258 would come out of the Sheriff's Department Equipment 21 line item. 22 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 24 seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we approve the -- 25 accept the 2000 LLEBG grant, and that the local match be 88 1 taken from the Equipment line item in the Sheriff's 2 Department. Any further questions or comments? If not, all 3 in favor, raise your right hand. 4 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 6 (No response.) 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Thank you. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, we have an item 10 posted for 11 o'clock. We'll take that one up. It's Item 11 33, presentation regarding Parks and Wildlife Indoor-Outdoor 12 Recreation Center Grants. Commissioner Williams. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, the Court 14 asked Commissioner Letz and me to begin investigating ways 15 to track some funds and figure out a financing plan for the 16 Hill Country Youth Exhibition Center master plan. I 17 inquired of the Texas Association of Counties about grant 18 funds that might be available for this purpose through 19 varying sources, and got -- that telephone call led me to 20 another county, and from that to Judy Knox of Langford 21 Associates, whose firm has had experience in dealing with 22 Texas Parks and Wildlife and the Indoor-Outdoor Recreation 23 Center Grants. I asked Ms. Knox if she would be good enough 24 to come to Court this morning and give us a little sense of 25 what these grants are all about, whether or not we might be 89 1 considered, and however her firm works in connection with 2 all the above. So, I would ask Judy Knox of Langford 3 Associates to give us some insight into this matter. 4 (Discussion off the record.) 5 MS. KNOX: Thank you, Commissioner. County 6 Judge and all the rest of the Commissioners, my name is Judy 7 Langford Knox, and the proposal package you see in front of 8 you -- it actually is under Langford, but it's hyphenated, 9 and Richard Salmon from Hays County still calls me Judy 10 Knox, so that's the distinction there in the names. Our 11 company has been in existence since 1983. Actually, my 12 father started the company as a grant administration 13 company. I joined the firm in 1991. He has since slowed 14 down a little bit, and I am the president of the company. 15 So -- and we're a small company, so when you talk to myself 16 and my partner, Margaret Hardin, you are talking to the 17 company. So, we've done grant administration since 1983. 18 We work with Community Development, Block Grant, Parks and 19 Wildlife. We've done some Texas Water Development Board 20 work. We've worked with Farmers Home, some E.D.A., and some 21 T-21 work with Texas Department of Transportation. So, 22 that's the kind of funds that we work with all the time. 23 Parks and Wildlife has certainly been an active part of 24 our -- our company for the last seven years. 25 The two -- the two types of Parks and 90 1 Wildlife grants -- I'll leave the proposal with you to show 2 you some references and some projects that we've worked on, 3 but I was asked to talk about Parks and Wildlife, and I've 4 handed out to you a 3-page item. That's the Project 5 Priority Scoring System. Parks and Wildlife does everything 6 based on a scoring system. What Commissioner Williams has 7 asked me to come speak to you today is about the Indoor 8 Recreation Center part of Parks and Wildlife's grants. They 9 have indoor and outdoor. The outdoor is a twice-a-year 10 grant application. They have -- they are in January and in 11 July. The indoor recreation centers are once a year, in 12 July. So, if you're considering making an application for 13 this program, you are at about the right time, because it 14 takes a little while to get these projects put together. 15 What Parks and Wildlife Indoor Recreation 16 Centers proposes to do is provide recreation services for 17 the community, and in indoor -- in an indoor way. I spoke a 18 few minutes with Commissioner Williams about what you're 19 looking at, and I think that this could work with what 20 you're trying to do with the Exhibition Center. They won't 21 fund rodeo arenas or -- even indoor rodeo arenas, even if 22 they're just equestrian -- used for just equestrian, not 23 rodeos themselves, but potentially could be used for the 24 Exhibition Hall, itself. You have to do six recreational 25 activities in a recreation center to -- to keep Parks and 91 1 Wildlife happy, pleased with the project, and I believe that 2 you probably could do that with this Exhibit Hall. This -- 3 the activities can be any range of things. It could be the 4 education of agricultural conservation, which I think 5 probably fits hand-in-hand with some of the things that 6 you're doing out there. So, I think that the -- the intent 7 of the -- of the Exhibit Hall probably would fit into this. 8 The monies that are available through Parks 9 and Wildlife are $750,000 in grant money. They do require 10 one-to-one match. So, from my understanding, this building 11 is going to be quite a bit -- potentially, quite a bit more 12 than that, so that the funds could be a portion of what 13 you're looking at. The thing with Parks and Wildlife, as 14 far as money is concerned, I said that they're a one-to-one 15 match, and they are, but they're more of a "you tell them 16 you've spent $2, they give you $1 back." So, when you 17 start, particularly on buildings, using their funds, you 18 need to be prepared to pay for it pretty much up front, and 19 then get reimbursed back half of it, because the process to 20 get reimbursed does take a while, and the building will 21 probably be finished before you'll start seeing completely 22 all of your reimbursements come back. You can make a 23 reimbursement request to them on a monthly basis, but it 24 sometimes takes them up to three to six months to pay for 25 them. Lots of times buildings are built prior to that time. 92 1 So, I just want to make sure you understand that that would 2 probably be part of the process. 3 Part of the scoring system -- on the first 4 page it talks about the local master plan standard 5 requirements. Part of the scoring system is based on a 6 master park plan that each entity does. I don't believe 7 that the County has a master park plan -- do you have a -- 8 did Parks and Wildlife accept a master park plan? Well, 9 that's great, because you can use that as part of the 10 scoring system. I was thinking that perhaps you might not, 11 'cause many counties don't. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We did one for another 13 grant which we never received, but we did the plan. 14 MS. KNOX: Okay. We'd want to relook at your 15 priority activities, because your scoring -- your scoring 16 for this grant would be based on your priority listed in 17 your master park plan. So, you're ahead of the game. I 18 actually was going to stand up here and say I still think 19 you have a pretty good shot at it, because all of the 20 projects that have put in for indoor rec centers over the 21 last two times have all been funded because there was plenty 22 of money available. So, even though they do say it's 23 competitive, it's -- it's not highly competitive. It was at 24 first, but it is not so much so now. So, it's -- even if 25 you didn't have a master park plan, 'cause those can be 93 1 quite expensive, I still think it would be a -- a pretty 2 good bet that you potentially would get funded, even without 3 a master park plan, but even better that you have one. 4 The score is also based on helping youth, 5 which you obviously already are with this facility. You are 6 not going to be able to get points for a new facility, 7 because you're basically redoing the one you currently have. 8 But, again, I really think that because they funded 9 everything for the last two years, you still have -- unless 10 there's a whole bunch of people that come out of woodwork 11 that suddenly want indoor rec centers, you have a chance. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What are the requirements 13 for new facilities? I mean, in reality, it's a new 14 facility. I mean, we're doing it -- 15 MS. KNOX: It's actually more whether it's a 16 first-time service or not. You've been providing that 17 service there up until this time. Well, I haven't gone out 18 and seen what you currently have. Is it an indoor facility 19 currently? 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: The current indoor facility 21 we have would be torn down as part of our plans to redo our 22 Youth Exhibition Center. 23 MS. KNOX: But what's -- 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: So what will become the -- 25 what we now use as the exhibit center or the indoor center 94 1 will -- would no longer exist. 2 MS. KNOX: But, as far as what is currently 3 there, it's more of a livestock barn? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It -- 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Right. It's -- there is an 6 arena, and the plan calls for actually building -- we have 7 an arena and exhibit building, and we would tear down the 8 exhibit building and actually build the new exhibit building 9 within the existing arena shell. 10 MS. KNOX: Because you're going more towards 11 a potentially convention center-type building, where you 12 could have multiple functions in it -- what you have now is 13 more of a livestock barn, and I'll have to talk to Parks and 14 Wildlife whether they'll consider the new facility a 15 first-time service, 'cause -- it may very well be, because 16 what you currently have is a livestock barn and not a 17 recreation center. So, if you don't have any other 18 recreation centers in town, you will get the points for 19 being the first -- providing a first-time service of 20 recreation. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It will be stretching it, 22 but anyway, we can try. 23 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Sure. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We want to be honest 25 about it, though. 95 1 MS. KNOX: Oh, yes, sir. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Coming from our 3 county, we want to be honest in this thing. 4 MS. KNOX: And we will -- and we will provide 5 that information to Parks and Wildlife if you choose us to 6 do -- go forward with an application, but we will suggest 7 that it would be a first-time service for indoor recreation 8 center. They -- they have no qualms about telling us 9 whether they feel like that is or isn't at that point. 10 So -- 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're familiar with that. 12 MS. KNOX: Okay. The most important thing, 13 if you want to move forward with this at this point, is 14 finding the dollars to match it with, unless the County 15 wants to -- wants to put the money -- get it themselves. 16 You're actually better off by having private industry of any 17 sort using -- using their dollars to match it, because they 18 give you extra points for using other sources of money other 19 than your own for a match. Again, that's not necessarily 20 going to do or undo you, but that is part of the scoring 21 system. So, if the school system put in some of the money, 22 you had a private donor that put in some of the money, and 23 the $750,000 match came from most everybody else other than 24 the County, then you would -- you would be better off in the 25 scoring system. That's not to say that County money 96 1 wouldn't go into it. You would just put your money into the 2 arenas that would be attached to it that Parks and Wildlife 3 will not participate in. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can the grant be, I 5 guess, put together so that the grant goes to augment or 6 improve the facility that was already planned? 7 MS. KNOX: It can, yes. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, like, go ahead and go 9 forward, and then if we get the grant, add something that 10 we'd like to have, but isn't in the original plan? 11 MS. KNOX: Yes. But you wouldn't be able to 12 use any money that you used previous to being funded as any 13 kind of match to the -- to the grant. You could do work 14 prior to getting the grant, but it wouldn't be able to be 15 used as a match. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In general, Judy, 18 these items that you list as priorities for public indoor 19 recreation projects that they take a favorable look at? 20 MS. KNOX: Mm-hmm? 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are we speaking of 22 just providing the facility for that, or is the County 23 required to provide the actual programming that goes on 24 inside it, the recreational programming? 25 MS. KNOX: No, the County is not required to 97 1 do that. You can work with other entities. As long as the 2 facility remains open to the general public at large without 3 any kind of discrimination, the County can have other people 4 run the facility. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Thank you. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or 7 comments? 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I'd like to -- 9 if Ms. Knox can, to give us a little sense of how her firm 10 works on our behalf. 11 MS. KNOX: Yes, sir. If you would -- if you 12 wish for us to go forward on an application, we would ask 13 that we have a group appointed that we have to work with 14 specifically on a more day-to-day basis, as far as plans and 15 money gathering and that kind of thing. I don't know if 16 that's how you have it set up currently. We can work with 17 Commissioners Court directly, but it -- it doesn't yield 18 itself as easily to having a group to work with on the -- on 19 the facility. And it looks like you potentially already 20 have one, just glancing at some of the documentation that 21 Mr. Williams -- Commissioner Williams shared with me this 22 morning, that helped him put together all of the 23 documentation necessary for the -- for the application, 24 itself. 25 It's hard for a Commissioners Court to go out 98 1 and raise money for a facility like this, and that's what 2 I'm more saying. You need to have somebody that's going out 3 to raise the money if you -- if the Commissioners Court is 4 not going to do the match totally themselves. And, so, if 5 we were -- had a group to work with of that sort, then we 6 could put the application together as time goes on till July 7 1st, which is the application due date. The application 8 requires that all funding sources are documented in the 9 application by letters of commitment. Not, "I think that I 10 would like to help this project." It has to say, "I commit 11 these funds or this amount of time to this project." And 12 those commitment letters are hard to get. Lots of people 13 want to help and they all have very good intentions, but 14 putting their name on the dotted line on their letterhead is 15 sometimes difficult to do, so getting those letters in line 16 several months before they're actually due is -- is a -- is 17 a priority. 18 The environmental part of it, we complete 19 that. The -- the letters of support, that also is helpful 20 with the group. Other people that would be able to use 21 facilities, having that group to gather those letters 22 together is also very helpful, as well. If you choose to go 23 forward with this, we would ask that you, by January, have 24 us online to -- to do this, because it takes a few months to 25 get this all together -- the application all together, and 99 1 if -- we've not put a proposal to you, but if you choose us 2 to do it, we charge $2,500 to put the application together. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Flat fee? 4 MS. KNOX: Flat fee, yes, sir. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there -- would that 6 include reviewing the current master park plan and, I guess, 7 doing any updates that were required to that? 8 MS. KNOX: Yes, we would help you -- I would 9 believe that the only thing you would need to really look 10 over is the priorities. Do you know if it has been accepted 11 by Parks and Wildlife? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. 13 MS. KNOX: Okay. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess it -- I say yes. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What does "accepted" 16 mean? 17 MS. KNOX: That they sent you a letter 18 saying, "We accept your master park plan." 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: It was part of a grant 20 application that was not funded, but the grant application 21 was accepted. 22 MS. KNOX: You should -- you still should 23 have received a letter saying that the master park plan was 24 accepted or not accepted. But I can check into that for you 25 and see if it was. 100 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And if it wasn't 2 accepted, you could probably find out the deficiencies that 3 existed? 4 MS. KNOX: Yes. I -- I know this is going to 5 -- I know this is going to sound strange. I don't like 6 planning particularly, but master park planners doing master 7 park plans tend to charge quite a bit for them, so we've 8 wound up doing just specifically master park plans; no other 9 types of plans, just master park plans, because you have to 10 have one, basically, in the outdoor part of getting an 11 application funded. You just can't get them funded without 12 a master park plan in place, so we write master park plans 13 as well. But I wasn't here today to sell you -- to try to 14 sell to you to do a master park plan. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm sure ours was 16 accepted, because it was -- they accepted the grant, and 17 that was never an issue. There were some other issues with 18 Parks and Wildlife, but -- 19 MS. KNOX: That wasn't one of them. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- the master park plan 21 was never a problem. 22 MS. KNOX: But if it wasn't accepted and 23 there wasn't a great deal of deficiencies, just minor 24 things, we would work with you to work those out. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just have one other 101 1 question, and that would be, to your knowledge, are there 2 any other potential grants out there that our project would 3 fit -- could fit within the parameters of -- 4 MS. KNOX: The only thing that -- there's not 5 a lot of grants for Parks and Wildlife in general. The 6 state -- 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Aside from Parks and 8 Wildlife. 9 MS. KNOX: Right. Aside from Parks and 10 Wildlife, you might be able to get some monies from 11 foundations that are specific to youth, and particularly to 12 agriculture or equestrian use. I do not know of them off 13 the top of my head. We don't -- we don't work too much with 14 foundations; we specifically work with state agencies. But, 15 I think that with -- there is a possibility of you maybe 16 getting some extra funding from those sources, and it would 17 be good to go ahead and start applying for those now, 18 because, again, you have to have them lined up before you 19 make application. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone else have any 21 questions? Thank you very much for coming and educating us 22 today. 23 MS. KNOX: Thank you very much. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Returning to the regular 102 1 agenda, the next item is Item Number 17, appointment of 2 Central Counting Station Manager/Judge and Tabulating 3 Supervisor, as required by the Texas Election Code. 4 Jannett? 5 MS. PIEPER: Yes. Gentlemen, this is just 6 another one of the election formalities we have to go 7 through. I am recommending that I be appointed the 8 Manager/presiding Judge, and that my chief deputy be 9 appointed the Tabulating Supervisor. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 13 seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we appoint Jannett 14 Pieper as the presiding Judge/Manager for the November 7th 15 election, and that we appoint Nadene Alford as Tabulation 16 Supervisor for the same election. Any further questions or 17 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 18 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 20 (No response.) 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. The next 22 number is Item Number 18, consider approving the cost to 23 charge for a copy of the 2000/2001 Kerr County budget. 24 MS. PIEPER: We had set a price for the -- a 25 copy of the proposed budget, but we never set a price for 103 1 the actual budget now that it's approved, so that's what I'd 2 like to discuss with you. 3 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What was the cost of 4 the proposed? 5 MS. PIEPER: I believe it was $5 for the 6 copy. 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Move that we charge $5 8 for a copy of the approved County budget. 9 MS. PIEPER: If I can make a statement to 10 that, I don't think that's going to pay for the -- 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Oh. 12 MS. PIEPER: -- the paper. 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We want to cover the 14 cost. How much does it take? 15 MS. PIEPER: I would suggest at least $10, if 16 not more. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What? 18 MS. PIEPER: At least $10. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we -- are those, you 20 know, copied -- do we get them from -- 21 MS. PIEPER: No. No, we take our book apart, 22 the one that's filed in our office, and we literally stand 23 at the copy machine and copy it. 24 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So, it's the cost of 25 copying time and it's paper. 104 1 MS. PIEPER: Right. 2 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Is $10 enough? 3 MS. PIEPER: Personally, I don't think so. I 4 think we ought to do at least $20. I've talked with the 5 Assistant Auditor, too, and she thinks -- she was thinking 6 $20 to $25. 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Would you -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My first thought was 9 $25, that's an awful lot of money, but I'll second at $20. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: I got $20. Got $21? $22? 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll move $20. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 14 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court 15 set the cost for a copy of the 2000/2001 Kerr County budget 16 at $20 per copy. 17 MS. PIEPER: Thank you. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or 19 comments? 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes, question. Is 21 there a copy of the budget that the public can peruse at the 22 desk? 23 MS. PIEPER: Oh, yes, sir. 24 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And in addition to that, 105 1 is there a copy at the library? 2 MS. PIEPER: At the library? Not that I'm 3 aware of. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We may -- I think we 5 ought to put one over there. I mean, we're going up on the 6 fee. A lot of people use that more than -- you know, I 7 think we ought to put one over there at no charge for the 8 public. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No charge for the 11 public? Charge them $5 just to go through the thing. That 12 was a joke. 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think that's a good 14 idea, make copies available to the public. If they don't 15 want to buy a copy, they can look at it. If they want to 16 buy it, it's 20 bucks. 17 MS. UECKER: Would you put it at the library 18 or in the law library? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Library. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Public library. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Public library. For us, 22 Butt-Holdsworth would serve the county, I think. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or 25 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 106 1 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 3 (No response.) 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Jannett, you'll get a 6 copy over there? 7 MS. PIEPER: Yes, sir, I will. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you very much. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item Number 19, 10 consider and discuss the ADCR Plan and authorize County 11 Judge to sign same. Ms. Nemec? 12 MS. NEMEC: Well, fortunately, our retirement 13 rate went down to 7.62 from 7.61, and that is staying with 14 the same benefits that we currently have, which is 8-year 15 vesting, retirement age of 60, and Rule of 75. If we want 16 to do the optional benefits, which is the partial lump sum 17 option, that would be an additional .33 percent added to 18 that rate. And then also, we have never had a 19 cost-of-living increase for the retirees. I am not 20 proposing that we do any changes to the -- to the plan this 21 year, especially with the increases we made this year to the 22 employees' salaries and all the adjustments that we made to 23 that. Hopefully, in the upcoming years, I would like to see 24 the Court consider a cost-of-living increase for the 25 retirees. That I know of, they have never had one. They 107 1 were employees of the County at one time, and we one day 2 will be retired also, and I just think that if -- if the 3 funding is there for them, then one year we should consider 4 that. But, at this point, my recommendation is to go with 5 the 7.62. That is what we have in the budget. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 9 seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court adopt the 10 ADCR with the 7.62 employer contribution rate, and the other 11 benefits as currently enjoyed and budgeted. Any further 12 questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your 13 right hand. 14 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 16 (No response.) 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 18 MS. NEMEC: Thank you. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item Number 20, 20 consider and discuss appointment of Brad Alford to be a 21 Deputy Constable for Precinct Number 1. Mr. McClure? 22 MR. McCLURE: Thank you, gentlemen. Judge, 23 and all four Commissioners, I appreciate the opportunity to 24 be up here to talk with you this morning. Some time ago, 25 Russ Duncan approached me to see if Brad could have an 108 1 appointment for a deputy constable. I want whatever is good 2 for the County and for the citizens in Precinct 1. If it's 3 a good idea for Brad to have a -- a commission, I don't 4 object to it. I really don't know for sure why Russ and 5 Brad wanted one, unless it was to keep Brad's certification 6 alive with TCLEOSE, the state organization that governs 7 peace officers. I found out this morning -- I didn't do 8 enough background on it, and I apologize to y'all for that, 9 but I found out this morning that a person that has been in 10 law enforcement and gets out of it can merely apply for 11 a leave of absence, and as long as he keeps his training up, 12 his -- his license will be active. So, it's more or less -- 13 I'd like to do whatever is good for Kerr County. That's 14 what I -- I was elected to serve the justice court of 15 Precinct 1, but I don't need any help doing that. I can do 16 that work in 20 hours a week, so I, in turn, volunteer to do 17 other things for the Sheriff's Office, transporting 18 prisoners and bailiffing in the different courts to occupy 19 my time and to kind of justify my existence. But, if the 20 Commissioners think that it's necessary for Brad to have a 21 commission, I don't object to it. So, it's just more or 22 less up to y'all. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is it required in -- 24 do you know if it's required in his job to be a certified 25 peace officer? 109 1 MR. McCLURE: No, it's not required. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's not? 3 MR. McCLURE: I don't think it is. Russ 4 would be the one to ask about that, but he's been doing it 5 for quite a while and he's not certified. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Graham is shaking 7 his head. 8 MR. GRAHAM: The present position he's 9 filling, I don't believe it requires a certified peace 10 officer. 11 MR. McCLURE: I don't believe he is, or he 12 wouldn't have gotten this far. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And you said that you 14 don't have to -- we don't have to appoint him to anything in 15 order for him to keep his license up? He simply has to -- 16 MR. McCLURE: No, he just -- 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- qualify with -- 18 MR. McCLURE: Yeah, he has to enlist -- he 19 has to enlist with the TCLEOSE of the state and go to an 20 inactive position, but he has to keep his schooling up. 21 Everybody that's an officer has to have 40 hours every two 22 years of -- of training, and he'd keep that up and be an 23 inactive peace officer, and it wouldn't affect his -- if he 24 goes back into law enforcement in the future, all he's got 25 to do is just -- he don't have to take all them exams and 110 1 all that stuff to get back in it. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess my thought would 3 be that -- I mean, I appreciate that you came, Don, but no 4 action on this unless Russ or Brad come and explain why he 5 needs it. I mean, I just don't see the point. I mean, 6 there can be other problems coming up if we have a deputy 7 police officer, and I just -- I'm not sure I know all the 8 ramifications of doing it, if he's going to be -- what he's 9 going to be doing, why he needs it. 10 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Take it a step further 11 and say, unless there is some reason for him to have the 12 appointment to do his current job, I don't see any reason to 13 appoint him. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 15 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: To do it. 16 MR. McCLURE: I agree. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And liability probably 18 comes with the appointment of some sort, I would think. 19 MS. UECKER: If I can make a comment -- and 20 maybe Officer Graham can clarify this -- I think maybe 21 they're also doing that because of their clientele; that 22 they do come across someone that needs a warrant served or a 23 notice served on them, and they're right there, rather than 24 calling an officer. Is that -- 25 MR. GRAHAM: My understanding, though, is 111 1 most of the time they run across somebody that's got a 2 warrant, it's here within the courthouse. Now, I know that 3 our courthouse, we furnish bailiffs and stuff, and Constable 4 McClure is here, so I really -- 5 MS. UECKER: Well, he's here 20 hours a week. 6 And, I was thinking; seems to me like I heard them 7 talking -- and this is truly hearsay, and I'll go see if I 8 can get Russ if you want me to, but I think maybe it's for, 9 like, civil papers and things that -- where there's contact 10 within their office and that type of clientele. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How do they do it 12 now? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Call for help. 14 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Call. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: I am firmly opposed to the 16 idea of anyone from the Collection Department acting in the 17 capacity of a peace officer, serving warrants or attempting 18 to make arrests. I think that totally blurs the distinction 19 between functions of law enforcement and Collections 20 Department. So, if there's any thought that Mr. Alford 21 would be acting in the nature of a licensed police officer 22 as Deputy Collections Manager, I think that's a very bad 23 idea. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, in other words, let 25 them come back in if they want to. If not, thank you for 112 1 your opinion, and -- 2 MR. McCLURE: I thought they'd be here to -- 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, thank you. 4 MR. McCLURE: -- express their feelings about 5 it. Thank y'all very much. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Constable. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item Number 21. 8 Constable of Precinct 2 had requested equipment to be 9 installed in a patrol vehicle. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Constable Ayala came 11 to me with this list. He has now has been in school almost 12 constantly since being elected constable of Precinct 2, and 13 he has a need to have equipment in his car. We've always 14 had discussions in the past about whether or not we should 15 do this. I think we have done it in the past, and these are 16 the items that he'd like to have considered approved. And, 17 as a companion, then -- 22, is it, Judge? That tells how we 18 would propose to -- to fund that. There is a considerable 19 balance of unexpended funds in the Constable's budget for 20 1999/2000, due to the fact that the constable who was 21 elected didn't serve out his term due to death, and so a lot 22 of funds were not expended. If possible, Mr. -- Constable 23 Ayala would like for to us consider this favorably, and I 24 would -- I would recommend consideration of it. And, if 25 it's not inappropriate, take them from the unexpended funds 113 1 in the '99/2000 budget. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Have we done it for other 3 constables, provided all the equipment? I thought we did 4 not. But I -- 5 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That was going to be 6 my question. How did we do it for the other constables? 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The other constables, 8 we bought -- we kicked and screamed a little bit about it, 9 but we did do it. We acquired a radio, radar, and this and 10 that and the other thing. The latest was tires, as you may 11 recall. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where are those items, 13 do you think, that we have purchased? 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: The ones that were 15 recoverable were recovered by the Sheriff's Department. I 16 believe they're back in the custody and use of Kerr County. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That which was 18 recoverable, yes. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Cough them up. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would move on Item 21 21 that we approve the list for Constable Ayala so he can be 22 equipped and do the job for which he was elected. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We need to know if 24 there's money there to pay for it. 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What fund would it 114 1 come from? 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He checked it out 3 with Tommy and he said that there was. If I can get some 4 confirmation -- 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't see how we can 6 take it from last year's budget any more than we could the 7 computer for district court. I mean, if it's -- I'm not 8 sure. I think we need to look at our -- our budget process 9 from the standpoint of if we're going to do this for the 10 constable in Precinct 2, we need to do it for all 11 constables, give them an allowance, spend a certain amount 12 of money for equipment. We've not done that in the past, at 13 least not to this extent, and I don't think that it's right 14 to fund one constable without funding all three of them -- 15 or all four of them. So, I'm opposed to doing it in this -- 16 this manner, from the standpoint of if we do one, we need to 17 do them all, as opposed to taking out of last year's budget. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we have an 19 obligation to equip them. 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Oh, I don't -- and I 21 wouldn't question that, that they need to have equipment. 22 The question is, we need to be consistent with all 23 constables and have a policy on how we provide equipment, 24 and then go do that. And this is probably legitimate, but I 25 think we need to know what the background is and how it's -- 115 1 the current equipment that the constables have, where did it 2 come from? How is it funded? And do we need to relook at 3 the whole question of equipment for constables? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. I'm not opposed 5 to doing it entirely. I just think we need to treat all 6 precincts the same. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can safely say the 8 constable from my precinct picks up his own tab on all those 9 issues. Except for his hearing aid batteries. 10 MR. McCLURE: What was the question? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wasn't a question. I 12 just said you pay for your own items. 13 MR. McCLURE: Well, yeah. I started off in 14 '79 doing this, and then we had to provide our own stuff. 15 But, now I've got a radio and stuff that I bought myself, 16 but it's about two years since I've touched that microphone. 17 I've got a -- a portable phone, and when I need a 28 or I 18 need help, I call the Sheriff's Office. But, that's my way 19 of doing it. I'm not suggesting that everybody do things 20 like that. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, there may be common 22 ground, somewhere in between providing nothing and providing 23 everything -- you know, everything, I think. You know, but 24 I think it should be a budgeted item. 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If we find out where 116 1 we are with our constables and their equipment, how are they 2 funded and how do we intend to fund them in the future, and 3 then we can act on this and get what they need. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe there -- I 5 think there is a line item under each budget for some 6 equipment, if I'm not mistaken. The problem is that he's 7 getting -- he's getting equipped from scratch, that he 8 hasn't had this before. So -- 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But so's the Precinct 3 10 constable. He was just elected; he was elected, served out 11 a term. He's basically new, as well, from the last couple 12 of years. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He should be equally 14 funded if he has the same needs. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think the reason 16 they probably put it in -- you know, in defense of the 17 constables, in their budgets is because they were given 18 direction not to change their budget essentially, so we 19 didn't give them a whole lot of opportunity, unless they 20 came back to us -- 21 (Ms. Sovil handed a copy of the budget to Commissioner Griffin.) 22 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that the current 24 one or last year's? 25 MS. SOVIL: Current. 117 1 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Current Capital 2 Outlay, zero. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do we know what was 4 left from last year's budget in Constable, Precinct 2's 5 entire budget? 6 MS. SOVIL: The only thing you can look at is 7 the amount of what was budgeted and what was expended, and 8 it will tell you on there. 9 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And the actual -- it 10 doesn't show what the '99/2000 budget was. It's not the 11 estimated actuals, but it's got the '98/'99 actuals. 12 MS. SOVIL: They changed formats on me. 13 Well -- 14 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: But it still ought to 15 come to us as a budget amendment, right? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think so. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That should be pretty 18 easy to -- 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me ask the 20 constable to redirect his efforts here, see if we can come 21 up with a budget. We still have time to do a budget 22 amendment on -- 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, it 24 doesn't -- 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- on the previous 118 1 year's budget, since there is no -- there are no funds in 2 this year. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, it's the 4 same money. That was -- as Larry said earlier, whether it's 5 just going to be in reserves or take it out of this year, I 6 mean, it's the same dollars, essentially. 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It makes more 8 accounting sense, if we're going to buy it in this fiscal 9 year, to have it come out of this year's budget somewhere. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me get back to 11 the constable, see if we can recraft this. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Could you two do 13 something similar so we can come up with a -- some numbers? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was going to suggest 15 that Constable Ayala get with the other constables and have 16 them come up with what they think is a reasonable amount. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 18 MS. NEMEC: Judge? 19 (Discussion off the record.) 20 MS. NEMEC: Legally, he cannot expend funds 21 from last year's budget if they were not purchased in 22 September of '99 -- or September of 2000. The invoice has 23 to be dated September 30th of 2000, or he had to have taken 24 the goods as of -- as of that date, or he cannot do it as a 25 budget amendment. You can tie things back until the middle 119 1 of November, but if it hasn't been purchased, you can't. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In this case, the 3 invoice is dated September 26th. 4 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: But it hasn't been 5 expended, right? 6 MS. NEMEC: So, it has been purchased, then? 7 These items have been purchased by him? 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I don't think 9 he's purchased it, but he has an invoice or a quotation, 10 whichever. Has a quotation dated September 26th. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He has an estimate. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Estimate, right. 13 MS. NEMEC: Can't do it. 14 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Dated September -- 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All right, we'll 16 get back -- 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nice try. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll revisit this. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll come back 20 again. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item Number 23, 22 consider and discuss open house for district courtrooms. 23 Commissioner Baldwin. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. It is time 25 to talk about this. I don't even know -- we need to decide 120 1 whether we -- we need to decide what day that we want to 2 have a grand opening, and I guess -- I guess one of the 3 things that we need to decide is are we going to have a 4 grand opening just for the courtrooms, or do we want to wait 5 till Ms. Uecker's operation gets open and then have one big 6 grand opening? 7 MS. UECKER: Please. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm reluctant to have a large 9 number of people coming through here when we're still in 10 construction. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I am too, and that's 12 fine, but I think that we need to make that decision, 13 because there are some of us -- Judge Ables, he and I have 14 been visiting about this, and, you know, we want to -- we 15 want to get our guest list now. We're going to have to 16 contact a lot of -- there will be a lot of people here from 17 all over this part of Texas that would come up here for the 18 opening, and we want to kind of put our guest list together, 19 and it's going to take some time to do all of that. So, I 20 think we need to establish an opening date, whether it's 21 just for the courtrooms or the whole thing, and no 22 difference one way or the other. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the thought -- 24 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: How about -- I'm 25 sorry. I just was just going to say, how about having a 121 1 small -- smaller ribbon-cutting ceremony or something of 2 that sort to get into business, and then, when the whole 3 thing is finished, we'll have a general open house that's 4 open to everybody? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That -- yeah, that 6 would be great. 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You can acknowledge 8 with the ribbon-cutting and the Judge present and all that 9 sort of thing, and grip and grin pictures, do all of that 10 sooner, rather than later. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do we have some kind 12 of anticipated completion date for the District Clerk's 13 office? 14 MS. UECKER: Yeah, by the end of the year 15 they'll be out of here. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: By the end of the 17 year. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This year? This year 19 or next year? 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that a promise? 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Are we talking fiscal year or 22 calendar year? 23 MS. UECKER: They have indicated that they 24 would be out of here by January 1. And, the way -- as fast 25 as they're going upstairs, I mean, they're already putting 122 1 in -- it's all been demolished and the walls are going back 2 up, and framing is going up and the inner walls are going 3 up. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My -- my thought is that 5 we would only have -- have one -- and, actually, I had never 6 thought about this at all. I -- and I'm thinking -- I know 7 you're thinking something along the lines of what Kendall 8 County did when they opened the courthouse. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's exactly right. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Elected officials come in, 11 have a pretty big to-do. I would pick a date in January and 12 do it all at once. And the other option is to come out with 13 Christmas parties. That's a bad idea if you're having a big 14 function. 15 MS. NEMEC: How about at the swearing-in, 16 January 1? 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: January 1, have 18 District Judges from all over the state come here? I don't 19 think so. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: That -- I'm not sure we can 21 count on that, given the performance of our construction 22 company. I think if we're going to plan something, it needs 23 to be in the latter half of January. And, I think 24 Commissioner Griffin makes a pretty good suggestion, that if 25 District Judges are anxious to have their pictures in the 123 1 paper, that we could have a ribbon-cutting and -- and, you 2 know, formally accept the new courtrooms. I don't have a 3 problem with that. But, as far as scheduling a larger 4 event, which I totally agree with, anything before the 5 second half of January is just dicey. But I think 6 Commissioner Baldwin has just volunteered to head the 7 committee to plan the function. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be happy to do that. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's look at the calendar. 10 I'd say somewhere between the second half of January and 11 first half of February would be a window to do it during 12 that period. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or do you want to wait 14 till spring? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I want to -- 16 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We may be forced to. 17 AUDIENCE: Fourth of July. 18 MS. UECKER: Well, with the construction 19 right now, if we do anything right now, even though the -- 20 the courtrooms are complete and we're using them, there's 21 still a -- I mean, they're using -- the construction people 22 have quite a mess up there, and using the elevator for 23 bringing up supplies and stuff, and I -- you know, there's 24 still a big dust problem, and I don't think right now it 25 would be a good time to try to have anything. Let's wait 124 1 and do it all at once. If the Judges want to do something 2 in their courtroom, they can. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I will work with the 4 District Clerk -- the State Champion District Clerk and the 5 District Judges and their offices, and we'll come up with a 6 date, and then I'll come back to you guys next time and lay 7 it on you. Cool? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Great. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Cool. 10 MS. UECKER: Buster, you're -- you're the new 11 president of what, the South Texas -- are you familiar with 12 the -- the new program that TAC has for the Individual 13 Achievement Program? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, a little bit, 15 mm-hmm. 16 MS. UECKER: Are we a candidate for that, as 17 far as the new facility? 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know. Do you 19 want to -- 20 MS. UECKER: Something you might want to look 21 into. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do y'all want to be -- 23 do you want me to contact them, see if we can get money for 24 it? 25 MS. UECKER: That's -- Susan Windall is the 125 1 new director of that. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't think there's 3 any money in it. I think you -- again, you get your picture 4 in the magazine. 5 MS. UECKER: A state magazine. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's push on a few more 8 items, and then we'll take our luncheon break. Next item on 9 the agenda is Item Number 24, consider and discuss adoption 10 of Conflict of Interest Rules for Designated Representative 11 and amendment of U.G.R.A. - O.S.S.F. contract to incorporate 12 such Conflict of Interest Rules. The Conflict of Interest 13 Rules are in your packet. I have shared these with Jerry 14 Ahrens, the president of the U.G.R.A. Board. He has said 15 they are fine by him, and that if we adopt these and ask to 16 have the U.G.R.A. contract amended to include these, that he 17 will take it to his board. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did we run it by our 19 attorney? No? 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't think so. 21 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Looks good to me. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it goes a long 23 way to -- for the public to be aware of what the policy is, 24 and that the -- you know, a lot of the, I guess, perception 25 that may or may not have been out there regarding this 126 1 issue. 2 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'll make a motion 3 that we adopt it. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. Do we need to 5 take it by the County Attorney's office as a form approval? 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Probably. It's not a bad 7 idea. Why don't we adopt them, subject to approval? 8 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. That's so -- 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: As amended. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 11 Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, that the Court adopt 12 the rules regarding conflicts of interest for Designated 13 Representative, subject to approval by the Kerr County 14 Attorney, and amend the U.G.R.A. contract to include these 15 as a part of the contract. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This -- this is 17 directly related to O.S.S.F. It doesn't have anything to do 18 with water companies or anything like that, does it? 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: That's correct. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I think that's 21 where part of the -- some confusion and hard feelings have 22 come in, is some ownership of some water companies and that 23 kind of thing. Okay. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or 25 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 127 1 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 3 (No response.) 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carried. Number 25, 5 consider and discuss approving service contract for Drug 6 Offender Education Program and authorize County Judge to 7 sign same. This is the basic same program we've had in 8 effect since 1995. Any questions or comments? 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we approve the 10 service contract for Drug Offender Education Program and 11 authorize the County Judge to sign same. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 15 seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve the 16 service contract for the Drug Offender Education Program and 17 authorize County Judge to sign same. Any further questions 18 or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 19 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 21 (No response.) 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item Number 26, 23 consider and discuss approval of the Eleventh Amendment and 24 Extension of City/County Firefighting Agreement, and 25 authorize County Judge to sign same. 128 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The same, Judge? 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 6 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, that the Court 7 approve the Eleventh Amendment and Extension of City/County 8 Firefighting Agreement and authorize County Judge to sign 9 same. Any further questions or comments? If not -- 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On that, I might make a 11 quick announcement related to that, that Chief Holloway 12 appointed Robert Taylor to be the E.M.S. Coordinator on an 13 interim basis. It's related to firefighting; thought I'd 14 bring it up at this time. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or 16 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 17 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 19 (No response.) 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's jump quickly to Item 21 Number 32 before we break for lunch. Consider and discuss 22 approving temporary road closure for Hermann Sons Youth 23 Camps. Commissioner Letz. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What this is -- there's a 25 letter that explains what it is, a cross-country meet, and 129 1 they would like to use -- well, the route takes them along a 2 county road, and they would like to have that road closed 3 that morning from 8 a.m. to 12:30. Actually, the name of 4 the road is Altenheim Road. They will be responsible for 5 putting up barricades, taking barricades down. I have no 6 problem with it. I'll make a motion that we authorize the 7 closure of Altenheim Road from Hermann Sons Road up to the 8 retirement home, October 28th from 8 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second that motion. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 11 seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve 12 closure of Altenheim Road from -- 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hermann Sons Road. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: -- Hermann Sons Road to 15 retirement home from 8:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. on October 16 28th, Year 2000. Any further questions or comments? If 17 not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 18 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 20 (No response.) 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this 22 time, it's my suggestion we break for lunch. What time 23 would you like to reconvene? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a good 25 suggestion. 130 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Reconvene at 1:30? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 1:30. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. We stand in recess 4 until 1:30 this afternoon. Thank you. 5 (Recess taken from 11:53 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.) 6 - - - - - - - - - - 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Its 1:30 on Tuesday 8 afternoon, October the 10th, Year 2000, and we will 9 reconvene this regular session of the Kerr County 10 Commissioners Court. The next item for consideration is 11 Item 27, consider and discuss IHR panic alarm system for the 12 courthouse. I was hoping the Sheriff would be here. When 13 we considered this item at the last meeting, the Court 14 approved the system with the proviso that, one, there be no 15 monthly fee, and two, that the alarm system would ring at 16 the Sheriff's Department. It's since been determined that 17 the alarm system will ring at the -- can ring at the 18 Sheriff's Department, but that it does not identify the 19 source of the call, other than the courthouse, which is 20 better than nothing, but certainly not the best possible 21 solution. In other words, it will just say there's a call 22 from the courthouse, but it doesn't say whether it's 23 District Court or County Court at Law or County Treasurer or 24 where. And, in order for us -- for it to show the source; 25 that is, the office from which the call came, we'd have to 131 1 pay a $20 a month fee and invest in a panel to be placed at 2 IHR for purposes of identifying the call. So, in light of 3 the specific instructions of the Court last time, it's back 4 before us. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I was either in 6 a coma or I wasn't here. I don't remember this item. I 7 guess I was gone. But, who all gets these buttons? I mean, 8 I understand the -- oh, wait, I see it here. Judge's 9 secretary, Courtroom 1 and Courtroom 2. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: And then the six additional 11 buttons would be for our office suite, County Court at Law, 12 Treasurer, Tax Assessor/Collector, Clerk -- County Clerk, 13 District Clerk, and I believe we finally decided J.P. 1, 14 because of the walk-in traffic. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Everybody, just about. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But you have to have 17 a panel that identifies it out there? 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, you have to have a 19 panel if you want it out at -- to show at the Sheriff's 20 Office that it was a call from Jannett's office or a call 21 from Spencer's courtroom or wherever. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would it -- 23 MS. SOVIL: We have a panel somewhere. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Not that we know of. 25 MS. SOVIL: We had one. 132 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was thinking that it 2 would be easier, from the Sheriff's standpoint, if we had 3 fewer buttons, which means he had fewer options of where he 4 would need to go. Do we need them in all those -- all nine 5 locations? 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, those are the -- I'm 7 not going to argue about the District Court. Wouldn't do 8 any good, anyway. The other places are places where the 9 public does business on a regular basis, and I think there's 10 -- if we're going to put a system in, then the system is 11 needed in those locations. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Has something happened 13 that causes us to think that something bad might happen? 14 Or are we just preparing for the future? Or -- 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: We've had isolated 16 incidences, but no consistent pattern. But the District 17 Judges came through and they wanted a panic button system in 18 their offices, and it was my feeling that it was not proper 19 for them to be protected when the rest of the courthouse was 20 not protected. It's my understanding that before they 21 renovated our office suite, there was basically a system 22 like that throughout the whole courthouse. Of course, that 23 was when the Sheriff's Office was right over here, and it 24 rang over there. But, I did not think it appropriate for us 25 to install a security system only for the two district 133 1 courtrooms upstairs. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is there an 3 additional monthly charge? Do we know that? 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: If we want -- if we want to 5 have it show which office it comes from, there's a -- 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There is additional? 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: It's $20 a month plus the 8 cost of the panel. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If we want it to work, 10 you have to pay an extra 20 bucks a month, basically. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would think, though, 12 that if we go along with it, to hold off on doing that next 13 step and see if we start getting a whole lot of buttons 14 pushed and the Sheriff is having confusion. I can't imagine 15 we'd use it -- once a year at most? I don't know, but I 16 think it's a good system to have, but I don't think -- 17 certainly, I'm not in favor of spending the extra $20 a 18 month. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, you know, the Sheriff 20 has said he can work with it, but it's -- it's not ideal. 21 If the panic button's pushed and he dispatches an officer, 22 you know, how critical is the amount of time that officer 23 takes to find out where he's supposed to be? That's the 24 whole issue. And none of us anticipated it being used very 25 often, if at all. Jannett, I don't know, in your -- 134 1 MS. PIEPER: We've used -- 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: -- 18 months experience, how 3 many times have you had need of something like that? 4 MS. PIEPER: We've used the speed dial when 5 Rick was here on his a couple of times. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Couple of times? 7 MS. PIEPER: But as far as actual 8 emergencies, there was once when a lady brought in a loaded 9 .357 Magnum. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: That would qualify. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What color of button 12 do you want? 13 MS. PIEPER: I don't care. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I don't know whether we 15 want to go ahead and do this, or do we want to go back and 16 look -- try to investigate further? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Didn't we approve the 18 $2,000? 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: If conditions were met. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And conditions weren't. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Conditions being that there's 22 no monitoring monthly fee and that it rang out at the 23 Sheriff's Department. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. So, the only 25 issue is whether we're going to pay the extra $20, because 135 1 -- because the proposal provides for the system and the 2 additional buttons. The only issue is $20 a month. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: No. You have to pay for the 4 panel, too. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's in here. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: No. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 16-point wireless 8 receiver. Is that not what that is? 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: That's not my understanding, 10 no. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We need a better panel or 12 supplemental panel. Is there -- 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: My suggestion is that we put 14 this off. Let me get with Keith Longnecker and have him 15 look into it further. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was going to say, are 17 there other options other than IHR? Could the phone company 18 do something like that? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, they do. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Jannett? 22 MS. PIEPER: Judge, I had a question in my 23 mind come up, because if -- if -- like, I have a long 24 office, so no matter where you put that one button, it's not 25 going to be sufficient. 136 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: But you have to look at where 2 the most likely places -- it's not likely to come up in your 3 break room. It's likely to come up at the front counter. 4 MS. PIEPER: Well, this lady actually walked 5 towards the back. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well -- 7 MS. PIEPER: But the system that we have now, 8 where the -- the bailiff -- I assume he has this little 9 beeper. Then, from wherever something happens in my office, 10 the clerk can immediately punch it in her telephone and it 11 shows up, County Clerk's office. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: That may be what we need to 13 look into. Let's put it down and do a little more 14 investigation. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Phone system may be the 16 best, 'cause that way it's already -- 17 MS. SOVIL: Except it's bad when the guy is 18 standing in front of you with a gun, you tell him, "Just a 19 minute," you have to call somebody. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, no, they have a 21 system just like this. They'd provide that service. 22 MS. SOVIL: Panic button underneath? Like -- 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Telephone company? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It might be a can with 25 some little wires running through. 137 1 MS. SOVIL: I don't care, but you can't tell 2 the person standing in front of you, "Don't hit me, I got to 3 make a phone call right quick." 4 MS. LAVENDER: You can, but it probably won't 5 work. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Find out what else is 7 available. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's go to the next item, 9 which is Item Number 30, consider and discuss Manufactured 10 Home Rental Communities section of proposed Kerr County 11 Subdivision Rules and Regulations. Commissioner Letz. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. Well, first 13 of all, a week or so ago, myself and David Motley met with 14 the representatives from the Manufactured Rental Home 15 Community and their attorneys; one, to -- our main purpose 16 is to come up with some, I guess, provisions that they could 17 live with. And we say that mainly because we're in a 18 lawsuit with them over our current position, so they felt it 19 made sense to have -- to try to work this out. 20 What we did, basically, is looked at the -- 21 the statute and went very, you know, close -- as close as we 22 could to the statute and pulled anything that we had the 23 authority to do out of our Subdivision Rules, where 24 applicable, and then tried to modify the language 25 accordingly. As an example -- and I noticed several places 138 1 where I missed it, but every time the word "plat" appears, 2 it should say "survey," because they are not required to 3 plat; they're not subject to any platting requirements. 4 There's some -- there's verbiage needed to be changed along 5 that line. I think the first two and a half pages are 6 pretty much -- you know, that's just giving us the 7 authority, and definitions and general provisions. When we 8 get into minimum infrastructure basis is where the debate 9 came in, and also where we have what we're requiring of 10 them. 11 Under drainage, we went back to our 12 Subdivision Rules and Regulations and came out with -- we 13 can pull that, pretty much what we require our subdivisions 14 to do. I didn't see that it was any different requirement 15 for manufactured homes. And these are the -- I do have a 16 question for Franklin on this. Oh, Franklin is here, good. 17 Franklin gave me some new language for this regarding 18 post-construction runoff rates versus pre-construction. How 19 does that go with the other provision that we have regarding 20 using the 5-year frequency for, you know, all calculations? 21 It seems to be a conflict, to me, so you might look at that. 22 Just, you know, when you have time. In those two 23 provisions, I see there's a little bit of a conflict right 24 now. I have it right now as you wrote it, but you might 25 look at that. 139 1 MR. JOHNSTON: I'll look at it. I don't 2 think they're talking about the same thing. I think the 3 post-construction runoff is after developed, but there's 4 going to be a higher velocity and this is the means of 5 slowing that down. They can use methods to slow it down. I 6 think that's what that's talking about. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, anyway, the language 8 under drainage is basically exactly as it is in our 9 Subdivision Rules and Regulations. When we get to 8.03 B, 10 roads, it's probably the biggest sticking point we had and 11 have had with trying to settle the language for this. And, 12 the bottom line is the statute is very explicit, that we can 13 have the minimum standards for ingress and egress of 14 emergency vehicles. The argument that was presented to me 15 by the Manufactured Home Rental Community Association was if 16 minimum standards are for our local -- or our -- more of a 17 country -- our country lane, not paved, that's what it 18 should be, regardless of the amount of vehicles. 19 The current Subdivision Rules varied the road 20 requirements based on the number of people using the road. 21 And their position was that if an emergency vehicle can go 22 on an unpaved country lane, they can go on a country lane, 23 unpaved, regardless of the traffic flow on it. And they 24 said -- and their point of view or their position was that 25 there's nothing in the statute regarding traffic. And there 140 1 isn't; it's only about emergency vehicles. So, what I did 2 was pulled out the unpaved country lane as the minimum 3 standard for roads, and then we changed the right-of-way to 4 30 feet, versus 60 that was required, and for the same 5 reason. They were agreeable to 30-foot right-of-way, but 6 they said that there's nothing really in the statute about 7 right-of-way for this road. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But the depth of the 9 base and crown and all that stuff stays in? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Same standards as we 11 have. The construction of the road is the same. It's just 12 that the width isn't in -- would not -- you know, these are 13 for private roads. They clearly, under all the survey 14 plans, would be -- would have language on them that if they 15 were going to be public roads, they have to meet our full 16 standards, but these are the private roads. That was that 17 issue. 18 Water availability, which we haven't -- we 19 have some authority on that, but we have the authority, 20 basically, to go into these -- what basically are going to 21 be our water systems, and we just decided the rules that are 22 in our Subdivision Rules, which is what T.N.R.C.C. rules -- 23 same requirements. Waste disposal, again, going by our 24 O.S.S.F. rules. And then the other area that we changed 25 quite a bit is survey requirements, and this is something 141 1 that I wasn't -- you know, we made some changes. We tried 2 to make it as close -- parallel to our platting process as 3 possible, but things such as lot lines are not going to be 4 designated, because they say that these lot lines are not 5 permanent. They move them around from time to time, because 6 they're renting areas, not necessarily lots. And, I don't 7 know enough, you know, about their business, but that was 8 the argument. So, it didn't make any sense to put lot lines 9 on there if they don't necessarily rent by lots. 10 But, all of the -- the -- you know, we 11 basically did the survey as we do a plat. It's on a mylar, 12 we get copies. And the mylar issue is mainly so that the 13 County Clerk can keep it in the same set of files, same 14 dimensions that we have for the plats. And that's about it. 15 The same certification that's required on our subdivisions; 16 911, Floodplain, Headwaters and all that. They have to sign 17 off on the -- on the mylar, the way we have it right now. 18 And they agreed to that; they didn't think that was a 19 problem. So, that's where we are. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Questions or comments? 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Jon, why is the 22 Manufactured Home Rental Community different from any other 23 subdivision? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because the -- the 25 legislation that gave us authority to regulate them was very 142 1 explicit as to what we could regulate. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why? I mean, what do 3 you think? Tell me why. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know. I think -- 5 I guess it's Senator Wentworth's legislation, and I would 6 guess it was to try to get it through with as little 7 opposition from the Association as possible. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What do you think it 9 is, Fred? 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: I think this is something 11 that many of the counties wanted, and basically it's a 12 compromise with the Manufactured Home Association. They 13 didn't want to have to be -- 'cause the people that own 14 these manufactured home -- rental home communities don't 15 necessarily want to have them platted, because many times 16 they're a temporary income stream. You take a piece of 17 ground that may not be ready for a permanent subdivision, 18 you make it a manufactured rental home community so that you 19 can realize some income off of it until such time as the -- 20 the economy and the demand catches up to make it a permanent 21 subdivision. But I think that the Legislature, through 22 Senator Wentworth, realized that there was a great deal of 23 abuse going on among some unscrupulous developers of these 24 homes -- these communities, and so they tried to come up 25 with some interim fix as to what would be required and what 143 1 wouldn't be. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we're on pretty 3 firm ground here. They, you know, pretty well looked at it 4 after we drafted it from their -- from the lawsuit 5 standpoint, which is a different issue. And, just because 6 they agree or don't agree doesn't mean we have to accept it, 7 but I feel that the way it is currently worded is as close 8 as we could get it to our Subdivision Rules and meet the 9 requirements of the statute. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think -- 11 basically, I agree with you, and it was a marked improvement 12 over situations that we have in the county. And one that 13 comes to my mind immediately is Hill River Estates off of 14 Skyline Drive in the eastern part of the county. With 15 regulations like this in place, we might not have a 16 situation as serious or as bad that one particularly is. 17 But, it does seem to me we are compromising our road 18 standards, and that kind of concerns me, with the minimum 19 right-of-way 30 feet as opposed to -- was it 50 or 60? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sixty. 21 MR. JOHNSTON: Sixty. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sixty in our current 23 rules. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If there's no way 25 around it, I guess there's no way around it. 144 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: That's a situation that 2 bothers me. Let's take the concept plan that we talked 3 about today. If that was a manufactured home rental 4 community, you have 238 manufactured home rental sites 5 coming out of a country lane. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a lot of 7 traffic. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: That's a lot of traffic. You 9 have to figure, with 238 manufactured rental homes, you're 10 probably looking at right around 500 cars, 'cause each 11 household will probably have an average of just over two 12 cars per home. So, you're looking at 500 cars coming right 13 out of a country lane, and you're looking at putting 14 emergency vehicles through that traffic. So, that -- that 15 concerns me. 16 MR. JOHNSTON: Is what you agreed to there 17 set in stone? Is that the final version? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, it's clear that this 19 was -- 20 MR. JOHNSTON: I would certainly -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- this was a meeting 22 between myself and -- and the attorneys from both sides, 23 basically, to try to come up with something to take back to 24 the Court. And, I mean, it's clearly -- you know, they know 25 that I don't like it and they know that it may not go 145 1 through the Court. And the only reason that they were 2 present is to try to avoid -- or to get the lawsuit 3 dismissed. But, that does not mean we should do it in a 4 certain way. I mean, the Judge has a very good point. And 5 I told them that same point, that -- 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: If we have the 60-foot 7 right-of-way, I mean, that would at least double the size of 8 the capacity of the emergency vehicles to get through. 9 Thirty feet -- I mean, that's not very much. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Like Lane Valley right 11 now, which isn't much. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Isn't much. If a big 13 fire truck goes rumbling down that road, the fire truck's 14 going to go -- everybody coming up against them is going to 15 end up in a bar ditch. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One of the problems that 17 they have hinged on is, one, talking to the -- I'm not sure; 18 I don't think it was Chief Holloway, but someone in Chief 19 Holloway's department, about the national standards for fire 20 trucks and the kind of roads they need, and this meets that. 21 You know, their -- their concern is more about cul-de-sacs 22 and turn-arounds and things of that nature than they were 23 the width. And, they were -- in these rules, we do have the 24 same cul-de-sac language that we have in our Subdivision 25 Rules, which is adequate, 50 foot. 146 1 MR. JOHNSTON: It's -- the minimum standards 2 of the subdivision can't be more stringent than the 3 subdivision. Ours is 60 minimum in the Subdivision Rules. 4 It goes up from there, depending on what type of road it is. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, but it doesn't -- 6 the legislation talks about roads. Doesn't talk about 7 right-of-way. The roads can be the minimum standards. 8 Doesn't talk about -- you know, and it's debated, the legal 9 issue as to whether the right-of-way is part of the road, 10 and I -- I can't answer that. 11 MR. JOHNSTON: This is a county-by-county 12 standard, but I think San Antonio requires 30-foot streets 13 with curb and gutter for their rental communities. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They wanted us to just 15 use San Antonio's language. The problem was, it wasn't 16 anywhere close to our road specifications. In my opinion, I 17 think, and in yours, it's more stringent, and we clearly 18 can't do that. And, I finally explained to them, you know, 19 we can go back with the -- you know, a right-of-way and say 20 that we just don't think that it's sufficient. We could go 21 with the smaller road, but we need the right-of-way because 22 of the safety issue. 23 MR. JOHNSTON: I think I'd argue for a 24 minimum of having it paved. Also the narrow road, but have 25 it paved for emergency vehicles' use. 147 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, yeah, I -- 2 MR. JOHNSTON: You know, the road that -- in 3 a rainstorm, can a big fire truck or an ambulance actually 4 drive on a road like that? It's obviously a different 5 weight than a car. The road might not hold up. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did you all talk about 7 if you have Johnny parked in front of his house and Billy 8 Bob's parked in front of his house on the 30-foot deal 9 there, how much room is there for vehicles to go in between? 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not much. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not much, but we didn't 12 specifically talk about that. But, what we can do, we can 13 -- you know, I can go ahead and re -- and change that to 60 14 foot and change it to paved country lane, and say this is 15 what we'll go with. All they can do is say no. I mean, you 16 know, and we can just go and we can proceed on that basis. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd like to see you 18 do that, personally. See where it takes us. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do you want a motion to that 20 effect, or -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably would be better. 22 I think they would have someone -- I think we need a motion. 23 That way we can say the Commissioners Court adopted these, 24 period. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: So, you'd like a motion to 148 1 adopt the Manufactured Rental Home Infrastructure Standards, 2 with the amendment that the roads be a paved country lane 3 with a minimum of 60 feet right-of-way? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do I have a motion to that 6 effect? 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll move it. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 10 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, that the Court 11 approve the proposed Manufactured Home Rental Community 12 Infrastructure Standards, with the exception that the 13 minimum requirements for road design to include paved 14 country lanes with a minimum cleared right-of-way of 60 15 feet. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, this is going back 17 to the same thing we did with the no-wake zone, I guess, 18 this morning. We probably need a public hearing on this 19 down the road, as well. So, we're just approving it from 20 the standpoint of, this is what we're going to go with. 21 Send it to the attorney and send it to them, but it's not 22 going to go into -- I guess be used as of this date. Or is 23 it? 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: No, it hasn't been adopted 25 either. We're simply approving a draft. 149 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do you intend to have these 3 approved as a separate order or as part of your Subdivision 4 Rules? Right now, we have a stand-alone order. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: I know you've been working 7 all along to incorporate this. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we -- I need to 9 look at the legislation again. I suspect we're probably 10 going to need to do a separate order, as we are with the 11 water availability, and then incorporate it in the 12 Subdivision -- actual Subdivision Rule document as a 13 separate chapter. But, it probably needs to be a separate 14 order, based on what Travis told me this morning on water 15 availability. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. 17 MR. JOHNSTON: Is this a revision? That 18 order is in effect right now. Is this a revision to the one 19 in effect? 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes, it would be. 21 MR. JOHNSTON: I don't think anyone's done 22 anything. Didn't you adopt it about a year ago? 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes. What we'd be doing 24 would be amending the existing order, amending and 25 restating. Any further questions or comments? If not, all 150 1 in favor, raise your right hand. 2 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 4 (No response.) 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item 6 for consideration is Item Number 31, consider and discuss 7 water availability section for proposed Kerr County 8 Subdivision Rules and Regulations. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Aside from the mobile -- 10 or manufactured home rental communities, this is probably 11 one of the areas of the biggest change in the Subdivision 12 Rules, so I wanted to put it on as a separate item. We can 13 spend a little bit of time with it and then make any changes 14 that are needed and bring it back with the full Subdivision 15 Rules, though this will also need a separate court order at 16 some point. And I will note that there is one change on the 17 first page. I sent a number of e-mails to Thea with 18 attachments, and I need to make one revision as to one of 19 those e-mails. But, anyway, under 5.03 C, acreage 20 requirements to meet water availability, it should read, 21 "The total number of lots permitted in any subdivision shall 22 not exceed the total acreage in the subdivision divided by 23 5 acres, unless the subdivision is served by surface water." 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Served by surface 25 water or served by a central surface water? 151 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Surface. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just surface. Is 3 that all we need? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's all I put. And 5 the reason is, I'm not sure that's the -- I added this 6 provision. This is very different than what we've had in 7 here before, but after a lot of our discussions and the work 8 I've done with the Region J, it didn't make sense to me to 9 allow a real high-density subdivision if we're concerned on 10 water availability. I mean, if you're going -- if 11 there's -- there's no reason to encourage a central water 12 system using ground water on 1-acre spacing, 'cause that's 13 exactly the problem we have right now, what has caused that 14 problem. 15 So, based on the grounding, a little bit of 16 water, that takes 5 acres to replenish the -- my mind went 17 blank -- replenish the aquifer, essentially recharge. 18 Recharge, which is sufficient for one household, which is 19 how I came to that 5-acre figure here, as well, and left it 20 as broad as possible. If someone wants to put in a central 21 water system or however they want to configure the 22 subdivision, you know, they have half-acre lots. If they 23 want -- as long as they have enough greenbelt areas under 24 this provision, they can do what they want. They just 25 cannot have more than the total number of lots, total 152 1 acreage divided by 5. 2 And there is a -- I might go through a few 3 of -- through it real quick in a few areas, and answer a 4 couple questions. I think Commissioner Williams sent me a 5 memo of some things that he wanted me to change, delete, or 6 others, and I might address as to why I did or didn't. On 7 5.03 A, under General, the second -- Item Number (2) reads, 8 "An adequate supply of water of sufficient quantity and 9 quality is available to supply number of lots proposed at 10 platted area." Bill, the reason that I left that in there 11 is because that is specifically out of Section 35.019, where 12 we're getting our authority. I'm just reciting, 13 essentially, their -- their provisions under 5.03 D, public 14 or community water system. Under Item (2), if you're under 15 more than 15 hookups or connections, you go under T.N.R.C.C. 16 rules. I'm just reciting that fact. But, under Item (1), 17 if you have fewer than 15 connections, currently you're not 18 subject to T.N.R.C.C. rules, and we're putting in a 19 provision that you have to follow the same guidelines as 20 T.N.R.C.C.'s rule, and Headwaters would be the reviewing 21 body. So, basically, if you're going to have a water 22 system, it will be up to certain standards in any event. 23 Under 5.03 E, individual wells, under well 24 testing, I changed this from the last draft and I put it in 25 bold so we won't forget about it. Under (a), if a 153 1 subdivision is 99 acres or less, you have to drill one well 2 to prove water availability. And if it's 100 acres or more, 3 you'd have to drill two wells. The prior drafts had 4 50 acres as the cutoff for one or two wells, and this -- 5 when I was going back through it, it seemed a little bit 6 burdensome to me to have two wells on 60 acres. The -- 7 anyway, I'll just leave it. It's up to the Court to decide 8 on that. It doesn't -- you know, I think this is better, 9 but I'm not set in stone on that amount; it's somewhat 10 arbitrary. The main purpose is to get testing to the 11 aquifer and to get some logs and specifically log some 12 specific science out of the wells, which will help 13 Headwaters more than anything else. And I just felt like 14 Headwaters; that, in either event, the developer will recoup 15 the cost of those wells when they sell those lots, so it's 16 not an undue burden to the developer. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: Has Headwaters commented on 18 the 50 versus the -- 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have not asked Cameron 20 on that point. Under Section 2, Letter P, sufficiency of 21 water, this was -- came to one of -- actually, most of this 22 language came from Cameron. It's not -- I might have 23 changed it a little bit here or there, but Cameron and I 24 discussed trying to determine what is sufficient water, and 25 we came up with -- or he came up with, and I modified it 154 1 slightly, that rather than have it somewhat -- or appear 2 arbitrary or subjective, to have very specific standards as 3 to what is an adequate well or adequate water. He came up 4 with an average family size of 2.8, with average daily 5 consumption of 300 -- I mean, of 200 gallons per day. I 6 don't know why, I rounded it to three. Family of three, and 7 150 gallons per day. It comes out with -- 450 gallons per 8 day for households, versus -- slightly more. I think 480, I 9 believe, if you use the numbers that Cameron originally had. 10 And that was based on wells and productive capacity of 8 to 11 10 gallons per minute, which is certainly not a great well, 12 but it's not a very bad well, either. And, if you -- if 13 your wells meet that requirement, it is assumed that you 14 have enough water. 15 And then Item (6), which is on Page 5. The 16 water availability requirements do not apply to any plat 17 if -- there are three exemptions. Minimum lot size, if the 18 lot is 15 acres or more; if the maximum number of lots does 19 not exceed five; or if it is a revised plat, the number of 20 lots within the subdivision, after taking into account the 21 revisions, does not exceed the original number of lots by 22 more than 20 percent. So, the intent is that if you fall 23 into any of these exempt categories, you do not have to do 24 any of the requirements for well testing. And the logic 25 behind this is, one, if you're a real small subdivision, 155 1 you're -- or it becomes cost prohibitive to drill test 2 wells, and the other item is that if you're going with 3 15 acres or more, based on the current knowledge we have of 4 the Trinity, that should be more than enough acreage to 5 support a family or a household on 15 acres. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: On that one, Jonathan, do we 7 want to put something in there to say they can only have one 8 well on a lot? 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That would be -- I think 10 -- yes, that might be -- 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: 'Cause, you know, I don't 12 want a situation where a person has 15 acres and they drill 13 seven wells. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: So we'd add something like 16 minimum lot size for any lot with any such subdivision is 17 15 acres or more, and not more than one well may be drilled 18 on any one lot. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's good. I had to 21 agree with Fred twice today. 22 (Discussion off the record.) 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the main questions -- 24 and if everyone is in agreement, other than the -- if we're 25 still -- we also have another meeting for public hearings 156 1 and this isn't the final time we're going to look at this, 2 but if this is a draft that we're comfortable with, I 3 would send it out to Cameron, primarily, who has helped 4 author most of this. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could I offer a 6 suggestion on 5.03 C? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So that it's clear 9 and not misunderstood. With regard to surface water -- 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- my suggestion is 12 that, "divided by 5 acres," comma, "unless the subdivision 13 is served by a centralized surface water distribution 14 system." 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Jon, I'd really -- I'd 17 be interested in knowing what Cameron thinks about the 18 99 acres thing and all that. I really would. I just had 19 lunch with him; I wish I'd thought of it. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Also, I think -- I mean, 21 Cameron has helped with these a great deal. Headwaters is 22 getting a lot of responsibility under these, so I think, 23 really, we need to make sure that they are comfortable with 24 these. And, I haven't talked to Cameron about this, but I 25 would suspect he's going to want to take these before his 157 1 board before we formally do this, because it is going to 2 require, you know, a level of effort from him. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: I'd like to suggest that we 4 need to move expeditiously on this, though, 'cause our 5 subdivision plan -- 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you're right. I 7 think we could actually, at the next meeting -- I talked to 8 timing a little bit with Travis Lucas this morning. 9 Timing-wise, one is a separate court order -- it's going to 10 require a separate order because of the authority that we're 11 using to establish water availability requirements, and the 12 Subdivision Rules can adopt these requirements, so there's 13 two separate items. And, we need to go through a public 14 hearing on these, as well. So, I would say at our next 15 meeting, we set the public hearing, and -- which will be two 16 weeks after, so basically the public hearing will be 30 days 17 or four weeks from today. It would go into effect at that 18 time, regardless of where we are on the overall Subdivision 19 Rules, which are basically finished as well, but Subdivision 20 Rules are not going to hold this up. And this -- I don't -- 21 and I think that will work with the public notice and all 22 that if we set the public hearing at the next meeting. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I like -- I'm kind of 24 like Commissioner Baldwin. I'd like to know what Headwaters 25 says about this. 158 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That will give us some 2 time; we can make an adjustment at that meeting prior to 3 setting the public hearing. And I apologize for the typing 4 on it. I did most of this myself, and my computer has a 5 mind of its own; I can't figure out why all of a sudden it 6 indents and other times it doesn't. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Just -- just for 8 clarification, the very end of it, 5.04 is not part of what 9 we're considering. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct. 5.04 is not 11 part of it, though that is the language -- I just printed 12 the page on the Subdivision Rules. I will leave that 13 order -- we'll do it as a separate order. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do you think we need to take 15 any formal action on this? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On this one, I don't 17 think so. I'll incorporate these changes and get it to 18 Cameron, as well, and ask if they want their board to look 19 at it, for them to get it before them as soon as possible, 20 and then put it on our next agenda to approve and set public 21 hearing. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else? Anyone else 23 have any questions or comments? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was going to ask 25 Commissioner Letz -- he was talking about meeting with all 159 1 those lawyers. Do we need to get you a panic button? What 2 were you doing? How many were there? How many lawyers were 3 there? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How many? Too many were 5 there. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Three. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Three too many. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You've got to quit 11 that, Jon. That's not healthy. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think Thea saw me that 13 day, and it's -- I think everyone knows how much time I 14 spend in the courthouse, and I was in one room with those 15 attorneys for about four hours. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He needs a panic 17 button. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else? If there's 19 nothing else to come before us, we stand adjourned. Thank 20 you all. 21 (Meeting adjourned at 2:10 p.m.) 22 - - - - - - - - - - 23 24 25 160 1 STATE OF TEXAS | 2 COUNTY OF KERR | 3 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 4 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as 5 County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, 6 Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. 7 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 16th day of October, 8 2000. 9 10 11 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 12 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 13 Certified Shorthand Reporter 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25