1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Regular Session 10 Monday, November 13, 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 November 13, 2000 PAGE 2 --- Visitor's Input 3 --- Commissioners' Comments 8 3 1.1 Pay Bills 13 4 1.2 Budget Amendments -- 1.3 Late Bills 13 5 1.4 Read and Approve Minutes 14 1.5 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 15 6 2.1 Introduce new Chief Appraiser 16 7 2.2 Road name changes, privately-maintained roads 16 2.3 Minor revision of plat, Lots 43 & 44, 8 The Horizon, Section One, Precinct 1 17 2.4 Minor revision of plat, Lots 120 & 121, 9 The Horizon, Section One, Precinct 1 19 2.5 Final revision of plat, Lot 1, Bluff Creek 10 Ranch, Precinct 2 19 2.6 Preliminary plat, Waugh Acres, Precinct 2 20 11 2.7 Preliminary plat, Paso Creek Ranch, Precinct 2 22 2.11 Possible funding to repair recent flood damage 38 12 2.12 Declare local flooding disaster 45 2.8 Open bids for 25-ton trailer, Road & Bridge 46 13 2.9 PUBLIC HEARING-Order establishing No-Wake Zones on Ingram, Flat Rock, & Center Point Lakes 47 14 2.10 Adopting court order establishing no-wake zones 2.24 PUBLIC HEARING - LLEBG grant, Sheriff's Dept. 94 15 2.13 Amended Child Care Local Initiative Agreement -- 2.14 Approve Data Exchange Contract for Kerr County 16 Collections Department 96 2.15 Approve RFP, authorize advertisement for project 17 management services, Chapman Building Systems 98 2.16 Amend resolution, Universal Cable Holdings, Inc. 101 18 2.17 Memorandum of Understanding with HCDJLSA 102 2.18 Resolution requesting introduction of local 19 legislation in 2001 Texas Legislature authorizing Kerr County to levy hotel/motel bed tax 104 20 2.19 Name U.G.R.A. Lake in memory of Darrell Lochte 120 2.20 Apply for 1-year waiver provision regarding 21 Bloodborne Pathogen Control Program 122 2.21 Approve County-sponsored contracts 126 22 2.22 Approve volunteer fire departments contracts 127 2.23 Approve proposed 2001 budget for Kerr Emergency 23 911 Network as required by Health & Safety Code 128 2.25 Approve revised On-Site Sewage Disposal order 129 24 2.26 Approve final draft, Subdivision Rules & Regs, set public hearing 133 25 2.27 Discuss Change Order Number 6 140 2.8 Award bid for 25-ton trailer, Road & Bridge 191 3 1 On Monday, November 13, 2000, at 9:00 a.m., a regular 2 meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in 3 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's 9 o'clock in the morning 8 on Monday, November 13th, Year 2000, and we'll call to order 9 this regular session of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. 10 Commissioner Baldwin, I think you have the honors this 11 morning. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do. If y'all will 13 stand and pray with me, please. 14 (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. At this time, any 17 citizen who wishes to address the Court on an item not 18 listed on the regular agenda may come forward and do so. 19 Mr. Siemers? 20 MR. DAVIS: I'm Donald Davis -- 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Go to the podium, sir. 22 MR. DAVIS: All right. I'm Don Davis with the 23 Greenwood Forest Homeowners Association, and we would 24 respectfully submit a petition where you'd honor our concern 25 on the ingress and egress through Greenwood Forest to the new 4 1 proposed Western Hills Subdivision. 2 AUDIENCE: You're too close to the mike. 3 MR. DAVIS: And also our concern for the water 4 supply out there. Thank you. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Mr. Davis. 7 Why don't you give it to your Commissioner? 8 (Petition handed to Commissioner Griffin.) 9 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Thank you. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Is there anyone else who'd 11 like to address the Court? Mr. Siemers? 12 MR. SIEMERS: Paul Siemers, HC-1, 156N in 13 Hunt. This morning is the last meeting I'm here 14 representing the Sane Water Policy Coalition. And this 15 morning it's my privilege to present to you the results of 16 our 6-week long petition drive. I'll try to be short this 17 morning 'cause it looks like have you a long agenda ahead of 18 you today. We, the Sane Water Policy Coalition, because of 19 our concern for the future of water in this community, and 20 the fact that we recognize that the area is subject to 21 drought and dry spells, and that we see nothing as a result 22 of the studies recently reported by the Region J group that 23 indicate that we have a plentiful water supply, and because 24 of the concern we see relative to the Lower Trinity and the 25 questions relative to its recharge, and because of the fact 5 1 that during this past summer, a large percentage of this 2 community was on severe water restrictions, we believe that 3 this community's future is dependent -- health and welfare 4 is dependent on how its water supply is protected and 5 managed, starting today. 6 We also believe that a golf -- golf 7 courses -- we know that a golf course -- golf courses use a 8 disproportionate amount of water, and that allocating a half 9 million to a million gallons a day for a fourth golf course 10 in this community is not compatible with our water supply, 11 and it's certainly not good water management. Even if the 12 water that's used on the golf courses is treated effluent, 13 we would not consider this as good water management, because 14 most of the water put on the golf courses is lost to local 15 reuse. And water that's put back into the Guadalupe River, 16 effluent or whatever, is -- does have reuse capability as it 17 goes downstream for domestic, agriculture, and livestock 18 uses, all the way from -- from Comfort -- from Center Point 19 to the Gulf of Mexico. And we believe that Kerrville -- 20 Kerr County should consider treated effluent as a -- as a 21 renewable resource and insure that it is recycled. 22 Our petition drive started 6 weeks ago, and I 23 want to make it clear to everybody that -- that we placed 24 very few limits on the people who signed our petition. The 25 only requirement that we had was that they were concerned 6 1 about water and the effect of excessive use on the future of 2 our community. We -- we accepted signatures from adults who 3 lived in Kerrville, adult visitors to the community. 4 Primarily, visitors -- we accepted their signatures because 5 it had been stated publicly that we needed a fourth golf 6 course in our community for our visitors. We accepted 7 signatures from teenagers who expressed a knowledge and a 8 concern about the water issue, because we believe that 9 involving them in this process for their future is very 10 important. 11 We wish we could express to you all the 12 emotions, and I have -- I have enumerated some of those in 13 the letter I've provided -- letter of transmittal I've 14 provided to you, of the people who came and talked with us 15 during this 6-week period. But, the most -- one of the most 16 common expressions we got as people approached us or we 17 approached them, and these were from the teenagers all the 18 way up to our very senior citizens, and that was, "We don't 19 need another -- expletive deleted -- golf course." And they 20 signed the petition. 21 In summary, we believe that this grass roots 22 effort -- community-wide grass roots effort has demonstrated 23 a desire to protect our water resources, and we believe that 24 the government bodies of the County: The Commissioners 25 Court, City Council, Headwaters Underground Water 7 1 Conservation District, and the U.G.R.A., collectively have 2 the authority to do just that. We therefore respectfully 3 request that you grant the request of the approximate 3,000 4 people, concerned individuals, including both elected and 5 appointed government officials who signed the petition to do 6 so; that you will do your part to impose a moratorium on 7 development of new golf courses until a water supply base 8 master plan has been implemented for the community. 9 There are 3,005 signatures contained in this 10 volume. That -- that breakdown -- I have provided you a 11 demographic breakdown in your handout this morning, and it's 12 in here. That, just briefly, to go through that, if I can 13 find it -- there it is -- 1,471 signatures are residents of 14 Kerrville, 194 residents of Ingram, and 1,023 were county 15 residents. The non-Texas -- the Texas visitors, including 16 the Hill Country surrounding communities, were 226. And we 17 had actually 9 foreign visitors who opted to sign the 18 petition. This is the results of our 6-week activity, and 19 I'd like to present this document to the Court now. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. 21 MR. SIEMERS: Thank you. If you have any 22 questions, I'll be glad to try to answer them. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Does anyone else 24 wish to address the Court on an item not listed on the 25 agenda? Is there anyone else who needs to address the Court 8 1 on an item not listed on the agenda? Seeing none, we'll 2 turn to the Commissioners' comments. Let's start with 3 Commissioner Baldwin. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, I've got a 5 couple of comments. I want to give you a report. I was a 6 guest this weekend of Texas A & M University to -- and this 7 was set up several months ago, that I went over there as 8 President of the South Texas Judges and Commissioners 9 Association, to brief me on some issues that are coming down 10 the pike dealing with Extension Service and some other 11 things. While I was there, they -- they also took me to the 12 football game, which turned out to be, I guess, the most 13 incredible event I have ever been to in my entire life. We 14 saw the Aggies almost beat the number one team in the 15 country. Largest crowd in the history of that stadium, the 16 B-1 bombers flying over, and every time A & M would score a 17 touchdown, all those old geezers kissing their wives. 18 (Laughter.) 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I'm not sure 20 they were their wives, but I asked -- I asked Larry about it 21 this morning. He says, "Well, I always kiss my wife." It 22 was just the most incredible thing I've ever experienced in 23 my -- and, of course, they handed you -- they give you 24 earplugs before you go in there, and you need them. It is 25 the wildest thing I've ever seen. And, on the -- on 9 1 football -- I want to stay on football. We'll go to Tivy 2 football. There is a game this Friday night, the first 3 round of the play-offs. Tivy plays this Friday night 4 against Southside of San Antonio, and it's going to be in 5 Kerrville, Antler Stadium. There will be a pep rally 6 Thursday around 6:30 on the Star downtown. So, we're in the 7 state play-offs now, so it's time for all of us, even those 8 people that are scared of the river going dry, Paul Siemers, 9 to come to the -- the pep rally and let's support our kids. 10 It's what this community is -- is really all about, is our 11 young people, and here's an opportunity to participate. 12 That's all. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Very good. Thank you. 14 Commissioner Williams? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Only thing I would 16 offer, Judge, is that the events of this past week have 17 caused me, on more than one occasion, to give thanks to God 18 for the framers of our Constitution, whose insight and 19 foresight never cease to amaze. 20 (Applause.) 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Amen. Hear, hear. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Letz? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two comments. One, to 24 announce that -- most of you probably know that Comfort 25 football -- can't let Buster be the only one to talk about 10 1 football. Comfort went undefeated for the third straight 2 year. Pretty remarkable achievement, and advancing to the 3 play-offs again. And, the other comment is, I don't know 4 that there's anybody here from the eastern part of the 5 county, but just to assure everyone who lives there, we are 6 working quickly as we can with some agenda items today to 7 try to solve the Hermann Sons bridge that washed out 8 situation. And, hopefully we will have at least some things 9 to announce later today or later this week, anyway, about a 10 timetable, what we can expect as temporary bridge put in or 11 a new bridge and/or new bridge built. That's it. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Commissioner Griffin? 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I would just like to 14 say that -- a "well-done" to -- particularly to our County 15 employees on the recovery from the flood or flood and a 16 half, as some of us are calling it, but also to the 17 state/fed folks that have jumped in to try to help and get 18 things moving. It takes longer than anybody would like, but 19 we're going to have to just deal with it, and I think the 20 agencies who are responsible for that have done a good job 21 so far. 22 (Discussion off the record.) 23 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Oh. I had a little 24 difficulty -- yes, I do also want to, while we're on 25 football -- I mean, I was so overcome with Commissioner 11 1 Baldwin's extolling of the game this weekend in College 2 Station that I sort of got lost in the drift there, but 3 everybody should understand that we have a third team that's 4 in the play-offs in Kerr County and surrounding areas, and 5 it's the Ingram Warriors. So, I think -- I think our 6 football scene has worked out pretty well for those of us in 7 the area. We finally got some reason to -- so maybe things 8 are looking up. If we can just get this recount on the 9 federal level taken care of and dispatched, then it would 10 have been a great, great season. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Very good. Well, I also 12 watched the football game on Saturday, the A & M/Oklahoma 13 game, and I was pleased -- very pleased at the outcome. 14 Beyond that, a few reminders. I'll remind everyone that our 15 meeting on November 27th is our last evening meeting; we'll 16 be convening at 6:30 in the evening, so plan accordingly. 17 Also, I'd remind everyone in the courthouse that our 18 computers -- mainframe will be down starting tomorrow. It 19 will be down through at least Thursday so that we can have 20 some major repairs done to the computer, which will actually 21 give us the capacity of enhanced internet access and service 22 for all of the people who are on the mainframe. 23 Third thing, since elections are all on our 24 mind, I'll remind everyone we have a meeting at 1:30 25 tomorrow to canvass and officially accept the results of the 12 1 election here in Kerr County. Based on what we're seeing 2 not only in Florida, but throughout the nation, I think we 3 owe a -- a great deal of thanks to Jannett Pieper, our 4 County Clerk, and her staff and to Paula Rector, the Tax 5 Assessor/Collector, who's also the Voter Registrar, and her 6 staff, for conducting a very fair and open and glitch-free 7 election. Many of you may not know that the turnout was 8 larger than anticipated, and we ended up Xeroxing about 9 2,000 paper ballots and distributing them to the various 10 precincts, which then had to be counted by hand. But, so 11 far, no controversy has arisen over the results of that 12 count, and I certainly don't anticipate it. We owe Jannett 13 and Paula a lot of thanks for their hard work in making sure 14 that we have the opportunity to exercise our franchise free 15 of concern over whether or not our vote actually does count. 16 Finally, it was my privilege last -- on the 17 3rd of November, along with Commissioner Williams, to attend 18 a function out at the Kirk Ranch, where the former Texas 19 Rangers Association announced that they are going to be 20 building a museum at the intersection of Highway -- of 21 Harper Road and I-10 for the Texas Rangers, a very ambitious 22 and very well-deserved commemoration of all the good Texas 23 Rangers have done for this county and for the state of 24 Texas. And, it's a great honor for us to be chosen as the 25 location for the museum sponsored by the former Texas 13 1 Rangers Association, and that's something we all look 2 forward to here in the next few months. 3 Having said all that, let's turn to the 4 business at hand and pay some bills. Mr. Auditor? Anyone 5 have any questions or comments regarding the bills as 6 presented? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move we pay the bills. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 10 seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that we approve the bills 11 as recommended. Any further questions or comments? If not, 12 all in favor, raise your right hand. 13 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 15 (No response.) 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Do we have 17 any budget amendments, Tommy? 18 MR. TOMLINSON: None today. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do we have any late bills? 20 MR. TOMLINSON: Gentlemen, have I three late 21 bills that I need hand checks for. One is payable to the 22 Kerrville Postmaster for stamps for $330 for the Treasurer's 23 office. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Excuse me. Folks, we need to 25 conduct business here. If y'all need to talk about 14 1 something, please go out in the hall and shut the door 2 behind you. 3 MR. TOMLINSON: The other one is to the Omni 4 South Park in Austin. It's for conference expenses for the 5 District Clerk in the amount of $331.20. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 7 MR. TOMLINSON: The other one is for -- to 8 Stoddard Construction Company for $100,399.18, and this is 9 for application -- or Draw Number 20, as approved by Keith 10 Longnecker and the architect. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions or comments? 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move them. 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 15 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we 16 authorize those three late checks as requested by the 17 Auditor. Any further questions or comments? If not, all in 18 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: Thank you, Tommy. At this 23 time, I would entertain a motion to waive reading and 24 approve the minutes of the regular session of Tuesday, 25 October 10th, Year 2000, and the special session of Monday 15 1 October 23rd, Year 2000. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 3 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 5 seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that we waive reading and 6 approve the minutes of the Kerr County Commissioners Court 7 regular session of Tuesday, October 10th, Year 2000, and the 8 Kerr County Commissioners Court special session of Monday, 9 October 23rd, Year 2000. Any further questions or comments? 10 If not, all in favor, raise 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. At this 15 time, I'd entertain a motion to approve and accept the 16 monthly reports. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 20 Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, that we approve 21 and accept the monthly reports. Any further questions or 22 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 23 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 25 (No response.) 16 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. We'll now 2 turn to the consideration agenda. First item is to 3 introduce the new Chief Appraiser of the Kerr Central 4 Appraisal District. Commissioner Baldwin. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Gentlemen, 6 Mr. Coates has been called out of town to some -- an 7 unexpected meeting, he'll not be here with us today. We'll 8 catch him at a later time. Commissioner Griffin, he will be 9 with us on Wednesday, though. 10 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Oh, good. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good. That's 12 all. We'll have to remove this item. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. We'll bring it back at 14 such time as Mr. Coates is able to come. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Commissioner. 17 Next item is to consider and approve road name changes for 18 privately maintained roads in various locations in Kerr 19 County in accordance with the 911 guidelines. Which one of 20 you guys wants to do this one? 21 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We only got -- 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Griffin? 23 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'll just make a 24 motion that we accept those as submitted in the package that 25 all the Commissioners have, and if there's not any that 17 1 require further discussion, I think we can go ahead and 2 approve those. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second that motion. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 5 Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court 6 approve the name changes or request for road names as 7 outlined in the information provided in our packets. Any 8 questions or comments? If not, all in favor raise your 9 right hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item 14 Number 3 is consider the preliminary replat for minor 15 revision of plat of Lots 43 and 44 of The Horizon, 16 Section One, Precinct 1. Commissioner Baldwin. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can do it. Very 18 simple. It's a minor replat. Simply taking two -- taking 19 two small lots and making them into one large lot, which 20 this Court seems to embrace as a good thing. So, I move 21 that we approve the preliminary minor revision of plat of 22 Lots 43 and 44 of The Horizon. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 25 Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, that the Court 18 1 approve the preliminary for minor revision of plat of Lots 2 43 and 44 of The Horizon, Section One. Any questions or 3 comments? 4 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. Is this not a -- 5 I'm sorry, maybe you were going to ask the same question. 6 Go ahead, Jonathan. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Under our current rules, 8 isn't this -- can't this be handled at one meeting? 9 MR. JOHNSTON: That is correct. 10 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It is not a 11 preliminary. It is -- 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm just reading off 13 here. 14 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: All we do is sign it. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's -- I'd like to 16 change my verbiage to a final, please. Preliminary and 17 final. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's not as posted. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Posting says preliminary. 20 We're not going to be able to do it as a final today. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bring it back next 22 month? 23 MR. JOHNSTON: Both of them say preliminary. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Just right off the request 25 for agenda item. So -- 19 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nitpicky Letz down 2 there. We'll get him in a minute, though. 3 MR. JOHNSTON: Number 2 also says that. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Number 4? Are we going to 6 pass Number 4 as well and repost it for next month? 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Let's do it 8 right. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: We have to do it right. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The next meeting. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. 12 MR. JOHNSTON: There's one caveat in that. 13 The -- no, that's something else, I'm sorry. No problem. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll go then to Item Number 15 5, which is to consider the final revision of plat of Lot 1, 16 Bluff Creek Ranch, Precinct 2. Commissioner Williams? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we got this 18 right; this is going to be a final. And it -- Franklin, 19 this is a splitting of one 100-acre tract into one 20 50-some-odd-acre tract, right? 21 MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah. It's almost 60, it 22 looks like. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sixty acres? 24 MR. JOHNSTON: To a 29.86-acre tract. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you have any 20 1 comments -- any problems with it? 2 MR. JOHNSTON: No problem. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move the final plat 4 approval for Bluff Creek Ranch as presented. 5 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 7 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court 8 approve the final revision of plat of Lot 1, Bluff Creek 9 Ranch, Precinct 2. Any questions or comments? If not, all 10 in favor raise 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. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, a quick comment 16 for anyone in the public. In the future, as soon as we 17 adopt our new Subdivision Rules, it will require two 18 meetings for revision of plat, but under the current 19 rules -- 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: For preliminary or 21 replat? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item Number 6, 24 consider preliminary replat of Waugh Acres in Precinct 2. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is a -- 21 1 replatting of a lot off of Witt Road called Waugh Acres. 2 It's taking a 9.95-acre lot and breaking it into three lots, 3 with a road created with a cul-de-sac. Franklin, any 4 comments on that? 5 MR. JOHNSTON: Going to build a country lane 6 road for the three lots and make it a public road so it will 7 be a paved road. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is this a preliminary 9 plat? 10 MR. JOHNSTON: That's correct. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move the 12 preliminary plat for Waugh Acres off of Witt Road as 13 presented. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 16 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, that we approve the 17 preliminary plat of Waugh Acres in Precinct 2. Any 18 questions? Comments? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do all three lots meet 20 the requirements, size-wise? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think they do. 22 MR. JOHNSTON: They meet the current 23 requirements; I think two and a half is the current size for 24 septic and wells, and these are all over that. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or 22 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. Number 7, 6 consider the preliminary plat for Paso Creek Ranch in 7 Precinct 2. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is maybe a 9 little bit more complicated. Mr. Johnston and I had a 10 meeting a couple weeks or so ago about this particular 11 proposed subdivision, which is off of C.P. River Road. It 12 extends back in there behind Paso Creek. And, we raised 13 some issues about flooding with Mr. Domingues, who has 14 responded. And, Franklin, why don't you take us through the 15 issues and go from there, please. 16 MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah. The issues were that 17 this is at the conjunction of two creeks and a river. We're 18 concerned about flooding. I think there was flooding in '78 19 that covered some of this area. We requested, like we did 20 on other subdivisions, a drainage study before we actually 21 got into the preliminary plat, make sure all this area was 22 outside the floodplain, and be safe. Developer really 23 doesn't want to do a drainage study. He's given us a couple 24 little letters. Charles can probably explain it further; 25 he's written a couple of them -- or written one of them. 23 1 And what -- we were anticipating them giving us a report 2 similar to this, which you see by the subdivision on the 3 agenda today, but the current subdivision, a report by an 4 engineer and a hydrologist with their name and the seal on 5 it, and not just a letter of -- of -- of annonotal 6 information. So, that's kind of what we're looking for. 7 But, Charles, you might want to make an address. 8 MR. DOMINGUES: What I've got here -- this is 9 an enlarged copy of the present FEMA map. You're going to 10 have to kind of share this a little bit. And, on it, this 11 is pretty much the exact copy, except some of the things 12 I've highlighted in red. You'll notice this is Highway 173, 13 Bandera Highway, and this is the river over here, Buster, 14 that comes down. This is Wharton Road here -- up here, and 15 this is the Turtle Creek. It comes through there. The Paso 16 Creek Subdivision is highlighted in kind of a pink color 17 there. And this is the road that goes over there. 18 (Discussion off the record.) 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is this right next to the 20 Shelton property? Is that what we're looking at? 21 MR. DOMINGUES: The Shelton -- Shelton used 22 to own it and had a -- one of his orchards in this area here 23 and over here. There's a real old barn that sets right down 24 here. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know. I'm just trying 24 1 to get my bearings. 2 MR. DOMINGUES: Okay. But that's -- there's 3 an old barn that sets right down there. Okay? What -- and 4 what we were looking at with trying to do, if you'll notice 5 on this, this highlighted and shaded area, the Guadalupe 6 River down there, that is the flood that comes down through 7 the Guadalupe River. And, these other shaded areas is the 8 flood that they have -- FEMA has -- that is a possibility of 9 a hundred year frequency, and of course that's a calculated 10 flood. Okay? This is the little creek that comes through 11 here. Each one of those shows -- you understand that, 12 Baldwin? 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, I'm with 14 you. 15 MR. DOMINGUES: Each one of those shows what 16 the width is of it. And also indicated on here is the limit 17 of their study, and the limit of their study shows that it's 18 somewhere in the neighborhood of 400 feet wide or something 19 at that particular point. So, they studied it up to there. 20 Okay? And this sheet that I've given you is information 21 about this 1978 flood. And, from what we can determine, the 22 1978 flood -- Franklin, let me switch with you there -- the 23 1978 flood was the highest flood that we've -- we've had. 24 And, we have determined in a couple locations what that 25 elevation is. This is a report by the U.G.R.A. that 25 1 indicated that -- if you'll flip over to the next page, the 2 flood on the -- Turtle Creek, on the lower side, the third 3 one from the bottom, this one right here, the elevation was 4 1555, and it was 9 feet higher than the 100-year flood. 5 And, that's a study from the U.G.R.A. 6 Right above it, it shows that the U.G.R.A. 7 has a -- at Wharton Road, it shows that the flood in the 8 Guadalupe River was at the 100-year flood line. Okay? 9 Anybody got a question, or are you still following? Okay. 10 Mr. Sorenson got information -- who is the adjacent property 11 owner to this -- that there was a building up here that had 12 a little water in it, and that's located right here. Now -- 13 oh, this is where that -- U.G.R.A. located the 100-year 14 flood upstream at this location right here. That's where 15 they had the 1555 elevation in the '78 flood -- I'm sorry, 16 '78 flood in this location. Mr. Sorenson purchased this 17 property here, and he was told that the flood came into this 18 building here. Okay? And there are some cypress trees 19 right down there where there is a limb in a cypress tree 20 that is foreign, and it's at a little bit lower elevation 21 than what is shown there. The drop in the -- the flood from 22 this 55 down to there is pretty much almost identical to 23 what the flood drop is in the creek or what the flow is of 24 the creek, which is a 9-foot drop from there to there. The 25 creek actually has an 8-foot drop. But -- and then, 26 1 projected downstream, using this elevation of this little 2 building here, these would be the elevation at these two 3 locations, at our property, okay, at Paso Creek. That's 4 what this is. Okay? 5 Now, this next drawing, this has -- if those 6 elevations are correct there, this is what the 1978 flood 7 would look like, the area that would -- that would have been 8 inundated, this blue area. I'm missing one. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all right, I 10 can see Fred's. 11 MR. DOMINGUES: Okay. That is the area that 12 the 1978 flood would inundate, which, as you can see, is a 13 great deal more than what the '78 flood would be. If you'll 14 notice down on this lower end there, the determination of 15 width is only something here, but across the width of this 16 whole thing is a number 2,500 feet wide, if we use those 17 elevations. Our concern is the subdivision. If we use a 18 100-year flood frequency on this, the 100-year flood creek 19 we'll see as a lot more than what the '78 flood is. And, we 20 would rather take -- and there's really two lots affected by 21 the flood. We would rather take and spend the money to fill 22 in the ground to be sure they're out of the '78 flood than 23 to spend $20,000 on an engineering study, is what the key to 24 it is. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And you can get the 27 1 permits to fill in, do you think? 2 MR. DOMINGUES: Oh, well, this is the high 3 ground up there. All it is is filling in 2 feet on the high 4 ground. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You don't require a FEMA 6 permit to fill in? 7 MR. DOMINGUES: Oh, no, it's not in the 8 floodway. This is up on the high bank, totally outside of 9 the flood area, is where -- the reason is -- is because all 10 these fields through there are flat and level, and once a 11 flood gets up to a certain height, then it spreads out over 12 a big area. It's like this -- you know, right at this area 13 up at the property here, the flood is 1,400 feet wide, which 14 is really wider than the '78 flood; it's wider than what the 15 flood was on the Guadalupe River. We want to build the 16 ground up about 2 feet from the high bank to insure that the 17 buildings would be -- at least building up 2 feet to insure 18 that the buildings are out of another '78 flood. That's 19 where we're coming from. We'd rather spend the money to go 20 ahead and do something other than what we already know, 21 because this is something -- this is -- this is a flood that 22 we do know happened, and we have evidence of what happened. 23 The '78 -- the 100-year flood is an empirical formula of 24 what might likely happen. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it did happen 28 1 in 1978. 2 MR. DOMINGUES: That's not a 100-year flood. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: The question I have really is 4 directed to Franklin. Does this information address your 5 needs, or do you still believe that we need a drainage 6 study? 7 MR. JOHNSTON: Subdivision Rules call for an 8 engineer to prepare a study and, you know, hydrologist. 9 And, you know, this is good information, I think, but it's 10 not an actual hydrologist that prepared it. Probably have 11 to grant a variance for that portion of the Subdivision 12 Rules. 13 MR. DOMINGUES: Well, the Subdivision Rules, 14 according to the way I read it, the 100-year flood elevation 15 is supposed to be determined from the FEMA maps, and not an 16 engineering study. And, the subdivision is according to a 17 drainage study. 18 MR. JOHNSTON: We know a certain -- certain 19 area is subject to flooding. You know, that's certainly 20 taking into account a drainage study. And, the FEMA maps, 21 only one of those drawings says -- it's not a studied area, 22 so the State really didn't study that area as far as FEMA's 23 concerned. They just guesstimated. 24 MR. DOMINGUES: The thing about it, the '78 25 flood, is that it's a height that we know that a flood 29 1 actually got. So, as Commissioner Williams said, should we 2 use that as a benchmark, as a 100-year frequency flood? 3 Because most of the time -- it's like Charlie Wiedenfeld 4 says, that most of the time, that the 100-year flood that is 5 designed is considerably lower. The flood that we had on 6 October the 23rd or something like that, it was at an 7 elevation of 15 feet lower, something like that, than what 8 the '78 flood was. But, part of the information that we 9 have determined from that flood last October was about 10 5 feet lower than the 100-year flood, which a 100-year flood 11 frequency, if designed through here, is going to be 12 somewhere in the neighborhood of about, as U.G.R.A. says in 13 their report, 9 feet lower than what the '78 flood was. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The problem is, our 15 drainage requirement is not only related to a 100-year 16 flood, it's related to flooding within that subdivision. 17 MR. DOMINGUES: Oh, yeah, we know. We know 18 that. We're concerned, you know, in doing a drainage study 19 for the Guadalupe River through here, it may take a 20 considerable -- you know, to determine the 100-year flood 21 frequency down there, it may take $20,000 to do that study. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're going to have 23 to -- I mean, from the Paso Creek, which runs through the 24 subdivision -- 25 MR. DOMINGUES: We have no problem, you know, 30 1 with designing all that through there, because we have solid 2 information as to what, you know, the design criteria is for 3 that. The problem is the -- is what do you use as a 4 benchmark to design the 100-year frequency flood? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you would use the 6 best maps we have. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One of the things 8 that cause me -- 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't think this Court 10 is -- has the ability to determine what benchmark you use, 11 but what you have to do is comply with the requirements of 12 the Subdivision Ordinance, present it to the County 13 Engineer, and then negotiate or discuss any concerns he has. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And one of those 15 concerns was that in 1978, as recorded by U.G.R.A., that at 16 Turtle Creek on the J.O. Whatley lot and at the Guadalupe 17 River on Wharton Road, it was 9 feet higher than recorded in 18 the FEMA map. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, the FEMA map 20 shows a 100-year floodplain. They also show a 500-year 21 floodplain. Most of this is in the 500-year, so you're 22 saying that the '78 flood may have been a 500-year flood; 23 may not have been a 100-year flood? 24 MR. DOMINGUES: Right. And when you come up 25 with an engineering design, the engineering design has to 31 1 use a 100-year frequency, and that's the point that water is 2 likely to flow down there according to what they determine. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 4 MR. DOMINGUES: See, and that, I'm sure, is 5 going to be considerably less than what that '78 flood was. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it doesn't eliminate 7 the need for the drainage study in the subdivision. 8 MR. JOHNSTON: Our position is, we'd like a 9 hydrologist to write a letter saying that that's what they 10 think also. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Charlie, is it -- 12 pardon me. Too much yelling at College Station this 13 weekend. Is it possible that an engineer could take the 14 data that you have and generate such a letter? I mean, that 15 would say that -- essentially, the same thing for a lot less 16 than $20,000? 17 MR. DOMINGUES: Well, here again, I am not 18 absolutely sure, you know, what -- you know, when using this 19 to generate this information, because this information is 20 really gathered as to exactly what happened, or what was 21 evidence that happened in a '78 flood, which is not 22 necessarily a 100-year frequency flood. 23 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I understand that. 24 MR. DOMINGUES: They have to generate, you 25 know, that frequency of a 100-year flood. 32 1 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: But, what -- but a 2 reasonable engineer might take this same data and say, Look, 3 the solution that you're proposing exceeds the requirements 4 of the 100-year flood -- 5 MR. DOMINGUES: That won't be any problem. 6 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- and, therefore, 7 would more than meet the requirement. And he signs it and 8 seals it, and that's all there is to it. 9 MR. DOMINGUES: We can do that. 10 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I would think that's 11 the -- that would meet our requirement for a certified -- 12 MR. JOHNSTON: This is a typical report, like 13 what we have on the one pending. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think our 15 Subdivision Rules are asking the developer to do a flood 16 study on a major river or channel of that river. I mean, 17 we're concerned more on the subdivision, itself. 18 MR. DOMINGUES: Mm-hmm, right. Yes. 19 MR. JOHNSTON: How the study -- how it 20 affects the subdivision. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 22 MR. DOMINGUES: How it affects the 23 subdivision. That's what we want to be sure of, you know. 24 Now, the -- the determination of that 100-year flood 25 elevation down there, really, to me -- you know, if we want 33 1 to -- you know, we -- we realize that this area has a 2 flooding -- you know, high flooding potential because of the 3 '78 flood, and we really need to get started in the 4 development of the lots of the subdivision. And, can the 5 100-year flood elevation be -- you know, that portion of it, 6 worked in at the final plat or when we bring in the design 7 plans? 'Cause we need to know whether or not the layout of 8 the subdivision and if 10-acre lots in this design will meet 9 with the County Commissioners' approval. 10 MR. JOHNSTON: Most recent example that I can 11 cite would be the Buckhorn R.V. Park, where there was a 12 question about the flow of water, and they did a study, and 13 I think they're still working on it, 'cause we haven't got 14 the final plat signed off on it, but we're still holding it. 15 But -- 16 MR. DOMINGUES: See, that's about, what, six 17 months or a year? 18 MR. JOHNSTON: But they did a lot of work 19 based on what they come up with. They raised elevations out 20 there and did some things. 21 MR. DOMINGUES: This really is affecting two 22 lots, and what we need to know is whether or not, you know, 23 the design layout and all is, you know, sufficient. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have a problem 25 with proceeding with the preliminary plat, but you're going 34 1 to have to have a flood -- a drainage study done by an 2 engineer before we give a final plat approval. 3 MR. DOMINGUES: We know that. 4 MR. JOHNSTON: Not just culverts, also 5 determining all this information. 6 MR. DOMINGUES: We'll determine this when we 7 get somebody at that time to determine what his opinion is 8 or run a drainage study on -- on it to determine what the 9 100-year frequency is, and according to the frequency of 10 flood, what you're going to do. The thing that we need to 11 be sure on what we have now, is the lot layout sufficient? 12 We need to know whether or not the design layout of the 13 subdivision meets with the County approval. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: We can just ask that question 15 of Franklin. Does the layout of the lots have any problems 16 with our Subdivision -- 17 MR. JOHNSTON: Lot layouts look fine. Just 18 the issue of those bottom three lots that are close to 19 the -- 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 2 and 3? 21 MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah, 2 and 3. Maybe 5 in 22 that area, what elevation they would have to build -- build 23 to. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There may be a problem on 25 getting a buildable site. 35 1 MR. DOMINGUES: Right. That's really 2 something that -- you know, in the building of it, what we 3 need to know now is, you know, do we have a road layout 4 that's sufficient to meet the County Subdivision -- 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Sounds to me more like a 6 concept plan than a preliminary plat. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But it's styled on 8 the agenda for preliminary plat approval. I don't think 9 we've got enough information for -- for that. 10 MR. JOHNSTON: There's also another issue 11 that we really haven't addressed yet. On the upper 12 left-hand corner, one of the main exits goes through another 13 subdivision, Silver Hills, through a lot in that 14 subdivision, and then empties to a county road, which is 15 really a very narrow road. Silver Hills Road goes out to 16 Highway 127. And, the issue is putting the extra traffic on 17 that road, you know, who's liable for upgrading that road? 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Comes out on 173? 19 MR. JOHNSTON: On 173. What did I say? 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Also, the entrance 21 road comes out of the C.P. River Road. That's part of the 22 low area there. Need to know a little bit more about that. 23 MR. JOHNSTON: This road design, I think, has 24 a high water outlet, but also there could be a main 25 entrance. And it -- you know, who'd be responsible for 36 1 upgrading Silver Hills Road with the extra traffic on it? 2 That would be a County responsibility? Or the developer's 3 responsibility? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Generally, my opinion is 5 that probably the developer, on the upgrade of it. Supposed 6 to be maintained, or at least -- what's the width of Silver 7 Hills? 8 MR. JOHNSTON: I think it's 16 foot. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is it -- I mean 10 right-of-way. 11 MR. DOMINGUES: The right-of-way's -- 12 MR. JOHNSTON: Oh, right-of-way's 50 or 40? 13 MR. DOMINGUES: Fifty. 14 MR. JOHNSTON: Fifty. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm back to Fred's 16 comment earlier. We need to -- we need to find out what our 17 County Engineer wants and -- and go accordingly with that. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my view. What 19 will satisfy you, Franklin? Just a full hydrology report, 20 or something between this and this? 21 MR. JOHNSTON: Well, in my opinion, that's 22 what the Subdivision Rules call for. Now, y'all could 23 override that and grant a variance to it, but I kind of feel 24 that's what the Subdivision Rules call for, and that's -- so 25 I gave that example. Other people are doing it. 37 1 (Discussion off the record.) 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: What's your pleasure? 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm going to ask 4 Larry -- you had suggested something in between the full 5 study and where we are today? 6 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, and that would 7 be, as -- as Judge Henneke indicated, would be something 8 that could be negotiated between the County Engineer and 9 the -- and the developer and developer's rep. But, it seems 10 to me that if -- if we can answer the intent of the 11 Subdivision Rule for a drainage study with the certification 12 from an engineer, that he could -- if he is -- if such a 13 person is willing to use this data, that that could -- that 14 could make a very quick study of it, is what I'm saying. 15 And that perhaps the -- the requirement for a full-blown -- 16 more like the one that Commissioner Williams has got in his 17 hand, that kind of study, perhaps he could stand on the 18 shoulders of some of this and -- and get to a much quicker 19 solution than -- 20 MR. JOHNSTON: That would be something 21 that -- 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would be 23 acceptable to you, Franklin? 24 MR. JOHNSTON: If -- if the hydrologist or 25 engineer would take that information and write a little page 38 1 letter or whatever to -- 2 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And, Charlie, do you 3 think that may be possible to do? 4 MR. DOMINGUES: Oh, yes. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's where 6 we'd like to go with that. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So that complies with 8 our rules? 9 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah, that's what -- 10 yeah. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What's the deal? 12 Let's go. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll see you back 14 again with something built on top of this. 15 MR. DOMINGUES: Thank you very much. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, let's skip over 18 to Item 11, which is to consider and discuss road, bridge, 19 and other damages from recent flooding, and possible funding 20 and repair of the same. Commissioner Letz. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda 22 based on the recent flooding we've had. I think 23 Commissioner Griffin referred to it as one and a half floods 24 we had in the past several -- I guess during the past month. 25 The biggest loss to the County was the loss of Hermann Sons 39 1 bridge, and -- but there's also a great deal of agricultural 2 damage that we got reports from the U.S.D.A. on, close to 3 $2 million. And, I think total county road damages were 4 about $600,000, plus or minus. Mainly, I put this on the 5 agenda specifically for the road damage in the county, and 6 to get an update from Leonard Odom as to where we are and 7 where we need to go on the road situation, specifically the 8 Hermann Sons bridge, and what the possibilities are of 9 getting a temporary bridge built with federal assistance. 10 MR. ODOM: Good morning. October the 21st 11 through the 23rd, we had that bad flood that came and took 12 down -- scoured the middle of the bridge at Hermann Sons, 13 and it collapsed. We had already done our maintenance on 14 that prior to that with the State, but we have an 15 incapacitated bridge at this point. Shortly after that, we 16 met with the State Highway Department and looked at the 17 options of replacement of that structure. At this point, 18 the -- there is a sequence which we have to go through, and 19 part of that is to reevaluate the bridge, which they are 20 doing now to bring it to a Priority 2 status, which allows 21 us to go ahead with the engineering for that. Had we been 22 able to start right now, it will be 18 months before you 23 could ever build -- start the construction of that -- of 24 that structure. 25 So, what we're trying to do at this point is 40 1 to get engineering in place, and then after we do that, what 2 they were looking at -- their new budget starts September 3 the 1st of 2001. So, what we will be trying to do at this 4 point, once the engineering goes in, all the -- it's just 5 like our budget. They're already set for the year, and it's 6 very difficult to get that money, let's just say, for right 7 now for that structure, so we have to put it into a 8 budgetary process. And that may be expedited in some way, 9 but essentially we're just looking at sometime in September 10 for starting. So, we'd have the engineering, then it would 11 be to a Priority 1, which would move it up on their 12 schedule, and they're working at that process right now. 13 Subsequently, about a week or so ago, I met 14 with T N.R.C.S, Texas Natural Resource Conservation Service, 15 which is a federal program, and the gentleman came out of 16 Temple. And, we had looked at this structure, looking at 17 our options, because we're looking at 18 months to two years 18 as the feasible length of time, so we looked at a temporary 19 structure, and that is feasible. That is something that the 20 young man, Tim Botchka out of Temple -- Tim just called me 21 this morning, and he said it will probably be two weeks, 22 Jonathan, and we'll meet down there again. We're trying to 23 let the water go down, and it's been over other parts of the 24 state. But, what -- it's sort of like a FEMA program. And 25 I assured him that -- that we would do what was appropriate 41 1 for a temporary structure across there, and also check with 2 the State that that temporary structure would not jeopardize 3 our permanent solution. 4 That permanent solution is about a $500,000 5 bridge, which we would probably have to participate at 6 10 percent with the State. But, the -- this federal agency 7 is soil conservation, is what it is, this T.N.R.C.S. He 8 said that they were looking at the possibility -- we have 9 two different options that we'll talk about, but where they 10 can do something temporary to get that traffic in a one-lane 11 situation, just like it was across there. But, we need to 12 let the water go down a little bit so we can look at the 13 structure. But, we feel like it's feasible for light trucks 14 and cars to go across there. And that we would participate 15 at 25 percent, which will be in-kind services or money, and 16 we're also looking at working on some of the areas in -- 17 down 39 in Precinct 4, where we have some -- not structural 18 damage, but river damage that we can participate in, and 19 that money would -- we would have money, maybe, to offset 20 some of the, you know, 25 percent in that temporary 21 crossing. But, we're probably looking at $80,000 to 22 $100,000 federal grant. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Leonard? 24 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The bridge, it just 42 1 goes back into this off-system program? 2 MR. ODOM: It is an off-system program, yes, 3 sir. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It is. And then the 5 new program you're talking about with the soil conservation 6 folks, that's also an off-system program? 7 MR. ODOM: Well, it is erosion control and 8 safety, so -- health, safety, and welfare of the people or 9 something they look at, but essentially erosion and 10 accessibility. We have a retirement home over there for 11 about 60 retired people, plus personnel. That is a 6 1/2 12 mile detour. We were concerned about the EMS and fire 13 protection for them, and so we wanted -- we looked at that 14 option, 'cause everyone comes in on that side, plus the 15 children, during the summer, for the different camps that 16 are up in there. They have a good road, but most of that's 17 through Kendall County that gets back there. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Leonard, as I understand 19 it, hopefully this next agenda item we would declare a 20 disaster, which would free up some funding for both ag and 21 road problems and other problems, private property damages, 22 if we go through with that. In talking with Tommy Tomlinson 23 this morning and also Joe Franklin this morning, I 24 understand we need a letter specific -- from the 25 Commissioners Court specifically requesting funding for the 43 1 temporary structure for that program. 2 MR. ODOM: I think a resolution or a court 3 order mandating that off the next agenda item. I've already 4 written that letter, I went ahead. They -- that's what this 5 call was about this morning, that he has received that and 6 that they will be replying -- as a matter of fact, the 7 letter's in the mail to us, and in reference to that. But, 8 I told him that this was appropriate timing, that -- that we 9 would get a resolution or a court order on that, that we 10 would declare it as an emergency, and that we would take 11 appropriate steps to participate. 12 (Loud construction noise in courtroom.) 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you think Judge 14 Ables is mad again or what? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would think, looking at 16 the two agenda items, that it's probably more appropriate to 17 authorize -- do a motion to authorize Leonard under this 18 agenda item which relates to funding for repair, and then 19 for the second agenda item, it's very specific for declaring 20 the physical disaster. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: I concur with that. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I will make a motion to 23 authorize Leonard Odom to proceed with the letter requesting 24 funding through the U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil 25 Conservation Service, related to funding to repair or build 44 1 a temporary structure on Hermann Sons Road bridge. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 4 seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court authorize 5 Leonard Odom to write a letter requesting the funding 6 through U. S. Department of Agriculture for temporary bridge 7 across the Hermann Sons Road bridge. Any further questions 8 or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 9 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 11 (No response.) 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there any other issues 14 related to the west? 15 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No, I don't think so, 16 not that we haven't already looked at and addressed. 17 MR. ODOM: But -- I don't know if there's any 18 others, but I think we're in pretty good shape. We're -- 19 during the next several weeks, we'll be patching and 20 clearing up. But, we've got access to everybody and it's 21 just a -- 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My precinct is in good 23 shape. Of course, we did it right the first time. 24 MR. ODOM: We did it right, yes, sir. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's move on to Item Number 45 1 12 then, which is -- 2 MR. ODOM: Thank you. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: -- consider and discuss 4 declaring a flooding disaster. I will tell the public, I 5 believe the Court knows that under my authority, I declared 6 a disaster last week for purposes of submitting information 7 to the State to start the ball rolling on -- on federal -- 8 on State reimbursement using the numbers provided by 9 Leonard, as well as by the various Commissioners. So, what 10 we have today is a court -- is a proclamation by the 11 Commissioners Court to basically continue the disaster that 12 was declared last week. Jonathan, do you have anything to 13 say on that? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. Only comment I have 15 is, a large portion of this disaster amount, which is 16 probably -- the total is up probably approaching $2 1/2 17 million estimate of damages, a large portion of that is 18 agricultural, mostly fencing and some erosion problems, 19 things of that nature. But, I think the total amounts to 20 probably about $2 1/2 million, I guess. But, I'll make a 21 motion to approve this as presented. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 24 second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve the 25 proclamation declaring a local state of disaster. Any 46 1 further questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise 2 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. Okay. Let's 7 go back to Item Number 8, which is opening bids, consider 8 and award or reject bids for 25-ton trailer for Road and 9 Bridge Department. We apparently have received only one bid 10 for that piece of equipment, which I will open. It is from 11 Fruehoff in San Antonio. The bid is for $22,383.80. I 12 would -- 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we accept the bid 14 and refer it to Road and Bridge Department. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 17 seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court accept the 18 bid and refer it to the Road and Bridge Department for 19 evaluation and recommendation. Any further questions or 20 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 21 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 23 (No response.) 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I assume we could 25 approve something if they brought it back today while we're 47 1 here? 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes. Or we can do it 3 tomorrow. Leonard? Do you want to come and get this? 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Frank's here. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Franklin, are you still here? 6 You guys can look at that and bring it back to us sometime 7 this morning? 8 MR. JOHNSTON: Yes, sir. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Thanks. All right. 10 At this time, the Court will formally recess its 11 Commissioners Court meeting and open a public hearing on a 12 proposed court order establishing no-wake zones on Ingram 13 Lake, Flat Rock Lake, and Center Point Lake. 14 (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at approximately 10:00 a.m., and a 15 public hearing was held in open court, as follows:) 16 P U B L I C H E A R I N G 17 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Before we open the public 19 hearing, I'm going to ask any of the Commissioners if they 20 have anything they wish to say prior to hearing the public 21 testimony. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. Judge, 23 Commissioner Griffin and I have talked about this. We've 24 had numerous telephone calls with respect to the subject of 25 no-wake zones on the three county lakes, and I think in 48 1 deference to the topic, so as not to delay a lot of folks 2 who very patiently waited up to this point, I'm going to 3 pull out of the proposed order Center Point Lake, leaving 4 only in the order Flat Rock Lake Park. 5 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And I will be making a 6 motion to take Lake Ingram out of any further ordinance to 7 be under State law. I think when we get to that agenda 8 item -- the next agenda item, we'll have a considerable 9 discussion on enforcement of State law, and -- and 10 augmenting that as we can with our Sheriff's deputies, as 11 we've discussed in the past, but that will be at the next 12 agenda item. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone else? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question. 15 Let me make sure I understood what you just said. You're 16 going to pull out Center Point? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're going to pull 19 out Ingram, but you're going to leave Flat Rock Lake -- 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In for the order. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- in for the order to 22 create a no-wake zone? 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, I don't -- are we 25 going to vote on that? 49 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: There will have to be an 2 amendment to the order. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Which we'll have to vote on 5 in the next agenda item. The Commissioners wanted to make 6 those announcements before the public hearing so these 7 people who are here concerned about specifically one lake or 8 the other would understand that they are not going to be 9 considered for no-wake zones. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Item Number 10, then, 11 we will -- we'll really have some discussion about Flat Rock 12 Lake? 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes, sir. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Before you even make a 15 motion, okay. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: So, at this time, we're in 17 the public hearing. I want everyone who's here -- we 18 appreciate y'all coming here -- to understand that it is -- 19 it is the expressed intent of Commissioner Williams, 20 representing Precinct 2, and Commissioner Griffin, 21 representing Precinct 4, to remove Ingram Lake and Center 22 Point Lake from the no-wake -- no-wake zone consideration, 23 which leaves us with only -- which will leave us, when that 24 action is taken, with only Flat Rock Lake under 25 consideration for a -- a no-wake zone. 50 1 Little bit of history. This item first 2 really came to our attention based on some requests from 3 people who live on Flat Rock Lake for a no-wake zone. It 4 was expanded to include Ingram and Center Point Lake based 5 on some feeling that we should treat all the lakes equally. 6 I'm sure each of the Commissioners, as I have had, have had 7 extensive conversations with people who -- who feel very 8 strongly about the issue one way or another. We're here to 9 listen to you all. And, in the interests of time, I would 10 ask all those of you who wish to speak now to -- to focus 11 your concerns on Flat Rock Lake, because that will be the 12 only lake that will be considered for a no-wake zone at the 13 conclusion of the public hearing. So, with that narrowing 14 of the issues, we'll open the public hearing. Is there 15 anyone here who would like to address us? Just please come 16 forward and give your name. 17 MR. VANDERKAM: Good morning. My name is 18 John Vanderkam, and I live at 2849 Bandera Highway, which is 19 located on Flat Rock Lake. I have over 400 feet of 20 shoreline on the lake with 150 feet of cement dock. I 21 believe that you are overreacting to the situation. For 22 example, you are proposing we go from totally unrestricted 23 speed down to only enough speed to maintain steerage. 24 Essentially, no wake. The reason you are doing this is 25 twofold, first item being safety and the second being 51 1 erosion. We should all be concerned about safety. And, 2 admittedly, there is the potential for an accident to 3 happen, but in the last five years, I know of no serious 4 accidents on the lake. By comparison, on Bandera Highway 5 between Highway 16 and the Shelton Ranch, we've had at least 6 fours deaths, and there's little or no priority from our 7 Sheriff's Department to control or enforce the laws on 8 Bandera Highway. And I think it's a -- to further dilute 9 the resources of our Sheriff's Department to enforce that is 10 a mistake. 11 Now, let me address the erosion problem. 12 Every time the river and the level of the Flat Rock Lake 13 rises 10 to 12 feet, the flow of water deposits up to 14 18 inches of mud on my dock which I have to get rid of. So, 15 I don't have an erosion problem; I got the reverse. I don't 16 know what to do with it. I don't know what to do with all 17 this mud we've got. I would bet that the river causes more 18 erosion than the few boats that use Flat Rock Lake. On 19 average, you can count on the fingers of two hands in a 20 week's time the number of power boats that use Flat Rock 21 Lake. It's miniscule. And, I look right over the lake -- 22 the main part of the lake. Power boats are not a problem. 23 It is mostly used with tubers and others paddling down from 24 the State Park. 25 You've already mentioned that you've taken 52 1 Ingram Lake and so on out of the equation. To that point, 2 to include every lake in the county under the same rules is 3 like saying the speed limit ought to be the same on every 4 street in the county. We let the -- we should let the 5 situation dictate our actions. It might be appropriate to 6 eliminate the jet skis and the waterskiing and reduce the 7 allowable horsepower to 25, but this should only be done 8 after an appropriate survey and investigation. Thank you. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. 10 (Applause.) 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes, sir? 12 MR. TURNER: Good morning. One thing before 13 I start. Does anybody know what the count of the -- the 14 national election was in Texas? We got all this emphasis on 15 Florida, and I haven't really heard what the vote count was 16 in Texas. 17 AUDIENCE: Bush won. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We won. 19 MR. TURNER: No, I know that. What's the 20 total number? 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: We haven't officially 22 determined that. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Votes haven't been 24 canvassed. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Please give your name first. 53 1 MR. TURNER: My name is Jerry Turner. I live 2 at Box 203, Ingram Lake, and I have lived there for 30 3 years. I'm just one spokesman for a small group of people 4 that are very concerned about taking and limiting recreation 5 on these lakes. Someone just made a statement that we're 6 not -- we're not singling out other lakes. We're not 7 singling out Ingram or Center Point, but we are going to 8 single out Flat Rock. And, my concern is -- excuse me a 9 minute, I'm not very good at this. We came here 30 years 10 ago because of eight months of sunlight, eight months of 11 good weather to use and enjoy water sports. That's the 12 reason for a lot of people living here. The weather, the 13 quality of education, and that's why we're here. 14 For a few people to use erosion as a basis 15 for limiting the thousands of people that enjoy these 16 waters, as you can see now, is very hollow. People come 17 here and buy property on these lakes. They expand the lake. 18 They want their frontage to include more than it has 19 included in the past, so here comes the dump trucks, here 20 comes the soil. They extend their -- their boundaries out 4 21 or 5 feet into the lakes. At that point, the lake -- at 22 that time, the lake starts to take it all back. And, with 23 the floods that we have now, every once in a while it not 24 only takes that back, it takes that back and a little more, 25 and then it deposits a lot of soil. 54 1 I have a plaque on my frontage that has been 2 there since 1930. It is still there. It is on the 3 frontage; it has not been eroded. What I see from new 4 people coming in is the erosion is on new added expanding of 5 their frontage on these waters, and -- and it doesn't take 6 boats. I've watched it, I've witnessed it. It doesn't take 7 boats or waterskiers. It is just the action of the lake 8 water trying to take back its original boundary. And, if 9 you go look at the people that are saying they're having 10 erosion, you will see where it is taken. It only goes back 11 to its original boundary. 12 What are the young people in this community 13 going to do if they can't use these bodies of water for 14 recreation? We don't have enough now to keep these children 15 here, young people. I think after the floods -- or what 16 we've seen, the flood and a half, erosion is not a 17 legitimate complaint. Safety. The people on these lakes 18 are concerned as much about safety as anybody. 19 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 20 MR. TURNER: And thank God that we are there, 21 because we help any time there's a problem with safety or 22 somebody getting out of line, using the lake for purposes 23 that they shouldn't. You cannot wait to see whether we're 24 going to have law enforcement there. The Fish and Game is 25 stretched to their limits, so somebody is doing it, and the 55 1 local people that are here that are using these bodies of 2 water are doing it. They're even using it now, and it's 3 muddy and there's debris out there and what-have-you, but 4 yesterday there were numerous boats out there. Landowners 5 come here and they buy this property on these lakes, and 6 then, because of noise that they didn't like, or because 7 people are actually laughing, swimming, and enjoying, they 8 want to make it their private lake. 9 The no-wake zones on this petition right here 10 was added for Ingram. Ingram has a no-wake zone, and 11 they've had it for years. So, this -- this statement that 12 we're going to have no-wake zones in Ingram also scared the 13 living heck out of us. What more zones are they going to 14 have? And -- and what it is is just a reduction of 15 recreation and people really enjoying this. I really enjoy 16 seeing 50 boats on that lake in my front yard, everybody 17 going and going. Sure, at times it gets a little hairy out 18 there, but somebody goes out there and kind of straightens 19 out, gets everybody going in the right -- right way around 20 the lake. But, to say that all that has to stop because 21 somebody across the lake has got a little erosion problem 22 is -- is nothing to be considered. And, the individual that 23 probably is complaining about the boats out there on this 24 lake at Flat Rock are complaining because they've never 25 owned a boat. And they're wrong if they -- if they can 56 1 dictate how many people are enjoying that because they don't 2 like to fish or they don't like to boat is -- is just -- 3 it's unfair. 4 Like I said before, people move to this 5 community because of eight months that they can use the 6 water and ski. You can't do that in Colorado, where we were 7 before. There's three months, and it's over. Here you can 8 fish and ski for eight months and use this water, jet skis 9 and what-have-you, and that's the reason for a lot of people 10 being here. I bought property here because it was a 11 facility where everybody enjoyed the water. I have never 12 ever decided that I ought to start a campaign so that this 13 part of the lake is my personal lake, and nobody's there. I 14 have always been concerned, and I wonder where the boats 15 came from that -- this lake that we have out here now 16 restricts boats on it, and you see nobody on it. Once in a 17 while you see a flat-bottom boat with a fisherman on it. 18 You -- somebody ought to come to Ingram Lake and see what 19 it's used for. You know, what -- and I want to mention one 20 other thing. There is no contamination -- 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Mr. Turner, we have a lot of 22 people who want to speak. I'm going to ask you to wrap it 23 up here. 24 MR. TURNER: Okay, I'm going to wrap it up 25 real quick. There isn't any contamination of these waters 57 1 through boat use or jet skis or what-have-you. In the 2 summertime, like we had with the droughts, the only odor 3 coming off of that lake is the fishy smell. It is not oil 4 or gas. Thank you. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. 6 (Applause.) 7 MRS. SCHLUNEGGER: Good morning. My name is 8 Kelly Schlunegger, and I only have two issues that I would 9 like to address today. The first item concerns the issue of 10 alleged land erosion on Flat Rock Lake. Now, I was 11 fortunate enough to grow up on Flat Rock Lake from the age 12 of 4 until I left for college. We were a community of close 13 friends, in and out of each other's homes, and we shared 14 each other's problems and concerns. During these past few 15 weeks, I have heard claims of 18 inches a year of land 16 erosion on the waterfront properties. Now, this would mean 17 that in 10 years, 15 feet of waterfront property would be 18 lost. In all the years that we lived -- and this is my dad; 19 I think he'll vouch for me here. In all the years that we 20 lived on Flat Rock Lake, this was simply not an issue, okay? 21 Believe me, if any of us were losing 15 feet of waterfront 22 property every 10 years, this issue would have been raised 23 and definitely addressed. So, sounds like fuzzy math. 24 Fuzzy math. 25 (Laughter.) 58 1 MRS. SCHLUNEGGER: The second issue that I 2 would like to address falls into the category of good common 3 sense. My husband and I and my daughter, we live on Ingram 4 Lake now because -- because I did grow up on the lake; it 5 was very much an important part of me and who I was, so I'm 6 thrilled to be on the lake again. But, talking about good 7 common sense, you know, people who bought property on these 8 lakes that we've talked about, Flat Rock, Center Point, and 9 Ingram, specifically Flat Rock, they bought property on 10 these lakes. They knew beforehand that the lakes were 11 public and open for water sports. If they wanted to live on 12 restricted lakes, then they should have bought property on 13 restricted lakes, because there are plenty of waterfront 14 areas in Kerr County which are restricted. It seems 15 analogous to buying a home near the airport and later 16 complaining that the airplanes are bothersome. On the other 17 hand, property owners who bought property on these lakes 18 with the intent to utilize their waterfront property for 19 boating purposes never dreamed that this right might be 20 someday taken from them. Thank you. 21 (Applause.) 22 MR. BOWDEN: I'm one of them old geezers 23 Buster's talking about. My name is Bill -- 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Did you kiss your 25 wife when the Aggies scored? 59 1 MR. BOWDEN: Oh, yeah. Yeah. As my daughter 2 told you, I bought a home -- property, rather, on Flat Rock 3 Lake back in 1974 and I built a home. I also, with the help 4 of my neighbor, built a dock, and it was a cantilever dock. 5 That dock -- the cantilever part was supported by a slab of 6 concrete. When I poured that slab, it was about 3 inches 7 above the ground. When I sold that property -- and I saw 8 Jim Ingram out there; he's a wonderful person -- it was 9 probably about 12 inches below the ground. So, the guy that 10 says it deposits soil on your ground when we have a flood, 11 he's right. It deposits a lot. But, really, what I'm more 12 concerned about is that I'm 76 years old, and through the 13 years I've seen our rights -- like they're claiming the soil 14 is being eroded, and I don't believe we need any more rights 15 taken away from us. Thank you. 16 (Applause.) 17 MR. SANDOVAL: Sid Sandoval. I guess most of 18 you know how often I fish at Flat Rock. I spend about 200 19 days out of the year there. I'm retired; that's all I got 20 left to do is fish. I started fishing there when I was 7 21 years old. I'm a native of Kerrville. My dad used to take 22 me there. I don't know if anybody knows why they call that 23 Flat Rock, but I do. I won't go into that subject, but I do 24 know why it was called Flat Rock. 25 As far as the -- the erosion is concerned, as 60 1 I've fished there all this time, in all these years, I've 2 noticed the banks of that river. Of course, that's where 3 you fish. You want the best fish, you fish the banks; I 4 call it hitting the banks. And I have not seen any erosion, 5 none whatsoever. Most of the area there is concreted, and 6 some of that area is up to 10 feet high. I think there's 7 only been about three new homes that were built closer to 8 the State Park, that were -- I guess part of that was just 9 built. I don't know if that's the case today or not, but as 10 I remember way back when, when there was not a dam there, 11 most of that area was gradually sloped into the river. A 12 lot of that -- a lot of that area was also back-filled at 13 that time, so it's not its natural -- it's not its natural 14 ground; it's backfill. 15 And, it's -- as the river goes in one 16 direction, it turns, it kind of angles out, and the water 17 just hits those banks pretty strong. It does not have to be 18 a boat. I've been out there when it's windy and it's 19 hitting those banks hard, but I still don't see any erosion; 20 banks are the same. I really don't see the problem as far 21 as erosion is concerned all this time that I've been there. 22 And, as far as the -- the fishing's concerned, we're taking 23 a lot of that from the children. I take my boat out there, 24 I take my children out there, take them boat riding. There 25 isn't a heck of a lot for children to do these days, 61 1 especially if you can't afford to pay Y.M.C.A., sports 2 centers and things of that nature. I remember way back 3 when, when I was child, I would go upstream to hunt and I 4 would be able to enter any part of that river through any 5 property. That is not so today. That's been taken away. 6 It's all fenced in. There's fences across the river, which 7 is illegal. 8 Now we're down to what we have left, which is 9 three dams. And -- well, U.G.R.A.'s a classic example of 10 how many fishermen go there. It's curious. They don't. 11 Flat Rock's become the same way. I fished there -- if I 12 fish there in a month, and if I see three or four boats 13 there in that month's time, it's too much. There really 14 isn't -- on weekends you see boats, but these are boats that 15 come from out of town to the State Park. These people pay 16 $50 a year to go to every State Park in Texas and do that as 17 a recreational outing. But, after the weekend's over, it's 18 all gone, so I don't see a problem with erosion. I see a 19 problem with making any laws that would affect our rivers, 20 and especially our lakes, the only lakes that we have. Take 21 that away and you take not only the -- the enjoyment of the 22 children that go there, but also the hotel/motel taxes that 23 people come here to spend to use these lakes and these 24 waters, which is the most attractive activity in this 25 county. And, if you start eliminating that, you're taking 62 1 money away from the county and the city. Thank you. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Mr. Sandoval. 3 (Applause.) 4 MR. BARKER: I'm Sam Barker, and a resident 5 of Flat Rock Lake. And, if Mr. Sandoval wants to come out 6 and see where erosion takes place, he can come out and we'll 7 show you where it was marked about seven years ago. As far 8 as the gentleman wanting to know about people who have owned 9 boats, I moved here from Corpus Christi. 10 AUDIENCE: Go back. 11 MR. BARKER: I had a big boat. And when I 12 came back -- 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Excuse me. Comments like 14 that are not helpful in this situation. If you persist, you 15 will be removed. Do I have an acknowledgement on that? 16 AUDIENCE: Yes, sir. 17 MR. BARKER: When we started looking at a 18 place to settle and we were looking at a place at Flat Rock 19 Lake, I went to the County Commissioners, as well as to the 20 people out at the Kerrville State Park, and asked them about 21 the status of that lake. They told me that that was a 22 no-wake lake. Therefore, I got rid of my big boat and I 23 came down here and I got a fishing boat. And we don't mind 24 people fishing in there, as long as they come out and fish. 25 I've seen Mr. Sandoval on the lake; he knows where I live. 63 1 But you can come out and take a look at my neighbor's 2 property that had a marker at one time where the lake was, 3 and it does erode. And when you start running around there 4 and ski -- jet skis and motor boats, we can show you the 5 erosion on the dock. 6 I've got a concrete dock, and it erodes and 7 I've had to repair it; cost me 6,000 bucks. The piece of 8 property right next to me, although there's no buildings on 9 it, it's a vacant lot, that fellow has had to repair his 10 dock. He's got a concrete dock. The person two -- two lots 11 down from me has had the same thing, and each time it runs 12 anywhere from $3,000 to $6,000 to fix those -- to fix these 13 concrete docks. And, so the erosion does take place, and 14 the biggest portion of the erosion comes from boats 15 constantly running up and down the lake, making wakes. If 16 you come out there, as Mr. Sandoval does, and fish, we have 17 no problem at all with that. 18 As far as safety goes, every time we have a 19 flood, just like the last one we had, it repositions all the 20 logs in that lake and it makes the kids who come out there 21 skiing, many of them not wearing life vests, extremely 22 dangerous, 'cause people don't know where all the logs are 23 repositioned, and they don't know where they can turn with 24 their big boats. But, like I said, if anybody wants to come 25 on out and take a look at my property and my next door 64 1 neighbor's property, we can show you where it erodes from. 2 Thank you all. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Mr. Barker. 4 MS. RISINGER: Hello, Commissioners. My name 5 is Tory Risinger, and my family owns property on Ingram Lake 6 and has for 30 years. I'm here to bring up our petition 7 that was signed, the petition to Kerr County to keep Kerr 8 County lakes open for recreational boating. This includes 9 no-wake zones for Ingram Lake, Flat Rock, and Center Point. 10 We have 1,493 signatures of people who do not want these 11 lakes to become no-wake. That's not just Ingram, that's not 12 just Center Point. It's Flat Rock too. We have people that 13 have signed from all over this area. And, Mr. Barker, I 14 just have one thing to say to you. Floods. Flooding, 15 erosion. Those two go together. It's not a boat. But 16 think about what a flood can do and how much it can move. 17 That is the issue, and we can't control the flooding. So, I 18 just wanted to point out our signed petitions. Thank you. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. 20 (Applause.) 21 MS. INGRAM: My name is Joyce Ingram. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pull that down. 23 MS. INGRAM: Okay? My name is Joyce Ingram, 24 and my husband and I live on Flat Rock Dam. We bought 25 Bill's property. We have had to come in and cement all of 65 1 the -- the dock area, and it still is eroding. And I'm not 2 going to argue about erosion here, 'cause I guess it's just 3 opinions, but we live there and we know the erosion problem. 4 My point today is safety. Two weekends ago, there were two 5 boats out there at Flat Rock on the dam doing wheelies. 6 They had children in the boat. They had no life preservers. 7 And this is -- this is a common concern. There's no one 8 patrolling it. No one. We stand out there and, you know, 9 give them dirty looks, but that doesn't do much good. But 10 one of these days, we're going to have a very bad accident. 11 Mr. Barker didn't mention it, but he pulled 12 some boaters out about three or four years ago, and they 13 didn't know the area. We've got stumps out there. Ingram 14 Lake is a completely different entity. It is a recreational 15 lake. They don't have stumps; they've got wide turnarounds. 16 And, I mean, I'm -- I think that's great if they want to 17 boat up there, but Flat Rock is -- is not a recreation lake. 18 It is for fishermen. And I have seen fishermen, both 19 Mr. Sandoval and a lot of other people, come up there, and 20 at a good rate -- you know, a slow rate of speed, getting in 21 there and start fishing. And then they have these pleasure 22 boats come up, and in disgust, they just pull right on out, 23 because you can't fish with all those waves lapping around. 24 I know this is a hot subject. I didn't 25 realize it was going to get this hot when we first began, 66 1 but I'm the one that began the petition to have some control 2 over the lake. I didn't include Ingram Lake because it's a 3 different kind of lake, but I still think -- and I'm not -- 4 I really think that we should have some kind of control over 5 Flat Rock Lake. Thank you. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. 7 MS. VINSON: I'm Judy Vinson, and I live on 8 Flat Rock Lake. We've lived there only four years, and I 9 love to see the boats out there and people having fun. But 10 we have a little boat and a trolling motor, and I'd like all 11 of you to come out there and look at the rocks and the 12 stumps. They're just under the water on that lake. It is 13 not safe to waterski there. And, I have seen people out 14 there, like she says, nobody with life vests, people pulling 15 kids behind a boat on a float. And I like to see people 16 have fun, but I don't want to see blood and people killed, 17 and that's what's going to happen there. 18 MISS SCHLUNEGGER: Hello. I'm Sarah 19 Schlunegger, and today is my ninth birthday. This is a 20 picture of me when I was seven years old skiing on Ingram 21 Lake. My friends and I love to go waterskiing and 22 innertubing. It's a safe and fun thing to do. We usually 23 spend our summer evenings down at the lake waterskiing. 24 It's a fun, safe, wholesome workout. 25 (Applause.) 67 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Happy birthday. 2 MR. WATTERS: I'm Roy Watters. I've lived in 3 the Hill Country here for the last 20 years; very proud of 4 it. I am concerned about the taking of people's rights to 5 use our lakes of this county. I lease a lake lot on Lake 6 Ingram, which I have given a key to get in so that the Parks 7 and Wildlife can use it to patrol that lake. I'm very 8 concerned about safety. I'm going to try to keep this on a 9 logical plateau and not on an emotional plateau, but if 10 we're concerned about safety, you know, y'all need to 11 consider some things if you -- if you take the boats off 12 Flat Rock Lake. 13 Where are they going? They're going to the 14 other lakes. We don't have enough lakes now, so what you're 15 going to do is overload the other lakes and then make them 16 dangerous. That, or you're going to send people on the 17 highway pulling boats to other lakes, such as Medina or -- 18 or Canyon or so on and so forth. We need more lakes, not 19 less lakes. We don't need to be taking people's rights away 20 to use their waterways in the state of Texas. I think 21 you're going to make things more dangerous if you -- if you 22 pull -- pull the boats off Flat Rock and concentrate them 23 more on the other lakes. You need to look at the logical 24 end of this. Thank you. 25 (Applause.) 68 1 MS. FRITZ: Hello. My name is Sylvia Fritz, 2 And I actually grew up in Center Point skiing on the lake, 3 and -- thank you. And I guess, like, everyone here was 4 concerned about all three, and my heart was in Center Point. 5 My friend, Tory's, is in Ingram. And -- and my big concern 6 would be if we could -- what could we come up with that 7 could make the lake safer for the people at Flat Rock so we 8 could keep it and it won't be an issue that we're going to 9 take one, and then a few years down the road, well, let's 10 take the others too. But, I don't personally go -- I went 11 there in high school, but I don't personally go there now, 12 so I can't say what it's like, but I -- can we come up with 13 something for -- other options for safety there? Markers or 14 things that maybe I -- people would be willing to help do to 15 preserve the rights, to keep the recreation on all three 16 lakes? 17 And then, just the comment would be, too, is, 18 like, I wasn't here when things were voted to take U.G.R.A. 19 Lake or whatever happened there. I wasn't here; I was away 20 in college, and it's just sad for me to see -- to look at 21 this. When you look out at Chili's, you see this beautiful 22 lake with water and nobody out there. So, that's -- I'd 23 like to address the Court to save all three lakes. 24 (Applause.) 25 MR. SIMPSON: Dear Commissioners and our 69 1 County Judge, my name is David Simpson, and my family and I 2 own a home on Ingram Lake. We have a very large family that 3 has both contributed to the to growth and the tax base of 4 Kerr County. I've owned property and lived on the Guadalupe 5 River for about 25 years. I grew up skiing on Lake Ingram 6 with my friends, and when we invested in our lakefront 7 property, it was mainly because of the wonderful recreation 8 that it could provide for our growing children. Water 9 sports are both healthy and a wholesome alternative to some 10 other forms of activities that young people sometimes get 11 involved with. Besides, I made my children a promise that 12 when they're old enough, that we would buy a boat and we'd 13 teach them how to ski. 14 We greatly cherish our right to use our lake 15 and hope that you will protect our rights, both personal and 16 property. We also believe that any restriction of our right 17 to use the lake would greatly affect our property value, and 18 we very enthusiastically oppose restricting our use of all 19 of our lakes. And, also, I have a question for the 20 Commissioners. You're taking this off the agenda for now, 21 but what is the chance that later on down the road you're 22 going to -- to put it right back on the agenda, maybe catch 23 us off guard next time? And once you give our lakes away, 24 we probably will never get them back. There are also rumors 25 that you're going to turn our lakes over to U.G.R.A. or the 70 1 T.N.R.C.C. We'd like to know if that's true. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. 3 (Applause.) 4 MS. HENSLEY: Good morning. My name's 5 Kathleen Hensley. I run the Ingram Lake Dam store, and I 6 watch the boats, I watch the people. One of the concerns 7 that I have is I have not, over the last two years of 8 watching over this lake, seen the johnny-on-the-spot people 9 that used to patrol the thing. We used to -- the Parks and 10 Wildlife, boy, they were right there if you didn't have your 11 life jackets on or whatever. What I'm not understanding is, 12 why do we have to keep making laws? Because nobody's 13 enforcing the laws that are already on the books. I'm not 14 saying we should have a police state out there, but year 15 before last, the rope that separates the swimmers from the 16 boating people was down for three weeks; I called to see 17 about somebody putting the darn rope back up. It wasn't 18 that the boats were going in too close to the dam; the 19 swimmers were going out in the middle of the lake. 20 It's just that when it gets down to nobody 21 knows what to do, well, let's pass another law. And I agree 22 that our rights are being taken away. I know that I spent 23 all my summers out on the lake. Everybody knows how to do 24 it. I do think that there needs to be more patrolling out 25 there, particularly on the weekends during the summertime, 71 1 to -- for people who are -- I don't want to classify it as 2 just young people, because it's not young people. It's 3 people that are out there that don't have a lot of concern 4 for other people's rights, so they need to have somebody 5 telling them, this is -- this is the way this works. We all 6 work together and we can all have fun together. 7 And, I just would like to know also, when you 8 said something about having people, you know, working with 9 the law enforcement agencies, who exactly is the law 10 enforcement agency you're supposed to call when there's a 11 problem? I had a man have -- have an absolute hysterical 12 fit last summer and called the -- the County Sheriff's 13 Office because his hat got wet 'cause it was sitting on the 14 dam. And, I did everything in my power to keep from 15 laughing at this gentleman, 'cause he was really upset, and 16 it doesn't do my business any good to laugh at my customers. 17 But, anyway, he was -- he said they got wet, and "the waves 18 are pushing my children over." Well, that's just one of the 19 little hazards. But, who is supposed to be in charge of the 20 lake? Are there multiple agencies, you know, where we could 21 all work together, you know, with the enforcement agencies? 22 I see the Parks and Wildlife boats going by, but I never see 23 it on the lake. I'm not for having, like I said, a police 24 state, 'cause we've got, Lord only knows, enough police 25 around here. But, anyway, I just wanted to say, could we 72 1 work with people to find out who we're supposed to call when 2 things do happen? Thank y'all very much. 3 (Applause.) 4 MR. CANNON: Hello. My name is Dylan Cannon, 5 and I'm 10 years old. I'm in fifth grade. I learned how to 6 waterski this year with my dad and -- with my dad and his 7 friend, Healey. I can ski on two skis, and I'm looking 8 forward to getting on one and slaloming. We ski -- my dad 9 and I and my brother, we ski two times a month, and we're 10 usually on the water at about 7 o'clock. This is a very 11 special time for us, because my dad works offshore, so we 12 we're usually on the water about 7 a.m., and we're usually 13 off about 11 a.m. We don't hurt anything or bother anybody 14 while we're there. And I hope y'all don't vote to take this 15 away from us, because this is very healthy and it's very fun 16 for us and all and everybody. Thanks. 17 (Applause.) 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tough act to follow. 19 MR. SCHLUNEGGER: He's been on my boat. I'm 20 Ueli Schlunegger, and we have the Inn of the Hills down the 21 street. When I got married some 10 years ago, 1990, my wife 22 and I at that time loved to ski. Tory Turner and her dad 23 brought us out during the time we were engaged, and we 24 skiied, and we loved it. And, in Texas we don't have 25 mountains -- I'm from Switzerland. We don't have mountains 73 1 in Texas to go snow ski on, so what's the next best thing? 2 We're going to let our boat pull us around the lake. My 3 concern is for the future. Not for myself, but for my 4 children, her children's children, and way down the road as 5 we begin to erode the possibility of us using lakes as 6 recreation, as, slowly but surely, every 10, 15 years, we 7 lose something else. 8 What are they going to have? Because once 9 the lake is gone, it's gone forever. The safety issues on 10 that lake -- we looked at that lake, my wife and I. When 11 she decided she wanted to live on a lake like she did when 12 she was younger, we looked at the lake, and Dr. Red Duke 13 bought a house out from under us on that lake. You guys 14 probably know where he lives. We looked at that house. The 15 day we made an offer was the day he had already bought it, 16 paid cash for it. So, we opted to go to Ingram Lake. There 17 were safety concerns, to me, on that lake, but I think once 18 you learn the lake, it's not an issue. And for locals using 19 that lake, it's not a problem. You can learn where all the 20 -- all the things are. There are things in Ingram Lake that 21 you can hit, and sometimes people do. It's not an issue if 22 you know about it. And, I would certainly appreciate you 23 guys not taking that thing out of the inventory for things 24 for our children and our children's children to do, because 25 there's just not enough in Kerrville. 74 1 A lot of times at the Inn of the Hills, we get 2 requests, "What is there to do in Kerrville?" Well, darn, we 3 lost our lakes to recreation; we've only got two lakes now. 4 So, we need to keep -- we need to think forward in this new 5 generation. Twenty years from now, the kind of boats that 6 are going to be out on the lake are going to probably blow 7 our minds away. So, let's not ruin it for the young 8 generation and make two lakes extra crowded just because 9 we've taken one out of the inventory. Thank you. 10 (Applause.) 11 MS. OWEN: I'm C.C. Owen. I do not live on 12 Lake Ingram; I live on the river, the Guadalupe leading to 13 it. This gentleman was speaking of boats that we may have 14 soon that will blow our minds. We've got one now already on 15 the river, and that's the jet skis. It's very bad. They do 16 not seem to understand the meaning of the word "wake." I 17 think if they cannot understand that we don't have enough 18 people to patrol it, I understand that certainly we can deny 19 access to the jet skis on the lakes so they cannot get up 20 river. Consider that. 21 MR. OLDEN: Good morning, Commissioners. I 22 happen to be a jet skier. Anyway, I've lived here 30 years 23 out of my 35 years; I've never had a ticket. Pulled many a 24 fisherman, person swimming, out of the water. But -- 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Would you give us your name, 75 1 sir? 2 MR. OLDEN: Michael Olden. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. 4 MR. OLDEN: All right. I'm sorry. I have a 5 little stiff neck; I didn't sleep very well last night, 6 'cause I've been here my whole life, and my whole life I've 7 spent on the river. I'm a 35-year-old foot specialist at 8 the V.A., a Navy veteran, 30-year resident of Kerrville. As 9 a boat ski owner, I formally protest the actions here today 10 to stop the people of Kerrville and the surrounding areas of 11 skiing and boating on the lakes mentioned in our area. I 12 grew up on these lakes. I learned to ski when I was 5 at 13 Flat Rock, along with my family and friends and neighbors. 14 You say -- the riverfront landowners -- that the boaters and 15 skiers erode the shoreline; you'd like to stop the boaters 16 from using the lakes by proposing a no-wake zone on our 17 lakes, under the auspice that it should be used for drought 18 conditions, and only -- and only which ruin your shorelines. 19 Well, I say to you, just because you're lucky 20 enough to live along the river does not give you the right 21 to dictate -- make laws and stop your fellow taxpayers from 22 enjoying what they grew up with. Who do you think built the 23 dams in this area, and why? Ninety-five percent of all dams 24 were man-made in the state of Texas. Why were dams used to 25 form a lake? Three reasons. To control flooding, to 76 1 irrigate downstream, and to make waterfront for all people 2 to enjoy and use. Not just the people living along the 3 banks. In our area, the dams are used to control flooding. 4 When I last checked, the citizens of Kerrville and the 5 surrounding counties have enjoyed these lakes for many 6 decades without very many problems, and living and enjoying 7 the freedom to do so. 8 These lakes are fed from the headwaters of 9 the Guadalupe. We did not run out of water during the long 10 drought, and we certainly do not need to use the riverfront 11 for irrigation. And you cannot tell us that we -- that the 12 flood doesn't cause 10 million times more erosion or damage 13 than the decades of recreational use. When I was off in the 14 Navy in the '80's, we had several floods; I saw the 15 pictures. I was unhappy about all the damage, but I still 16 could not wait to get home to Kerrville and ride my 17 cherished river. I was very surprised when I watched the 18 Kerrville-Schreiner State Park put in the wire mesh and 19 rocks to form a barrier for flood erosion. Who had to pay 20 for that? We did, the taxpayers. We did not complain. I 21 say you do not own the river; no one does. 22 That was a great idea by the Schreiner Park. 23 That was for flood control. Why don't the persons living on 24 the -- along the river that are concerned about erosion, why 25 don't they try some sort of effort like that? Put markers 77 1 on those stumps. I've ran that river since I was 5; I've 2 never ever hit a stump, never had a problem. Pulled plenty 3 of people out of that water. So, as a boat owner and a 4 lifetime resident with many years to go, don't keep -- keep 5 putting regulations, passing laws for your benefit. We've 6 already paid our dues to the State of Texas through boat 7 stickers, et cetera, to preserve the river and the 8 waterways. I do not know a single boat owner that, when 9 they see a piece of garbage floating by, that we don't lean 10 over and take it out of the river. So, think of that the 11 next time we have a flood and all your waterfront owners' 12 stuff comes floating down and polluting the river. 13 And what about the billions-of-dollar-a-year 14 business of camps along the river? Why don't we do 15 something about that? No way. It's always who has the 16 money, isn't it? You don't stop to think of all the 17 businesses you would affect if you stopped the usage of 18 further restriction on the lakes. The boat owner buys fast 19 food, water toys, gas, oil, boats, jet skis, property and 20 houses also, and send their kids to camp too, just like you. 21 I say we've already designated the U.G.R.A. areas as a 22 no-wake zone for drought and water as a pristine lake. 23 Where do we stop? If we continue with these actions, you 24 will push every boat owner, young and old, out of Kerrville. 25 Is that really what you want? This will lead to other 78 1 cities following our lead, and sooner or later that 95 2 percent of all man-made lakes will only belong to the 3 waterfront associations and we will have nowhere to go to 4 relax and cool off, relieve stress, and ride our boats and 5 ski with our families and children, just because we don't 6 live along the river. Don't punish us. We might as well 7 put a sign out in front of Kerrville, "Welcome to Kerrville, 8 the home of nursing homes, trailer parks, retirees -- 9 (Laughter.) 10 MR. OLDEN: -- "those without money. And 11 young folks and boat and ski owners not allowed." I will 12 say -- 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm going to have to ask you 14 to wrap it up here. We have other people who may wish to 15 speak. 16 MR. OLDEN: Yes, sir. Being that we don't 17 have a governor or president yet, I urge you to give this 18 matter more time and to make a vote if you think it has real 19 merit. Consider the future of the next generations on 20 Kervillians who would like a chance to ski, boat, et cetera. 21 Don't deny them. Thank you, sirs. 22 (Applause.) 23 MS. SIMPSON: Hello. My name is Deborah 24 Simpson. We live on Lake Ingram and we have a lot more 25 boats there than there are on Flat Rock. This whole very 79 1 dry summer, we noticed no erosion whatsoever on our 2 property. However, the last flood took a big chunk out of 3 our bank, so I would think it would be fair to compare that, 4 you know, erosion should not be an issue from boats. Are 5 there some other options for Flat Rock? Maybe cleaning out 6 some of the debris? I realize the fishermen want some of it 7 in. Is there some that could be removed? Could you 8 increase the patrolling to make sure that people are using 9 their life vests, that they're not going too fast? Rather 10 than just restricting it altogether, I think, you know, we 11 can find a compromise here. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. 13 (Applause.) 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Is there anyone who has 15 something that they feel is really necessary for continued 16 discussion here? 17 MS. WARD: I just will take a moment. I am 18 Erline Ward. I live the third house from the dam. About 19 the erosion, if anybody who says we don't have it would like 20 to look at my bank, I invite them to come out. I'm the one 21 that has -- it seems that being the third -- there's a -- I 22 don't know what you would call it, but I take no issue with 23 the fishing boats. I want people to come out and fish. But 24 we have speed boats out there. And I can guarantee you, 25 when they -- they come up and down 40, 60 miles an hour, 80 1 just keeping -- they're just out there for -- and the waves 2 just -- I just stand there and just watch it wash the banks. 3 So, I -- why -- why is it, if we have speed limits on our 4 highways, that we can't do something about the speed on our 5 beautiful lake? I consider -- I have family who live on 6 huge lakes in east Texas. I consider Flat Rock Lake a pond, 7 and it is not large enough. It's actually just the river 8 widened a little bit. And they -- these speed boats come in 9 and they go down to the dam and they circle around and 10 around and around and around, and just swish the water up 11 against the banks. That's all I have to say. I take no 12 issue with the people who like to fish out there. I like to 13 see them do it. I like it myself. Thank you. 14 MR. INGRAM: I'll be very brief, Judge. I 15 know you're tired of it, and I am too. I live with the 16 little lady that lives on Flat Rock Lake. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: Give us your name, sir. 18 MR. INGRAM: Jim Ingram, I'm sorry. And I'm 19 here to tell you, there is a significant safety problem, 20 there is a significant erosion problem. And I think the 21 main question really is, what can we do about it? Thank 22 you. 23 MR. WILLIAMSON: Hi. My name is Trevor 24 Williamson, and I'm in the seventh grade. I'm here today 25 because my dad and I do not want you to take away the only 81 1 thing we do together, waterskiing. My dad works offshore 2 and we never have enough time together to do all this 3 because of my dad's short time at home; we do not have time 4 to go anywhere else. This is close by and gives us more 5 skiing time. I want to be a waterskier all-time champion, 6 and when I win, which I will one day, I can tell everyone I 7 learned everything on the Guadalupe River of Ingram, Texas, 8 thanks to the kind people who let me ski. Thank you. 9 (Applause.). 10 MR. HAWKINS: I'm Carl Hawkins. I own Vista 11 Camps, Camp Rio Vista for boys and Camp Sierra Vista for 12 girls. I've used the rivers -- the river and the lake for 13 recreation since the early '60's. And I won't parrot all 14 the good reasons for not -- for using the lakes and things 15 that the -- as the good citizens have given you, but during 16 that time, literally hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of 17 children from all over Texas and across -- foreign countries 18 have come to our camps to enjoy the Hill Country and our 19 programs. Skiing is an exciting part of our program, so I 20 would respectfully urge and request that you strongly 21 consider the needs of the citizens here today. Thank you. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. 23 (Applause.) 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone else? Seeing no one 25 else, this concludes the public hearing on the no-wake zone 82 1 order. 2 (The public hearing was concluded at approximately 10:54 a.m., and the regular 3 Commissioners Court meeting was reopened.) 4 - - - - - - - - - - 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, I think we're 6 going to take a break. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's come back at 5 minutes 9 after 11:00 and continue with the regular agenda. 10 (Recess taken from 10:54 a.m. to 11:05 a.m.) 11 - - - - - - - - - - 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: It's 5 minutes after 11:00. 13 We'll reconvene the regular session of Kerr County 14 Commissioners Court. After we've concluded the public 15 hearing on the proposed no-wake zone, the next order of 16 business is Item Number 10, consider and discuss adopting 17 court order establishing no-wake zones in Ingram Lake, Flat 18 Rock Lake, and Center Point Lake. Commissioner Williams. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Since I'm the villain 20 in this matter, having introduced the proposed court order 21 on behalf of some of my constituents who live in Precinct 2, 22 specifically on Flat Rock Lake Park, let me lead off. First 23 of all, I thank everybody for attending the public hearing 24 and giving us the benefit of your point of view with respect 25 to the use of our small lakes. They're not in the category 83 1 of a Canyon Lake by any means, where I'm sure a lot of 2 things happen there that you wish could happen here. And 3 thank you for listening to those who may not have the same 4 opinion about the utilization of lakes that you have. 5 When I first introduced this order about 6 three or four months ago, I did so because of the concerns 7 that were expressed to me by the people who live on Flat 8 Rock Lake. As has been stated repeatedly here today, none 9 of them had any objections to people who swim in the lake, 10 who fish in the lake, or otherwise use common sense with 11 respect to power boats on the lake. There was in my mind, 12 and still is, two issues; that of public safety, the use of 13 the waterway in terms of skiing and fast boating, and, of 14 course, any property damage to people who live in that area 15 who have just as equal a right to have their property 16 protected as any of the rest of us who do not live off a 17 waterway. 18 Most of you may -- many of you may be 19 familiar with what's in Chapter 31 of the Parks and Wildlife 20 Code, and then again, you may not be. Subsequent to 21 introducing the legislation, I asked -- I, along with 22 Commissioner Griffin, asked the County Attorney to research 23 the existing law, and what we found is kind of interesting, 24 and I'm going to read a few things to you from it. I'm 25 reading Title 4, Water Safety, Chapter 31, Subchapter A, 84 1 General Provisions. And it's Paragraph 31.002. 2 (Loud noise in the courtroom.) 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If that was a shot, 4 it missed. 5 (Laughter.) 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is entitled 7 State Policy. "It is the duty of this state" -- this is 8 state law, not county regulations. "It is the duty of this 9 state to promote recreational water safety for persons and 10 properties in and connected with the use of all recreational 11 water facilities in the state, to promote safety in the 12 operation and equipment of facilities, and to promote 13 uniformity of laws relating to water safety." The 14 application of the chapter, which is titled 31.004, "The 15 provisions of this chapter apply to all public water of this 16 state and to all vessels on public water. Privately-owned 17 water is not subject to the provisions of this chapter." 18 Under Subchapter D, Boating Regulations, 19 31.091, entitled Uniformity of Boating Regulations, it is 20 the interest -- "In the interest of uniformity, it is the 21 policy of the State of Texas that the basic authority for 22 the enactment of boating regulations is reserved to the 23 state. The commissioners of a county may enter an order on 24 its books designating certain areas of as bathing, fishing, 25 swimming, or otherwise restricted areas, and may make rules 85 1 and regulations relating to the operation and equipment of 2 boats which it deems necessary for public safety." The 3 rules and regs shall be consistent with the provisions of 4 this chapter. And we would have to file those with the 5 State. I'm -- I won't go on too much, because it's just on 6 and on and on, about 35 pages of Parks and Wildlife Code 7 that deals with this issue. 8 So, it really boils down to not putting -- 9 whether or not to put an additional court order on top of 10 the existing State law with respect to the public safety and 11 the utilization of our state waterways. There was mentioned 12 about U.G.R.A. lake, which subsequently may be -- may be 13 renamed. That comes under the purview of the City of 14 Kerrville; it's within the city limits, has nothing to do 15 with Commissioners Court. It is also a public safety issue 16 in their minds, because it is where your drinking water 17 comes from in this particular area if you live within the 18 city limits of Kerrville, and therefore, there is a concern 19 for not polluting that water. In my mind, it's not 20 necessary to put another regulation or court order on the 21 books; 35 pages of that is sufficient to get the job done, 22 if it's enforced. But, I really believe that the people who 23 live on these waterways have a right to have their concerns 24 aired, and if their property is being damaged, they have a 25 right to have us take note of that. 86 1 I fully appreciate the rights of anyone else 2 who lives on the waterways who wishes to use them for 3 recreational purposes. God love you, I used to do that too 4 when I was a young man many years ago. You have the right 5 to do that. I appreciate all the sentiments of the young 6 people here today who took the time away from their studies 7 in school to come and tell us about it. It is not our 8 intention to disenfranchise anybody with respect to the use 9 of the waterways, so I think it really boils down to an 10 enforcement issue as to, what do we intend to do about 11 enforcing 35 pages of State law which is already there? And 12 that I'll defer to Commissioner Griffin. 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Let me also thank 14 everybody for coming today, because it's good that we hear 15 directly from you on an issue that's as important as it is 16 to all of you here. I became convinced after the study was 17 done of the State law -- and, by the way, Travis Lucas, our 18 Assistant County Attorney, is back at the back of the room, 19 and we all owe him a big thanks, too. He did some excellent 20 research on the law determining what and who is responsible 21 for what aspect of water safety and so on, and I think we 22 still have a ways to go. My view has developed on this that 23 we do have perhaps an enforcement issue; not so much a 24 problem, but something that we need to recognize, and that 25 is that it was great in 1950 and '60 and '70, when there 87 1 were very few people putting demands on these three lakes. 2 We've got a different situation now. The 3 population is -- appears to be headed even higher; we're 4 going to have more demand on those lakes. And we, as 5 Commissioners on this Court, have as our first 6 responsibility the safety of our citizens. So, one of the 7 things we need to look at, irrespective of any other 8 ordinance, which I don't think at this point is necessary at 9 all, is enforcing the State law as it exists. And -- and I 10 will be making -- I think there's a consensus on the Court 11 that we probably need to get our Sheriff's Department 12 involved. We can do that through Parks and Wildlife. We 13 can have deputies certified for water enforcement, law 14 enforcement to help augment Parks and Wildlife on heavy 15 demand times, weekends in the summer, Memorial Day, Labor 16 Day, those times of the year when we get high demand on the 17 lakes. 18 And, at the same time, I would ask -- and I 19 haven't sprung this on him yet, but could I ask the Sheriff 20 to coordinate with Parks and Wildlife to see what, under 21 State law, we can do as far as warning signage? Perhaps 22 "Ski At Your Own Risk," if you will, but something that 23 says -- or "Hazardous Area Due To Stumps"? I don't know 24 whether that's even possible, but maybe it is. So that if 25 we look at it in terms of bucking up the enforcement 88 1 capability on the lakes, and that we look at working with 2 Parks and Wildlife to do everything we can to insure safety, 3 then I think we have -- have done our job. And I think that 4 this dialogue and this whole process has probably been good 5 in that respect, because it's brought those issues to the 6 front. I -- I think that is our ultimate solution, and -- 7 and if we need that in the form of a motion at some point, 8 I'll be glad to make that. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My turn? I almost 10 agree with everything you said here. And the way I remember 11 it -- I haven't read that in a good while, but I've read it 12 a couple of times, and the way I remember it is that any 13 certified peace officer in the state can participate in -- 14 in these laws if they obtain this special water safety 15 schooling. But, then again, it comes back to, you know, I 16 think if we put up a sign on our lakes, it should say you 17 have to comply with state law, period. Or they're -- they, 18 the State, is going to do something about it. You know, I 19 see it as a -- as a state law. I see Parks and Wildlife 20 as -- as the -- as the agency that should regulate it. And, 21 I mean, I'm not opposed. I just can't see Rusty out there 22 in a canoe chasing those people around -- no, that was a 23 joke. That was a joke, Rusty. 24 (Laughter.) 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just think, 89 1 primarily, before we jump off anything and send in a bunch 2 of deputies out there to -- to do the State's job, I just 3 think that we need to -- we need to encourage the State to 4 do their own job. And it's their law. Don't shake your 5 head at me, Rusty. If the State -- you know, and what it's 6 going to come down to is another state mandate, and we're 7 going to pick up the tab, is what the thing's boiling down 8 to. But, it's a state law. Parks and Wildlife needs to do 9 their own job out there. Now, in -- and if there is heavy 10 times -- and I guess there is. I cannot picture that, but 11 if there is heavy times, work out on the lakes. And, you 12 know, I would assume that the S.O. and Ingram Marshal and 13 those kind of folks could assist. I don't have any problem 14 with that. But I do not see us sending a bunch of people 15 off to school, getting certified, buying us a bunch of boats 16 and going out and doing the State's job. I just -- I don't 17 see that. 18 But -- and the way I understand it, even the 19 state law specifically talks about, you know, all those 20 things of the wakes creating damage to your property, 21 driving a boat around another boat, a boat around a swimmer, 22 driving too fast, drinking. It's already in the state law. 23 I mean, it's not anything that we need to -- in my opinion, 24 that we need to deal with. It's already there. And the 25 State Parks and Wildlife Department needs to enforce their 90 1 own law. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My only comment -- and I 3 basically agree with what's being said. The state law is in 4 place. That's all we need. I don't see any reason to pass 5 any additional court orders on the County level. But, I 6 would like to also respond to two questions I think 7 Mr. Simpson asked. One, is this going to come back again? 8 And I think my feeling is no; on no-wake zones, I think the 9 state law is adequate and should be adequate for the future. 10 I cannot imagine this coming back again, to answer that one. 11 MR. SIMPSON: Thank you. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, you know, I'm only 13 one Commissioner. The other thing, again, Mr. Simpson asked 14 a question which I think came up a lot due to the -- this 15 discussion was -- and, basically, it was a comment he made 16 about U.G.R.A. taking over the lakes, and I think what he's 17 probably referring to is a meeting or discussion that was 18 held between the Commissioners Court and U.G.R.A. regarding 19 control of the dams. And, at that meeting -- and nothing 20 has been done on that. It was discussed. And, I stated at 21 that time -- I restated my position again that, in my 22 opinion, Kerr County should maintain control of all those 23 dams. And -- but that was just a discussion at one time. 24 Nothing is moving forward, to my knowledge, on that. 25 But, my position -- I restated what I said at 91 1 that previous meeting. But, basically, I just concur that 2 the state law is adequate, and there's no reason for an 3 additional order at this time, or in the future, for that 4 matter. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have only one other 6 comment before taking action here. I would reserve the 7 right -- the right to bring back to the Court for discussion 8 the subject of signage, the appropriate signage that can be 9 of assistance in enforcing. But, I think Commissioner 10 Griffin had a good point, in that we really need to research 11 it with Parks and Wildlife through our law enforcement 12 agency to determine what signage is available, what signage 13 is necessary, and so forth and so on. 14 And, to add further to what Commissioner 15 Baldwin said, though, just one -- one more comment with 16 regard to enforcement. Under Subchapter E, Enforcement 17 Penalties, Paragraph 31, the Commissioner was absolutely 18 right when he said that all peace officers -- I'm reading 19 from the law. All peace officers of this state, game 20 wardens commissioned -- by commission must be certified as 21 safety enforcement officers by the department to enforce the 22 provisions of the chapter by arresting and taking into 23 custody any person who commits any act or offense prohibited 24 by this chapter or who violates the provisions of the 25 chapter. 92 1 Having said that for consideration of the 2 Court, I would withdraw today the enactment of Agenda Item 3 2.10 with respect to the establishment of county -- a county 4 court order on no-wake zones, with the clear understanding 5 that we would research signage and bring -- I will bring 6 back another topic at a later date with respect to signage. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Any further questions 8 or comments? 9 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I would also ask the 10 Court to ask our Sheriff to look at the certification 11 process. I know we know something about it. It's, like, an 12 8-hour course. It can be done here, I'm told. We don't 13 have to send anybody off to school; it can be done here in 14 Kerrville or in Kerr County somewhere. And, at least 15 investigate that and come back to us with what your 16 recommendation might be for a plan, et cetera. Can I ask 17 the Court to ask our Sheriff to do that? 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I think the Sheriff can 19 take note of the fact that he's required to -- 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Our recommendation has 21 always been that -- nobody in the department has ever been 22 certified, but I think it is something that we should have 23 had years ago, because what happens a lot of times during 24 the summer, during the high peak season, is Parks and 25 Wildlife gets called to the bigger lakes to go enforce those 93 1 laws. I think we have -- I'm just putting this on the 2 record. I was against the no-wake deal, because I do 3 believe we have plenty of laws on the books. Little bit 4 different than -- Commissioner Baldwin's respect to it is 5 kind of like you don't want big government or federal 6 government coming in and telling us what to do. I think if 7 those lakes are in this county, the County needs to be 8 trained and certified to be able to enforce the laws in this 9 county, and that is the laws that are currently on the 10 books. And so, yes, I'm totally for getting our people 11 certified in it. But I don't care to have to use a canoe to 12 enforce them. 13 (Laughter.) 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all you're 15 getting out of this Commissioner is a canoe. 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But I do believe that we 17 have plenty of laws on the books. The way I've read the 18 Parks and Wildlife Code and everything in there, I'm pleased 19 to see y'all pull it off the agenda, and I just will work 20 hard to get our department trained in enforcing those laws 21 so we can -- 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Sheriff. 23 (Applause.) 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: I think that disposes of that 25 topic for this day. Thank you all for coming. We're going 94 1 to move on; we have quite a bit else to do. At this time, 2 we're going to take up Agenda Item Number 24, which is a 3 public hearing on the LLEBG grant. Folks, we've got a lot 4 to do yet. Thank you all. 5 (Discussion off the record.) 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: The next item we'll take up 7 for consideration is Item Number 24, which is a public 8 hearing on the LLEBG grant for the Sheriff's Department. 9 Sheriff, you're going to walk us through that? 10 (Discussion off the record.) 11 (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at approximately 11:15, and a public 12 hearing was held in open court, as follows:) 13 P U B L I C H E A R I N G 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This is the same grant 15 as we got last year. Last year the amount was $15,000. 16 This year it's $11,000-something. We had our other 17 committee meetings on our intended use of the 18 $11,000-something. What I intend for it to be used for, if 19 at all possible, is, number one, in the budget process this 20 year we did not approve -- mainly because we did get six 21 more cars, trying to do that, but a lot of the other Capital 22 Outlay line items got cut. One of them was bulletproof 23 vests. We did not approve any bulletproof vests. I need at 24 least six or seven to keep us current on dated vests and 25 that. 95 1 The other thing that I told the Commissioners 2 I'd use that last $15,000 grant for and -- and that we had 3 the public hearing and everything on was portable radios, so 4 that when we do get our radio communications system fixed, 5 we'll have portables, save that expense to the County. We 6 purchased 31 portable radios at that time to outfit all the 7 deputies and that, and have a couple extras. I still need 8 another six or eight more, so I would use it to buy 9 bulletproof vests and more portable radios for our officers. 10 The only other minor expense out of it, when 11 we purchased the new portable radios out of the last $15,000 12 grant that we had, I took all our old portable radios to 13 have them refurbished and working, to where we would have 14 emergency spares in case we had another deal like the fire, 15 to where we could issue out radios with our channel so 16 everybody could communicate. And, in doing that, that price 17 of fixing those old radios is running between $600 and 18 $1,000, and I'd like to use it for that also. And those are 19 my intentions with that grant money. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: This is a public hearing. Is 21 there anyone from the public who'd like to address the Court 22 on the grant which the Sheriff has just described? This is 23 a requirement for use of the funds in the grant. Again, is 24 there anyone from the public who would like to address the 25 Court on the LLEBG grant? 96 1 (No response.) 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Seeing none, this concludes 3 the public hearing on the LLEBG grant for the Sheriff's 4 Department. 5 (The public hearing was concluded at approximately 11:20 a.m., and the regular 6 Commissioners Court meeting was reopened.) 7 - - - - - - - - - - 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll return to the regular 9 order of the agenda. Item Number 13 has been pulled. We'll 10 reconsider that when the contract is available. Item Number 11 14 is consider and discuss approval of the Data Exchange 12 Contract to assist the Collections Office locate persons who 13 owe Kerr County money. Brad, are you here to speak on 14 behalf of that. 15 MR. ALFORD: Yes, sir, I am. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. 17 MR. ALFORD: Thank you. What this is is a 18 program that will allow us to access the Texas Workforce 19 Commission records to help us further locate people that owe 20 us money and have outstanding criminal warrants for them. 21 We have -- Mr. Duncan said we already have the money in 22 place out of his Search and Program budget line, but it 23 would be a contract; it has to be signed between the County 24 and the Workforce Commission. I believe Travis, if he's 25 still here, with the County Attorney's office, has gone over 97 1 the budget and has signed off on it. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone have any questions for 3 Mr. Alford? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would assume -- in 5 Travis' letter here, he -- he requests that we add some 6 language. 7 MR. ALFORD: Yes, sir, and I believe Travis 8 changed -- 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would assume that we 10 would do that if we approve, huh? 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Its says language was added. 12 Page 1, Roman Numeral III, Subparagraph E. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It has been added as 14 per the County Attorney's request? 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: That's what's it says in his 16 letter. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what it says. 18 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. It's attached 19 thereto. So, I would assume -- 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, I see. I see, 21 yeah. Typical lawyer. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or 23 comments? 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move adoption of 25 the Data Exchange Contract and authorize County Judge to 98 1 sign same. 2 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 4 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court 5 approve the Data Exchange Contract with the Texas Workforce 6 Commission and authorize the County Judge to sign same. Any 7 further questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise 8 your right hand. 9 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 11 (No response.) 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 13 MR. ALFORD: Thank you, gentlemen. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Item Number 15 is 15 consider and discuss approval of a request for proposals and 16 authorization for the County to advertise for project 17 management services for the proposed Texas Capital Project 18 for Chapman Building Systems, Inc. This is a requirement 19 under the grant, that we advertise, unless the County is 20 going to operate as the grant manager for proposals, since 21 the sum that would be expended for management is in excess 22 of $25,000. I see no sentiment whatsoever in the County to 23 do it ourselves. And, having a look that the implementation 24 manager -- manual, which is about twice as thick as our 25 agenda book for today, I don't think any of us wants to take 99 1 on the chore of being the management agent for this grant 2 proposal. Therefore, it's necessary that we authorize a 3 request for proposals and accept bids to act as the 4 administrator of the grant in the event that the grant is 5 awarded. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And, the funds for 7 that administration would come from the grant, Judge? 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: That's correct, the funds for 9 administration are included within the grant. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah, I'll make -- 12 second. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do you have a question? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, question. I guess 15 I -- I remember dealing with this -- it seemed like a year 16 or 18 months ago, I mean, or maybe -- 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A year ago. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I'm just -- I haven't 19 heard anything since then. All of a sudden, this is before 20 us. I'm just kind of -- 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. No, we had 22 another item on the agenda to move ahead on it. 23 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Last summer. It 24 was -- June? 25 AUDIENCE: August. 100 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: In August we had to have a 2 public hearing. We formally authorized the grant 3 application. 4 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Slipped my memory. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 7 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court 8 authorize the request for proposal and -- approve the 9 request for proposal and authorize the County to advertise 10 for project management services for proposed Texas Capital 11 Project for Chapman Building Systems, Inc. Any further 12 questions or comments? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One more question. Since 14 I forgot the other agenda item, is this still going on in 15 Center Point? 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, it's going to be 17 close to the airport. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: By the airport? I do 19 remember it now. You jogged my memory. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Option to purchase 21 land there. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I recall it now that you 23 said that. I was waiting for something to jog my memory. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or 25 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 101 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 16 is to consider and discuss approving an amended 6 resolution consenting to assignment of rights regarding the 7 construction, operation, and maintenance of a cable 8 television system from La Vernia Cable Company, LLP, to 9 Universal Cable Holdings, Inc., and authorize County Judge 10 to sign same. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this back on the 12 agenda at the request of David Petty. There was a -- the, I 13 guess, resolution as submitted previously had an error in 14 it, one of the names -- one of the technical things. I'll 15 turn it over to David, let him explain what the word change 16 needs to be. 17 MR. PETTY: All right. Originally in the 18 document, there was just a routing oversight with the 19 language, as far as originally it was Universal Cable 20 Communications. After submitting it to the attorney, he told 21 me that that corporation cannot own assets; it's supposed to 22 be Universal Cable Holdings. It's the same company, it's 23 just a -- a language routing with the document. And that's 24 what I'm asking today, is if the Court would accept this. 25 With a -- an initial from the -- the Commissioners Court and 102 1 myself, the attorney representing the Universal Cable 2 Holdings will accept that. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move that we authorize 4 the County Judge to initial the change as stated in the 5 resolution we've previously adopted. 6 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 8 seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court authorize 9 the County Judge to initial the change in the name for the 10 resolution previously adopted regarding assignment of rights 11 on cable television system. Any further questions or 12 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 13 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 15 (No response.) 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Thank you, 17 David. 18 MR. PETTY: Thank you. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item Number 17, 20 consider and discuss a draft of Memorandum of Understanding 21 between Kerr County Commissioners Court and Hill Country 22 Junior District Livestock Show Association. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda, 24 related to the -- it's something we've talked about for some 25 time, and considering the next agenda item we finally got 103 1 moving on quicker than I had previously thought, this really 2 is not for us to adopt today. It's really more to look to 3 make sure the Commissioners are comfortable with that 4 language. The Stock Show Association is looking at the same 5 resolution, and I have not heard back from them, so it's 6 just more of a -- you know, to make sure that -- you know, 7 Commissioner Williams and I were authorized by the Court to 8 proceed on this. I want to make sure that the Court is in 9 basic agreement in the direction this resolution is going. 10 And the intent of it is, one, for the County to eventually 11 take over control of everything out there. You know, chairs 12 and some of the other -- well, most of it we've already 13 done, but there is some rodeo equipment that we still do not 14 own, that the Stock Show Association owns. And also to set 15 some of the Stock Show Association's requests, and I concur 16 that there is no agreement or anything in writing about the 17 usage of that facility by the Association, and that should 18 be reduced to a formal Memorandum of Understanding. That 19 should as binding as you can make it, I think, legally to 20 keep that relationship going where they get free use of that 21 for the stock show and for their annual fundraiser event. 22 And, Commissioner Williams, I think I incorporated the 23 modifications that you had into this, but it's just more -- 24 I don't know that we need action on it, unless -- it's more 25 of a direction, if this is okay with the Court. 104 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could it take the 2 form, Commissioner, of instruction for to us to proceed with 3 memorializing this in a document between us and -- between 4 the Commissioners Court and the -- 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that would 6 probably be a good idea, a resolution, knowing that there 7 will be some modifications probably coming back from the 8 Stock Show Association in the final draft. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or 10 comments? Looks good to me. All right. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll bring it back after 12 the Stock Show gives us their formal comments. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item Number 18, 14 consider and discuss approving a resolution requesting 15 introduction of local legislation in the 2001 session of the 16 Texas Legislature authorizing Kerr County to levy a 17 county-wide hotel and motel bed tax. Commissioner Williams 18 and Commissioner Letz. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is a 20 continuation of the discussion, I believe, from the last 21 court session, which we brought before the Court the notion 22 that the hotel/motel bed tax in Kerr County could be the 23 basis of a funding mechanism for the expansion/renovation of 24 the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center. We didn't take 25 action two weeks ago, having discussed it considerably, but 105 1 we brought it back today in a formal resolution form for 2 that action. And what it really does is asks -- sets the -- 3 sets the topic up and asks our State Representative 4 Hilderbran and State Senator -- 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wentworth. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- Wentworth -- one 7 of those moments -- to introduce into -- introduce this in 8 the Legislature on our behalf. It would be, if passed by 9 the Legislature, enabling legislation giving us authority to 10 levy a tax, not to do the actual levying of it. That would 11 come at a subsequent date. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My comments are -- and 13 Commissioner Williams, I guess, is aware of these both, that 14 I would like the resolution to be a little bit more limiting 15 than it is, the -- one, two, three, four, five -- sixth 16 "Whereas." The resolution, which calls for up to an 17 8 percent. Based on the studies we've done, I don't think 18 we need 8 percent, and I think that it's -- I would prefer 19 that a resolution -- we narrow that down to what we actually 20 would need for this one project. And I would also like 21 additional language in here making it very specific, or more 22 specific than it is, that this tax can only be used for this 23 one project. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought we 25 incorporated that in here. 106 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's in here, but it 2 should maybe be stronger, in my mind. And -- 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do you have some specific 4 language you'd like to insert? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On your last topic, 7 though, it is in there. It's under "Resolved," Jonathan. 8 We picked it up as you had suggested. I think the Resolved 9 on top of Page 2, talking about the authority levying 10 collection of the tax would expire automatically two years 11 after payment in full of any debt incurred for the expansion 12 and construction of Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center, 13 unless expressly continued. I believe that's where you 14 asked for it to be. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess my comment was, 16 it was the -- as long as it's clear it's only for that. And 17 "express" -- I guess -- 18 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It's expressed 19 appropriately. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: "Express" -- I was going 21 to say "express and only purpose." 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the second to 23 last has it also. I think that's another area where you 24 need to -- the second to last "Whereas" provides such tax 25 for the purpose of implementing the master plan and an 107 1 affirmative vote by the Kerr County Commissioners Court 2 subsequent to passage of such legislation. 3 MS. SOVIL: We incorporated those two that 4 you'd asked for. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. But, I guess the 6 other one would be, you know, the amount. And I really 7 think that we don't need 8 percent. We don't need to be 8 asking for 8 percent, I don't think, based on the numbers 9 that we've received from Mr. Henderson; I don't think we 10 need that much. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What number should 12 that be? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it can be 14 6 percent. That gives us adequate -- 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: Six percent, based on the 16 memo we have from Commissioner Williams last time, would not 17 be adequate. Unless we had -- unless we had a higher -- 18 unless we had a higher number in the city than them. From 19 Mr. Williams' -- his calculation was that, based on 20 7 percent levy in the county and 4 percent levy in the city, 21 we would raise adequate funds to serve the debt. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But I think that 23 the -- the -- that, I guess, presumes that 100 percent of 24 the financing was going to come from the tax, and I don't 25 think that's the intent. I think the financing -- that we 108 1 have talked to the City about getting some funding from them 2 through E.I.C., and I think that we also have talked about 3 grants. And I think, you know, that we should follow 4 through with that, that we need to get grant funding. And, 5 I guess I would like to make it as -- as if it isn't a tax 6 increase, and I think we should tie our own hands as much as 7 possible, because it's -- to keep it at low as possible, 8 because it is -- I would just -- 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, it's my memory that -- 10 that the numbers that Commissioner Williams put forward were 11 based on obtaining, basically, a million dollars of local 12 funding. I mean, I could agree with the 7, but I think if 13 we go 6 -- the problem I have with 6 is that if we need 7 in 14 the county, then we have to go back to get authority for 15 that. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One other comment. I 17 think 7 might be the magic number. Six I think is light; 8 18 may be too much, as the Commissioner pointed out. Seven may 19 be the magic number. But, furthering discussions we had two 20 weeks ago, I presented our project to the Kerr County 21 R.C.& D. for their -- for their information, and for the 22 purpose of asking them to begin the process of searching -- 23 helping us search for grants for some segment of this 24 project. Maybe all of them, but certainly some segments. I 25 think they unanimously approved our plan and instructed 109 1 their managers to begin that process, so that process is 2 under way. And other grant application processes will -- 3 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If we -- as a part of 4 this whole package, would you accept 7, Commissioner? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Seven. I mean, I 6 guess -- yes. The answer to that is yes. I think it's very 7 important that we go forward with this, but I also think 8 it's -- I want to make sure that it's very clear that this 9 Court's going to go after this other funding; we're not 10 going to levy a tax more than we need. You know, my 11 personal preference -- and I said this, I think, to 12 Mr. Henderson at one point during our meeting with him. I 13 would really almost prefer that we go out to the voters to 14 get this tax improved -- I mean approved, but Mr. Henderson 15 informed us that that was not under the legislation -- 16 enabling legislation. He didn't say it couldn't be done, 17 but he said it never -- he was not aware of any county where 18 that was placed in the legislation. So -- but I really -- 19 you know, this is a -- a very big project for this county 20 and a very important project. I certainly support the 21 project, but I want to make sure that the community supports 22 it as well. And, you know, my number one preference would 23 be probably to get in the resolution that it goes out for a 24 county-wide vote before any tax. I don't know if that can 25 be done under the, I guess, enabling legislation that 110 1 enables us to go -- 2 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If we asked for a 3 non-binding referendum, anyway? On the following election? 4 If we had the authority, there's nothing that says that we 5 can't ask for it. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I don't know if we 7 have -- I don't know if you can just throw a non-binding 8 referendum on -- that's one issue. The other issue is the 9 cost of having such a thing. I mean, when do you have it? 10 If you have it on just a standard election day, there 11 probably would be no other county issues on the ballot at 12 that time, so we would have the full cost of the election. 13 If you have it on -- on, you know, the November election 14 ballot, then that puts us well behind the eight ball to 15 actually garnering the funds in order to start the project 16 at the earliest opportunity. I think we've seen today that 17 if -- if the citizens are -- are informed of the issue, 18 they'll let us know what they think about it. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I agree, but I 20 would -- rather than have it a -- the form that we had 21 today, I would prefer to put it out for the -- all the 22 public to give us their opinion on a more proactive basis, 23 that -- rather than have them come in, as they did today, on 24 an enabling basis. In my opinion, they came to express 25 their opinion; they didn't want us to do something, and I 111 1 guess they could do that again before we institute the tax. 2 But, you know, I don't know if we can put it in the 3 legislation that it requires a county-wide vote. I 4 personally think that we can, but I think -- also think that 5 it would -- you get a lot more public support for a -- a 6 very big project for this county if you get the public to 7 vote for it. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Doesn't -- in 9 reality, isn't that going to be the case? If we are 10 obligated to bond for construction of a project, part of 11 that obligation is certifying where the funding's going to 12 come from to pay for those bonds. Would not that be the 13 issue, then, that would be supported by or -- or not 14 supported by the public? 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: I think -- 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At this juncture. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: I think it depends on the 18 type of vehicle that's used. If it's a bond, I believe we 19 would have to go to a vote. If it's a tax anticipation 20 note, such as was used with the Annex, we would not have to 21 go to vote. The question will be which is the most 22 advantageous for the Court? Typically, if we go on a bond, 23 we'll get a better rate, because it will be backed up by the 24 full faith and credit of the County; whereas, if we go with 25 a tax anticipation note, it would not necessarily be backed 112 1 up with the full faith and credit of the County. So, that's 2 a decision that we have to make, and that decision will 3 impact upon whether the voters have to weigh in. Again, 4 there's a -- Jannett's standing over there nodding her head. 5 An election is not something that we simply decide to do and 6 go out and do it. 7 MS. PIEPER: That's true. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: You have it -- have it 9 approved -- if it's a bond election, you have to have the 10 language approved, there has to be ballots printed, and you 11 have to have election judges in every precinct and you have 12 to organize a complete election. And, what would an 13 election cost, Jannett? Six, $8,000 typically? 14 MS. PIEPER: More than that if you're going 15 to go county-wide. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: You know, that's a cost that 17 we may want to incur in order to make sure that this is a 18 project that has the widest possible support among the 19 community, but it's -- it's something we have to take into 20 consideration when we come to the decision as to how we're 21 going to fund this project, if that's -- if we come down to 22 that decision. Be that as it may, though, you know, the 23 linchpin of that decision is going to be, do we have the 24 authority to go out for this type of tax? 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You have to have that 113 1 authority before you can do anything. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: In order to have this 4 authority, we have to get Representative Hilderbran to 5 introduce legislation. Today is the first day to introduce 6 legislation in the next Legislature, so the timing on this 7 is such that we have to move on it -- 8 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Now. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: -- this month. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Right, I 11 understand that, and I -- you know, and I said that I 12 support going forward with this. I just want to also make 13 sure that, if at all possible, we get it before the public 14 for a vote before we proceed with the basically $8 million 15 dollar project for the county that the taxpayers have to pay 16 for. The taxpayers have the right to say whether they want 17 this. 18 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We can share that if 19 we went the bond route, because they would have to vote on a 20 bond issue. And I suspect that's the way I would lean, 21 would be a bond issue. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, okay. Well, if we 23 go to 7 percent, I will be happy with the resolution as 24 written. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I would move 114 1 the adoption of the resolution as presented, requesting 2 introduction of local legislation in the 2001 session of the 3 Texas Legislature authorizing Kerr County to levy a 4 county-wide hotel/motel bed tax, with the amendment that 5 the -- first, second, third, fourth, fifth -- sixth 6 "Whereas" be changed concerning percentage, be changed from 7 8 percent to 7 percent. 8 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You'd also have to 9 change the "Resolved," too. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, and the 11 "Resolved." 12 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Top of the page. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the "Resolved" is 14 the same thing, from 8 to 7. 15 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 17 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court 18 approve the resolution requesting introduction of local 19 legislation in 2001 session of the Texas Legislature 20 authorizing Kerr County to levy a county-wide hotel and 21 motel bed tax, as amended to cap that tax at 7 percent. Any 22 further questions or comments? 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a couple of 24 comments. I'm going to vote against it, because it's a tax 25 increase. Doesn't matter who pays the taxes; it's still a 115 1 tax increase, and I just think that the plan that we've -- 2 that we have put together and moving forward with is -- in 3 my mind, it's kind of like -- it's a battle of ideas here, 4 in a way. We -- my idea of building a facility out there 5 is -- obviously is different from you-all, and that's okay. 6 You know, the people didn't elect you to come down here to 7 try and please me, and vice-versa. So, you know, this is a 8 -- this is government. 9 But, my idea of -- of -- and, first of all, 10 I've been kind of beat up a little bit over some of my 11 comments a couple weeks ago. My -- I firmly believe that we 12 need to build some type of facility out there, upgrade that 13 facility out there. There's no question of it. The thing 14 needs to -- and I'm not concerned about your concerts or the 15 -- the new program -- the new visitors coming in and having 16 conventions. That's way down the line in my priority list. 17 But, the stock show people, we've -- the stock show has 18 outgrown that facility. And, because of that and that only, 19 I think that the building needs to be expanded. But I don't 20 think -- I don't think -- in my opinion, I just don't think 21 that $8 million program is the right thing to do for Kerr 22 County. 23 It's my opinion that what we could do, maybe, 24 is go to the E.I.C. and get that million dollars that you're 25 talking about -- or around a million, I can't remember 116 1 exactly -- around a million dollars you're talking about, 2 and budget -- put it in our budget, just like we did this 3 facility here, couple hundred thousand dollars a year, and 4 just -- just kind of a pay-as-you-go thing. Instead of 5 reaching out and embracing a whole $8 million program, just 6 pay for what we can pay for. And I've got a couple of 7 questions. Have we -- have we talked to the City of 8 Kerrville about all this? The City Council? How did they 9 vote? 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: They haven't taken it up yet, 11 but we have had discussions with them. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the City of 13 Ingram? 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We intend to take it 15 up with them. Supposed to take it up, yes. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, and I -- and, 17 gentlemen, don't get me wrong. I see exactly what you're 18 doing, and I applaud you for it. In my very short time in 19 government, it appears to me that if you wanted to -- if you 20 want your Representative and your State Senator to do 21 something, you would approach them with a unified front. 22 You'd approach them with the City of Ingram, City of 23 Kerrville, and Kerr County Commissioners Court and say, 24 "Gentlemen, this is what we want." And that really and 25 truly adds strength to it. But, I just want to let you, up 117 1 front -- know up front that I'm opposed to this -- this type 2 of taxing, and I will be voting against it. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only comment I have in 4 response to one of Commissioner Baldwin's comments, I think 5 we are going out to all the entities to get their support, 6 but someone has to go first. Since the County is the lead 7 agency, someone has to do the resolution for -- you know, to 8 start it. I anticipate this will go before -- 9 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Are we not the only 10 entity that has to have legislation passed to be able to 11 impose such a -- any kind of tax on hotel/motel? The other 12 entities can -- can -- well, they can do it now, but we 13 don't even have the authority do that, so it's hard to deal 14 with them on how we build a -- perhaps any tax structure, 15 unless we at least have the authorization to do it. Now, if 16 something comes up later -- and I know that everybody's 17 cynical enough to think that if you say you can raise the 18 tax, you're going to do it, but frankly, I wouldn't be for 19 going out for the bonds through those taxes if it turns out 20 that that's not the thing to do. But, to have that 21 possibility, we've got to get the legislation going now, 22 whether we end up doing it or not. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. And, actually, 24 my point is, I can see the mayor and the City Council 25 reading in the paper tomorrow that Kerr County is going to 118 1 raise taxes in their city, you know, and that's my question. 2 Have we gone there and said to them, you know, these things 3 might happen? These things might happen in our community? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, we have. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And are you for it? 7 Are you going to jump on board and go with us in this thing? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The answer is yes on both 9 of those. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I'll route the 11 phone calls to your office, then, if they -- if they, in 12 fact, come in. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Before we vote, I think the 14 point needs to be made that we, as the elected officials in 15 the county, have an obligation to -- to move forward in ways 16 that benefit all of the citizens of the county. And we have 17 to find ways to do that. We're spending about three and a 18 half million dollars to renovate the Annex over here. Your 19 taxes are going to pay for that, and we've obligated the 20 County to the tune of several hundred thousand dollars a 21 year to pay for that. We did it through the mechanism of a 22 tax anticipation note. It was done by the previous Court, 23 but that's out of tax dollars. Those are our tax dollars. 24 They come out of my wallet and your wallet and your wallet. 25 The hotel and motel tax concept allows us to move forward 119 1 with necessary renovations of the Hill Country Youth 2 Exhibition Center, principally using somebody else's tax 3 dollars, in the sense that you and I don't pay the tax 4 unless we go and stay in a motel or hotel in Kerr County. 5 People who come to visit Kerr County, who 6 come here to use the river, who come here to take their kids 7 to the camps, to enjoy the recreation, they pay the tax, 8 which is then used to build the facility for us to enjoy, as 9 well as for them to enjoy. I don't know how long we can 10 continue out at the Youth Exhibition Center without 11 significant repairs and renovations. My guess -- and it's 12 purely my guess -- is that the minimum we could do out there 13 in any meaningful sense in order to improve the facility is 14 about a million dollars, and that would be difficult for us 15 to fund out of local ad valorem taxes, without either 16 eliminating other projects or having a tax increase, which I 17 think all of us here on the Court are committed not to have. 18 We're going to have to find some funds one 19 way or another to do something about the Youth Exhibition 20 Center in the not too distant future. The concept of a 21 hotel and motel tax is a way to bring those funds together 22 in a manner that allows us to do what has to be done in 23 order to benefit all of us for the long-term. We need -- 24 improvements to the Hill Country Youth Exhibition Center, 25 under the plan that the Court has already adopted, will be 120 1 to double the capacity of the Junior District Livestock 2 Show, which is now really out of space at the current 3 facility. So, this is an issue we're going to have to 4 address in the near future, and if it's not through this 5 mechanism, then we're going to have to step up to the plate 6 and do it principally ourselves. 7 With that said, does anyone else have any 8 questions or comments? All those in favor of the 9 resolution, raise your right hands. 10 (Commissioners Williams, Letz and Griffin, and Judge Henneke indicated by raised hand 11 they were in favor of the motion.) 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: All those opposed, same sign 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nay. 14 (Commissioner Baldwin indicated by raised hand that he was against the motion.) 15 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries, four to one. 17 Okay, next item is Item Number 19, consider and discuss a 18 resolution in favor of naming the former U.G.R.A. Lake in 19 memory of Darrell Lochte. You have in your packets a letter 20 from Jim Brown, the General Manager of the U.G.R.A., as well 21 as a copy of the resolution that they have adopted. All of 22 us who knew Darrell knew this would be a fitting tribute to 23 him. He was a founder not only of the U.G.R.A., but of 24 Headwaters, one of the pillars of this community for more 25 years than anyone can remember. And I, myself, think it 121 1 would be entirely fitting in his memory. Does anyone have 2 any questions or comments about -- 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think it's a 4 splendid idea, Judge. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think, if my memory 6 serves me well, Mr. Lochte was also the County Attorney 7 here. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: That's correct. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: For years, and a great 10 man. One -- as the Judge said, one of the pillars of our 11 community, and I think it's a wonderful and fantastic thing. 12 He's one of my heroes. 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Do we have a copy of 14 the resolution for us? 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely not. No, 16 we just adopt stuff. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Oh, okay. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: The resolution would be 19 similar to that adopted by the U.G.R.A. 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I would move that we 21 adopt a similar resolution and authorize County Judge to 22 sign same. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that 24 emotion. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have -- 122 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: First of all, moved by 2 Commissioner Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that 3 the Court adopt a resolution similar to that adopted by 4 the -- by the U.G.R.A. supporting naming of the former 5 U.G.R.A. Lake in memory of Darrell G. Lochte. Any questions 6 or comments? 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, I have a 8 question. And we will then forward our adopted resolution 9 to the City of Kerrville? Don't they have the naming 10 rights? 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or 14 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 15 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 17 (No response.) 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. We can do 19 one more, probably. Item Number 20, consider and discuss 20 applying for one-year waiver provision contained in the 21 final Texas Department of Health Rules dealing with the 22 Bloodborne Pathogen Control Program. I was amazed to read 23 in the local County Issues -- most recent County Issues put 24 out by TAC that, according to rules adopted by the Texas 25 Department of Health in July, counties are required to have 123 1 an Exposure Control Plan to address occupational exposure to 2 bloodborne pathogens. Now, you talk about unfunded state 3 mandates. I was, however, very pleased to see that there is 4 a provision to get a one-year waiver, because the -- the 5 requirement takes place January 1st, 2000, so I'm asking the 6 Court for authority to send a letter to the Texas Department 7 of Health asking for the one-year waiver, since we do fall 8 into the category of a rural county. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 10 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved -- second. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 12 Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, that the Court 13 authorize applying for one-year waiver from the rules 14 dealing with the Bloodborne Pathogen Control Program. Any 15 further questions or comments? The Sheriff has a question. 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Only thing I would 17 wonder about -- and I haven't checked into it since I took 18 office. Part of this -- and there are a lot of bloodborne 19 pathogens, and that was the immunizations that firemen, 20 policemen, law enforcement of any kind had to have, like the 21 hepatitis B vaccinations, which are a 3-part series, which 22 gets pretty expensive. Now, in our occupation, as with the 23 deputy sheriffs and that, I would be against getting a 24 waiver, and giving our guys that inoculations -- or those 25 vaccinations if they have to have them. Especially waiving 124 1 that for a year. I would rather see our law enforcement get 2 those vaccinations if we need them. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: My understanding is that the 4 waiver we're asking for is that we have an Exposure Control 5 Plan. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. I -- 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: It has nothing to do with the 8 inoculations. 9 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Has nothing to do with 10 controlling -- doing the right thing. This is just having 11 to have the paper plan that the State buys off on. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Travis? 13 MR. LUCAS: Rusty, I can talk to you about -- 14 I think I know what it entails. I can tell you outside. 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. I just wanted 16 that comment. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: Someone else had a comment. 18 Who was it? Commissioner Baldwin? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. I was going 20 to suggest that we let them know that we're not interested 21 in any of it. But, I notice here this note, I guess, is 22 from Sue Glover. I'm not sure where it came from. It says 23 there is another waiver provision contained in the rules 24 dealing with undue burden. I assume that's talking about 25 some kind of financial burden that the State mandates that 125 1 we -- I would hope that we would call Sue and tell her that 2 we're definitely interested in not participating in any 3 undue burdens. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Is that a volunteer? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah. Yeah, 6 absolutely. I mean, don't y'all agree? 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Sure, absolutely. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They're suggesting 9 here -- the way I read it, they're suggesting that we 10 contact them and say, you know, "hold on a minute" kind of 11 thing. So, I'll be happy to call her and tell her we're not 12 interested -- or that we would ask TAC to represent us well 13 there. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or pay for it. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or pay for it. Even 16 better. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: The issue before us is to 18 apply for the one-year waiver. The motion's been made and 19 seconded. Any further questions or comments? If not, all 20 in favor, raise your right hand. 21 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 23 (No response.) 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this 25 time, gentlemen, I believe we should break for lunch and 126 1 return at 1:30. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would agree with 3 that. 4 (Recess from 12:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.) 5 - - - - - - - - - - 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. It's 1:30 in the 7 afternoon on Monday, November 13th. We will reconvene this 8 regular session of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. I 9 believe the next item to take up is Item 21, consider and 10 discuss approving county-sponsored contracts with Dietert 11 Claim, Hill Country Crisis Council, Kerr Economic 12 Development Foundation, and K'Star, and authorize County 13 Judge to sign same. Has everyone read the contracts that 14 are provided in your packets? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I looked them 17 over, and my only question is, does anybody see any kind of 18 change from last year? 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: As was represented to you 20 earlier, there are no changes from what we did last year. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good. I move 22 that we approve. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 25 Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, that we approve 127 1 the contracts with Dietert Claim, Hill Country Crisis 2 Council, Kerr Economic Development Foundation, and K'Star, 3 and authorize County Judge to sign same. Any further 4 questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your 5 right hand. 6 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 8 (No response.) 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item is 10 Item Number 23, consider and discuss approval -- I'm sorry, 11 Item Number 22, consider and discuss approving volunteer 12 fire department contracts between Kerr County and the 13 Ingram, Center Point, Elm Pass, and Comfort Volunteer Fire 14 Departments and authorize County Judge to sign same. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move approval. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 19 Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, that we approve the 20 volunteer fire department contracts between Kerr County and 21 the Ingram, Center Point, Elm Pass, and Comfort Volunteer 22 Fire Departments and authorize County Judge to sign same. 23 Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your 24 right hand. 25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 128 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 2 (No response.) 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item is 4 Item Number 23, consider and discuss approving proposed 5 budget for the Kerr Emergency 911 Network for the district's 6 Fiscal Year 2001. Is Mr. Sandlin here? I see Mr. Ballard's 7 here. 8 MR. BALLARD: He should be back. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Want to defer action on this? 10 Or do you want to move forward? What's the wish of our 11 representative? 12 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What do you think? 13 (Discussion off the record.) 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I looked it over. I 15 don't have any problems with it. The questions I had, I 16 talked to our representatives. My, you know, questions were 17 satisfied. So, I mean, I'm ready to go forward. 18 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think so, too. I 19 might just mention that it's great to have both of our 911 20 Board members here for discussion of the 911 budget. I 21 think, as I recall, this may be a first. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's a first that I 23 know of, Commissioner, I'll guarantee you. 24 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So, it's good to have 25 both of you here. I'd make a motion that we go ahead and 129 1 approve it as submitted. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 4 Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, that the Court 5 approve the proposed budget for the Kerr 911 Network for the 6 district's Fiscal Year 2001. Any questions or comments? If 7 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. Item 25, 12 consider and discuss approval of revised Kerr County order 13 on OSSF -- on On-Site Sewage Disposal and set a public 14 hearing for same. Commissioner Griffin. 15 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. Today I -- and 16 in the -- in your packets, for the Commissioners and Judge, 17 you'll see that this is a new draft. This is a -- a version 18 that I precoordinated with the T.N.R.C.C. It addresses, I 19 think, the three substantial issues. Maybe not as complete 20 as some might like it, but I think it has in the Section 10, 21 as proposed, significant attention to those three areas that 22 have concerned us most, and that is our ability to inspect 23 systems at some point in time, preferably with the -- with 24 the change of ownership of a tract or lot. It also 25 establishes the 5-acre limit for properties that have a 130 1 private well, which is really a water availability issue, 2 and we need to stress that very strongly. The acreage 3 limitation you see here in this order is to make our 4 O.S.S.F. order consistent with our Subdivision Rules. It is 5 not to impose a 5-acre limitation because of O.S.S.F. And 6 that's a very important distinction, one that T.N.R.C.C. 7 makes, and one that -- that I agree we should make, as well. 8 The other issue addressed in Section 10 is that we would 9 require a permit and inspection on all systems, regardless 10 of acreage. T.N.R.C.C. says they will buy this essentially 11 as we have it here, give or take whatever corrections we 12 want to make. But, hopefully, we can -- at least I can get 13 rid of this tar baby, which I would love to do. But, I 14 would submit it for approval by the Court and set a public 15 hearing for -- Judge, I'll defer to your -- 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: December the 11th. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: December the 11th, 18 public hearing at 10 o'clock in the morning. And that's my 19 motion. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 22 Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court 23 approve the proposed Kerr County Order on On-Site Sewage 24 Disposal and set a public hearing for same for 10 o'clock 25 a.m. on December the 11th, Year 2000, here in the Kerr 131 1 County Commissioners' Courtroom. Any further questions or 2 comments? If not, all 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. 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Judge, also, I would 8 like to have us establish a price for a copy of this order 9 that will be on file with the Clerk. This version, 10 according to the T.N.R.C.C. model, does have Chapter 285 as 11 an attachment, so it's a lengthy document, as you can see, 12 because of that. Now, this could be photocopied on two 13 sides; there's no reason for it to be single-sided, as this 14 is, so it would run about 35 pages if it were double-sided. 15 But -- 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do you have a suggestion? 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What's a -- 5 bucks? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Five or ten. 19 MS. BARBEE: At least ten. 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Ten dollars? I'll 21 recommend $10, if that's the consensus of the Court, and 22 we'll establish that as the price. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, we ought to make that a 24 motion. 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: A motion. I'll move 132 1 that it's $10 a copy, double-sided. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner 4 Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, that the Court 5 set a price of $10 for a copy of -- full copy of the 6 proposed Kerr County Order on On-Site Sewage Disposal 7 available through the Kerr County Clerk's office. Any 8 questions or comments? 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only comment I have is 10 that the -- since so many of the -- of the public have 11 basically requested that we follow -- or want us to follow 12 state rules, which we're doing, if they don't want to get 13 a -- might just make a note, I guess, at the Clerk's office 14 that a lot of that is the state rule. And, if they want to 15 look, actually, at we're doing, they could get the pages -- 16 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: First four. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: First four pages. No 18 need to get that large document. First four pages would 19 cover, I think, anything we're doing within the county. 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Good point. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At what cost? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think standard cost. 23 MS. BARBEE: It would be a dollar a page. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Dollar a page. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion's been made and 133 1 seconded. 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. Next item is 7 Item Number 26, consider and discuss approval of the final 8 draft of the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations, 9 set a public hearing on the same. Commissioner Letz. This 10 is your tar baby. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm currently trying to 12 get rid of mine. Mine's been hanging around longer than 13 his. I think everyone received a copy of the latest draft 14 that's dated November 6, 2000. Far as I'm concerned, it's 15 ready to go, or we're ready to go, set public hearing. 16 There is one correction in the Appendices, if I can find it, 17 and Jannett caught me about it. Maggie, you may know where 18 it is quicker. On the fee schedule, there is a price, I 19 thought of the Subdivision Rules. 20 MS. BARBEE: It's actually the prices for 21 certified copies should read $5. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, there it is. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On Page 13 of the 25 Appendix. And it's under -- about halfway down through 134 1 pages under the category, Final Plat or Final Revision of 2 Plat. The last item, Certified Copies, should read $5, not 3 $1. And then the final item on that page, Certified Copies, 4 should read $5, not $1. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Jon, I can't find the 6 first one -- oh, Certified Copy? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner, we got an 10 opinion from our County Attorney that we could charge 11 sufficient to cover the notices and the mailings for the 12 revisions that are included in the proposed rules. Are 13 those numbers plugged in here anywhere? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: We may want to bring that 16 back after the public hearing and amend this schedule to -- 17 to incorporate those costs, because, as I recall, that's 18 fairly -- we have to publish notice three times, and some 19 cancellations, isn't it? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, revision and 21 cancellation. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: There's three times, and send 23 certified copies to all the landowners. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 25 MS. BARBEE: Certified mail. 135 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We might -- to me, I 2 think probably the best way to handle it would be to put it 3 under Revision of Plat and Cancellation of Plat, all actual 4 costs of the publication, or any costs in addition to the 5 certified notice. I guess just pass on actual cost, 'cause 6 I don't know how we'd set a fee. It would be difficult. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Actually, it's -- it's in 8 here, if you look at it under Revision of Plat. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's in there from -- 10 that's -- but -- the public notices on it is in there; 11 "include public notices." I'm sorry. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: So -- 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we probably ought to 14 add Cancellation of Plat, I believe that same requirement. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Change the title to 16 "Revision or Cancellation of Plat." 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Original Plat and 18 Cancellation of Plat? 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just Revision or 20 Cancellation of Plat. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, on a -- a related 24 matter, I don't know if I made a comment on manufactured 25 homes, 'cause they're closely tied to this. That draft is 136 1 in the County Attorney's office. And, we had previously set 2 a public hearing for the 27th. That hearing will not take 3 place because we don't have it -- we have not received a 4 final copy from the County Attorney. Well, I guess we have 5 one that we have sent down there for him to look at. We 6 never got it back yet, so we have not been able to put a -- 7 a copy for the public to view, so we can't have the public 8 hearing. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Too late for us to forward 10 one down there. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He's got our copy. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: What about the water 13 availability? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's done. 15 MR. LUCAS: Yeah, it's done. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Is it down at the County 17 Clerk's office for public inspection? 18 MR. LUCAS: Yeah, ours is. The Water 19 Availability is fine. The other one, that was David's. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Is the Water Availability 21 down at the County Clerk's office for public viewing? 22 MR. LUCAS: Yes, I just told you that. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. All right. 24 MR. LUCAS: Yeah. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: But the Manufactured Housing 137 1 is not. 2 MR. LUCAS: No, that's David's project. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's just, you know, 4 for information purposes, that we make -- and I don't -- and 5 I talked with David, and he's been talking with their 6 attorney again. And I told him, I said, "If they don't like 7 it, give us what they want and we'll address it, but we're 8 going forward." And I haven't heard back. I -- that was 9 last Thursday or Friday. I haven't heard back from him. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, our options are to pull 11 back the public hearing or to send down to the County 12 Clerk's office what we submitted to the County Attorney's 13 office and let that be the vehicle for the public hearing. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean -- you know, I 15 mean, I -- I share partially with the County Attorney that 16 we need to be helpful to get this resolved with the -- 17 whatever the association is that's suing us. But, on the 18 other side of it, we can have the public hearing on the 19 current draft, and if there's not a substantial change or -- 20 you know, we could go forward with it. We don't have to 21 adopt it immediately after the public hearing where you 22 receive comments from the public, and then not act on it at 23 the same meeting, or we could act on it at the same meeting. 24 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Put it on, and if we 25 can't get there, we -- we don't get there. I don't see any 138 1 problem with that. Why not go ahead and use the copy that 2 we have as the public hearing copy? 3 MS. BARBEE: Does that mean you want something 4 put in the newspaper? That's the thing, to have the 5 newspaper article say what's available, what we're going to 6 have the hearing on. And what I'm getting is, we don't 7 really have it ready. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's ready. It's -- it's 9 ready, in my opinion. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The Letz version of 11 it. 12 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And that's all we've 13 got to go on at this point. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I haven't changed my 15 version in quite a while. I would think that we -- you 16 know, this is not an agenda item; we really can't take 17 action on it in any way, other than kind of connected with 18 subdivisions indirectly. Get a copy down there. And, I'd 19 recommend we do both, and if we decide we need a second 20 public hearing later, we can do a second public hearing. 21 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah, we could. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Who has a copy? Do 23 you have a copy of what was sent down to the County 24 Attorney's office? Will you see that that gets to the 25 County Clerk's office today? 139 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. 2 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Get there today. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone have any 4 questions or comments on the Subdivision Rules? Other than 5 to say job well done. If not -- 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll move we set public 7 hearing for December -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 11th. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- 11th. That our date? 10 December 11th for the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and 11 Regulations. 12 MS. SOVIL: What time? 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: 10:30. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 10:30. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 17 seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve the 18 final draft of the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and 19 Regulations and set a public hearing on the same for 20 December the 11th, Year 2000, at 10:30 a.m., here in the 21 Kerr County Commissioners' Courtroom. Any further questions 22 or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 23 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 25 (No response.) 140 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 2 MS. SOVIL: Cost? 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, the cost of this 5 document we probably should set as well for the public. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Ten dollars as well? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we did front and back, 8 it would be -- well, it's 40 -- yeah, probably $10 front and 9 back. 10 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Is that a motion? 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion we set 12 price at $10. 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 15 second by Commissioner Griffin, that we set the price for a 16 copy of the proposed Kerr County Subdivision Rules and 17 Regulations and appendices thereto for $10 per copy, front 18 and back, available through the Kerr County Clerk's office. 19 Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your 20 right hand. 21 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 23 (No response.) 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Okay. Final 25 item that I'm aware of is Item Number 27, consider and 141 1 discuss revisions to the scope of work and change in 2 contract as proposed in Change Order Number 6. Mr. 3 Longnecker. 4 MR. LONGNECKER: I believe all of you have a 5 copy that was sent to you by Mike Walker of Change Order 6 Number 6. I see two different cover sheets with that. One 7 is the amount that the architect and myself feel is what it 8 should be, and the other is what the contractor wants. 9 Mr. Stoddard of Stoddard Construction is not represented 10 here today. We were hopeful that he would come, but he 11 hasn't. And, what we would like for the Court to do is go 12 through these item-for-item and have a vote or an approval 13 or disapproval of each of the items on their own merit as to 14 whether or not they should proceed. 15 And, I might say that at this time we are 16 continuing to work, but only on those things that are within 17 the scope of the contract, and not anything to do with these 18 items. However, if we do not continue to get these changes 19 done, we will be holding up the work and -- and final 20 completion will be delayed, so that's one of the reasons we 21 want to get this in here. Again, we have had a lot of 22 trouble finding the right prices, and this certainly does -- 23 still does not cover all of the items needed to complete the 24 contract. At this time, I'm going to turn it over to Mike 25 Walker and let him go through the items and present the 142 1 reasons why they're needed, and the price that the 2 contractor wants and what we feel is -- is the price it 3 should be. Mike? 4 MR. WALKER: Thank you. Commissioners, let 5 me, just before I start, reiterate one of my duties. It's 6 about two pages long, but one of my primary duties during 7 the construction/administration phase is to act as the 8 impartial judge between the contractor and the owner. I try 9 to wear that hat as gracefully as possible, and not push too 10 much to one side or the other, even though you're the guys 11 that pay me, but I do have to be -- I do have to be fair to 12 the contractor. In that pursuit, after the deadline to file 13 what you have before you, I went to some length Thursday and 14 Friday to talk to the contractor, run him down, and then 15 also talk to some of the subcontractors. In the process of 16 doing that, I've -- I want to sort of amend some of the 17 costs that I gave you in that outline, because he was able 18 to explain to us -- he or they was able to explain to us 19 what some of the other cost factors were that were not 20 apparent in what the -- the contractor initially presented 21 to us. 22 So, what -- what I can -- these still are the 23 same line items. Number 1 is still Number 1, and we can 24 follow down through there. And you can see the ones that 25 I -- I changed that didn't change. The first item relates 143 1 to -- let me grab -- I brought some large drawings that I 2 could put up on the easel here, if that would help us 3 understand what's going on. But -- and some of these do get 4 kind of complicated, but let me say that the first item 5 primarily dealt with the whole issue of once we discovered 6 the historical ceiling, several of the County officials 7 looked at it; there was a determination made that maybe we 8 should try to save that, leave the lay-in ceiling out, 9 change the light fixtures, patch the plaster, paint the 10 plaster, and attempt to leave that old vaulted ceiling in 11 there. This, of course, would also make the Texas 12 Historical Commission very happy, because that was one of 13 the things that they chastised us about, was -- was taking 14 that courtroom out of circulation and making it something 15 else. 16 So, the first item, $16,326, I had a hundred 17 dollar "uh-oh" in there, so that's a difference of what you 18 had on the initial submittal. I won't say that's totally 19 the picture, but that's about as concise as we can do it. 20 Now, keep in mind, with that $16,326, you also have a 21 surplus of lights, lay-in, that went in the lay-in fixture 22 -- the lay-in ceiling that can be used in your expansion 23 downstairs when you fill in that space. So, we have those 24 lights, plus I'm going to get into another item for the ones 25 that would have been in this room that would also accrue to 144 1 that future tentative improvement, whenever you make that. 2 So, the basic problem here is that we had to go in and buy 3 35 light fixtures where we used to have -- I think it was 4 18, and so the lighting level is -- so we could keep the 5 lighting level the same. But we had to pull these light 6 fixtures up and stick them in between the covers in that 7 vaulted ceiling, so that is an issue sort of unto itself. I 8 do not see a whole lot of relief. 9 As you can see in my first submittal, I 10 considerably marked the -- the matching in plaster ceiling 11 down. Keep in mind that there is a lot of water damage. 12 There's -- somebody told me there were 300 holes. I don't 13 believe there's 300 holes up there, but there are a lot of 14 holes that have to be patched and there are whole sections 15 of that plaster, due to roof leaks, that were damaged over 16 the years, and we certainly wouldn't want to take a chance 17 on leaving that. So, all those holes that were poked in 18 there for light fixtures or for suspension wires for the 19 1977 ceiling, all of that has to be plugged back up in order 20 to -- to try to reuse that ceiling. There was some other 21 minor trim work and things like that, but that's the basics 22 of it right there. Any questions on that before I move to 23 another one? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You mentioned light 25 fixtures. I don't see light fixture on that list. 145 1 MR. WALKER: Design Electric. It's all under 2 that Design Electric. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. Thank you. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: So, the -- the bottom line 5 to -- to retain the existing "hysterical" ceiling is 6 $16,326. Is that correct? 7 MR. WALKER: Yes, sir. 8 MR. LONGNECKER: Does that include the 9 painting too, Mike? 10 MR. WALKER: It says paint in here, so I -- 11 seems like there was a -- do you have 22 there? Seemed like 12 there was an item on 22 -- 13 MR. LONGNECKER: You got it shown here at the 14 top of your Number 1. 15 MR. WALKER: Yeah. It's picked up on another 16 item. 17 MR. LONGNECKER: The painting is shown here 18 on your other outline here, right at the top. 19 MR. WALKER: Okay. 20 MR. LONGNECKER: Top, Number 1. 21 MR. WALKER: Yeah. If that's all the paint 22 you're talking about, yeah, that's painting. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about painting 24 the walls? 25 MR. WALKER: They were in the contract 146 1 already. 2 MR. LONGNECKER: It's already in the 3 contract. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 5 MR. LONGNECKER: When you take your ceiling 6 out, you've got to -- it has to not only have the plaster 7 repaired, it's got to be painted again too, so that has 8 to -- 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If y'all haven't been 10 up there to see what it uncovered, go up there and look at 11 it. It looks fantastic. You're doing the right thing by 12 preserving that, in my opinion. 13 MR. WALKER: Thank you. Well, we'll try, if 14 it can be afforded. Again, the only thing I'll temper that 15 with is the fact that there's, you know, several -- couple 16 of thousand dollars, I would guesstimate, of light fixtures 17 that are going to be able to be reused in the future. 18 That's -- you could subtract or put in another ledger 19 somewhere. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do you want to take action on 21 these individually? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd rather do them all at 23 once, if we could. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I don't mind doing them 25 all at once, but let's keep in mind that we don't have to 147 1 approve all of them or none of them. So, if we have that in 2 mind, let's just proceed, then, with Number 2. 3 MR. WALKER: Number 2 is a small item in 4 here, and that just had to do with the fact we originally 5 told them to sand the walls down. They're not going to do 6 that, so we needed some trim work to go against the counters 7 that the District Clerk wanted along the walls, so that's 8 just a -- a matter of taking care of that. Number 3 -- 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Wait. 10 MR. WALKER: Excuse me, I'm sorry. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: This is for trim work 12 requested by the District Clerk? 13 MR. WALKER: I believe it's for -- let me 14 check. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: What -- if and that is -- 16 MR. WALKER: Oh, no, I beg your pardon. Beg 17 your pardon, that was not that. There was a cabinet in 18 there -- there were two cabinets; there was a printer stand 19 and an index counter that needed to be combined because of 20 space limitations, and the District Clerk did request that 21 we do that, and we put them together. And, for some strange 22 reason that came out to be $150 more, and the millwork 23 subcontractor won't back off of that number. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Questions? 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What if that millwork 148 1 wasn't done? What would it do? What would it look like? 2 MR. WALKER: I'll let the District Clerk 3 answer that. There's a reason she wanted that done. I 4 think we have -- there's a tight space that existed in 5 there. I can't even remember what all the reasons were, but 6 we wound up with less space in there than I guess had 7 originally been visualized. Do you want to answer that? 8 MS. UECKER: Well, I don't know -- I don't 9 know what the $150 difference is. Just for putting those 10 two together? 11 MR. WALKER: Well, remember, it had drawers 12 on one side, shelves on another. We took it all out, we put 13 in a lot more shelves, and then we did some other 14 modifications -- minor modifications to it. 15 MS. UECKER: Oh, drawers. We took -- 16 MR. WALKER: Yeah, took the drawers out. 17 MS. UECKER: Well, instead of having -- in 18 other words, instead of having two freestanding units, we 19 put them together so that we could save some space. And 20 what about eliminating that part of the counter? Is that 21 going to give us a credit? 22 MR. WALKER: Yeah, that's later. 23 MS. UECKER: Oh, later. Other than that, I 24 can't -- I can't say any more about that, 'cause I don't -- 25 I don't know what the -- what the difference is for. 149 1 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So, we do get a credit 2 for some of this same work that was done in the same area? 3 We get a credit later on? 4 MR. JOHNSTON: Yes. 5 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Can you point that out 6 to us? Where? Just jumping around. 7 MR. WALKER: It's under -- 8 MR. LONGNECKER: That wasn't included in this 9 directive, was it, Mike? 10 MR. WALKER: I thought it was. Maybe it's in 11 22. Gentlemen, I know it's in here; I'm just not finding -- 12 MR. SIEMERS: What's Item Number 5, if I may 13 ask? That was an architect-recommended credit for something 14 in the District Clerk's Office. 15 MR. WALKER: That -- no, that's strictly in 16 her office. 17 MR. LONGNECKER: We revised the credenza in 18 your District Clerk's Office. 19 MR. SIEMERS: That's not what we're looking 20 for, then. 21 MR. WALKER: No, that's not it. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And it's only $20. 23 MR. WALKER: It's on the breakout. It's, 24 like, $460. Let's see if I can find it. Oh, okay, I know 25 what it is. If you look at the architectural hardware -- 150 1 there's no page numbers, but in your backup there, there's 2 something from Gunckel Millwork in Seguin, and in there they 3 talk about deleting 7 feet of counter by others. And in 4 that, they gave zero credit. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page are you on? 6 MR. WALKER: It doesn't have a page number. 7 It looks like this. Gunckel. It's -- there's three of 8 those pages, and you have to have the right one, but it's 9 under item 3-E there. And in that, they did not give any 10 credit, and that was when I marked it down to minus $420. 11 Let's see now how it translates to the summary page. It 12 would be under Item 3. That's where it would be. 'Cause I 13 was convinced that they -- and the problem with that is that 14 the countertops are being made by somebody else; they're not 15 being made by Gunckel. 16 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So, Item 3-F on that 17 sheet is where that credit is. 18 MR. WALKER: Yes. That's where he didn't get 19 one and I just wrote one in. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Before we go too much 21 further, there's two different numbers on this. There's the 22 ARM number, which is -- that's what you're recommending? 23 MR. WALKER: That's right. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: And the other number is what 25 the contractor requests? 151 1 MR. WALKER: That's what he originally 2 submitted, yes, sir. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: And that's the difference in 4 the two cover sheets, between the 37 and the -- 5 MR. WALKER: Well, that was -- I had given 6 you an original cover sheet with the stuff in your packet, 7 but when we get over to the second page of this one I just 8 handed you, you'll see that that increased. 9 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Now $28,744? 10 MR. WALKER: $28,744, yes. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Instead of $18,408. 12 MR. WALKER: Upon further review with the 13 contractor and the subcontractors. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. All right. 15 MR. WALKER: Would you like me to continue? 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions on Number 17 2? Okay, Number 3. 18 MR. WALKER: Okay. In Number 3, again, I 19 refer to the drawings there. There's quite a few minor 20 changes to the drawings. The major thing that was done was 21 that the -- the District Clerk wanted the side returns on 22 the desk dropped to 26 inches, and so there -- that was a 23 goodly portion of that number. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would you explain what 25 that means? 152 1 MR. WALKER: The side return is that -- 2 there's a counter desk in front of you as you stand up 3 there, and then there's a side return where they either put 4 a keyboard or typewriter or something, and they changed that 5 down to 26 inches, which is keyboard height. Otherwise, 6 they would have, you know, probably had to -- or could have 7 put a keyboard caddy underneath the desk and just pulled it 8 out, but they elected to do this instead. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: And that's $4,895? How much 10 would the caddies cost? 11 MR. WALKER: The caddies are $80 a piece. 12 MS. UECKER: I don't know what you're talking 13 about, Mike. 14 MR. WALKER: Do I need to illustrate? 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: What electrical revisions are 16 required, then? 17 MR. WALKER: There were some electrical 18 outlets changed on that front counter that the District 19 Clerk requested. I think I can make this work. 20 (Mr. Walker set up a drawing on the easel.) 21 MR. WALKER: Okay. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is really going 23 to be clear. 24 MR. WALKER: I thought that would clear it 25 right up for you. Okay. Here's the front counter. Here's 153 1 the old front doors to the District Clerk's office. You 2 come up the stairs and come in. She has a long counter that 3 goes here that has five workstations, and we reused -- to 4 please the Historical Commission, we reused some of the old 5 railings in there. These are all -- this is all new, of 6 course. And what we're talking about is these side returns 7 right here on -- to the side of each clerk that works there. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Originally, they -- they 9 were all the same height? 10 MR. WALKER: They were all the same. And 11 then, in terms of outlets that changed -- this will even be 12 more clear to you, I'm sure. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Kind of like a Florida 14 voting ballot. 15 MR. WALKER: Yeah, you punch it here -- no. 16 There were -- there was just a handful of outlets. These 17 that were clouded that were moved around various places. 18 And, see, she actually worked in another workstation back 19 here in her secretary's area. It's all -- everything 20 that -- that you -- well, I shouldn't say everything; some 21 of these are old revisions, but some of the -- and there was 22 an outlet added here, another outlet added there, so there 23 was about a half a dozen outlets added to the end process. 24 Linda may want to elaborate on what -- 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mike, what's the dollar 154 1 amount we're looking at on this? Is it $4,895 or $2,840 for 2 changing the -- 3 MR. WALKER: My recommendation on that is 4 $2,840. His is 4,000-something. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 895. Okay. 6 MR. WALKER: Yeah. 7 MS. UECKER: Can I say something? Mike, I 8 originally understood in the beginning that those returns 9 were 26 inches, anyway. I -- I don't have a copy of the 10 document you have, and that's why I said, you know, why 11 aren't they 26 inches? You know, plus I didn't know that 12 changing them was going to be $4,000. You didn't tell me 13 that. 14 MR. LONGNECKER: We didn't know it either at 15 the time. 16 MS. UECKER: But, based on the fact that I 17 thought that they were supposed to be 26 inches in the 18 beginning is why I said that. Now, if it's going to cost 19 $4,000 and we can live with computer caddies, that's fine. 20 I'll -- you know, we can withdraw that one. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, the actual -- 22 MS. UECKER: I had no idea it was going to be 23 $4,000 to make that change. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That includes -- 25 actually, it's just millwork, counters, paint and labor. 155 1 MR. LONGNECKER: That's got some electrical 2 in it, too. 3 MS. UECKER: And I don't know what -- what's 4 the electrical? 5 MR. WALKER: Okay. I beg your pardon. The 6 electrical wound up being down under another issue. This 7 gets really complicated. The -- the electrical is under a 8 different issue. This -- this 2,660 is -- 950 and so forth, 9 that's all for the work that they say they wanted to change. 10 Now, let me -- let me tell you why I marked them down. In 11 March of '99, when we reissued the drawings after we 12 finished with A.D.A. and the Historical Commission and the 13 City and everybody else, these all -- these -- like, these 14 low petitions that I was just pointing out to you, all that 15 was in that package. As Mr. Longnecker can tell you, these 16 folks have been balking all along, even though those 17 revisions were on the drawings, they were circled, they were 18 called a revision, and we sent a transmittal with it that 19 says any and all changes, we need a price on. They're 20 saying, okay, we never gave you a price on that. 21 Now, I have a lot of trouble with that. I 22 mean, if they -- if we said give us a price change, they 23 didn't give it to us, then, you know, to come in at the 24 eleventh hour and say, oh, we never gave you a price 25 change -- for example, these railings which had to be raised 156 1 up so they could be useful to 36 inches, that is in that 2 amount of money, and that's why I marked it down. So, what 3 I'm basically giving them credit for is for the changes they 4 had to make in the tops of those, so they're asking for a 5 lot more. And those are the reasons -- or some of the 6 reasons, anyway, that we had to mark them down and say 7 that's just not fair. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, if Linda's going to 9 go just add the computer caddies, which is $400 for five 10 computer caddies, in lieu of changing the counters, we can 11 change that -- we can probably install them ourselves, 12 but -- or we can have them install them for -- 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll do it ourselves. 14 MR. WALKER: Yeah. Well, and this is what 15 happened up here, because they delivered them by accident, 16 and I think it -- we paid them $80 for them, and they went 17 ahead and put them in. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, we can eliminate 19 Number 3 for $4,895? 20 MR. WALKER: As far as I know, we can, yes, 21 sir. If that's what everybody's willing to live with. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay by me. 23 MS. UECKER: When did that price come in? 24 'Cause I had no earthly idea it was going to cost -- 25 MR. WALKER: Not less than a week ago. He 157 1 gave us prices, and they -- we nim-nawed back and forth. 2 MR. LONGNECKER: Barely had time to get this 3 thing in last Thursday. 4 MR. WALKER: Yeah, I just barely got it in. 5 So, we scratch Number 3. 6 MS. UECKER: I don't see -- I don't even have 7 a copy of what you have, so I don't even know what you're 8 scratching. 9 MR. WALKER: Okay. On the owner's request, 10 again, the District Clerk, on Number 4, asked that she -- 11 she bought her own refrigerator, which is, excuse me, an 12 apartment-size refrigerator. And we had expected 13 under-counter and so forth, so they gave us a little bit of 14 credit there. The -- they didn't give us enough, so I asked 15 for some more for that, and then we made some modifications 16 to that kitchen unit that goes in that break/training room. 17 And, as you see, they didn't give us a whole lot of money 18 there. The Design Electric changes were to change some of 19 the circuitry and add some more outlets to that unit, and I 20 think they also -- there's another issue that deals with 21 taking some floor outlets out and making them wall outlets, 22 which are less expensive, but I don't believe in -- in that 23 item, so I'll just let that stay there at 550 and -- 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, it's 550 to get rid 25 of the -- 158 1 MR. WALKER: Basically, just added some 2 outlets to that kitchen unit. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How many outlets were in 4 there? 5 MR. WALKER: I think two; one for a microwave 6 and one for a burner, and -- 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How many circuits? 8 MR. WALKER: Three. There were two, now 9 there are three. And then we took -- the refrigerator had 10 to be moved over to the other side of the room, so that 11 changed that electrical, and that electrical had to be 12 changed to come in -- all wire moved around the wall. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I don't see a 14 microwave and another appliance to be one -- might not be 15 its own circuit, Mike. I do it all the time. We run 16 concession stands; we have two circuits to run two 17 microwaves, two warmers, and all kind of equipment in the 18 football concession stand, and it works. And I cannot 19 imagine that you're going to have more equipment than you do 20 in the Antler Stadium concession stand, which runs on two 21 circuits, in the break room. 22 MR. WALKER: It may work, but it doesn't meet 23 the national electrical code. That's what we have to go by. 24 So -- 25 MS. UECKER: What about that water heater 159 1 unit or whatever that thing is that -- is that going to run 2 on that circuit? Or the -- 3 MR. LONGNECKER: No. 4 MR. WALKER: No, it's the same -- 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: We're adding $550, basically, 6 so we can have a full-size refrigerator and a microwave. 7 Does that kind of sum it up? 8 MR. WALKER: That's maybe an 9 oversimplification, but yes. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is it about 11 moving the refrigerator? You lost me there. 12 MR. WALKER: It went from where it was in the 13 room under the counter to across the room, because there's 14 no room over there; there's all the windows. So -- 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: From small to large? 16 MR. WALKER: Yes, sir. 17 MS. UECKER: Well, no. The Court budgeted an 18 amount for a refrigerator similar to the size that we have 19 now. And, when I came down and looked at -- at the one in 20 Thea's, it's like this big. You can't put anything in 21 there. The door on that one is broken and it's frosted over 22 or whatever, and I just couldn't see us -- 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Besides that, it 24 needs defrosting. 25 MS. UECKER: Besides it needs defrosting. 160 1 But I have more than one person, you know, that stores their 2 lunches and Cokes and other things, and that just was not 3 going to be large enough for that. They bring their lunches 4 and put it in the refrigerator, and -- 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I agree, I think 6 it's a good idea to get a regular refrigerator rather than 7 one of those under-counter things. 8 MS. UECKER: And the amount for the 9 refrigerator has already been budgeted. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. My question is 11 the other appliances that appear to be needed for the 12 circuits. But -- 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mike, would you go by 14 Antler Stadium and see how they do that? Just a joke. Just 15 a joke, don't get hot. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're not up to code, 17 that's probably true. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions about 19 Number 4? If not, let's move on to Number 5. 20 MR. WALKER: Number 5 is the -- I'm sorry, 21 I'm having trouble holding this together -- the credenza 22 changes that we talked about before behind Linda's desk. 23 And also that went with that -- there were some electrical 24 changes that went with that. You'll see down there, I've 25 sort of drawn an arrow up there from Design Electric; there 161 1 were some changes for that, and that involved an expense and 2 a credit, and that's just the way that washed out. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Washed out with $120 credit? 4 MR. WALKER: That's right. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: By your calculations. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, 120 -- 7 MR. WALKER: No, you have to take the 481 and 8 add it to the -- so that makes it, like -- 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 361 cost. 10 MR. WALKER: 361 cost. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 261. 12 MR. WALKER: I beg your pardon. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: And that is, again, for 14 redoing the credenza? 15 MR. WALKER: And the electrical changes that 16 went with it. I think there was an outlet -- 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: How was the credenza changed? 18 MR. LONGNECKER: We took some drawers out of 19 it and made it -- instead of 18 inches deep above the 20 countertop, it's only 12 inches deep. For the millwork, 21 itself, it's a credit, and then there are the changes on the 22 electrical -- 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Why were there changes -- 24 MR. LONGNECKER: -- added back in. And, 25 according to the contractor, it's minus $120 credit. 162 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Why were there changes in the 2 electrical? I don't understand. If all you did was change 3 the depth of the -- 4 MR. WALKER: We changed -- we had to change 5 the method of accessing it, to where they had to come around 6 a wall, and I guess you'd call this a discovered condition. 7 We got in a situation of -- we'll get into a whole thing 8 here later about channeling the floor and so forth. But, as 9 I recall, that was a wash. That was a net because of the 10 electrical changes. I'd have to go back to the -- the full 11 detail on that, which is back here in your backup. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I guess I'm -- I'm 13 obviously not a contractor, 'cause I have a hard time 14 understanding how you can go from 18 inches to 12 inches on 15 a credenza and end up costing you $481 in electrical work. 16 MR. WALKER: Just a second, I'll tell you. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: You haven't moved the 18 credenza any, you haven't moved it up or down. 19 MR. WALKER: There was -- there's two items 20 under Item 5 back in your -- if you'll look at the Design 21 Electric pages back here, you'll see there's an item -- the 22 first item is expense, a cost, which it wound up being 23 $733.24, and then on the next page is the credit they gave 24 for that against it was $252. Oh, okay. The District Clerk 25 wanted to add these outlets right here against this back 163 1 wall, so it's not actually in her office, but they lumped 2 that -- all this cost together, because they're -- they're 3 accessing that by coming down this run right here, so they 4 added that to that particular run. What this did is gave 5 her an additional arrangement for that -- this whole second 6 area right in here, so she could get another workstation in 7 there. 8 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So, it adds a 9 workstation? 10 MR. WALKER: Yeah, basically adds a 11 workstation. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Could you put a 13 popcorn machine there? 14 (Discussion off the record.) 15 MS. UECKER: Wasn't that one of the four 16 electrical outlets that we eliminated? 17 MR. WALKER: No. No, it's on the -- it's a 18 different place. You're thinking about the one in the 19 training/break room. We eliminated those. 20 MS. UECKER: No, I'm talking about the ones 21 in the floor that we eliminated. 22 MR. WALKER: We didn't eliminate. 23 MS. UECKER: You didn't eliminate those? 24 MR. WALKER: We didn't eliminate. 25 MS. UECKER: We just added. 164 1 MR. LONGNECKER: Part of this is all because 2 we have decided not to put this ceiling in down here or go 3 into any Commissioners' offices, to work above the ceilings 4 there, to drill holes, to bring the electrical up from 5 downstairs. We've got it now to the point where we're 6 either channeling the floor or we're going around the room 7 with wire molding so that none of this down here has to be 8 disturbed. I think that's -- 9 MR. WALKER: Yes. 10 MR. LONGNECKER: -- part of what this problem 11 is. We're having to make some changes in the electrical, 12 and we were in hopes that the credit for not putting this 13 ceiling and doing this work down here would more than cover 14 the work that's going on up there, the changes that have to 15 be made. 16 MR. WALKER: So, right above your head, 17 instead of drilling a hole, we're going around. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the net cost is a 19 little bit more to do it this way? 20 MR. WALKER: Yes. 21 MR. LONGNECKER: Well, after we take away 22 this ceiling, and that's going to be when we get down to 23 Item 6. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. 25 MR. WALKER: Any questions on 5? Okay. Six 165 1 is close to home here. This is this room and the changes 2 that were made. This room was to have lay-in ceiling with 3 fluorescent lights, and then reuse some of the ceiling fans 4 and lights in here. And, in lieu of that, we're taking all 5 that out under Item 6 that you see right there, and that's a 6 credit of 2,350. And, I went over these numbers, and that's 7 the agreement. Any questions? 8 MR. LONGNECKER: That also includes -- we 9 will keep the lights that would go in here, the same as we 10 would keep them upstairs. If we redid the ceiling -- in 11 other words, where we keep the old ceiling instead of the 12 new lay-in, so we have not only those lights up there; that 13 we would have these lights down here that can be used in any 14 finish-out work for downstairs into the expanded area of the 15 Annex. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that because they 17 wouldn't give us a reasonable credit, or because it's a 18 better deal for us? 19 MR. LONGNECKER: What we'd have to do is, 20 instead of paying a restocking credit for those lights, you 21 know, we would just be buying lights that would -- are 22 paying for about half of -- of the lights, and we'd be 23 better off if we just keep them and save that restocking 24 fund. 25 MR. WALKER: Questions about 6? The next 166 1 page -- oops. 2 MR. LONGNECKER: Item 7? 3 MR. WALKER: Next page, Item 7. This is the 4 concrete demolition that I referred to. I think I can show 5 you better on this electric plan. Again, to try to stay out 6 of your ceiling down here and to minimize the amount of 7 floor damage that we had to do, we did determine, even 8 though it doesn't show on the old drawings, that the 1926 9 drawings -- that there was a topping of variable depth that 10 was placed over this. And then -- and actually, the plaster 11 walls were put up and it was poured up against it, so we did 12 have an inch and a half or so -- anywhere from 13 three-quarters to an inch and a half to deal with. So, what 14 we did is that we -- we essentially deleted everything that 15 should have come through here, through this counter 16 upstairs, went under this low wall, and then this shaded 17 portion you see here is all that we actually wound up doing. 18 Now, please let me explain very carefully; we 19 never authorized them to channel that floor. We asked them 20 to cut a patch right here. They went ahead and channeled 21 the whole floor. So, deal with that however you -- you 22 choose. What we also did, this -- it's under that same 23 item, is that there was -- there were four outlets in here, 24 which we have required floor channeling which we omitted 25 instead. Linda agreed to just put those outlets over here 167 1 on this old furr out around this column. So, this few feet 2 there is all we wound up channeling. The contractor and I 3 have had numerous discussions over the phone and in person 4 about the -- the amount of that. It took three guys three 5 days to do all that. I think he probably knows what those 6 numbers are, 'cause it's already done, so I don't think that 7 there's -- you know, unless -- 8 MR. LONGNECKER: I was originally assured 9 that -- and I asked them, I says, "Don't do anything if it's 10 going to increase the cost that I -- cost of the contract." 11 And they assured me that doing it with the channeling in 12 lieu of coming down here and drilling holes and having to 13 miss the steel, the reinforcing steel to take down and put 14 back ceiling down here, to demolish other places, that this 15 would be at least a wash; there would be no extra expense. 16 So, they went ahead and channeled the floor anyway. And, 17 they're all cut. They're ready to put the conduit in and 18 the floor outlet boxes. That's ready up there now. So, 19 when I found out that there was going to -- that they wanted 20 more money for it, I stopped the procedure on that part of 21 it, but they have gone -- gone ahead and channeled the floor 22 without, you know, letting us know how much more they wanted 23 it to cost, because they had told me in the beginning that 24 it was not to -- would not raise the cost of the -- the 25 contract. 168 1 MR. WALKER: Not only that, but my quibble 2 with them over that is, you see out to the side there I made 3 a note, the credit for difficulty of access to the first 4 floor. Well, that's a right hand/left hand deal where, you 5 know, it's not the contractor who actually cut it; it's the 6 electrician and -- and so forth. But it does negate all 7 this work where they come in and tear up all three or four 8 of y'all's offices down here and drill up through the floor. 9 They still would have to chip out a place in the floor for 10 the floor outlets to recess in the concrete, but they 11 wouldn't have had to make this journey across the floor like 12 this. So, I do not feel, and I never have felt, that this 13 was fair -- a fair price. And, in spite of that, I -- you 14 know, I suggested that you might give them a maximum of 15 $1,000, because it -- some of that was sort of 16 hunt-and-peck, but -- and change of direction. And, 17 certainly, I know it's costing them money. But that's -- 18 I -- I'll leave that up to you, however you feel about that. 19 Adding back the concrete for 60 bucks, I think that's 20 reasonable. So, however you feel about that. Any questions 21 that I can answer? 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're saying that you 23 feel like the thousand -- we should offer them about a 24 thousand bucks, and the $60 for the concrete is reasonable, 25 so give them the $1,060? 169 1 MR. WALKER: At a maximum, yes, sir. Again, 2 those are my maximum recommendations, but that I could see 3 justified. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Number 8. 5 MR. WALKER: Number 8. Plaster ceiling and 6 the work -- let me read it off to you here. Okay. This is 7 a little bit complicated, but in that foyer upstairs -- this 8 foyer upstairs, there's a -- there is a -- a piece of furr 9 down -- we originally called for the ceiling to come all the 10 way back at 11 foot 6, or whatever the height is up there. 11 And, because of the difficulty we ran into, discovered 12 conditions with that, existing ducts that needed to run 13 through here, I told them go ahead and leave that plaster 14 furring in, and they'd just add a fixture in here, which you 15 already own the fixtures, so that's not a -- a big issue. 16 So, there was a minor bit to do there. And then I think 17 there was some tear-out there on that corner. Let me see if 18 I can get this all -- nail this down. 19 And then in that, also, I allowed them to -- 20 to do a -- a lesser amount of tear-out. Originally in the 21 contract, we called for all of the plaster ceilings up there 22 to be taken down. Obviously, we stopped on the courtroom, 23 but then all the rest of those flat ceilings up there, we've 24 allowed them to do that. Quite honestly, I think for doing 25 that, you, the owners, deserve some credit. You know, 170 1 that's a lot of bracing they didn't have to do and things 2 like that, so I think that that's -- that's the majority 3 of -- of that issue. The -- the $1,491 is for -- is 4 basically electrical. And, what that is, part of that is 5 discovered conditions. There is a sheet that covers it back 6 here. I think it's before the last -- next to last one of 7 the Design Electric sheets, and in there he itemizes what 8 all that's for. Part of what we had to do there -- and I 9 did -- of course, I ran this by our electrical engineer, and 10 he concurred these were pretty good prices. 11 One of the things we did have to do is, at 12 the base of this stair, this big open stair that goes down 13 to the first floor, there is a light fixture which they had 14 to go ahead and convert to an emergency fixture, because 15 there was -- there really -- this is a very dark area when 16 the lights go out. So, that -- and that required some 17 extremely difficult pulling of wire, because those things 18 are imbedded in concrete, and they had trouble with both 19 this stair -- this switch at the top of the stairs, and 20 getting to this light fixture down here. And that is what a 21 goodly portion of that is for. Seemed like there's 22 something else, and I'll -- Keith, do you remember what 23 else? There was something else with that -- 24 MR. LONGNECKER: No. 25 MR. WALKER: -- that Roger had to do, and I 171 1 don't know what it was. But, like, $300 of that -- over 2 $300 is just that light fixture that -- that is -- has a 3 battery backup in it. And there's a special light fixture, 4 that funny little fluorescent -- the little round 5 fluorescent that you almost hit your head on when you go 6 upstairs. That had to be replaced with something that will 7 work in case of a power failure. This sort of relates back 8 to the -- the pulling of the emergency generator. Because, 9 again, we are very uncertain of where those emergency 10 circuits are, but that was supposed to be -- hopefully was 11 one of those that was on that emergency circuit, which we 12 don't have. And I will write you a letter about that later; 13 I think we have a serious situation with that. That, I 14 believe, is all of that $1,491 issue. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions on that? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only question was the 17 last comment about our serious situation. He's going to 18 write us a letter. 19 MR. WALKER: Well -- 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: If we have a serious 21 situation, we'll have to look into it, won't we? Number 9. 22 MR. WALKER: That was for some revisions. 23 Again, that pesky little duct that was existing that ran 24 down through the middle was causing some problems, so what 25 we elected to do on this -- this wall right here was to -- 172 1 we told them to run this wall -- concrete block wall all the 2 way to the roof duct because we didn't think we were going 3 to have any ceilings. We allowed them to keep the ceilings. 4 It became obvious, because of this duct that cuts across 5 here, that what we probably should do is we just run this 6 wall up to 9 foot 4, and then put in a 2-hour ceiling on top 7 of that so that we could have our protection for that vault, 8 and it wound up being one of those things that -- that's a 9 little bit easier to do, 'cause part of what happened -- 10 part of the problem here is that the old hallway came across 11 here. And while these beams do cross across here and stop, 12 there is a coffered ceiling in up above what used to be the 13 hallway which later became incorporated into the courtroom, 14 and it was probably -- it's probably better if we don't take 15 that out. 16 MR. LONGNECKER: Simplification, that winds 17 up being a credit for $735. 18 MR. WALKER: And my issue with that was they 19 didn't give us enough money. It should have been about 20 $1,500. They gave you about half that, and so I felt like 21 that that was a number -- and, like I say, I've discussed 22 almost all these issues with the contractor this morning, 23 and I won't try to put words in his mouth, but I will tell 24 you basically what he said. Some of these he agreed that, 25 yeah -- like the masonry, maybe there is some more money, 173 1 but then -- but, essentially, these are my numbers. So, if 2 we -- even if we agree to something and go back with 3 something, I don't know if we're doing anything more than 4 negotiating at this point, because he is not -- I mean, he's 5 not signed on to anything other than his $37,000 that he 6 asked for. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not even if we take 8 out Item 3? 9 MR. LONGNECKER: I'm sure they would be more 10 than glad -- his position is, I'm more than glad to not 11 change anything, to just keep on going. 12 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Item 3 would be 13 $2,840. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's move on to Directive 15 22. We'll come back to the contractor's -- 16 MR. WALKER: Okay. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: -- charges. 18 MR. WALKER: You want to talk about those 19 overhead items? 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Back to -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Could you give us a 22 revised amount, since we took out -- 23 MR. WALKER: $2,840 off of this. Let's see 24 if it's a -- wait a minute. 25 (Discussion off the record.) 174 1 MR. WALKER: Yeah. My only problem is that 2 he has a labor burden item in there. I wouldn't be too 3 accurate in that if I did that. Item 3 has a -- 4 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It would actually go 5 down more than that, take some of his burden off. 6 MR. WALKER: It will change that. I would 7 have to go back and pull out the old calculator, figure that 8 one out again, but -- but, basically, you could add $2,500 9 back to that. 10 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It would remove some 11 of his burden, so it would be more than that, wouldn't it? 12 MR. WALKER: You're right. 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Be more like -- 14 instead of $2,840, probably be $2,940, $2,950 or something. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The way I'm reading 16 Number 3 here, there's a figure in the labor column. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. So, I mean -- 18 MR. WALKER: He puts a labor burden on the 19 bottom when you get to this figure right here. See, he's 20 got a labor burden there, and that -- all these get added up 21 and multiplied times 40 percent. That's how he comes up 22 with that. 23 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Actually get credit 24 for a little more than $2,840 if you don't do Number 3. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Directive 22? 175 1 MR. WALKER: Again, this acoustical lay-in 2 situation, we -- in the Storage Room Number 2, which is the 3 one directly -- what used to be called the old jury room, or 4 Linda's storage room, we just left it lay-in ceiling out of 5 that, left -- just left it plaster. They've knocked a bunch 6 of holes in it for conduit, because that's where the panels 7 are in that room, and they -- but we would pass those and 8 then put some of the just surface-mounted less expensive 9 fluorescents on that ceiling. So, that was a $281 credit 10 for that. Any questions? Number 2 is the -- wait a minute. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: This is where you took 12 care of the 9 foot 4 walls instead of -- 13 MR. WALKER: For some reason, I thought that 14 was on the other one, but I -- 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: It is in the other one. This 16 is a revision to the other one. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah. It's a revision 18 to the Number 9 -- Item 9. 19 MR. WALKER: So, this is a total of -- yeah, 20 he didn't put the sheetrock on it before, is -- I guess is 21 what the problem was. But, anyway, he -- well, he did, 22 though. I think he charged us for that ceiling twice. 23 Sorry about that. So, that -- I guess Item -- Directive 22 24 really is just -- unless I am missing something here, should 25 just be minus $281. 176 1 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, we have the 3 ability to bring this back tomorrow with correct numbers. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yeah, I think we can do that 5 if we make some decisions as to what we want to do. Okay. 6 Let's talk about the contractor's overhead/profit, about the 7 end of Directive 21. 8 MR. WALKER: Okay, I'll just briefly explain 9 those numbers. You remember the issue about $500 a day that 10 we went into before. The contractor is telling us at this 11 point that -- and we pretty well told him there's not going 12 to be any more $500 a day, so I think this is another way to 13 approach that, in that we -- he's put $2,400 in there for 14 temporary facilities and could give me no reasonable 15 explanation for it, other than he has telephone running and 16 some sort of overhead running. This is a longstanding 17 dispute that we've -- we've discussed many, many times, 18 about what's overhead and what's -- what he calls extended 19 general conditions. But we have a lot of trouble buying 20 that -- that figure. 21 Anyway, I graciously suggested that he 22 might -- if you combine his added supervision -- because 23 this is taking more time, this stopping, revising the 24 millwork. The guys are standing there waiting for the 25 signal of what to do on this, because they're not 177 1 fabricating that new millwork 'cause they don't want it to 2 be wrong, so that it will involve some more time on the job. 3 It will extend the job, and there -- if you'll notice on the 4 change order cover, he did not ask for any days. It's still 5 September 29th, which is a little bit overdue. I gave him 6 $4,000 for that, which I felt was more than adequate, but he 7 hasn't, again, agreed to that number. Labor burden is 8 simply -- you add up all the right-hand column and you 9 multiply it by 40 percent, and that's how that comes about. 10 B & I is Bonds and Insurance, which he uses 6 percent, has 11 used 6 percent ever since the beginning of the job. A 12 little higher than what I'm used to, but not unreasonable. 13 And Overhead and Profit is his 10 percent that he adds, as 14 he's entitled to add to any change. 15 MR. LONGNECKER: Temporary Facilities and 16 Overhead and Profit, to me, should be the same place. 17 Temporary Facilities is part of Overhead. Telephone is 18 about the only thing he's getting. 19 MR. WALKER: I do not disagree with Mr. 20 Longnecker on that issue, but the contractor vehemently 21 disagrees. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: The problem I have with these 23 charges is that he doesn't recognize the part that he plays 24 in his additional cost. I mean, he was -- he's known for at 25 least 8 weeks to get numbers together for preserving the 178 1 existing ceiling, and he knew very bluntly after our last 2 meeting that he couldn't go forward with changes unless they 3 were approved. My personal opinion is that at least half of 4 the cost of delay can be attributed to the contractor by not 5 providing prices for the changes that have been requested. 6 I find it unconscionable that the man can make additional 7 profit simply by dragging his feet in providing information 8 that he's required to provide. The fact that he's not 9 willing to come to Court today and defend his overhead, to 10 me, indicates that he feels he has us over a barrel and that 11 we have no choice but to go along, which I find 12 reprehensible. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's next? 16 MR. WALKER: If you would like to make 17 decisions on any and all of these -- 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, Commissioner -- 19 MR. WALKER: -- I'll be glad to finalize 20 change orders. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Baldwin reminded 22 me that we can recess today and come back tomorrow without 23 having to repost. We already have a meeting posted for 1:30 24 tomorrow to canvass the votes. We could take this up at the 25 conclusion of that. To do so, we'd have to obviously issue 179 1 a -- Mr. Walker and Mr. Longnecker some decisions as to what 2 we want to happen on some of these items. I think it's 3 clear that we want Item Number 3, Change Order 21, deleted 4 in its entirety, and we want that credit reflected. You've 5 indicated to us that Item Number 20, Change Order -- 6 Directive 22 is a duplication. 7 MR. WALKER: I believe that's correct. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: So that would take that 9 number off. I would be tempted to say okay, we'll go along 10 with the labor burden, the bonds and insurance, and the 11 overhead and profit, but not supervision or the temporary 12 facilities, as far as the contractor add-ons are concerned. 13 I simply don't see that those are justified, particularly 14 temporary facilities. 15 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You, in essence, cut 16 that out, though, didn't you? 17 MR. WALKER: I just reduced -- I took them 18 together and reduced. 19 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right, because it was 20 61-something, and -- 21 MR. WALKER: Right. 22 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: $6,120, and he made 23 that $4,000, which is just about cutting out the -- 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What does he consider 25 temporary facilities? Does he see -- in my mind, that means 180 1 that he's from San Antonio and he's moved up here and he has 2 to set up a little shop or little office somewhere. And I 3 can see us participating in something like that, but we're 4 providing the space. 5 MR. LONGNECKER: We're providing electric, 6 water, and -- 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's send him a bill. 8 MR. LONGNECKER: -- and then the office. The 9 only thing that's temporary facilities is the telephone. 10 MR. WALKER: And toilet. He has his toilets 11 in there. 12 MR. LONGNECKER: Yeah, he does have an 13 outside -- he has a toilet, but those are -- those are 14 normally part of overhead in -- in figuring contract costs. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would think so, too. 16 MR. WALKER: Well, there is a provision in 17 the general conditions that allows him to call these costs. 18 There is. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Say that again to me, 20 please. 21 MR. WALKER: There is a provision in the 22 general conditions of the contract that do allow these -- 23 some of these items to be called costs. And, therefore, 24 it's not part of overhead. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So we have agreed with 181 1 him up front that he can use our office and charge us for 2 it? Is that what you're saying? 3 MR. WALKER: No, no, no, no. I'm sorry. Let 4 me try again. 5 MR. LONGNECKER: You're talking about the 6 specific item of a temporary outside toilet? 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, toilets and 8 telephones? 9 MR. WALKER: Toilets and telephone, 10 primarily. Dumpster. That's primarily what's he's having 11 to deal with. 12 MR. LONGNECKER: Also, the specifications 13 call for this temporary facilities to call -- to furnish 14 that amount with -- with your specifications under temporary 15 facilities also says that these things will be furnished 16 under that. 17 MR. WALKER: That they will be furnished, but 18 they are a cost; it's itemized on his breakout as a cost. 19 So, it's -- he can make a case for some of these things, but 20 again, that's not very much. I mean, that's not -- I can't 21 find $2,400. 22 MR. LONGNECKER: Not $2,400 worth. 23 MR. WALKER: I can find a few hundred 24 dollars. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: If he wants to give us 182 1 itemized telephone bills, and make sure that the long 2 distance charges relate to this project and he's not calling 3 his broker in San Antonio, we might consider that. 4 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think on that one, 5 probably point out he misplaced a decimal point; it's $240 6 instead of -- 7 MR. WALKER: All right. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: My suggestion is that we ask 9 Mr. Walker or Mr. Longnecker to bring this back to us 10 tomorrow, recalculate it to give us the appropriate credit 11 for this Item Number 3. And, my suggestion is to delete the 12 supervision and temporary facilities. I don't see those. 13 MR. WALKER: Altogether? 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: His number's not 15 good, and yours is not a lot better. 16 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well said. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to agree 18 with the Judge. I -- our attorney is walking out the door. 19 I can't imagine him allowing us to spend public money on 20 this kind of stuff like that temporary facility thing. I 21 just can't imagine that. 22 MS. UECKER: If this Court has subpoena 23 powers with the Judge, why couldn't you subpoena 24 Mr. Stoddard to be here? 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: If we wanted him here, we 183 1 could. Question is, do we want him here? 2 MS. UECKER: To explain some of this. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Again, I agree with 4 the Judge. 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Before you move too far 6 forward on this, there's one comment I'd like to make. It's 7 related to -- because of the amount of money y'all are 8 having to spend, it's not related in the work, and that is 9 in our holding cells up there. Talking to Mr. Walker and 10 Mr. Longnecker, they still do not have prices to fix this. 11 We've already had two serious trials up there, one being 12 capital murder. I cannot use these facilities. They've 13 requested prices to fix it. My understanding is, it's going 14 to be pretty expensive to fix it and get it past Jail 15 Commission, so I don't know where we are, but I need some 16 help from the Court in getting Stoddard to get this moving 17 on so that I can provide safe facilities when we have 18 inmates in those courtrooms. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, perhaps denying him his 20 supervision and temporary facilities request because of his 21 delays in obtaining those numbers will get his attention, 22 and we might actually hear from him. 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I hope we hear from 24 something, 'cause we've got another trial starting this 25 week. We've had a capital murder, we had a serious drug 184 1 case last week. We've got to retry the capital murder. My 2 understanding is that the Judges are seriously considering 3 running two trials at a time, because we have those two 4 courtrooms, and I have no place to hold these inmates when 5 they -- we can't even do that, 'cause when they took out, 6 you know, part of this up here, they took our old holding 7 cell away, and we have no way -- 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Could we get some independent 9 prices on doing what needs to be done? How hard -- 10 MR. LONGNECKER: It would be pretty difficult 11 to -- 12 MR. WALKER: The way the contract's written. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't care what the 14 contract says. How hard would it to be get independent 15 prices on doing what has to be done for Jail Commission? 16 MR. LONGNECKER: Well, first we have to find 17 a contractor that would come in and work on it, and then 18 we'd have to get him to price it and make the changes, and 19 that will take time. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Aren't we basically 21 welding that one door shut and changing the -- 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They've got to install 23 an intercom system. They're supposed to put bars up in some 24 of the ducts, they they've got to change the heights of the 25 ceiling, they've got the change the way the doors are 185 1 mounted, they've got to extend the glass down in the 2 visitation. They've just about got to totally redo those 3 holding cells from scratch to be able to use them. They 4 weren't built in any way that would conform to Jail 5 Standards. And it's -- you know, I just -- I do have a 6 serious problem with it, because we are -- and I word this 7 carefully. We are putting people in there, inmates, one at 8 a time, but I have to have a jailer or a deputy inside with 9 him. So, it's not considered a holding cell; it's just a 10 place to sit, and it's just extremely dangerous when we 11 start to really kick off. We had court a couple weeks ago 12 in which we had between 25 and 30 inmates up there at a 13 time. I've got court this Thursday, which I'll have between 14 25 and 30 inmates in there, and I have no place to secure 15 these people. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sheriff, was the 17 design of those holding cells not approved the by the Jail 18 Commission? 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Nothing was approved by 20 the Jail Commission for these holding cells. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon? 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The Jail Commission 23 never knew about those holding cells. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: It's my understanding that -- 25 that at the time they didn't think they were subject to the 186 1 Jail Commission, because no one stayed overnight. 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I'm not knocking 3 anybody; that was before my time, so I don't know this. But 4 we got a problem. 5 MR. LONGNECKER: May I add, one of the 6 problems that we've had is the combination -- there's a 7 conflict between what the fire marshal and Building Code and 8 City of Kerrville want and what the Jail Commission -- what 9 they requested. Mike Walker designed it according to the 10 Code, as enforced by the City of Kerrville and the fire 11 marshal and the City building specs. Now, there's a 12 difference here. One has to relent to the other, and 13 there's a conflict that has to be resolved, and that's part 14 of the problem. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: How significant is that 16 conflict? I mean, do you know, Keith? Are we talking 17 about -- 18 MR. WALKER: Switching the doors is very 19 expensive. 20 MR. LONGNECKER: The doors -- we've got to 21 take -- there's two huge steel doors, security doors, up 22 there that would have to change places. Both have to be cut 23 out of the wall, concrete block wall, and -- and switch 24 places. Then that will change the door swing. The doors 25 are swinging into the cells now. 187 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Is that a conflict between 2 the Jail Commission and the fire marshal? 3 MR. WALKER: Yes. 4 MR. LONGNECKER: Yes. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: How -- so the fire marshal 6 says they should swing out? 7 MR. LONGNECKER: The fire marshal approved 8 the thing the way they are swinging now; that's the way they 9 wanted them. That's the way City Building Code wanted them, 10 and that's the way they were built. Now, then the next 11 thing, the Jail Commission wants them to swing out into -- 12 one into the elevator vestibule, the other one out into the 13 vestibule next to the Judge's bench or to the courtroom. 14 MR. WALKER: And the one that swings to the 15 elevator is an A.D.A, problem because it swings into the 16 clear space for the elevator door. So, they're -- they're 17 asking us to do something that is against -- 18 MR. LONGNECKER: It's a conflict to all the 19 different codes and agencies. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's get together this week 21 and hash these out, get on the phone, see what we can work 22 out. But why don't we go -- why don't we see if we can't 23 get somebody to bid on making those changes? I don't know 24 who you guys -- put your heads together and see if you can 25 come up with someone who -- 188 1 MR. LONGNECKER: One of the problems you've 2 got on that is another contractor entering into an area 3 where we already have a contract. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I understand that, but 5 we're in a situation where our existing contractor is not 6 cooperating with us. It's not only costing us money, it's a 7 public safety issue because of the difficulties that it 8 produces to the Sheriff's Department in effectively managing 9 dangerous prisoners when they come to the courthouse for 10 their -- for their trial, and that's something that we 11 cannot sit here and allow to just be perpetuated because the 12 contractor has his nose out of joint. 13 MR. LONGNECKER: We'll go ahead and certainly 14 get busy and try to find someone as soon as possible. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: At least give us an 16 alternative. 17 MR. LONGNECKER: Yeah. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: If the contractor thinks that 19 were abusing his contract, well, he can get his junk dog 20 lawyer and come down here to Kerr county and talk to our 21 junk dog lawyer, you know, if -- 22 MR. WALKER: We have to put this out to bid? 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Depends on how much it is. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, my thought would 25 be -- I mean, some of these things need to be worked out 189 1 between the Jail Commission and the City of Kerrville, and 2 those things -- I'm more concerned about some of the things 3 that we can fix relatively easily with some bars and the -- 4 the intercom thing between the attorney and the prisoner, or 5 that window lower down here. Also the intercom outside -- 6 between inside and outside, but some of things I think that 7 we could -- you know, we could work on getting fixed 8 relatively easily. I mean, I think let's work with the 9 Sheriff to get what whatever we can to make it safe for him, 10 you know, and then we can work out some of these other 11 issues between the Jail Commission and City of Kerrville. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, they're interrelated. 13 In my opinion, the Sheriff is -- I believe the Sheriff is 14 comfortable with the holding cells the way they are. It's 15 the Jail Commission that won't let him use them the way 16 they're designed. 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only problem I 18 actually have with the holding cells as they are, the only 19 thing that I honestly feel needs to be corrected, and then 20 the rest of it hopefully we can work out, is, one, we do 21 need an intercom system from inside to outside, to where we 22 can monitor what's going on. Two, the window in the 23 attorney visit needs to come on down to where it's a 16th of 24 an inch instead of where we can pass things through. Those 25 are -- and, three, one that I think is more of a -- a 190 1 nuisance, but I think it definitely needs to be corrected at 2 the same time, is with the type of toilet that's in the 3 men's holding cell, when you flush it, as y'all well know, 4 it echoes off the back walls in the courtroom. And if we 5 put 15 inmates in there, they're not going to accomplish a 6 single thing in that courtroom, because all those inmates 7 are going to be doing is flushing that toilet, interfering 8 with the goings on in the courtroom; it is that bad. So, 9 those are three things, and the last being, you know, just 10 an irritation deal, that I think definitely need to be 11 corrected. 12 Now, there are some things that, hopefully, 13 between the architect and the fire marshal and the Jail 14 Commission, you know, if we can get everybody on the same 15 page, maybe we can work out with the Jail Commission to do. 16 Only thing is, Jail Commission is going to consider that a 17 new facility, okay? So, where we used to be able with our 18 old facility to get variances and things like that, they're 19 going to be hard pressed to give us variances on a new 20 facility. We're going to have to come up to their 21 standards. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, let's just -- 23 MR. WALKER: Commissioner Letz asked that a 24 while ago about a variance, like, for example, on those 25 doors. I was told don't even try it. They won't approve 191 1 it. 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: New facility. 3 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Certainly, if we've 4 got a public safety issue here and the contractor is 5 nonperforming -- and I know there's bound to be some kind of 6 nonperformance clause in this contract -- we are certainly 7 within our rights to go get another bid, and we ought to do 8 it. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: We cannot continue to be 10 subject to the contractor's desire to extend this over ad 11 infinitum. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll get a resolution 14 between the fire marshal and the Jail Commission as to who 15 has the biggest hit. Okay. Are we clear on what we're 16 going to do tomorrow, then? Our meeting is set for 1:30, if 17 y'all could just bring in the revised change order, as we've 18 discussed. Before we leave, we've got to do one more thing. 19 Go back to Item Number 8, which is the bids on the trailer 20 for Road and Bridge. Road and Bridge has reviewed the bid 21 which was received. They have determined that it meets the 22 requirements of the bid package, and they have recommended 23 that the Court accept the bid for -- from Fruehauf Trailer 24 Services in the amount of $22,383.80. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 192 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How much was budgeted? 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: They say it's within the 3 budget. I don't -- haven't reviewed that. 4 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Letz, 6 seconded by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court approve the 7 bid from Fruehauf Trailer Services, Inc., in the amount of 8 $22,383.80 for the 25-ton trailer for the Kerr County Road 9 and Bridge Department. Any further questions or comments? 10 If not, all in favor, raise 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. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge I want to say 16 one other thing on this -- on this deal with Mr. Stoddard 17 and all, that I've voiced in here before. I really would -- 18 I think it would be wise for us to make sure our County 19 Attorney understands what's going on here and start getting 20 him in the loop, because I see a storm down the road. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner, I think I've 22 told you this before, but this has gone on so long, we've 23 had Mr. Pollard involved in this almost from the beginning. 24 And -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good. 193 1 MR. LONGNECKER: Mr. Pollard has received a 2 copy of my progress reports every -- twice a month, same as 3 you have. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else? Okay. We 5 stand adjourned. 6 MS. SOVIL: Recessed. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: We go into recess until 8 immediately following the posted meeting for 1:30 tomorrow. 9 (Commissioner's Court recessed at 3:03 p.m.) 10 - - - - - - - - - - 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 194 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 20th day of November, 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