1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT Regular Session Monday, December 10, 2001 9:00 a.m. Commissioners' Courtroom Kerr County Courthouse Kerrville, Texas ~~ PRESENT: FREllERICK L. HENNEKE, Kerr County Judqe H.A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 LARRY GRIFFIN, Commissioner Pct. 4 1 ,^ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to 11 12 13 ,.- 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 I N D E X December 10, 2001 PAGE --- Commissioners Comments 3~"~,3; 1 . 1 Pay Bills 7 a73 1 . 2 Budget Amendments 8 oZ73 1.3 Late Bills g 1.4 Read and Approve Minutes 1U~3~ 1.5 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 10'~l3CI 2. 1 Introduce for recognition Kerrville Christmas - Q~SC-V.S`~1C Lighting Corporation Board of Directors 11 2.2 Consider adoption of Cafeteria Plan options for Kerr County employee health insurance for 2002 14`~3~ 2.3 Remaining right-of-way acquisition needed for Sheppard Rees project 27~13~ 2.9 Abandonment of Gul~~h Ranch Road (South Park), and set public hearing date 35a73L 2.5 Approval of preliminary revision of plat for Creekwood V, Precinct 2 ~7 ~i 9 2.6 Approval of preliminary revision of plat for ~ Twin Springs Ranch II, Precinct 2 4 2.7 PUBLIC HEARING - revision of plat for Hartshorn ~ Country Sites 5g ~ 2.8 Approval of revision of plat, Hartshorn Country ~ 13? °`L Sites 59 2.9 Approval of final plat for James Avery Craftsman Subdivision ~~~~~~pp 60a~n1 2.10 Consider name changes for County-maintained roads in accordance with 911 guidelines 61a~ ~ 1'.11 Resolution to participate in 215th Judicial District Narcotics Task Force 63 x735 2.12 Consider Rainwater Harvesting Tax Incentive Program, proposed component of County's Water _„ ~~~0~ Conservation Policy 56 2.13 Commissioners Court certification of lists of organizations using HCYEC, determine eligibility for discounted fees proposed in rate schedule 72~~'~3 2.14 Consider holding workshop on County Technology Utilization in January 2002, set date and time 91a13~{ 2.15 Approve slate of commissioners for Kerr County Rural Fire District No. 1 95'a~'~ 2.16 Procedure for compiling/summarizing Commissioners Court evaluations of department heads and County personnel 962`73f~ 2.17 Discuss retention of outside counsel to complete lease negotiations for radio tower leases 107a73S"~ 2.18 Discuss County notification procedures to road a7~~ name changes and 911 113 --- Adjourned 142 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 On Monday, December 10, 2001, at 9:00 a.m., a regular meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court: P R O C E E D I N G S JUDGE HENNEKE: Good morning, everyone. It's 9 o'clock in the morning on Monday, December 10th, Year 2001, and we'll call to order this regular session of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. Commissioner Letz, I believe you have the honors this morning. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. Everyone please stand. (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) DODGE HENNEKE: 'Thank you, Jonathan. At this time, any citizen wishing to address the Court on an item not listed on the regular agenda may come forth and do so. Is there any citizen who would like to address the Court on an item not listed on the regular agenda"? Once again, is there any citizen who'd like to address the Court on an item not listed on the regular agenda? Seeing none, we'll go into the Commissioners' Comments, and we'll begin with Commissioner Letz. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have any this morning. 1 i 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ly 20 21 22 2i 24 25 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Moving right along, Commissioner Griffin. CUMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Just one thing, and I'm still getting several phone calls -- I've gotten several phone calls complimenting our koad and Bridge Department on the quick response after the last flooding episodes we had. And as of today, I think, in Precinct 4 at least, there's no open issues that are left, Road and Bridge-wise, from those two flood events, and well done to Road and Bridge Department. If you you'd pass that along? MR. JUHNSTUN: I'll tell them, the ones that do it. JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Baldwin'? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have nothing today, sir. 'Thank you. JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Williams? COMM1551ONEH W1LLlAMS: Orie quickie. 1 want to congratulate the good folks of the Center Point Historical -- Center Point Area Historical Association for accomplishing a really herculean task. Over the last 18 to 24 months, they have raised $47,000, which qualified them to receive a $47,000 grant from the Peterson Foundation so they could secure the property in the heart of town for their historical park. It's been a real yeoman effort on their part, and a lot of good folks have worked hard and deserve 5 1 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 ZS credit for a job well done. Last night they had their Center Point Christmas parade and tree-lighting, and they had it in their new historical park, and it was really, really neat to be a participant in that. So, my congratulations to them on a job well done. JUDGE HENNEKE: Very good. A couple things; I want to offer the Court's congratulations to Jannett Pieper and her staff down at the County Clerk's office for once again being awarded the Five Star Award by the t3ureau of Vital Statistics for the accuracy and service they provide to the citizens of Kerr County. This is the third year in a row, I believe, that the County Clerk's office has won this award. It's just another example of the outstanding service that's provided to Kerr County by the employees of this -- of this county, and to Jannett and all the people who work down there, we want to give our thanks and appreciation for their hard work. Also, we want to give our congratulations to Greg Shrader for being named the president of the Texas Association of Daily Newspapers. Once again, it's always nice to have statewide recognition for the excellent work that's done in the private as well as the public sector here in Kerr County. I want to offer my congratulations to the people who put on the courthouse lighting ceremony on December 1st. It was a marvelous ceremony. 1 think we had probably ten times as many people h 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 15 1h 17 1tI ly 20 21 ~, 23 24 LS in attendance as we have before, probably due partly, in fact, to the parade which was before that. It was a wonderful time and a great ceremony. We want to recognize those people in a little bit. I want to offer my thanks at this time for their hard work and for the betterment of us all. Finally, a couple scheduling requirements. I'll remind everyone that our final meeting of this year will be Friday, December Zlst, at 9 o'clock here in the courtroom. From 11:00 to 1:00 that day, we'll be having our employee's luncheon down in the basement annex, as we did last year, and that's always a good time. I look forward to that. If need be, we'll come back and reconvene court after the Christmas party. The absolute drop-dead deadline for agenda items will be Monday, the 17th, at noon, because we have to post the agenda, really, that afternoon. So, don't come asking for favors after that time, because there won't be any indulgences granted. We have to get that done on time, so keep that in mind as you move forward. And the first meeting in December -- in January is the 14th of January, so we'll have -- we'll have a long period of time between meetings, unless something comes up and we have to have a special meeting. So, please keep those scheduling items in mind. Anything else? If not, let's move on to the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1J 16 17 10 ly 20 21 22 2j 24 2S approval agenda and pay some bills. Tommy? Does anyone have any questions or comments regarding the bills as presented? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have one question, Judge. JUDGE HENNEKE: Go ahead. COMMISSIUNER BALUWIN: On Page 1, Commissioners Court, the third item down, Continental Casualty Company for $2,814. Is that a prisoner lawsuit? MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, it is. It's attorney fees on -- on a rase concerning the -- the law enforcement liability. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And this is part of the -- oh, yeah, it says deductible; I can read. Okay, thank you. 'That's all I have. JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone else have any questions or comments regarding the bills as presented? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move we pay the bills. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve the bills as recommended and presented by the Auditor. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 8 1 2 3 4 5 h 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ;The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (NO response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Budget amendments. We have one from the Youth Exhibition Center. MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. This is a request from Glenn Holekamp. We discovered that there was no budget item for -- for the lease on his copier for the Ag Barn. The past three years, this has been funded out of a grant from AACOG, the Solid Waste grant, and he -- that grant we no longer have, so we have -- in order to pay this for the -- for the year, he's recommending that we transfer the $1,000 from Major Repairs in the Youth Exhibition Center to Lease Copier Expense. COMMISSIUNER BALDWIN: So moved. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner BaL~win, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court approve Budget Amendment Request Number 1 for the Youth Exhibition Center. Any further questions or comments? COMM1SSlONEN. LETZ: Question. Do you know how much longer is left on that lease? Seems like a -- you know, 1 don't know how much they use that copier. Seems like a pretty high amount. Is that the standard amount for -- Sl,000? 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2q 25 9 MP.. TOMLINSON: Yes. JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Do we have any other budget amendments, Tommy? MR. TOMLINSON: No, I don't. I have a late bill. JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. MR. TOMLINSON: It's payable to First Insurance Agency, and it's for renewal of a bond for Constable, Precinct 2, for three years, and it's for $135. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought we did that last time. Mk. TOMLINSON: There was a budget amendment for this, I believe. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Vkay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. CUMM15SiONER GRIFFIN: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court approve a late bill and a hand check in the amount of $135 payable to First Insurance Agency for the Precinct 2 constable bond. 10 i ~. 1 G 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Any ques*ions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Okay. At this time, I'd entertain a motion to waive reading and approve the minutes of the November 13th and November 26th sessions of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. COMM1551UNER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court waive reading and approve the minutes of the Tuesday, November 13, and Monday, November 26, meetings of the Rerr County Commissioners Court. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this time, I'd also entertain a motion to approve and accept the monthly reports as presented. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 11 I 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 i7 1° 19 ,0 G~ Z~ 23 z4 ~G ~~ I I J~JDGE HEPdNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, it second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court approve and acr_ept the monthly reports as presented. Atiy questions or comments? if not, ali in favor, raise your right hand. lThe motion carried by unanimous vote.j JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. ([4o response. ) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. All right. We'll now turn to the consideration agenda. first item for consideration is Item Number 1, introduce for recognition the Kerrville Christmas Lighting Corporation Board of Directors. Commissioner Williams. COMMISSIONER WILLLAMS: Tkiank you, Judge. it's a pleasure to be able to do this this morning, because I don't know how many other members of the Court have had phone calls or people stopping you and saying how well -- how well the courthouse and the grounds look tc passers-b y, but I've had a number of them, and I think it's time that we say thank you to those who've made this possible. About six or seven years ago, I guess, then-Commissioner Ray Lehman and Jim Murphy got themselves together, I yuess over a cup of coffee anal a doughnut down at Donut King, and decided we needed to do something about the courthouse square, and they began a fledgling effort to decorate the courthouse lawn and trees and the grounds and so forth, which led to bigger and 11 I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 a 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ^4 25 better things, Over the last three years -- and that effort, incidentally, struggled in its infancy, and it way a lot of hard work for a very few number of people, but they did manage to get it done and keep it alive. I believe three or four years ago, the group decided to incorporate and bring other folks into the -- into the mix, and they have since incorporated and filed for 501(c~(3) designation with Internal Revenue Service. They have engaged in fundraising over the last three or fcur or so years, and what you see on the courthouse square is the product of their efforts, and it is an ongoing effort. It's a work in progress and will continue to be so as we -- as we move Lorward each year. So, with a great deal of pleasure, I'd like to introduce all these folks who work so very hard, and they do it all year lonq; they dcn't just do it in the Christmas season. They me=t all gear long, planning and helping and directing what's going to take place, ordering the materials, seeing that they're here, and organizing work forces to get the job done in the fall. So, we'll start with the fellows who made it possible at the very beginning, and if you would stand as I call your names and be recognized, and iL would be our pleasure to thank you publicly for your -- your really fine efforts. Jim Murphy and Ray Lehman are the two who started 13 `~ 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 F 9 10 11 12 13 24 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 L 2 23 24 2S all this. Dick Lehman has joined them. Dick Eilerman has joined, Pat Dye, Louise Kirby, Beverly Bond. Absent today are Walter Schellhase and Sudie Burditt, who are a very integral part of it, and it's a pleasure to say publicly to you, thank you for a job well done. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Jim, do you want to say something? MR. MURPHY: One thing. Can't miss the opportunity. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm shocked. MR. MURPHY: I'm Jim Murphy; I live at 203 Riverhill Boulevard. I want to thank the Court for allowing us to do this over this period of seven years, We think it has grown, as Bill has said too, and it's going to get bigger, We won't put -- we won't overload the courthouse lawn, don't qet me wrong. We might change something, do something like that, but the thing I wanted to say basically was that l can't leave here without thanking Glenn Holekamp and his crew. You know, they've done this basically on their time. They're not doing it working for -- while working for you people and for the County. So -- but I do want you to express that to Tenn and }iis crew, that we thank -- we appreciate very much what they've done. Thank you. 14 1 3 4 5 E 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1S 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLiAMS: Also the community service workers, and we've even had some -- MR. MURPHY: Oh, yes. COMMISSIONEP. WILLIAMS: -- some trustees from the jail who've been involved at various dines. MR. MURPHY: You're right. Thank you again. JIIDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Jim. We appreciate it. ?dent item for consideration today is Item DJumber 2, consider and discuss adoption of variable benefit plan for Kerr County employee health insurance for the calendar year 200^. We had a workshop on this last Tuesday. It was well-attended by employees. Basically, the concept which is before the Court is to offer the employees three different deductible plans. No employee will be deprived of any benefits. The employees have the option of retaining ar.d maintaining the current level of insurance benefits which they enjoy today. Let me say that again. Benefits are not going to change unless an employee chooses that they ought to change. If we adopt this variable plan today, the employee will have, first and foremost, the option of simply keeping the current insurance in effect. However, ii they choose to go to a higher deductible, which means that the County will pay less for their insurance, we will take the difference between what the County pays for the current insurance, at a $400 deductible, and what the County will 1~ 1 2 3 4 Ii f j 6 I ~ 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 ld 19 20 21 22 23 Z4 ..-~ 25 pay for a $~"0 or a $1,2.00 deductible, and place that amount in a medical savings account which may be used by the employee to either buy down the premiums, perhaps with their employee benefits, or to purchase other medical services. For instance, the money could be used to pay for orthodontia work for a dependent of the employee. Additionally, the employee will be able to place money of their own into this medical savings account on a pre-tax basis, so that, Tor instance, if an employee had entered into a contract with one of the local orthodontists to pay $100 a month for braces Eor one or more of their children, the employee could designate that $100 to be deducted from their salary on a pre-tax basis and placed into the medical savings account, and they could then get reimbursed from that medical savings account for those expenses, thereby saving the income tax on the $1,200 that they would have paid for the orthodontia work over the course of a calendar year. Let me emphasize that this is on a reimbursement basis. The employee first has to pay the bill and then present the bill for payment, and then the employee is reimbursed on that basis. BuL it is a way for employees who have some good handle on their medical expenses for the coming year to do some saving to be able to -- to handle those expenses. That's the thrust of the proposal that's being made today. Does anyone have any questions? 16 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 i2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 21 L t 23 ,q 25 We have with us Brian and Curtis Finley, our medical -- our insurance advisers, as well as Mr. Ray Rothwell, who represents the -- the actual insurance side of it. So, if anyone has any questions regarding the proposal or the impact on the employees, let's hear it from them nuw so we all have a clear understanding of what's -- what's at issue here. Anyone have any comments or questions? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I guess I have a question. It was asked of Mr. Rothwell the other day, and I -- over the weekend, I couldn't remember the answer to it, but, the -- there you are, the reimbursement. How long will it take our employees to be reimbursed once they submit the -- the proper forms to your company"? MR. ROTHWELL: That's really a question of the Finley agency. I -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Somebody answer it. MR. ROTHWELL: Yeah. JODGE HENNEKE: Brian? MR. FINLEY: Commissioner Baldwin, the normal turnaround rime is two weeks or less, depending on the mail service, quite frankly. We have some that actually -- if the claim is filed immediately or the receipt is sent irr, like, on a -- on a Monday, it's conceivable that it could be back by the next Monday, if the mail service runs properly. 17 1 7 3 4 5 E 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 COMMISSIONEK BALllWIN: Okay, thank you. MR. FINLEY: We like to say two weeks. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It you live on a new county road, you may never get it. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The one that's had the name change. JODGE HENNEKE: Let's don't be mixing agenda items. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sorry. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Judge, is there going to be something put out to all the employees so that they r_an actually see and understand what their options are'? JUDGE HENNEKE: If we adopt this program -- and I'm going to let Brian speak to that -- there will be a series of meetings at the departments. We'll probably have one at your complex. I would anticipate one at Road and Bridge, and at least one here in the courthouse. Brian, do you want to speak to that? MR. FINLEY: Sheriff, what we would like to do would be to meet with each department. We would like to immediately, once this is approved, set up meetings with you and other department heads to get you thoroughly indoctrinated on this, and then schedule meetings with your individual departments. We will have charts that will give 18 1 2 Y 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 I8 19 20 21 ~2 ^3 1'4 ,G L J them illustrations of exactly how this will function in their behalf and the options that will be theirs so that they can, each one, make an intelligent individual de~isiuu with no pressure from peer group or anybody else. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. JJDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or comments' COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a comment. I'm -- I'm not opposed to it, and even though I didn't make the workshop, I did have the opportunity to meet with Brian and he brought me up to date on it. Just some simple maLki would indicate that an employee -- if you treat this as a savings plan, I guess, is really what we're saying this is; it becomes a savings opportunity for people, and if they don't have any problems health-wise, or if they don't have any extraordinary circumstances, they can come out pretty well on it. It seems that Plan B does offer an opportunity for employees to save some money over and above what the increase in the deductible is, and that's good. Plan C doesn't offer that. Plan C, if you weigh the increased amount of the deductible against the amount saved, it doesn't come out quite at as good, but Plan B does. MR. r'INLEY: Commissioner Williams, the -- that's just an illustration that you have in your possession there. As it relates to Plan C, the -- the difference of 19 1 3 4 r 5 6 1 ~ 1 9 1G 1 11 12 13 14 1S 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 .-~ 24 25 some $35 or $3h between the employee's premium Lox Plait A savings account by either one, and -- or used for other benefits that the County does presently provide or may provide in the future in the way of other medical options. i3ut, really, each one, whether they Lake a B or a C option, will have the proportionate savings, so to speak, that they can utilize on other benefits. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which I understand that, and I'm not against the concept. aL all. I'm just pointing out that under the B -- the B -- the A plan savings versus the increase in the deductible, Lhe employee corms out okay. The B plan savings versus the increase in the deductible doesn't come out quite as well. J~JDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or comments? Once again, I want to emphasize Lhat this is something that's voluntary on the part of the employee, in the sense that they have a choice. It's an effort that has been generated by Barbara Nemec, who sent her regrets; she had an engagement she couldn't reschedule today. And I have worked with the Finleys and Mr. Bothwell, because we had a number of employees who expressed to Barbara or myself that they would like to have some options in the health insurance. Again, it's entirely optional to the employees. zo 1 2 4 S 6 1 I 8 9 10 1 11 12 ~ 13 14 15 15 17 1 ti 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 There is no pressure. 'f here is nothing which will require high -- for a higher deductible and offsetting some other expenses, then this will give them the ability to do that. Again, we're providing -- bringinq this plan before the Court now because the last Legislature gave counties, for the first time, the option to offer this type of a pre-tax medical option benefit plan to our employees, so it's something that we haven't had the ability to do before now, and we want to give our employees the option to be able to control, if they so desire, a certain portion of their medical expenses and reimbursements. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I have two questions. One, on timing. Assuming we implement this plan, do the employees have a window when they have to make a decision? Can they change any time during the year? Can they change back if they don't like it? I mean, how does -- do those issues get handled? MR. FINLEY: Commissioner Letz, under the I.R.S. regulations, under Section 125 of the Internal Revenue Code, which is commonly called the cafeteria plan, if an employee opts to place their -- their premium dollars 21 1 3 4 5 6 8 9 lp 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1g 2n L1 22 23 24 25 under the pre-tar. allocation, they are locked in fcL the period of the plan year. In the County's case, that's going to be the calendar year. And they can make no changes except in the event of a major lifestyle change, and the I.R.S. identifies those as a birth, a death, a marriage, a divorce, disability, or job change. So, if there is a major crisis, the r. they can make whatever change is required, all the way up and down. One other aspect of this, if they elect to put that -- those extra dollars and more with them, as the Judge has indicated, those dollars can be used for any family member. It's not dust the employee. They're not designated, so subsequently, an employee who insures only himself could set aside dollars that could be used for a dependent child that is not currently insured. COMMISSIONER LETZ: When would the employees make this election this first year? MR. FINLEY: Between now and the end of the year. COMMISSIONER. LETZ: That's what I'm saying. So, there's a very short time for this to have any benefit to the employees this first calendar year. MR. FINLEY: Well, they make the ele~~tion to begin January 1 of '02. COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Right. MR. FINLEY: And it will run for 12 months, ~^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~4 25 yes, sir. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, a decision's got to be made before January 1st. MR. FINLEY: Yes, sir, that's correct. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, the other -- I guess the second question, on the -- and we discussed this a little bit when I visited with you -- the types of things that qualify under the plan. How is that determined? Is that -- is there a list that the Court puts together, or is it just up to the employees totally to wore that out with you? MR. FINLEY: You're referring to eligible expenses? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Such as, you know, dental plans. MR. FINLEY: Yes. The I.R.S. -- well, the options that the Court presently has available are the very ancillary-type coverages. You have a cancer policy, I believe, a life insurance, disability, and different things of that nature. Those are all eligible and may be paid for under the cafeteria shelter with pre-tax dollars, so that even those dollars that they save by moving from Plan A, for er,ample, to Plan B, they never have to pay tax on. The I.R.S. identifies the eligible expenses that are medical expenses that they can use those dollars for, if they put 23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 lh 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 them, in a rredical reimbursement account. JUDGE HENNEKE: I think what Commissioner Letz is asking is, will you be able to provide the employees with a -- an illustrative list of the types of things that you get reimbursed for? MR. FINLEY: Yes. JUDGE HENNEKE: Like co-pay -- MR. FINLEY: Yes, sir. I'm sorry. JUDGE HENNEKE: -- cleaning your teeth, like going to the eye doctor, like buying a pair of glasses or like, you know, an emergency room call. Types of things that they could use the savings account for. MR. FINLEY: We have a booklet that will be distributed to everybody that gives them -- not a totally complete list, but a partial list of those eligible items, and those that are obviously not eligible, so that there's no conflicts. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, thanks. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And it's very liberal. It's a very liberal -- MR. FINLEY: Yes. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- allowance, I mean, for the types of things that -- in the medical arena that you can use those for -- those dollars for. JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone have any -- 24 1 7 3 4 5 5 8 9 'G 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ,` 23 24 25 Jannett? MS. PIEPER.: No, I'm sorry. DODGE HENNEKE: Ada? MS. MARTELON: I do have a question. JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. MS. MARTELON: It's been my experience doing payroll that a lot of times employees will opt for dependent coverage or whatever, and about the first paycheck that's minus that premium amount, they just discover -- they're not budget-oriented, you know; they really can't afford it. And it isn't a birth -- it isn't a birth, a death, marriage, et cetera, and they're locked in for a year. From our standpoint, what -- what is our recourse? MR. FINLEY: We try to -- we try to emphasize that, Ada, right up front, telling them that they are locked in, if they elect to pay for that under cafeteria plan. Now, if they do not want to be lor_ked in, then they can pay for any benefits with after-tax dollars, and they can come to you and -- MS. MARTELON: After-tax? MR. FINLEY: -- say, you know, "Take me off." But if they are under the cafeteria plan -- and we're very, very emphatic about that so that they understand that it's a 12-month commitment. MS. MARTELON: Thank you. 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. PIEPER: I have a question. DODGE HENNEKE: Jannett? MS. PIEPER: It we put money though this, are we on a time limit as far as when we can use it? MF.. FINLEY: Yes, ma'am. I'm glad you asked that question, because it is a use-it-or-lose-it type of a situation on the medical reimbursement funds. The Internal Revenue Service says, "If we're going to give you the tax break, then you're going to use it the way we say," in so many words. You have 12 months in which to use it. We -- we simply say be very conservative your first year. The Judge's illustration of a kid in orthodontics, that's a slam-dunk; you know it's $100 every month. But if you think, "Well, maybe I'm going to have to do this or maybe I'm going to have to do that," don't do it. If it's a known upcoming medical expense -- we just did the school system, just finished them up last week on their cafeteria plan, and I had one lady coming in. She said, "This thing worked so beautifully for me last year because I knew I had about $1,500 worth of expenses. I don't have any that I know about this coming year, so I'm not going to do it." So, you can change it on the anniversary date each year, but you want to be sure that you use it up in that time frame. Now, normally, the major company that we use on this sends out a notice about 90 days prior to the end of the plan year z6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 u 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 ~~ 23 29 25 saying, "You have sc many dollars left. Please spend them," to keep you posted so that you're not caught unawares. MS. PIEPER: With this being pre-tax, does it affect the Social Security in any way when we get -- MR. FINLEY: Yes, it does. If you have those dollars taken out pre-tax, it does have some impact, depending, of course, on your -- on your income level, on ultimate Social Security benefit. And some people opt not to participate for that very reason. However, we have found, in the last 15 years that we've been using cafeteria plans, that probably fewer than 1 percent of the people feel that there's any significant impact on their Social Security benefit -- ultimate Social Security benefit. MS. PIEPER: Thank you. JUDGE HENNEKE: Brian, let me -- as a follow-on to Jannett's question, how long after the end of the plan year do you have to submit your receipts for reimbursement? MR. FINLEY: Ninety days. Ninety days. JUDGE HENNEKE: So -- MR. FINLEY: It must be an expense incurred by the end of the plan year, which you have 90 days for filing. JUDGE HENNEKE the pleasure of the Court? Any other questions? What's 2~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 P 18 ly 20 21 22 23 29 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'll move that we adopt the plan as presented. It provides flexibility. It's a good plan, I think. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second the motion. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court adopt the proposed Kerr County health insurance plan allowing for three options for the calendar year 2002, to be effective January 1, Year 2002. Any further questions or comments'? if not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. (NO response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Very good. And, Brian, you and Curtis and Ray will be coordinating with the department heads for the meetings with them, as well as with the employees? MR. FINLEY: Yes, sir. JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, very good. Thank you very much. We appreciate it. Next item for consideration, Item Number 3, consider remaining right-of-way acquisition needed for Sheppard Rees project. Franklin Johnston. MR. JOHNSTON: Morning. JUDGE HENNEKE: Morning. 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1/ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .-. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Morning. MR. JOHNSTON: We have all the right-of-way on the Sheppard Rees project except for one-quarter of 1 acre. It's owned by Mr. Rick McCray, who purchased the Horizon Subdivision. This one-quarter of 1 acre we had appraised by TexAppraise, Billy Snow, and he appraised the land at $972, and removing and reassembling a fence at $900 approximately, for about $1,372. I talked to Mr. McCray on the phone several times. He thinks his land's worth considerably more than that. He indicated he's willing to donate that one-quarter of an acre if he would get a tax credit from Kerr County for what he thinks his property's worth, and permission -- he owns across the road, and the road cuts off a little corner of his property, the remainder of which would be about three-quarters -- about seven-tenths of an acre, and he would like permission to move his sales office out of The Horizon proper and place it on the other parcel of land with an appropriate septic system, an aerobic septic system, and pipe water across the road from The Horizon to service it. And, with those two conditions, he would donate that property to Kerr County. We feel like this is a little bit out of our expertise, and we would like the Court to refer this to the County Attorney or private attorney, if they choose, to even see if a tax credit is something that Kerr County wants to do, and if these ?y 1 -, 3 4 J 6 7 R 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 lS 19 20 21 L~ 23 24 LS conditions are acceptable. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I think -- I think you're right, that we need to, in my opinion, refer it to an attorne;~ to look into the tax, credit issue. But, as far as placing a building on our property, I -- I don't know. I just -- that doesn't -- I'm not real comfortable with that. It just doesn't feel good, when we're trying to -- our goal is to obtain right-of-way and make the road nice and wide, and then somebody comes along and puts a building there. It just doesn't -- MR.. JOHNSTON: Well, I mean, I may have spoken wrong. It's his property. It's the remainder after the road right-of-way is purchased -- you know, is settled. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, we're talking about -- MR. JOHNSTON: lt's his property. It's just split; the rest of it is just a little parcel about -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're talking about allowing him to lay a line across the county road? MR. JOHNSTON: An~~ it's a substandard size iot, you know. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: As far as -- MR. JOHNSTON: Seven-tenths of an acre loY_. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, now, that's U.G.R.A.'s call. I mean, that's not something that I would 1 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 L 'J 21 ~~ 23 24 25 30 vote on today. MR. JOHNSTON: U.G.R.A. said an aerobic system would be feasible. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you a question as a -- as the County Engineer. What about allowing them to lay a line across -- a water line across the road? MR. JOHNSTON: Well, that's done routinely. If they do it properly, according to our -- you know, the way we had set out in our Subdivision Pules, it's perfectly all right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So you wouldn't have any problem with that part of the deal? MR. JOHNSTON: Public utilities place lines across the road all the time. COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question -- or I guess concern is, I mean, I presume that their tax bill -- or his tax bill out there far exceeds $7,500, assuming he owns a lot of unsold property out there. And, if that's true -- MR. JOHNSTON: I don't think that corresponds to what the tax appraisal is on the property. That's just what he thinks it's worth. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I'm saying if he wants that $7,500 credit, and if his taxes exceed that on the total Horizon property, we're paying him $7,500 and 31 1 1~ i 1 1 2 3 4 5 E 7 A 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 ~z 23 24 25 giving him something else. I don't see how that's a good deal to us. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No. COMMISSIOP~ER LETZ: I mean, we're paying him -- I mean, we'd be better off writing him a check for $7,500 and forgetting Fart B. I mean, I don't understand how this credit he]ps you. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: As a matter of Pact, if a tax credit is a doable thing legally, if you caii do a tax credit, then I don't see any way in the word that we can agree to pay him more than the appraised value - give him more of a tax credit than the appraised value. JUDGE HENNEKE: I think., by law, we can't purchase this property for more than the appraised value. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's what I mean. So even if you do it with the tax credit -- yeah, even if you do it with a tax credit, rather than a straight sale or whatever, I don't think you could ever exceed the appraised value. COMMISSIONER WILL7AMS: Or is he suggesting that his -- his donation of the property would entitle him to some sort of a -- a letter of consideration from the County so that they do take it off his federal income tax, the value of the property? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's not our 32 1 `' 1 i 3 4 5 6 7 a a 10 11 12 13 14 15 lF 17 1R 19 ~g 21 2~ L~ 24 ~5 bailiwick, I don't think. JUDGE HENNEKE: That would be up to him. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's not what he's saying. JUDGE HENNEKE: That's between him and the I.R.S., but I think I would certainly be disposed to signing a letter saying thank you for your valuable contribution of however many acres it is. And any contribution to a political subdivision is deductible from yw r federal income tax. But that would be up to him. You know, I don't think we can pay more than the appraised value unless we go through the condemnation process and he appeals it, and the Court establishes that it's worth more than L}ie appraised value. I think we need to -- as Franklin suggested, I think we need to refer this to the County Attorney or other appropriate legal expertise for their recommendation, COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I don't know, I don't -- I agree with that, but, I mean, I don't see much point in spending time in the County Attorney's office or money on the tax credit issue unless he's -- unless he doesn't want a true tax credit; he's talking about I.R.S. taa credit. I see no reason why we'd ever give a tax credit for the same amount that he wants for the property. It makes no sense. I don't even see why we should waste our time on a tax credit. If we're going to pay kiim the money, `~ R 1 1 1 1 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 1H 19 20 21 ~G Z3 ~4 25 33 we pay him the money. I mean, the credit is the same thing. Assuming his tar, bill exceeds that, it wouldn`t be -- you know, the only advantage would be if his tax bill is $1,000 a month or some lesser amount; be four or five years before we paid him, so we have some time value there. I mean, credit's the same thing as paying him the money, but I don't see any point in wasting time on the credit issue. JUDGE HENNEKE: I think we need to refer it to the County Attorney as far as our opLicns on acquiring the property. CGMMISSIONEP, GRIFFIN: Right, overall. DODGE HENNEKE: Period. COMMISSIGNEF. GRIFr'IN: Including the tas credit issue. C0MM7SSIGNER BALDWIN: Franklin, i~ he in the room? Is he in this room? MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. McCray? (No response.} MF,. JOHNSTON: I guess not. C0MM7SSI0NER, BALDWIN: I just thought maybe iae could short-circuit -- this guy looks like a lawyer to me up here on the front row. (Discussion off the record.} JUDGE HENNEKE: And so the consensus seems to be that we will refer this to the County Attorney's office 34 r r 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 lE 17 1S 19 20 21 22 Z3 24 25 for recommendation as to our options for acyuirinq this remaining piece cf right-of-way. COMMISSIONER. GRIFFIN: We need a motion for that? Or just -- i JUDGE HENNEKE: I think we can -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just a second. Is this the -- is this the last block in the -- to put the picture together? MR.. JOHNSTON: It's the last one. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; Okay. MR. JOHNSTON: The plans on tYie road should be ready this week or next, and the construction will probably begin next summer, so we need to yet this cleared up in the next six months. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree, we do need a court order. Actually, I'd like to add into the court order that -- almost a specific time frame, if -- if the County Attorney could please get back with us within two weeks. JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I know that we think that's impossible, but it's a court order. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I agree with putting a time limit on it, because I don't see a lot of time to mess around with it, to me. It looks like we're going down the road to completion. We need to yet it 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 L 1 ~2 23 24 25 started. I think we need tc put a time limit to get our options back and then proceed. COMMISSIONER BALUWIN: So, I move we refer this to the county Attorney and ask him to please have an answer back to us in two weeks. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court refer to the County Attorney the issue of acquisition of the right-of-way from Mr. Rick McCray and request that the County Attorney provide us with his response within two weeks of today's date. Any other questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: 6pposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Okay. Item Number 4, consider the abandonment of Gulch Ranch Road, Guadalupe Ranch Estates, Precinct 4, and set the public hearing for the same. Commissioner Griffin. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. Are you prepared to talk to this also, Franklin? This is one where we -- in working road name changes and addressing with 911, in dea]ing with Road and Bridge Department, dealinq with the property owners there, this was a suggestion that they made, 1 i 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2 S 35 *_ha*_ the -- they would like to abandon that road and gate it and he able to control the traffic on it, and that's what this public hearing and what this agenda item is to do, is to set the public hearing so that they can come in and enplain their -- their position. I think we've already gotten one of the -- I think there are only two landowners involved. We've already gotten one of the affidavits. One is in process; we should have that by the public hearing. So, all of the landowners involved -- the two property owners involved will have affidavits saying that's what's they want to do. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Isn't that what the rule says? COMMISSIONER. GRIFFIN: The law says -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A hundred percent? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah, you have to have i00 percent. MR. JOHNSTON: This one road, I think, is not paved, and there's a paved road that goes the same -- same place by another route, so it's not cutting anybody off or anything. It's -- JUDGE HENNEKE: So, we have one landowner, Mr. McAnelly, who has already said okay, and then we have one '_andowner for 201, 202, 203, and 204? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. 1 1 r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ~, 10 11 1~ 13 I4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 -, L 23 24 25 37 MR. JOHNSTON; Hightower. JriDGE HENNEKE: What about the property at the -- across from where the road dead-ends? COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the upper side? JUDGE HENNEKE: Yeah. MR. JOHNSTON: Across from where it says North Park Road? JUDGE HENNEI`E: No. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Top of the page. JUDGE HENNEKE: Go where the road dead-ends. Who owns the property just beyond that? Which apparently is serviced by South Park Road, as well. MR. JOHNSTON: I'm not sure. There's another road up there that services the frontage on that property. JUDGE HENNEKE: Still, I think the iaw says in order to abandon a road, everyone who has access to -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: But we're not going to abandon that part. JUDGE HENNEKE: Which part are you talking abou*_? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: This part of the road here. We're talking about this part. JUDGE HENNEKE: This property up at the very top? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think there's 38 w ~~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 another road there. I think that's a road. MR.. JOHNSTON: You see a little short portion. I think that rcad ties into North Park. DODGE HENNEKE: That's a road there that's running across. MR. JOHNSTON: Right. JUDGE HENNEKE : Okay. MR. JOHNSTON: It's very -- this doesn't show the whole p icture, but it T' s into this roa d. COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN; What if it doesn't go anywhere? I mean, you can't cut that road off. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN; No, t hat road -- that road does. We've got a bigg er map; for the public hearing, we'll bring in a bigger map. MR. JOHNSTON: Probably get -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I see what you're asking. JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't have a -- I think we just need to make sure that we have consent from everyuiie who we're reguired to. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. JUDGE HENNEKE: And L don't know if that would include the individual who lives on the north side of where South Park Road dead-ends or not, but that's an issue that we need to make sure that we have -- 1 I 1 ~-_ 1 2 3 4 5 6 a 9 it 11 12 13 14 i5 16 17 1S 19 20 21 22 23 24 2~ 39 COMMISSIONER GRIFr'iN: That road is -- that road that we're talking about abandoning is unpaved, is it not? The -- there is a much better access on Llie road that -- that little piece that you see there. JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I'm not disagreeing with that, but that's not the legal issue. The legal issue ;s -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN; I think the question -- JUDGE HENNEKE: -- if everyone who -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Is served bV the - JUDGE HENNEKE: -- is served by the road in question. Is the person who ]fives to the north of South Park Road served by North Park Road? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. You'd -ask the same question of this landowner right here. JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, he's already involved. MR. JOHNSTON: We have to notify everyone in the subdivision by mail, each lot? Do they all have an interest in each road? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think we do. I think there has to be a notifLcation that goes out tc -- JUDGE HENNEKE: Do we! MR. JCHNSTON: 'Cause that -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's a 1 1 1 i 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 13 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 40 cancellaticn of subdivision. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's cancellation of subdivision. It's not -- no, I don't think. it is. MR. JOHNSTON: We ran into that once before. JUDGE HENNEKE: But it's not a -- COMMISSIONER, LETZ: if you change the plats, you get rid of the road. JUDGE HENNEKE: That's a different -- that's a different code. It's a different section. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, the code of abandonment, if it's not in a subdivision, that's all yuu have to follow. I think if it's in a subdivision, you have to follow both. MR. JOHNSTON: I think so. Might have to do a replar_ also. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We'll have to ask that question before we -- I think we can do it. MF. JOHNSTON: Seems like we ran into this once before, that -- unless we've changed that portion -- that each person that lives in a platted subdivision, if you abandon or close part of a road, they all have a -- an interest in all the roads in the subdivision. Do they all have to agree to it? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We did -- that was Japonica Hi11s. 1 3 4 5 h 7 H 9 i0 11 12 13 i4 15 16 17 1F 19 20 21 ?2 23 24 25 41 MF,. JOHNSTON: Or just adjoining owners? JUDGE HENNEKE: My understanding is just people who are serviced by the road. But ghat may be roads in an unplatted area. COMM7SSIONEk BALDWIN: But 7 think all the property owners in the subdivision do have to be notified. MR. JOHNSTON: Should be notified? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah. Notification is the -- for sure. But, we need to research that. I think we car. still -- we need to do that before we do the public hearinq, but we can go ahead and set the public hearing. JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm fine with that. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'll make a motion that we -- that we consider -- that we set a public hearing cn the abandonment -- I want to get the language right; hang on a second. MR. JOHNSTON: So, the sequence would be public hearing; then, if you choose to abandon it, then the revision of plat comes later? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Riqht. It has to -- you ha`~e to do this first. MR. JOHNSTON: All right. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. So, 1 want to say that that -- the motion is that we set a public hearing on the abandonment, discontinuance, and vacaCion of Gulch 42 7 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 l4 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 21 ~~ 23 ~4 25 Ranch Road, as provided by the Transportation Code; that we set that public hearing for January 14th, 2002, at 10 a.m. DODGE HENNEKE: I think we have a public hearing already at 10:00. We might need to -- don't we have the roads and the street_ signs -- speed linut sign at 10 o'clock? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was leading, not listening. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But under the revision of plat, just reading it real quick, we have a public hearing and we have rc notify by registered -- or certified registered mail, return receipt, each of the owners in the subdivision. I don't know why we couldn't do them both at the same time, do both public hearings at the same time, and have one public -- or, you knew, back-to-back; I don't know if you can do them at the exact same time. And deal with it at one time, rather than two. I don't know if there's any savings on notice, publication. Maybe there's different items, I'm ncr_ sure. But, I mean, it does take a -- looks like the same notification requirements for revision of a subdivision -- or revision of plat, rather. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. How about you crafting the motion, then, since you're looking at it? If you want to get it right. 1 ~-. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 H 9 10 1i 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~q 25 43 MR. JOHNSTON: Who has to pay for all these notices? Is that the person applying for this thing? COMMISSIONER LETZ: 1 believe it's the rourt_. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: The County. MR. JOHNSTON: The County? Yeah, 'cause one of these persons are not in the subdivision. One is in the subdivision. COMMISSIONEF, LETZ: The road's in the subdivision, correct? MR. JOHNSTON: Right. I think that's a boundary or something. I think it goes Lu Phase II or something on the other side. JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, someone will have to provide us with the names and addresses. Correct, Jannett? MS. PIEPER: That's correct. JUDGE HENNEKE: For notice. We do have to send it. MR. JOHNSTON: That's what I'm saying, is that the landowner does that. JUDGE HENNEKE: Someone, typically the developer, the person proposinq the revision, provides us with the names and addresses. So, one of the individuals that want this road abandoned will have to be the person who does that. And you may -- may be getting the cart before the horse to try to have them at the same Lime because of 49 1 1 1 .~-. 7 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 L1 22 23 ~4 2 =. the notice requirement. COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Jannett, do you know, is it the same notice? I'm trying to save the money for twn notices. MS. PIEPER: That I think would be a legal question. I'm not COMMISSIONER LETZ: One at a time. We do the public notice on the vacation, but I don`t think we can vacate it at that time; I think we have to ;aait unti] after we do the next public !-searing. JiJDGE HENNEKE: We can have the public hearing for it.. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So -- MR. JOHNSTON: What time did we set that? 70:30? JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Griffin, second by r_ommissioner Letz, that the Court have a public hearing at 10:30 a.m. on January 14th, Year 2002, at the Kerr County Courthouse regarding intention of the Kerr County Commissioners Court to abandon, vacate, and discontinue Gulch Ranch Road, formerly a portion of South Park Road, as provided by the Texas Transportation Code. Everybody clear on that? Any further questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 1 1 I 1 1 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 y 10 11 12 13 14 1S 16 17 1H 19 20 21 2~ 23 24 25 45 7UDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) DODGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number 5, consider approval of the preliminary revision of plat for Creekwood V in Precinct 2. Commissioner Williams. COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: I'll turn this over to Franklin and to Lee Voelkel, who will explain what this is all about. MR. SOHNSTON: Lee man probably explain this a little better than I can. This -- this and the next item on Twin Springs is going to -- I think this one, Creekwood V, is divided into two portions, and on one portion we're going to do a partial abandonment, and then it's going to be picked up by Creekwood in the next item. So, this one is to -- is to pick -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Picked up by Twin Springs. JUDGE HENNEKE: Lee, before you start -- MR. VOELKEL: Yes, sir? JUDGE HENNEKE: -- let me go ahead and call the next agenda item, tco, which is consider preliminary revision of plat for Twin Springs Ranch II. And that way we'll consider them both at the same time, and I'll he less confused. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm already confused, 1 i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 lq 15 16 17 lt' 19 ,0 21 22 23 24 25 46 MR. VOELKEL: Let me txy to simplify Here, if I can hopefully not make it more confusing. Mr. Burgess is the owner of this property, and he owns all of Crcekwood V, which is an existing subdivision; one lot, 500-plus acres. He has bought three lots in Twin Springs, which adjoins the Creekwood V property r_o the north, another platted subdivision. What his intent was, was to take part of Creekwood V and the lots in Twin Springs, put those together into a subdivision in a reconfiguration of lots for him to be able to sell. So, we originally just did the plat for the Twin Springs, thinking that we could just take part of Creekwood V, throw it in there, and we'd have that plat. To be politically correct -- and this came up through City Ha 1l and our dealings with them, because this is ETJ property. They decided -- and we all decided the best thing to do would be to do two plats. First of all, replat Creekwood V and do that into two lots, one lot 300 acres, which is where his residence is that he will keep. The north part of that, which is the 200-acre tract which we will be calling Tract 2 -- or I believe it's called Tract 2. JUDGE HEDSNEK,E: 1k3. MR. VOELKEL: Lot 1B, thank you, sir. So that new he has Lot 1B of Creekwood -- Lhe revision of Creekwood V to put with the lots in Twin Springs, which brings us to our other plat, and then he'll have that 47 1 A f 1 1 2 3 4 S E 7 8 9 10 11 1~ 13 14 15 16 I7 19 19 20 21 L 23 L4 2S reconfiguration. He's going to -- and he plans to build a new road and reconfigure those lots. COMMISSIONER LETZ: My confusion -- I mean, I -- everything till you get to Twin Springs, I understand what 1 was locking at, the plat. How does he get access? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Access on Spur 100. MR. VOELKEL: That's a good question, Jon. I'm glad you brought that up. Creekwood V, as it exists, accesses off of Creekwood Road. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. MR. VOELKEL: On the north part of Creekwood V, Twin Springs Ranch has adjoined that, and there's Twin Springs Boulevard that comes to the north part of that lot, and it's up in the very far righthand corner of Creekwood V. So, when he divides the Creekwood V into two lots, the Lot 1A, which is the area for his house, will be served off of Creekwood as it presently is. Lot 1B will be accessed off of Twin Springs Boulevard, which exists in the subdivision adjoining to the north. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Off of Spur 100. MR. VOELKEL: Off of Spur 100, correct. Did that c7 ear it up at all? COMMISSIONEk LETZ: I understand. I'm trying to figure our where it is. Is it right here? I can't put this plat and this plat -- figure out where -- 48 r 1 2 3 4 5 E 7 8 Q i0 11 12 13 14 15 16 ii 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 G ~. MR. VOELKEL: Okay. Here -- Twin Springs -- this area right here is same as this here, so this tract accesses off of Twin Springs Boulevard. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Twin Springs. MR. VOELKEL: And then it continues on going this way. COMMISSIONER LE'PZ: P,ighC here? MR. VOELKEL: That's correct. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That would have -- MR. VOELKEL: And I'm glad you noted that. We'll add that to the plat so that's clear. It's on this one here, but it's not real clear on this big one. COMMISSIONEP, LETZ: He's going to build a road off Twin Springs to acr_ess the rest of the lots? MR. VOELKEL: That's correct, yes, sir. Twin Springs Boulevard is a private road that was built to the County's standards. His intent is to maintain a private road built to County standards for the new road in his subdivision. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Now I understand. MR. JOHNSTODI: Since the entire subdivision is owned by one owner, I guess a public hearing wouldn't be required, right? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Creekwood V? MR. JOHNSTON: Right. 49 1 ~- 1 3 4 5 5 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 _^1 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right, buL that's not the case in -- MR. JOHNSTON: That's not the case in the other one. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- 'P win Springs. MR. JOHNSTON: We could do a partial abandonment without a public hearing. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, that's Lhe way it reads. If they're a non-developer owner, they don't need to do the public hearing. JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Does anyone have any questions or comments regarding the -- the revision of plat for Creekwood V, or the revision of -- preliminary revision of plat for Twin Springs Ranch II? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only question I have, you mentioned private roads. Are there any stipulations on Twin Springs Ranch on their private roads? Aren't those private roads as well, as I recall? MR. VOELKEL: That's correct, yes, sir. COMMISSIONER LETZ; L mean, there's nu problem between him using private roads to get to a new subdivision? MR. VOELKEL: As long as he -- those lots are in that subdivision, I think what the deed restrictions say so I 1 r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 L1 22 23 24 25 is that he's able to use that road for any future development. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that raises a question, Lee. That applies to Twin Springs as we know it today, right? But, in effect -- MR. VOELKEL: Correct. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- kie is expanding Twin Springs by addinc7 a piece of Creekwood V to it. What does that do to us? JUDGE HENNEKE: I think that creates another property. MR. JOHNSTON: It creates another -- Twin Springs I? 7 don't know. Isn't that what this is called? COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's dust something -- I don't know that we can answer it today -- something you're going to have to make sure that we're satisfied when it comes to that next step, that there is legal access to that subdivision, and that's going to take probably an attorney's opinion. JODGE HENNEKE: The roads in Twin Springs I are dedicated to the use of the people in Twin Springs I. MR. VOELKEL: Correct. JUDGE HENNEKE: It does not give anyone the right to establish a Twin Springs II and use the same roads. COMMISSIONER LETZ; Probably -- 51 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 G 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, we had that problem out in Riverbend Ranches. COMMISSlUNER GRIFFIN: Right, North Fork Riverbend Ranch. But, by agreement you can do that. I mean, if -- if the other subdivision owners agree to it, then you don't have a problem. COMM155IUNER WILLIAMS: But it has to come back and has to be replatted? JUUGE HENNEKE: No, it doesn't have to be replatted, but you'd have to -- I mean, the granting of an easement is specific to the people it's granted for, and one person cannot take that benefit and give it to other people. MR. VOELKEL: Would that prohibit anybody in Twin Springs from replatting their tract of land? JUDGE HENNEKE: No, not their tract, because they're within the original piece of land, and it -- the easement of the roads benefit everybody in that land, so they can replat. They can do it, 'cause it's given to that piece of land, but you can't extend the benefit to a separate piece of land unless you get the people in the first piece of land to go along with it. You need to -- that's a -- MR. VOELKEL: I hear what you're saying. We'll get that -- JUDGE HENNEKE: 'f hat will have to be 52 r ~- 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 clarified. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Prior to the final plat. JUDGE HENNEKE: Because it is a private -- private road on a -- on an easement for the specific benefit of people in Twin Springs I. MR. VOELKEL: Got you. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Another option -- and it would still require the same thing, but it might be a little more straightforward to some of the people -- is to revise Twin Springs and expand it, and when do you that, you would have to do legal notification, get everyone's -- or the required number of people to agree to it. I mean, there's two ways you can do it. Either expand the subdivision, which would require notification, or you can get permission to use the roads and have two subdivisions, either way. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right, either. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That would solve the -- MR. VOELKEL: Sure. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: But I don't think -- but we can approve the preliminary based on that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Preliminary for Creekwood or preliminary for both of them? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Both of them. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Both of them. 53 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~2 23 24 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Approve the preliminary for both of them, knowing that that's an issue that has to be addressed. MR. JOHNSTON: It actually has two accesses. MR. VOELKEL: That's correct. Can I make another comment? Or -- I have a question that's come up in our review from Headwaters and U.G.R.A. U.G.R.A. has sent a review that everything is in order. They have requested a change in the signature block on the final plat. I didn't know if that's something that we need to do, or -- we'd be preparing these plats for sometime in January; if that change has been adopted, or if we stay with what we -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two things on that. One, I would make sure that the signature block that's on there is what the Court has authorized up to now. I believe they're using language that we have not approved. But the second part of it is, we're -- or I'm in the process of talking with Stuart Barron, trying to find out what language U.G.R.A. wants. That will be coming to the Court, probably at our next meeting. So, the language may be changing, but for the time being, what's in the Subdivision Rules is the language, period. MR. VOELKEL: So, whatever's in the books up to now is what we use? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. And if -- yeah, 54 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 and I've told Stuart that. MR. VOELKEL: Okay. And, on the Headwaters issue, I was under the assumption that if we address the water availability in the Subdivision Regulations, that we would get approval from Headwaters. In their review, they have requested a certified letter, and he wants it from the surveyor, that there are no wells on the property. I told Cameron Cornett that that's something that I would not be able to do. As a surveyor, I really think that's an abuse of my certification and my seal; that's for boundary surveying, not for surveying wells. I suggested that the owner of the property be the one to do that, and we're still at a point where he hasn't accepted that. To get final plat approval, is that an issue that we'll have to get resolved? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- it's not -- in my opinion, it's not in our Kerr County Water Availability Requirements, explicitly. They don't have the authority to ask you to do it on our behalf. They may have it on some other authority. MR. VOELKEL: But can we get our plat approved without that? I mean, there also is -- and you're probably aware of -- in the regulations, there's a requirement to show existing wells. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 55 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1R 19 20 21 ^2 23 24 25 MR. VOELKEL: Which we do. We just don't have a certified letter that says there are no other wells on the property. And, quite frankly, on 500 acres, I don't know if anybody would want to make that kind of statement. We don't walk the entire property. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I mean -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Y'all have just set off some alarms. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: First you were talking about they had -- someone has put language on the plats that hasn't been authorized by the Court. Is that U.G.R.A.? COMMISSIONER LETZ: U.G.R.A.'s -- I'm hearing from Stuart -- he sent me some language that they're using, and I asked him where he got it. He said that's what they're currently using. That's not what the Subdivision Rules say you need, so you have to use what we say. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think that one's taken rare of. COMMISSIONER LETZ: If you want to change it, you need to submit it, and we will -- you know. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nevertheless, they stepped outside their authority. We need to get a big stick and hang it here in this room somewhere, and -- I mean that. I'm tired of that. And then this thing coming along with 56 1 2 3 4 5 E 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 lb 17 18 19 20 L1 22 23 24 ^5 Headwaters, that really angers me a little bit. MR. VOELKEL: It's frustratiny^ for me. I thought that, with the water availability requirementU, which are pretty -- pretty tough, that that's what we've been going by. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely. MR. VOELKEL: If we can accomplish that, that we have satisfied Headwaters. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. MR.. VOELKEL: And that might not be so. COMMISSIONER GRIFr'IN: I think the point here is that, for platting purposes, the book is the book. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeaki. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And that's all anyone needs to go by. If Headwaters has additional requirements -- and we're working another issue on the same kind of additional requirement by Headwaters. If they have an additional requirement, that's up to them to either come to the Court and say, "We would like for to you incorporate this in the Subdivision Rules," and we can consider that, or they can charge off on some other state law that they have and they can go do it on their own, but not for platting purposes. MR. VOELKEL: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER LETZ; 1 think it brings up the 1 1 2 3 4 5 E 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 21 22 23 24 25 57 point that i*_ may be appropriate for the Judge to write a letter to everyone that signs off on the plat and just remind them, these rules have now been in effect for two years; that there is no authority for anyone to change anything, period. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN; Or do additional requirements or anything. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The rules are the rules. DODGE HENNEKE: I will be happy to do that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: 'Cause I think that -- you know, I know that -- well, there's two instances now where there are some additional requirements being made. If they're not in the rules, they're not in the rules. If they need to modify them, they need to come to us and we'll consider modifying them. MR. VOELKEL: I just wanted to bring that to your attention. It's a little frustrating still working with Headwaters to resolve that. Hopefully we'll be able tc. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know what you have to resolve. You know, you bring it in here, and if it's -- if it meets our guidelines, we're going to approve it. Nevermind. JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's take up the agenda ,~-~ 1 2 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1i 18 19 20 21 2_ 23 24 25 58 items. Do I have a motion to approve -- and we can take them together -- the preliminary revision of plat for Creekwood V as well as the preliminary revision of plat for Twin Springs Ranch II, Precinct 2? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Since you've stated it, Judge, I'll move it. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the CouiL grant preliminary approval -- grant approval for the preliminary revision of plat for Creekwood v in Precinct. 2, and also grant approval of preliminary revision of plat for Twin Springs Ranch II in Precinct 2. Any further questions or comments? If not, all in favor raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. MR. VOELKEL: Thank you, sir. JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. At this time, the next item for consideration is Item Number /, which is the public hearing for revision of plat for Hartshorn County Sites. At this time, we will recess the Kerr County Commissioners Court meeting and open the public hearing. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 J9 'The regular Commissioners Court meetinu was closed at 10:00 a.m., and a public hearing was held in open court, as follows:) P U B L I C H E A R I N G JUDGE HENNEKE: Is there any member of the public who'd like to address the Court on the issue of Che revision of plat for Hartshorn County Sites, Precinct 1? Once again, is there any member of the public wYio would like to address the Court on the issue of the revision of plat for Hartshorn County sites in Precinct 1? (No response.) SUDGE HENNEKE: Third time's the charm. Is there anyone who'd like to address the Court on the issue of revision of plat for Hartshorn County Sites in Precinct 1? Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing and reconvene the Kerr County Commissioners Court meeting to take up Agenda Item Number 8, which is consider the approval of revision of plat for Hartshorn County Sites in Precinct 1. (The public hearing was concluded at 10:02 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was reopened.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISSIONEF. BALDWIN: I'll refer this ?o the County Engineer, Mr. Johnston. I think Charlie Digger -- is this his also? MR. JOHNSTON: This is his, yeah. I think it's all in order. Recommend approval. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2 ^3 ~q 15 60 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions yr comments? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move that we approve the revision of plat for Hartshorn County Sites, Volume 1, Page 68 and 69 in Precinct 1 in Kerr County. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Baldwin, second by Commissioner Griffin, that tYie Court - approve revision of plat for Hartshorn County Sites, subdivision recorded in Volume 1, Pages 68 to 69, located in Precinct 1 in Kerr County, Texas. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) DODGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) DODGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item is Item Number 9, consider the approval of final plat for James Avery Craftsman Subdivision, also in Precinct 1. Commissioner Baldwin. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: County Engineer. MR. JOHNSTON: Same issue. We've been through it and everything's ready for approval. JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions or comments? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I approve -- I move that we approve the final plat of James Avery Craftsman Subdivision, Precinct 1, in Kerr County, 'Texas. 61 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court approve the final plat for the James Avery Craftsman Subdivision 1or_ated in Precinct 1, Kerr County, Texas. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. MR. JOHNSTON: Just for the record, the mylars are in my office. They're still in my office, so I'll bring them by after lunch for signature. JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. All right, very good. Thank you, Charlie. Thank you, Keith. We appreciate it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Tommy. JUDGE HENNEKE: The next item for consideration is Item Number 10, consider name changes for County-maintained roads in accordance with 911 guidelines, and a speed limit sign. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I believe this is on here in case we were going to add anything. We already voted on it last time, so I don't think -- I'm not adding anything. Are you? 62 i 1 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: There is a -- Road and Bridge called me this morning. There is one in Precinct 4 that we can add to that hearing that will be held on the 14th, and that's to change Windcrest, one word. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: "Win" or "Wind"? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Windcrest, one word, to Yavo, Y-a-v-o. There's actually a Yavo there now. This is a continuation of that, you know, the way the road's been redone, so it makes -- the road would have one name instead of two. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good idea. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So we 'd add that to the list. DODGE HENNEKE: Is that a motion to add that? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's a motion. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Griffin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court add to the previously approved name changes, changing the name of current road Windcrest in Precinct 4 to Yavo, Y-a-v-o, a continuation of an existing road, such change to also be considered at the public hearing to be held on January 14, Year 2002, at 10 o'clock a.m., in the Commissioners Court in Kerr County, Texas. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 63 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item is Item Number 11, consider and discuss Resolution to participate in the 216th Judicial District Narcotics Task Force. Morning. MR. BARYON: Morning. How are you doing? JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone have any questions of Mr. Hill regarding the resolution? MR. BARYON: Mr. Barton. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's T. Clay Barton. JUDGE HENNEKE: Mr. Barton, sorry. Any questions or comments? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Has anything changed from last year, Clay, as far as the -- as far as this agreement is concerned? MR. BARYON: What do you mean, Buster? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, 1 mean, has -- has anybody's contributions -- I notice there was a -- they're listed back here. I'd like to point out, by the way, City of Kerrville, $46,000, Kerr County, $44,000, and Gillespie and Fredericksburg total up about 3U between the two of them. We're picking up the big part of this. Of course, we house y'all here and you do most of your work 64 I 1 1 2 3 4 5 E 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 here. Clay, forgive me for raising my voice. But, has any of those numbers changed from last year? MR. BAR'I'UN: I think -- I don't have a comparison from last year's numbers, Buster, but I think some of the numbers went up, some went down. It was based upon mostly the fringe benefit contributions, is what makes the adjustments on that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move we -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Before that, is this one of those that requires review by the County Attorney? JUDGE HENNEKE: No. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I don't think it does. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir, never has. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'm sorry. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's see. How's it written? I move that we approve the resolution to participate in 216th Judicial District Narcotics Task Force. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Baldwin, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court approve the resolution authorizing Kerr County to participate in the 216th Judicial District Narcotics Task Force, and authorize County Judge to sign the interagency agreement as well as the resolution. MR. BARYON: Can I be heard off the record? 65 ~-- 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 ~1 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. MR. BARYON: Can I be heard off the record? JUDGE HENNEKE: Not in this forum. MR. BARYON: I was going to respond to Buster's first question, as far as comparison to Gillespie County. JUDGE HENNEKE: That's fine, but we can't go off the record in -- MR. BARYON: Okay. JUDGE HENNEKE: -- a public meeting. So, if you want to talk to Commissioner Baldwin -- MR. BARYON: Kerr County had a total of 237 arrests on my task force last year, as compared to 17 in Gillespie County. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or comments? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or is there anything else we can do for you? JUDGE HENNEKE: If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Okay, very 66 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 --~ 19 15 16 17 18 19 2C 21 2G 23 24 ~5 good. Next item for consideration is Item Number 12, Commissioner Williams. We have been Yiere I think each time we address Court their suggestions for improvement or their suggestions for correcting things that they thought were problematic, We've done it each time, and as of the last time when we brought it about a month ago, there were still some concerns about -- particularly about how long how we fund for this particular initiative, Given that we don't know how many people might participate, and being that we set our budget year in October and some of these folks come up for eligibility during the course of the year by having done so, and we don't know the extent of that, we might find ourselves unable to fund what we had anticipated, or the demand might exceed our ability to fund. So, what I've done this time was to make some basic changes, particularly in the area oP the credits, and those changes are that the aggregate amount of credits will not exceed the amount included in this fiscal year budget, and any qualifying system that does not receive credit or appropriate tax credit in the following year's certification 1 2 3 4 5 F ~ 7 I S 9 10 1 11 ~ 12 ~ 13 ,--~ 14 15 16 17 1H 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,-- 25 67 will be eligible for consideration in subsequent years. And that's all preceded by saying that each fiscal year, Kerr County will budget the maximum amount tkiat it possibly can, if any, available for credits against Kerr County taxes. So, if someone -- if the demand exceeded our budgeting, then that person or persons who did so would be eligible for consideration on a future date. So, this gives uo the opportunity tc budget for it and avoid surprises by reason of too many people coming forward and doing it, and gives us a little bit of control in terms of what it is that we might be willing to do in terms of a tax credit of S1 for each $10 invested in rainwater harvest~nq, That formula hasn't changed. The limit is $1,000, which would equate to some installation; there's no credit for installation, because that becomes subjective. Somebody may say, "Well, I did it myself, and the value of my work" -- somebody like Raoul, who did it all himself -- "the value of my work is $25,000," as opposed to cahatever he could have had it done for by reason of some professional doing it. Sv, we take out the installation and limit the - - our incentive to equipment only, and we go from there. So, hopefully, I've addressed the questions that the Court has raised. I don't know, but we're willing to test it today and see whether we have 68 ,~^ 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1~^ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Z1 22 23 24 25 addressed those issues. I'd be happy to answer any questions my colleagues have. JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions? COMMISSIONER W7LLIAMS: Starting with Commissioner Letz. JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions or comments, Commissioner Letz? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess the only comment I hati~e is that it's -- it is an improvement; however, I don't see that this gets us any further than we've already done at our last motion, where we approved Ltiis as something the County encourages, because there's no funding in the budget to do it at this time that I know of. And I think that I like the part about having a maximum amount, but I think this should be done at budget time, and I think at that time we should also consider the other possible, I Guess, water conservation programs from a budget standpoint. And, so, I don't -- I don't see a need for this, 'cause that doesn't do anything more than what we already did at our last court order -- or last time we looked at this, when we approved the program. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Wouldn't it -- if we put this one into effect, we can add other things. This would not be effective until the next fiscal year, so -- I mean, it wouldn't be for this year, because we haven't h9 ,~~- 1 2 J 4 5 7 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ~l G2 23 24 25 budgeted anything for it. I think that's what Commissioner Williams was trying to address, is that we would have to do that in the next budget cycle. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct. COMMISSIONER GRIFr'IN: So we`re not committing anything for this year by doing this. We're just setting up the process that says we'll approach it in the next budget cycle. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a waste. I think there's no reason for it. I mean, it doesn't do anything, so it should be handled at the next budget time. My point of view, COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it will be handled at the next budget time. We can -- we can determine what, if any, amount we want to put in and the limit of that, and any future credits that might be forthcoming would be limited by that amount for consideration in that particular year. And if there are -- if that exceeds -- if the number exceeds the amount we budgeted, then they carry over to another fiscal year -- budget year. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What I -- the point I was making, Jonathan, is that if they do this now, this is on t_he books; we don't commit -- we're not committed to anything until the next budget year, so why not go ahead and take care of this one and start looking at some of the 70 1 3 4 5 b 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ~l 22 23 24 25 other -- the cedar eradication or whatever else, if we want to do that, and we can, like, line these things up. We don't make a commitment now to any of them until the budget process, but we don't have to address these again as part of the budget process, which just slows us down. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I understand that, but to me, it's putting the court order out there. It's just out there with -- I mean, we're going to have to vote on it next budget anyway, so I don't see any reason Lo do it now, 'cause it doesn't do anything. Just having a court order for the sake of having a court order. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: But it lays out the program so that people can consider that for next year. I mean, this tells you -- this gives you the rule that we're going to go by for this particular water conservation measure, and it may not get funded at all, but this at least tells the public what we -- what it would have to have to be able to consider it at a11. And -- and those -- those expenditures will take place this year, this fiscal year, fcr consideration in the next one. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think what it does -- in my opinion, what it does is it publicly puts Kerr County Commissioners Court -- some of our money where our conservation -- water conservation issues are. We put our money where our mouth is with regard to water conservation. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 I9 20 21 22 2J 24 zs ~l And I see no harm in that. JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or comments? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would move the adoption, Judge, of the rainwater Harvesting Tax Incentive Program, a proposed component of the Kerr County Water Conservation policy. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court adopt the Rainwater Harvesting Incentive Program as a component of the Kerr County Water Conservation policy. Any questions or comments? All in favor, raise your right hand. (Commissioners Williams and Griffin voted in favor of the motion.) JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed? (Commissioners Baldwin and Letz voted against the motion.) JUDGE HENNEKE: The vote's two to two. County Judge votes aye. Policy is adopted. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Congratulations, Bill. Y'ive times. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you very much. Appreciate it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Should we get law 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 72 enforcement in here for this rowdy crowd? Getting a little wild back there. (Discussion off the record.) JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, let's take our break, and we'll come back promptly at 10:35. (Recess taken from 10:20 p.m. to 10:35 p.m.) JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll reconvene this regular meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. The next item for consideration is Item Number 13, consider and discuss Commissioners Court certification of a list of organizations that use facilities of the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center for purposes of determining eligibility for discounted fees, as proposed in Option 2 of the Exhibition Center rate schedule. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We goofed. Let me give you a copy of a letter that came in -- I think Jamie put it in my box last week, one more letter. It sort of addresses the problem. I think we thought we dealt with it in its entirety in terms of who's eligible for what types of discounts, discounted fees that were proposed as Option 2 -- part of Option 2 when we set the new fees for the arena, and the first crack out of the box, we get a question directed at me -- well, it was two questions. Why do people have to come ask me for approval? And they don't, and I don't know 1 3 4 S 6 7 8 y 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 73 where that got started. They come to Commissioners Court if there's a problem. And the second is, who's going to make a determination as to who's eligible and who's ineligible? I think that's what this is all about, and I really think we need to have some discussion with the folks at the Exhibit Center who do the booking and who have to face these various questions Trom time to time. I thought we had settled it, but apparently we hadn't, so that's why it's back on. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think two things before we -- on the agenda item, I think we settled it partially, but I think we didn't really -- I think, as I recall, our last motion was it's a 501(c)(3) or they come to Court to get on our approved list, or actually "and" they have to come to the Court to get on our approved list. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what I thought, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We still need to do the list. We never have voted on a list. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Even so -- and, Glenn, you and Jamie better step up to the podium, because I think there are some questions that are really going to have to be addressed to you. I'm looking at the last page of your backup material that talks about nonprofit events that are booked from 2000 through 2002, and these are the ones that we know have been accorded -- or wish to be accorded a 1 ~-. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 74 discount because of a not-for-profit status. Which is it? Have been in the past, or wish to be, or both? MS. HENDERSON: Actually, both. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. MS. HENDERSON: I listed the events that have been nonprofit before, 'cause we never did a deduction rate, really. We normally did either none -- they either paid none or a11. And then these are the ones also, like the wild game dinner, that did not give me a call back before the 14th, and which y'all had decided was going to be the cutoff time for that, and they never r_alled me back, so now they're wanting to know if they're getting a deduction or they're getting -- paying nothing. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, this is what really precipitated -- the Mounted Peace Officer Wild Game Dinner is what really precipitated this discussion. That's the question that was directed to me, and so I guess the Court has to decide it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: To me, I mean, it would be simpler -- I mean, if they're a 501(c)(3), they -- you know, they should get it. 'Cause that way it will keep all of them from coming to the Court; they can make that decision out there. I was not even aware of it until just a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 y 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 L 1 22 23 29 ~5 75 to automatically get it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was going to say that's a different issue, but it's equivalency. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. The other -- and if they're not one of these -- you know, either approved by the State or approved by the I.R.S., I think the Court can still give that nonprofit status if we so choose, but if they qualify under those two, I don't see why we have to. You know, it seems like a lot of extra work for those to have to come to us when they can make that decision out there. But the other thing that we need to decide is the percent deduction, which we haven't discussed. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Jon, before you leave the nonprofit thing, though, now, does that -- does that include folks from outside our own area? Floresville, Texas, or New York City or -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We had set up two categories in that regards. I don't mean to jump in front of Jon, but if you look at Option 2 on the -- on the sheet -- the rate sheet that we adopted last time, we talked about local commercial, nonlocal commercial, nonprofit local and nonprofit out of our local and out of the county. So -- JUDGE HENNEKE: Not in Option 2. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's at the bottom of the page. And I assume, Glenn, that it was your intention 76 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that in the order in which they're rated, local commercial was entitled to zero deduction, right? MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nonlocal commercial, you're saying they could get a 25 percent deduction? JUDGE HENNEKE: That -- the deductions are for nonprofit; they're not for commercial. MR. HOLEKAMP; Yeah, nonprofit. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, there's only two categories that are not-for-profit; out-of-county or in. MR. HOLEKAMP: Nonprofit organizations may be i granted zero to 100 percent deduction in rates. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who's going to make a determination of which category it is? MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, the classifications whir_h the Kerr County Commissioners Court listed here is what it says on Option 2. JUDGE HENNEKE: I think we should have just a -- you know, policy that out-of-county nonprofit is entitled to a certain deduction, and in-county nonprofit is entitled to a different deduction. MR. HOLEKAMP: That's what we're asking for. JUDGE HENNEKE: That's, you know, based and headquartered in Kerr County. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do all of the ones on the 77 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 list that you provided in the backup, are they -- du they all have 501(c) status or state status? MR. HOLEKAMP: We've never asked them LPL it, so we're not sure at this point. Is that correct? (Ms. Henderson nodded.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Some of them may not even be incorporated; is that correct? MR. HOLEKAMP: That is correct. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As is the case with this one where the Secretary of State certified the corporation as a not-for-profit. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So if, historically, we want to keep these at low or no cost, the ones on the last page, then we do that by actual action today. We would just put them on the list, even though they may be unincorporated, and would -- in the future, those would be done -- if they're 501(c)(3)'s, they would be done automatically. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I quess that's what they're asking, so we don't have to be making a decision every time that somebody comes out there. COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the nonprofits, in the past, they haven't been charged anything? MR. HOLEKAMP: That's correct. COMMISSIONER LETZ: utility hookup or 78 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 anything? Absolutely nothing? MR. HOLEKAMP: No, nothing. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would almost say that -- I mean, I don't know that we should be 100 percent -- I mean, that we should be, I guess, subsidizing nonprofits out there. As I looked at the list, there's only one that you gave to me that pays no rates, and that's the Hill Country District Junior Livestock Show. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Fundraiser. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Fundraiser. And their use of it for the show. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Sure. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Those are zero. To me, the other ones that are local should get, maybe, a -- you know, pay 25 percent, you know, of the rate. And out-of-town ones, you know, 50 or 75 -- 50 percent, something like that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what i was thinking. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because I don't think it's right for us to pay 100 percent -- I mean, to cost the County money to hold anyone out there, other than the stock show. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would -- that would probably cover the cost of utilities and setup 79 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2t charges. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which other folks pay for; is that correct? Other folks pay a utility charge? MS. HENDERSON: Correct. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Setup charge? MR. HOLEKAMP: That is correct. JUDCE HENNEKE: The deduction we're talking about, does that relate to all of the charges? Or just the rental fee for the facility? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think all the charges. Because, I mean, the ones that use -- you know, something like the fair, if they're using -- they use the whole facility. They should be at a different basis than the garage sale, which I assume is using, you know, a very small section. I mean, I don't -- it should be whatever they're using, 'cause you pay 25 percent of the total of whatever they're using, or 50 percent. JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I -- I think that we ought to give them a break on the fee for the facility, but not the -- the electric hookup for the -- MR. HOLEKAMP: Electric hookup, or you could use it as a utility charge, electrical charge, whatever. I think that was discussed at one point, where those are fixed, whether you turn on electricity or not. Hnd I don't 80 1 ,-- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ._ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 know if it's a flat fee or if it's a -- I would think a flat fee would probably be the most -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS; Well, flat fee based on what? If one organization comes in and is eligible for a discount and we're talking about a utility charge, and this organization only uses the Exhibit Center, the flat fee for utilities in the Exhibit Center is going to be consideidLly different than the flat fee for the whole facility, right? MR. HOLEKAMP: Absolutely. But, see, here every one of them except for the Kerr County Fair are just an evening-type function or afternoon-type function. It's really not a -- a several-day operation. So, you could probably base it on a H-hour function. The only other one would be Law Enforcement Youth Awareness Day, which is a -- that's all day. But, really, as far as utilities are concerned, it's very minimal, because it's a -- they bring kids in to look at different booths, you know, in the arena, so there's really not -- and there's not much of a setup involved. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We11, I mean, and 7 think also -- I mean, Kerr County, like the Sheriff's Department -- I mean, we don't charge our own departments. That should also be exempt. I think they shouldn't have to pay a fee; that doesn't make sense. 25 ~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about the Kerr 81 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 County Fair? JODGE HENNEKE: Not a part of Kerr County. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's different. I mean, the Sheriff's Department, we fund. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand it's different, but golly, seems like to me the fair is kind of a -- kind of like the stock show, almost. Almost. Not quite, but almost. COMMISSIONER LETZ: 1 -- you ku~w, it depends on -- that's why it's before the Court, because it's -- MR. HOLEKAMP: It's very difficult. It's just like -- I'm going to use K.I.S.D. Teacher Appreciation Banquet. What that is, is a two-, three-hour thing in the evening, and the in the Exhibition Hall, the tables and chairs. I mean, they just needed a place where Lhey could put, what, 250 people? Yeah. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN; Uo we have -- do you have somebody there during the event? MR. HOLEKAMP: Normally we do, yes. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. So, there's a minimal cost, but -- MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah, it's very minimal. But, there again, it's where -- that's a real difficult one, when you start talking about those types of -- like, the Sheriff's Department Police Academy Banquet. 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ^3 24 25 82 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, in each of these cases, Glenn, do we do the setup and the take-down? MR. HOLEKAMP: Normally, yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. JUDGE HENNEKE: Sheriff? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Only thing I have to say -- of course, a lot of that setup and take-down, I think, is done by trustees, isn't it? But, the -- the main question I'm asking, such as the Hill Country Mounted Peace Officers Association, you know, the -- the one thing about that is the assistance and help that they give the county, as far as law enforcement during the entire year; you know, the fire situation, the manhunts we have. They bring out their own command post, set it up, you know, hook up electricity. I mean, there's a lot of things they do for us. Donated to the bulletproof vest program, things like that. I'd hate to -- to see us turn around then and start having to charge some of these that really do give back to the county in -- in ways and sums that, you know, we couldn't even really say, and the County turns around and is just going to start charging them for a one-night deal or something. I'd hate to see that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; And the K.I.S.D. Teacher Appreciation, those people handle our children, the future of our great county. 83 .^~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, we do -- the Mounted Peace Officers also do that Law Enforcement Awareness Day for the kids, which to me is a public service and a public deal to educate kids and let them see what -- you know, not just law enforcement; 911 is normally out there, KPUB's out there, you know, different ones at that Appreciation Day, let them qet educated. It's an educational deal. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You could say those things about almost everybody on this list. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I agree. That's why I said it's a hard deal to decide. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Looking at that list, excluding the fair, each one of these just uses the Exhibit Center, correct? MR. HOLEKAMP: No -- yeah. MS. HENDERSON: The meat goat producers gathering. MR. HOLEKAMP: But that's an Extension -- MS. HENDERSON: Yeah, that's an Extension. MR. HOLEKAMP: That shouldn't even really be on there, because that is an Extension-sponsored -- MS. HENDERSON: They either use the Exhibit Hall or the indoor arena, normally. They don't normally use the whole fairgrounds. 84 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lU 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. HOLEKAMP: The rest of those are -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: These are all locals? I mean -- MR. HOLEKAMP; Oh, yes. Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question, Jamie. Where did this one -- I want you to take the letter back. It was addressed to you guys. Where does Run and Rope Youth Association -- where does it fit in this? MS. HENDERSON: This came in the mail to me. A lady called me and said she wanted to not pay -- first of all was she wanted a deduction on the arena. She also wanted to work the stalls themselves, but they got to keep the money that they charged for the stalls, so basically they were charging for the stalls instead of us charging for them. And I asked her if she was a nonprofit organization; she said yes. So, she sent me this as proof, I'm guessing. And, I -- you know, this is why I'm here. I have no idea what I'm supposed to do from here, what deduction I'm supposed to give her. MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, she's asking -- she's asking for everything to be free, basically. And she is in error in here; the Kerrville Fair Association does not collect fees from the stalls and hookups. That's Kerr County. I mean, she just doesn't -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See -- excuse me. To 85 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 15 16 17 13 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 me, this organization right here, that -- which the Secretary of State says that they are a certain classification, to me, they should get a 5U percent reduction. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All fees, or rental fees? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Everything. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: All fees. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's easier for me that way, all fees. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It you keep going into the micro stuff, I mean, we're going to start -- you know, how many commodes did they use while they were here? You know, that kind of thing. (Discussion off the record.) COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we went to -- I mean, most of these on the list use the Exhibit Hall. And if they used it for -- I mean, if they were charging -- will you charge them -- you charge them a one-day usage, correct? Or will you charge them by the hour for an evening function? Like, say, there's a commercial -- say the K.I.S.D. Appreciation thing was a wedding, and they were going to use it for three hours. Are they charged for a day or for three hours? MS. HENDERSON: A day. 86 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: A day. Take 25 percent of $250 and -- $75? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: $62.50. COMMISSIONER LETZ: $62.50. To me, that is not an unreasonable fee. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. COMMISSIONER LETZ: For someone to use that. I don't think it's right -- every one of these organizations helps the community. But, also, I don't think that the County should be subsidizing specific charities. And I think, by charging a minimal fee that at least covers the time of -- some of the setup time and -- really not the setup time much; a lot of that is done by community service or by trustees, but we do have supervisors out there. Mike has to be there, primarily, or somebody. And we shouldn't be subsidizing at 100 percent. So, to me, 25 percent reduction for, you know, everyone on the list except the Hill Country stock show -- Hill Country District Junior Livestock Show should get zero, because that's under separate agreement. Everybody else that's local pays 25 percent of the rate, whatever that rate would be. And if you're out-of-town, pay 50 percent. And if you want to come back to the county under -- like, somebody in the fair wants to come to us and work out a separate deal, we'll entertain that at that time. That gets us moving forward, and if it 87 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 G1 22 23 24 25 doesn't work, we can always adjust it. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Is that a motion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's a motion. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second. COMMISSIONER LETZ: If you can repeat it, -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. I'll second it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- Judge. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court adopt a policy that nonprofit organizations, being defined as organizations that have a 501(c)(3) exemption from the Internal Revenue Service, or nonprofit corporation status from the State of Texas, headquartered and based in Kerr County, receive a 75 percent reduction in the rates, and that a nonprofit organization, defined the same way, based and headquartered outside of Kerr County receive a 50 percent reduction in rates, with the exception of the Kerr County Junior District Livestock Show Association, which is covered by a separate agreement. Any questions or comments? MR. HULEKAMP: All right. The letter from the -- the Run and Rope thing that y'all received, based on what y'all are .saying, that will be approximately a 50 percent deduct in fees; is that correct? JUDGE HENNEKE: Correct. 88 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. HOLEKAMP: All right. Now, instead of $10 a stall, it's $5 a stall? Or were you talking about the buildings and the setup? Are you talking about everything? JUDGE HENNEKE: The motion was everything. MR. HOLEKAMP: Everything, okay. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Technical question that perhaps the way the order is now -- would now be worded is, it's 501(c)(3)'s, and I think maybe we want to change that to a 501(c), because there are (c)(6)'s which would also apply, but they're all nonprofit and/or charitable organizations. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Change the type. DODGE HENNEKE: Should be a 501(c) And, also, everyone needs to understand, by definition, a political entity has the same status as a nonprofit organization. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's right. JUDGE HENNEKE: So Kerr County, K.I.S.D., they all fall under the nonprofit grouping. Clear enough to move forward? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, those are the folks that have to administer it. Is that clear enough for you guys? MR. HOLEKAMP: We'll give it a try. JUDGE HENNEKE: I think the understanding is, 89 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 2~ if someone wants to -- you know, to ask for zero fee or something like that, they have to come to the Court. MS. HENDERSON: Okay. JUDGE HENNEKE: Y'all cannot administer that. If the fair wants to come in and say, "Well, we don't think we should pay anything because of all these things," tell them, "We don't disagree with you. You just need to put it on the agenda and take it to the Commissioners Court." MS. HENDERSON: All right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If they're happy, bring them to Court. If they're angry, send them to Bill Williams. MR. HOLEKAMP: One entity indicated to Jamie and us that since this is -- out-of-county is a different charge than in-county -- MS. HENDERSON: They were going to find someone within the county to do the rental so they could get that rate. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's a little -- JUDGE HENNEKE: The motion is "based and headquartered." MR. HOLEKAMP: Can I get a copy of that order? So -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, absolutely not. 90 1 1 1 I r 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 L 1 22 23 24 25 MR. HOLEKAMP: Because we'll have to mail it to these people. COMMISSIONEK W1LLlAMS: That would be a subversion of the court order. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. Based and headquartered. It's where they are based and headquartered. MR. HOLEKAMY: I understood that, because it needs to -- JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other discussion? Any other questions or comments? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only other comment on the "based and headquartered," not like -- it might be an organization like Little League, which never has used that facility, but we loan them a lot of stuff. Anyway, different story. They're not based -- technically, that's based nationally, but there's a local organization. JUDGE HENNEKE: They have a charter. They have a local charter. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, but it's based under national charter. I mean, the designation is held in Williamsport, not held in Kerr County. JUDGE HENNEKE: Yeah, but the Kerrville Little League is -- charter is based in Kerr County. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. JUDGE HENNEKE: Just like a lot of the 1 2 3 4 5 E 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 91 national organizations, you have to have a local organization, like Y.M.C.A. All right. Ready to vote? All in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (NO response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item for consideration is to consider and discuss holding a workshop on county technology utilization in January 200 and set a date and time for such workshop. Commissioner Griffin. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. It's no secret that the age of high technology growth is upon us in county government, as it is in every other sector of our economic and cultural community, and -- and the purpose, that I think this is a -- would be a great time for us to sit back and review, in a workshop environment, where the County stands in -- in actually using and -- and exploiting the technology that's available to us today. Not so much as to try to figure out exactly what we're going to do next year or next month, but to at least give us all the background and the information that we can amongst ourselves, particularly within the county, on what do we have already that we're not using? What computer capability do we have? What -- what is there out there that may be available from the State? 92 1 2 3 9 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1~ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 And maybe there's nothing, but in the area of law enforcement or county clerks or district clerks or whatever, what's out there that we might be able to exploit with the equipment that we've got today, with a little bit of reprogramming, perhaps, or just using what's already available to us? That would be the real thrust. We could also take a look downstream and see where are we headed. Where are we headed in e-government, for example? And I think all of us that get the County magazine and some of those publications know that the State has a lot of initiatives going, that counties have done quite a bit in this area; some more, some less than us, and we've just stuck our foot into it with a -- certainly, with the web site. But, where can that lead us? And this would be a -- in a workshop environment. Needs to be something where you don't have to be a computer expert. But the County Clerk, for example, through your organization, Jannett, would -- you may have attended some seminars or some of your training sessions where they've talked about things that the clerks are doing that can either be tied to a computer system, or perhaps it's a phone system; not necessarily computerized here. But -- but the point is, is that we would look in this workshop for all of the department heads and elected officials to sort of tell us where your area of 93 1 I .-~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1? 1a 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 expertise is headed, statewide and in the counties, and what do you hear and what would be something good to have? We may hear more about scanners and printer-readers and all those sort of things that we hear about from time to time; at budget time, usually. And -- and what are those things that could be of advantage to us? And, that would be the thrust of this. That would be the purpose of this. But not to necessarily lay out expenditure of funds, but at least, if there's something that we think we ought to be thinking about three years down the road, two years down the road, ten years down the road, let's get it on the table and talk about it. That's the real purpose of this thing. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner, I just returned from a TAC board meeting at the end of last week, and TAC is putting together a pretty good-size program, and I just -- lack of knowledge; I'm not even going to attempt to get into it, but I do have the paperwork with me that I'll provide you. And they are in the process of doing some pilot programs in some counties as we speak, and it's pretty interesting things going on. And the gentleman that's heading that up, his name is Stan Reid. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Oh, yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So I'm sure that Stan would be happy to come over here -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That'd be great. I 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2n 21 22 23 24 25 99 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm positive Stan would be happy ro come over here and do a short presentation. JUDGE HENNEKE: Call his mama; she'd tell him to come over. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I'm saying. We can get Stan over here. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's an excellent idea. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They're doing all kinds of pretty neat stuff. JUDGE HENNEKE: Do you have a date in mind, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. I'll make the motion that we set a workshop on the county technology utilization on January the 28th at 1:30 p.m. That's the afternoon of our second court session in January. JUDGE HENNEKE: Do we have a second? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Griffin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court set a workshop on county technology utilization for January 28, Year 2002, at 1:30 p.m., here in the Kerr County Courthouse. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 1 2 3 4 5 F 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 L S 95 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item for consideration is to consider and discuss the approval of a slate of Commissioners for the Kerr County Rural Fire District Number 1. Commissioner Griffin. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. In the backup page there that you have is a copy of a letter from Elaine Casteel, who's the president of the Fire District. This is -- for those that may not know it off the top of their head, this is the Ingram fire district. They have just had elections of their slate of -- of the Board of Commissioners. They would be retaining Donald C. Oehler and Bruce M. Bond, and also, electing -- they elected Kenneth w. Wood, who is a resident of Bear Paw Subdivision and has a good background for this sort of thing. We are required to approve their slate, and I would make a motion that we approve the slate as presented with those three individuals. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve the slate of Commissioners for the Kerr County Rural Fire District Number 1, as presented by letter dated November 28, Year 2001, from Elaine Casteel, President of 96 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ]0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2~ z3 24 25 the Kerr County Rural r'ire District Number 1. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) DODGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item for consideration is consider and discuss the procedure for compiling or summarizing the Commissioners Court evaluations of department heads and County personnel appointed by the Commissioners Court, discussing those evaluations with the person in question, and recommending any personnel actions arising from the evaluations. A bit of a reminder; last January, I believe it was, we adopted a form and a policy of evaluating the non-elected department heads and other personnel appointed by the Commissioners Court on an annual basis. I have sent out to each of the Commissioners those evaluation forms, and ask you to have them back to me by the end of this month. The question now becomes, after we receive those back, how we're going to utilize them effectively. And this is not a decision for me; this is a decision for us, so I throw it open for discussion at this time. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, the way -- best way, probably, to do it is to just compile all of the results on one sheet, and I'm indifferent whether we 97 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 average them or -- or let each individual -- you know, with a name or not a name, but anyway, give that to the employees, and then if they chose to want to meet with us, they meet with the entire court. If they -- if they just throw it away cr read it or whatever they want to do with it, that's fine, but I think we should, you know, provide that to them, and then it's up to them if they want to come to the r_ourt. But I don't think they should meet -- if they want to meet with just one Commissioner or the Judge one-on-one, that's fine, but if they want anything official, it needs to be before the full court. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That could be in executive session or open session, at their choice. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct. JUDGE HENNEKE: That's fine. I don't have a problem with that. The -- the next step -- or another step is, what if there's any employment action that we collectively, or one of us individually, feels needs to be made as a result of evaluations? COMMISSIONER LETZ: It comes to the court as an executive -- 1 mean -- JUDGE HENNEKE: But, I mean, who initiates that? Does any Commissioner or myself put on the agenda to consider and discuss whatever? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I think any 98 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 ~~ 23 24 25 Commissioner can do it, or Judge can do it. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Sure. JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm a little bit different from Jon's theory on how to deal with it. I like that -- I really hadn't thought about that, but I've always been of the mind that -- that each individual would come in -- if we don't have each individual come in, we miss an opportunity to encourage people. And I think, you know, it's -- an evaluation is a tool, not only to demerit, but to encourage, and I kind of like that. You know, it's really the only opportunity that we can sit here and say, "You're doinq an exemplary job. We salute you, and keep up the good work, and don't ask for any more money" kind of thing. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You talking about appearance before the court in a personal executive session? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If they want. I mean, it could be in an open session. JUDGE HENNEKE: I think Buster's saying just to schedule everybody in. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I'm saying, is to schedule everyone. JUDGE HENNEKE: And, you know, we can -- the individual in question has the ability to make it open I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 11 18 19 20 21 22 ~3 24 25 99 session if they desire. I believe they start out in executive session. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. JUDGE HENNEKE: And the individual in question has the ability to request that it be in closed session. But I think what Commissioner Baldwin suggests, instead of putting it in the -- that the employee can request -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: They don't have to do it, JUDGE HENNEKE: Just go ahead and schedule them, and provide the feedback to the employee at that time. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have a problem with doing it either way. The reason I thought -- I mean, my recommended way was that I think it's intimidating to a lot of the employees to have to meet, I mean, five-on-one. And, you know, it's a difficult -- and I think it's awkward for a lot of them. And I think -- you know, I just don't see any reason to require them. I wouldn't mind maybe scheduling a day, you know, and have a time set up for each one, but requiring them to come sit before us, I just -- to me, it's a little bit -- can be overbearing. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, how about doing it -- if they don't want to do it then, they just don't have to. They just let us know that they're not going to be at 1 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ly 20 21 22 23 24 25 100 their scheduled time. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would tend to agree with Jonathan in terms of just a review, but if there is some action required as a result of the review, that's a whole different issue. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. COMMISSIUNER GRlr'r'1N: The Judge's question, though -- I think it was a good one -- is that that would have to be initiated by somebody on the Court. It always would have to be initiated by somebody on the Court. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think it would be a good idea, probably, to set it up on one afternoon or one morning, whatever, one time, and have it set up for everyone to come at one time. So, kind of like a -- a time definite, you know, a schedule, so it doesn't linger on through February. We're going to do it on, say, January 15th, and set up a time and, you know, encourage them to come, 'cause I think it's good, but I just -- you know, if they don't want to come, I don't think we should require them. Doesn't make that much difference. I don't have a strong feeling one way or another if it's required or their option, but I think it should be a -- an afternoon, or we, you know, have a time to do it. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It would be -- I want to make sure I got this right. It would be in executive 101 1 L 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 session far us, a closed meeting, buL the employee would have the option of requesting that it be in an open meeting. I think that's what it means. JUDGE HENNEKE: Yeah, that's my understanding of the requirement. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One exception to what you said, Jon, was whether or not an employee opts to appear before whomever -- we haven't decided that yet -- for the review portion, right'? If we know in advance that the - that the results of the review very well could ]end itself to some other type of action, that employee ought to be required to come, because you don't want to say anything about him later -- say, "Oh, yeah, you didn't show up such-and-such day, but tomorrow we're going to have a court session, personnel executive, and the axe is coming down. So that's -- I mean, there has to be some basis for them knowing full well what it's all about. That's my only point. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's a good point. And with that, maybe we'd better require them all. You'd hate to say -- kind of like if you get, "You must appear," you know you're in trouble. JUDGE HENNEKE: I think that we're getting to where -- you know, that -- well, what I'm hearing is the Court would like to schedule an afternoon where al] the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 102 evaluated employees have a defined time to come and participate in their review. I think it is a participatory thing, like Commissioner Baldwin points out. You want -- it's not us looking down; it's trying to engage in how we can improve the whole operation. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- reminder; I think we should probably meet at the table, as opposed to up here. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. How about a spotlight? (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And one chair? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: With us totally in the dark. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, then, I guess the part we haven't discussed is how to compile the data. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And what's sent to the emp]oyee -- given to the employee. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who's going to do it? JUDGE HENNEKE: I think the employee has a right to have a copy of the evaluation. 103 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Of ear_h? JUDGE HENNEKE: Of each. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Each evaluation. JUDGE HENNEKE: What I would suggest is that we have -- just have to make a packet for each employee. "Here are your five evaluations, here's your time, and your review will be conducted at a certain day." And, we probably ought to set those up, really, in a workshop, so it's just a review. Any action that has to be Laken then would have to be placed on an agenda. Or would you rather have it set up so that -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's in a workshop? JUDGE HENNEKE: Just the review. So, we have two things. We want to review their evaluations, and the second issue is, we want to -- that came up about what if there's any action that needs to be taken. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Give me an example of what kind of action might be taken. JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's just say we have an employee, and the employee has been picked up for a serious violation of the law. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we need to terminate them. JUDGE HENNEKE: We need to terminate them, exactly. Do we want the ability to take the personnel 104 1 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~2 23 24 ~5 action at the same time we do the review? Or do we want to separate the review from the personnel action? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, you're saying the executive -- the workshop's in executive session? JUDGE HENNEKE: Workshops will be in executive session unless the employee wants it to be in open session, which they have the right to do. And then, if, as a result of the reviews and/or the evaluations, there's an action that has to be taken, a termination, a suspension, do we want to have the ability to do that at that time? Or do we want to separate those in time so that we have to put it on the agenda for court -- COMMISSIONER GRIE'FIN: I think you ought to separate them, and I'll tell you why. Because it's more due I process that way. If the review is for employee performance, it has nothing directly to do with a felony pickup or something. But you want -- you would have the -- you have the ability at any time to address a personnel action in executive session on our agenda, and I think that would be the proper time to put any personnel actions on, would be in a formal executive session, with the employee, of course, having the right to -- to demand an open session. But I think this review is separate from tYiat. In my mind it is, anyway, because the other aspect of it could happen any time, not just as a part of this review. It could 105 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 happen any time. If somebody committed a felony and we had to terminate them, and -- I mean, not committed, but was judged guilty. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with that. We ought to separate them. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me give you an example of what I had been through before. Not picking on Franklin; I'm just using his position as an example. We went through that one time with the unit road system head, and the law requires you -- I mean, there's public hearings -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All kind of little things. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Gue process. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that you have to -- that they require you to do. And, so, I don'L -- that's the only one I know about. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's the reason I think it would be better to have -- any personnel action should be separately addressed. We would get legal assistance and all that. This review is just -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 1 agree. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- to talk about employee performance, and mostly in the positive side, 106 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 obviously. But -- and areas that could be improved and so on. So, I just think we ought to separate the two and not try to do it as part of the workshop if there is an employee action that comes out of this. COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: I agree. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Do we think we need a court order to that effect? I don't necessarily think we do. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think we do, so there's no doubt in anybody's mind what we talked about and what we -- what the game plan is. JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll let you frame the motion. JUDGE HENNEKE: Is that a motion? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. I'll move what you frame, if I like what I hear. (Laughter.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Do we have a tentative second? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right, we have a tentative second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court 107 1 L 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~2 23 24 25 adopt the procedure that the evaluations of the non-elected department heads or other individuals appointed or employed directly by the Commissioners Court will be conducted in a workshop in the month of January, following receipt of all the evaluations, and that the employee will be provided, prior to the evaluation -- prior to the review, with a copy of each evaluation, and that any personnel action that's required as a result of the evaluations will be -- will not be taken at that workshop, but will be scheduled for a separate Commissioners Court meeting. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sounds good. JUDGE HENNEKE: Is that close enough? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Close enough. JUDGE HENNEKE: I want everybody to be comfortable with this. Okay. All in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. The next item for consideration is consider and discuss retention of outside counsel to complete the lease negotiation for the radio tower leases in conjunction with the Sheriff's Department radio project, and utilize the excess funds in the County Attorney's Assistant Salaries line item to pay 108 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2q 25 for such outside counsel. Sheriff, you and I are on the hook for this. I'm going to defer to you. SHERIFF' HlExHOLGEx: My copy says you are. JUDGE HENNEKE: It says down there, name of person addressing the Court, Judge and Sheriff. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Mine just says, parentheses, Judge. All this is, is on the tower leases, the L.C.R.A. leases and the Five Star Cellular tower leases, we're still trying to get those done. Dailey Wells has said that they're ready. They need to apply for all the licenses, the F.C.C. licenses, to be able to get us licensed for each tower. Problem is, we don't have any signed contracts yet with those -- with L.C.R.A. and with Five Star. I have discussed this with the County Judge and David Motley on numerous occasions. David has a lot of irons in the fire that are slowing him up, I think, drastically. He's short one person in the County Attorney's office, one assistant attorney. He seems to be having problems hiring one. But this really needs to get moving now, because it is a very important project to get going. And, on the Five Star one, there's going to most likely be some things we have to do as the County, and -- maintenance division, on constructing the fence and on the road, but it's just something -- I hate to let it ust sit, and that's where we've been. I'd like to see those contracts signed as soon 109 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 as possible so that we can get this on down the road. COMMISSIONEP, BALDWIN: Rusty, if I remember, there are some things with the tower people, the tower -- the folks that are to erect the towers, themselves, that has to be done in January. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In our little timetable, there was something that had to be done in January, and that all hinges on -- they can't come out -- they can't leave the office until we get this done. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Everything hinges on these leases being signed -- these contracts being signed. I don't remember what the -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But the first step, there was a January date. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't remember exactly. I'd have to go look back -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm telling you there is. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- at a timetable of what we were doing. But, you know, everything -- they can't start doing any work until we get the F.C.C. licenses. You know, we can't start building the fence or doing the roads until -- to get all that stuff ready and organized until we get these contracts signed, 'cause we don't know what the 110 1 3 4 5 6 8 G 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 final details on the contracts are going to be. They can't start bringing up any equipment; nothing can be done until these contracts are done. And it's been since the day the -- the project was awarded to Dailey Wells that we've, you know, been sitting on this. I'd like, in some ways -- and I know David's looked at it some. I know he was advised of the court meeting today so that he could be here. And I know he is short-handed; I'm not trying to downplay David. It's just that this is a time-sensitive deal. This is a -- a very, very important project, to get our radio system up and going correctly. We originally were hoping to have it online totally by February -- end of February or March. And, you know, we sat here two months, I think, and haven't even gotten the leases done, so I think we're running behind. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, it's a fair assumption the whole project has slipped by 60, 90, or 120 days; is that correct? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Slipped by every day we don't get those leases signed. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I'm not opposed to getting outside counsel at all. I -- but I think it needs to be paid out of the Professional Services; that's what the line is for. Just my only -- my only hangup. And I'm not so hung up on that that I won't eat lunch with you 111 .-. 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~2 23 24 25 guys. JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, we've got to get it going. We've had the draft of the L.C.R.A. lease for -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: See, there's actually four contract. DODGE HENNEKE: -- 30 days or 60 days. SHERIFF HIEHHOLZER: One for each tower. The contract with Dailey Wells has already been signed on what they have to du and getting the equipment. It's just that the individuals -- the four lease contracts -- I know L.C.R.A. had sent two rough drafts up to the Judge that the Judge has looked at, I've looked at, Motley looked at. I don't know what Motley's opinion actually was, other than I think he sent them back saying he doesn't see anything wrong with them. But the Five Star contracts had to be drawn up. I heard that there is a rough draft of them, but I haven't scen anything. Nothing's come across. I don't have any feedback from the County Attorney. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, would you use Mr. Pollard? Or -- DODGE HENNEKE: I have spoken to Tom, and Tom -- Mr. Pollard has said that he would make himself available. COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: Great. Fantastic. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The question is, from 112 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 what line item do we pay for it? I'm kind of like Commissioner Baldwin; I'm not opposed to it at all. I want to get it moving immediately. The question is, who pays? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, Professional Services -- Ltiat's what that line is there for, in my opinion. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN COMMISSIONER BALDWIN it for. Yeah. What I've always used COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Do I hear a motion? That sounds pretty good to me. We want to get it moving. Let's see. I'll make the motion that we -- that we engage an outside counsel to complete the lease negotiations with the -- on the tower leases in conjunction with the Sheriff's Department radio project, and the funds be taken out of Professional Services. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court authorize retention of outside counsel to complete the lease negotiations for radio tower leases in conjunction with the Sheriff's Department radio project, and to take the money for such services from the Professional Services line item in the Commissioners Court budget. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question. 113 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 DODGE HENNEKE; Yes? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Has the basic contract with Wells be reviewed? Or are we starting from that? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, the contract with Wells -- Dailey Wells has been signed. It's in place. It's just these tower leases. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, it's all the subsequent agreements, then, that have to be looked at. Okay, thank you. DODGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Okay. At this time, we'll stand in recess until 1:30. (Discussion off the record.) (Recess from 11:25 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.) DODGE HENNEKE: It's 1:30 in the afternoon on Monday, December 10, Year 2001. We'll call to order this regular session of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. The item for discussion at this time is to consider and discuss County i,otification procedures to road name changes and 911. 114 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 5 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 10 20 L I 22 23 24 25 Commissioner Letz, this is your tar baby. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I like that term. I put this oii the agenda mainly because at our last meeting, we, I think by consensus -- I don't recall us ever voting -- changed vur procedures basically by having Road and Bridge quit putting up road signs for a while. We discussed that; we never v~Led on it. Anyway, I was talking to Truby right after the meeting, and it dawned on me that we never voted on that, but we kind of decided to do it, but no one was -- I just happened to think to tell Truby at the time. So, anyway, I thought it would be good to put it on the agenda to kind of work -- to make sure this really is more of a -- well, it is entirely a County discussion today from the standpoint of what the County's doing on notification and how we're, you know, working. Paula Rector had some concerns about road name changes and how she got into the mix. In the backup, there's a list of everyone that Jannett notifies and when she does that, and it just seems to me that we need to make sure that -- that we have this procedure down pat and we're not -- don't have any more confusion, as we've had in certain areas of the -- Commissioner 1's area. And I'd like to introduce two people that came in from the post office in Comfort that I invited, just to have a representative. Ray Acevedo is the 115 1 L 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Postmaster in Comfort, and Anthony Bohnert, longtime friend, in delivery. Anyway, so that's kind of where we are. There's some backup in the -- that I provided, two things. One is the Road and Bridge procedures, what Truby is currently doing, and along with the -- you know, when she's -- or when Road and Bridge is currently going out and putting up signs. And then the second item is the distribution list that Jannett uses to -- as soon as we have a court order approved. And, mainly, I just want to make sure that we're all on the same page, and that was the intent on this. From our last meeting, it sounds like, at a minimum, the 45-day period is on hold for the time being; that we're not putting up any more road signs until everything is worked out between all name changes and the Poat Office. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's sort of where we were headed last time. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if that -- you know, and I think that probably necessitates changing something -- some of thts stuff. JODGE HENNEKE: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And just kind of, you know, open it up for any comments. Dave's here, I know, from 911, and I know -- Paula, I don't know what you -- you 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ^5 116 know, what you need and when you need it, but, you know, we just need to make sure that, from a voting standpoint, that is all taken care of. I think a lot of it from the current mailouts is taken care of. The Post Office will recognize name changes, you know, for a 12-month period, and you're going to use the current old mailing addresses for everybody you currently have on file, and they should all be delivered. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That was going to be my first question. That still is the rule, is it not? MR. ACEVEDO: Right. There's -- you work through the Post Office. The way I've received it at other offices I've worked at is, we receive a notification from the County showing the old address, the new address, and what we've done -- or what I did is help the -- the 911 people in making sure that the names matched up with the properties and stuff, because a lot of times the property owner isn't exactly the person that's staying there at the -- at that location. Now, a question I would have is -- is, we're guided by the San Antonio district office, and they pretty much tell us how it's going to work or what -- when things are going to go ahead and come out, as far as the names and when we're supposed to implement and stuff like that. Now, has there been -- I guess what I'm asking is, has Cindy -- Cindy Guerrero, the one that works in the 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 117 district office, has she -- is she part of the whole coordination and stuff? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. Yes. MR. ACEVEDO: She is, okay. So, really, I would be working through her, or I would be calling her to find out exactly what is going to happen, stuff like that, in the changeover. You know, so I just assume that y'all work through her and tell her that we're going to do this at this time, and we're goinq to be sending out the changes and stuff. Or is that not the way it works? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, I think that's the way it started to work after we talked about it last time, or at least that's the way it was working in our minds. And that confirms what you found out, Buster, that -- that we need to get that information into San Antonio, into Cindy Guerrero's hands, and that, really, the trigger should be when we notify her of the date of implementation, then she will notify the Post Office. MR. ACEVEDO: And that's the way it's always worked in the past. I just wanted to confirm that, if that's what's happening, or if that's -- I spoke with Bob Hanson earlier, and pretty much just to see if he was going to be here or not, and he said he was not going to make it, but that -- that, as far as he was concerned, that he -- or really both of us, we have to go through the procedures set 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 118 up by our district office. And if there's anything different from that, well, then we can't go -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Sure. COMMISSIONER LETZ: In the past, I don't know -- you know, I rely on T. or Jannett, whoever -- who has been notifying the Post Office up to now? (Mr. Sandlin raised his hand.) COMMISSIONER LETZ: 911 has. And from -- and we're changing that to be a joint letter coming out by the County? Or -- I mean, and I'm asking the question. MR. BALLARD: May I offer a suggestion? To keep it clean, I think perhaps we should offer it to the County, with recommendations, and then when the County feels they have enough for the massive change, then turn it over to Carol Guerrero so that she can notify the Post Office. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: In other words, we would aggregate the approved changes. MR. BALLARD: Yes. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Until we feel that there is enough to -- it fills the right postal blocks and all that sort of thing. When we have that ready to go, we would send that to San Antonio. She, in turn, would send it to the appropriate Post Office. Is that what we're saying? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's what -- I'm going to ask a question about that. 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 119 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Rhetorical question. MR. BALLARD: Still in the dialogue, but it's a hard starter. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is the protocol for notifying the Post Office? You're talking about notification of the Post Office. What does that mean? Do we go directly to San Antonio, or do we go through the Postmaster -- local Postmaster? MR. ACEVEDO: What I'm going to do as soon as I get back to the office, I'm going to go ahead and speak with Cindy Guerrero and let her tell me where she's at with -- with this -- with this project here, and have her go ahead and start working on implementing the -- the changeover, because she really has to be involved. What she does -- and I believe what they do -- we have our edit books that have the address, the rural route number and the person's name and whatever else is on your edit book, as far as the prefixes and stuff like that on the -- where they're going to be converted. You know, that you might need in order to do the -- the crossover with your person's data that you're goinq to have, and the new street number which you're going to need to send out. But, when I receive the stuff, that's on there. So, she's going to have to help you -- or send you this information. We can't release the edit books, but she can, and she'll send you the 1 2 3 4 5 F 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 120 information. From there, you would have at least a lot more data that you can use to start cross-putting everything and get that on the way. When that is done, then you would work with Cindy to go ahead and say, look, this is the cross book, send it to -- send to it Cindy, and then Cindy sends us this information and we scheme out everything with the new numbers, new streets and everything, and we get our edit books to reflect all the changes. That goes in, and then everything's done. When a letter comes in with the new address, when it's already schemed with the correct number and everythinq, we can go ahead and get the mail delivered. That's the way I've seen it work in the past. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Mm-hmm. MR. ACEVEDO: I'm not an expert, though. COMMISSIONER LETZ: T.? MR. SANDLIN: Where I left it a while ago, when we had the -- the check and edits, the galley routes, whatever, for the west end, as we go through there and determine who's at this postal route, then we fill that in. Earlier, a couple years ago, when we were starting to do this, Ms. Guerrero did deliver that to -- she was going to deliver the check -- what we call the check and edit sheets to us, you know, your confidential format. We fill it in, and then she asked us to give it to the local Postmaster so 1<<^1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1^ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 they could look at it and then get it to her. She has now said that they think it works better if I fill those out and give them directly to her, and that was -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's essentially the same thing you said. MR. SANDLIN: That was a recent -- that's a recent development. It's not a big change; it just changes who I send it to. MR. BALLARD: The question is, should we go through the County or deal directly with Cindy? JUDGE HENNEKE: We've already approved -- we've already approved the name change. MR. BALLARD: Yeah. JUDGE HENNEKE: The question is, at what time -- I guess the question is, do we send to it Cindy? If we send it to Cindy, that means that you all have to hold the information and give it to us when you have a Lural -- a route done. Because my understanding is that Ms. Guerrero wants to work on completed routes. She doesn't want to work on census blocks or subdivisions; she wants to work on completed -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: At least a route. DODGE HENNEKE: At least a route, yes. MR. BALLARD: A route at a time. DODGE HENNEKE: So you can hold it and give 122 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 it to us and we can send it tc her, or when you have a route done, you can send it to her. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that gets me back to my question. If you -- who's going to know what the route is if not the Postmaster? We don't know what a route is. JUDGE HENNEKE: They get -- that comes in the edit information. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That comes in the edit. MR. ACEVEDO: That's going to be this one out of Comfort. If someone were to -- say the County were to ask me for any kind of information, as far as to help y'all, I would do it. But, really, I would say it should go through the district, because she's -- that's why we have a coordinator -- 911 coordinator out of the district office, so we won't have to be doing 911 work besides what we're doing. So, I would say Cindy is the person to go through. COMMISSIONER LETZ: T.? MR. SANDLIN: On the east end of the county, say Comfort, and on the west end, Mountain Home and Hunt, the routes are 39 and 41; they're fairly simple. As we get closer here to town, to Kerrville, the routes -- we can't see the route from that check and edit sheet. I mean, these guys can look at it and know what it is, but it doesn't mean 123 1 .- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 anything necessarily to me. Like the Ingram Postmaster, for his, where some of them criss-cross, like -- it starts out of Ingram, gets almost to the high school there at Ingram, and then that's a different route. That comes out of a On the far west end and east end, it's different, and I just want to clarify that. The other thing we run into is the postal route sometimes, especially if they're working -- and we think we got it solved. Out by Mo Ranch, one of those subdivisions, there's, like, 14 -- I think there's 14 mailboxes out front, but there's 60-something properties in there, and a lot of those people get their mail either in Kerrville or at the Hunt Post Office. And just following along the routes in question, just working that route, and I'm saying strictly follow the routing process, we skip -- you see where we can have the possibility of skipping those folks. I mean, we're not intentionally skipping them, but we try to take -- and I talked this over with Cindy. Let's say we go into Guadalupe Ranch Estates subdivision. That may only be 8 or 10 rural address, but we've got that block done, and then we will feed that to her. What Cindy says was they don't want to start the actual delivery or the conversion until each one of those routes, as they have 124 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~2 23 24 25 defined them, approaches 90 percent completion. But she said if we need to, we can send it in a chunk, as long as we send in -- fill in that form and send it to -- send it t~ her. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Good. If we send in the forms, I wonder if she could hold them, because she knows what a block is, you know. And I'm wondering if we could just ask her to hold them until she's ready to spring on them. MR. SANDLIN: That's what I'm saying. She can look at it. When she sees whatever the demarcation point is -- JUDGE HENNEKE: Then she -- MR. SANDLIN: -- she can notify us back and say, "We're firing to send the letters out," and then I would -- T. Sandlin's suggestion -- I would say that would be the time. Because, intermixed with all that, we're having to do a separate database for the phone company, which may or may not, depending on the number of phones, number of occupants, necessarily match that. So, we would hold the phone database, what I would suggest, have that prepared for the Post Office, and when the Post Office says, "Okay, we're ready to implement Route 77," and we know by that time where that is, then at that point I would suggest that the ]etters go out and any road sign changes go up. 125 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Then we would dump the data to the telephone company, so it all happens at the same time. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does Cindy -- oL will she -- does she notify you, T., or does she notify the Postmasters? I mean, who -- I mean, it seems that -- I mean, I think it's a good idea to send it to her and almost let her held them until she gets enough to do. I mean, I don't -- I don`t know that it's reasonable to wait until you get a finished postal route, because 1 don't know ~kiet you'd ever get finished. As soon as you finish, a new subdivision may come in. But, whenever she gets a bunch of her -- to me, it's reasonable for her to update what's done, anyway. MR. SANDLIN: As I understand, she will have that ready, and then she will notify the Postmaster of that proper area. And then -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: At that notification, the County needs to be notified. We need to know when Cindy has done what she needs to do so then we can trigger all the other notifications. JUDGE HENNEKE: The road signs, everything else. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Road signs. JUDGE HENNEKE: One of the trigger points -- the trigger point should be where the Post Office signs off on the new 911 address. 126 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 ft 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 MR. BALLAR.ll: Since they're unique to anything we usually work with, they should be the trigger. JUDGE HENNEKE: And the question becomes, how do we find out about when she signs off? Do we find out about it when she sends you the list? MR. ACEVEDO: When she sends out the letter -- see, we receive just a bulk number of letters to notify our customers that the 911 number has changed from this -- or from the old address to the new address, and we deliver those to the customer. They have one year to change their -- their address, and your mail will be delivered with both addresses during that one year. That's it. So, when they send us that letter, they -- the cover letter has the -- the notification that is going to go to implementation at this date, and the "cc's" on the bottom usually have all the -- the County and any one else that's involved that -- on the 911 changeover. So, I would say that she would notify you when that happens automatically. She should, I would think. I'm pretty sure I've seen it. MR. BALLARD: If she does it now, she will, because she's a very cooperative person. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, but up -- up to now, maybe she's notifying the County, but I don't know where it's going in the county, because we're not getting it. Of course, I haven't had any changes in my precinct 127 1 2 3 4 5 h 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~~ 23 24 25 yet. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I don't think she has been doing that; I don't think that was the procedure, was for her to notify the County. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think she was notifying the Postmasters when she got the right kind of information, when she had -- had her edit and data -- check and data -- check and edit sheets. When she had those right, she was notifying the Post Offices that were concerned, but she wasn't notifying us, necessarily, because we never had asked to be notified. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which brings into question the 45 days. It says 45 days after approval -- I assume that's our own approval -- Road and Bridqe installs signs. How do we know 45 days is enough time for her to do her job? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We're talking about doing away with that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That doesn't work any more. MR. BALLARD: That was a good idea at the time. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We thought that everybody would be protected within 45 days and signed off 128 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 until then, but that -- that part of the procedure, we would say, no longer applies. We would wait until she notifies us and the Postmasters, and that would trigger the letters that would go out to the property owner, or to the resident. MR. SANDLIN: Now, in that process, would it be that we take our package, this area we completed, we -- we get it to y'all, and we hold onto the phone -- the part that affects the phone company. We would get it to y'all and to the Court, whomever is designated, and also, as we get those parts put in, we send it to Cindy, and then Cindy could say, "Okay, we're ready to convert Route 66. we're going to send the letters out." Notify y'all. We could have the package to y'all with that information in it, to where y'all could send a joint letter out over, say, the Judge's and the Postmaster's -- appropriate Postmaster's signature. Is that -- JUDGE HENNEKE: That would be a good way to do it, because that -- I mean, that's the way it's done in Gillespie County, as evidenced by the letter that Commissioner Baldwin brought in last time we talked about this. If we work out a system where a joint letter goes out, I think that would -- I mean, that gets us all in the loop. MR. BALLARD: With all due respect, Judge, if -- if Cindy is going to notify all the customers -- 129 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 postal customers that the address is changed, and then we're going to follow up with a common letter, couldn't we find a way to just -- JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, see, I don't know -- MR. BALLARD: -- have one notification'? JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm talking about one letter. One common letter is what I'm talking about, which is what I think is done over in Gillespie County. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, what I mean -- but you can sign the letter that Cindy sends out. JUDGE HENNEKE: Sure. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We just create a form letter. Is that -- I mean, is that possible that we work on getting a letter like Gillespie -- MR. ACEVEDO: I would really like to talk to Cindy. I spoke with her one time, I think, when you had that meeting where they were putting the bridge in in Comfort out there. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. MR. ACEVEDO: And I went and called her to let her know that -- that the conversion was going to be coming at some time in the near future. And you had someone that was working on that very hard to get it done. And I would like her to get a little bit more involved with the -- with Kerr County and in getting the -- everything worked out 130 .~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and stuff. I assume that she never did -- or she never -- has she ever directly been involved with this changeover? COMMISSIONER LETZ: She talked with Commissioner Baldwin. That's the only-- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've had a phone conversation with her. MR. ACEVEDO: A phone conversation. MR. BALLARD: T. Sandlin has talked to Cindy -- talks to Cindy on a regular basis. That's where we get our -- the check and edit sheets from. JUDGE HENNEKE: I think we've got the gleanings of a solution here, but I'd like to suggest that a member of the Court actually have a physical sit-down with Ms. Guerrero, and make it very clear -- get very clear as to when, you know, exactly what's going to happen. I think everybody's willing to cooperate and everybody's got the best interests of those citizens and the consumer in mind, and -- but we've got a little -- you talk to her and then you talk to me and I talk to her and she talks to you, and she talks to him and he talks to her. And I think, from my point of view -- from the Court's point of view, it would be the best solution if we could have one individual go make a pilgrimage to San Antonio and sit down and say -- MR. BALLARD: Write it down. JUDGE HENNEKE: Write it down. Get it all 131 r. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R 9 ZO 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~4 25 written down and then bring it back, and we could all understand it, and then all the citizens will understand it. I mean, I think -- I think everybody is -- everybody has a good idea of how the system will work, but I'd sure like to have it put together where everybody has an opportunity at one time to look at a piece of paper and say, "Yeah, that's hcw it works." COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I agree with you; that needs to be done, but I've been thinking a little bit backwards of that. Maybe invite her up here, which she said she would be happy to do, and sit down with all oL us. Paula, 911, and -- JUDGE HENNEKE: If she's willing to come up here, I mean, that's a marvelous solution. You know, we could have -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be easier for her to come up here, and let's sit down with everybody. JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I`d suggest -- I'd rather not have everybody. I'd suggest we have one or two members of the Court, Paula -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I mean. Someone from each entity. JUDGE HENNEKE: -- T., a member of the 911 Board, any of the local Postmasters who feel they need to be involved. And -- 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2] 22 23 24 25 132 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Invite Lliem all, yeah. MR. ACEVEDO: Cindy's very cooperative. She would be more than happy ro come down here acid work with us here, and she's a focal point anyway on this whole thing. She would have all the answers and get it all done, and get it all done at one time. JUDGE HENNEKE: I think that's a very good idea. MR. SANDLIN: She's had experience with other counties, how they`ve had to work their stuff out, too. Would you like me to contact her and see if I can arrive at a common date? Sometime in -- I don't want this to go on forever. Sometime in January? JUDGE HENNEKE: I think sometime in December. MR. SANDLIN: Okay, I'll try. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tomorrow? JUDGE HENNEKE: Who on the Court wants to be involved? COMMISSIONER WILL7AMS: Commissioner Baldwin does. JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISS7ONER BALDWIN: Mr. Baldwin does. COMMISS7ONER GRIFFIN: L'll be glad to. DODGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Griffin. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You know, the point I 1 ~-. 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 133 is, is that we can -- with Cindy here, then we caii sort of work it backwards. You know, here's what the Post Office does to trigger things, and in a postal sense, and Lhen we can sort of work it back, just as we've ta]ked through generally here, and see where the process really starts, and then who's the best person to do that. So, I think we could work that out. MR. SANDLIN: I have another question related to this. We're not stopping our address -- I mean, we're not stopping gathering the information and putting the numbers on the squares and all that, but I have stopped sending out any of our red, white, and blue notices. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. MR. SANDLIN: We typically don't do that between -- right during holiday season anyway, 'cause that's too traumatic. But, instructions from the Court would be to hold off on -- not sending more out till we get ttie coordination issue? I mean, we're not going to stop doing our work; we're just not going to mail out any more notices any more. Is that acceptable? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We have a question from the side of the bench over here. JUDGE HENNEKE: Far right has a question. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's exactly right. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not too long ago, .-. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~2 23 24 25 134 Commissioner Baldwin and I met with a member of your staff regarding the format of the information that is provided to the Postal Service for change -- old, new, and made some suggestions as to how that format might be changed to cause a better understanding of the data. Has that been done? MR. SANDLIN: The word I got from -- that was -- that particular form was done just for Kerrville Post Office. I even brought some in here. Post Office wants us to work strictly off the check and edit sheets, as they provide them. MR. SALLARD: We've been doing that. JUDGE HENNEKE: But the issue that was here was that the information we were providing Lhe Post Office was not in a format that they needed in order to -- to recognize the changes. COMMISSIGNER WILLIAMS: That's why the Commissioner and I went out there. JUDGE HENNEKE: The question was, are we giving it to them in the format they want now? MR. SANDLIN: We have been giving it to them in both formats. We were giving it in the check and edit, and he also asked for a letter per address showing like they did it; we went the extra yard and did that for them. They said no, just st~r_k with the check and edit sheets. We said okay, we'll do that. 135 ~-. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 L~ 29 2_ JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. MR. ACEVEDO: By going through the district and working with the -- with Cindy, that would just totally take the local thing out of the -- I don't even -- you know, as far as working with the local Postmaster, really, it should be working with the district office where everything is -- they tell us what we need to do. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. She's the decision maker. She sits down at the computeL and makes the changes. I mean, I never have understood why we're going through an intermediary. And she requested -- you know, send this stuff straight to me, and that's the way you do it. MR. ACEVEDO: Only time you get involved with -- as far as the local is when Cindy calls us. Uhe's doing the mapping, and she's -- but we have to have our A.M.S. maps and stuff, address maps, and we tell her more or less, you know, where it's located, as far as on the map, and then they redo all the maps and stuff with the new streets names and everything. They put the street names on there. But, really, other than that, everythiny just comes from the district telling us when they have -- when the implementation date and everything is, and the 1uca1 -- as far as working with the County, I don't -- I don't see it, unless they call us to help them with something, we're not 136 ,.. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 G 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ,~ 23 24 25 involved. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Sounds like that's the way -- we're going to the right point in their chain of command. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, under our current procedures, we're going to stop at (f), which is "County Clerk to notify list of people of name change," and (i), "45 days after approval Road and Bridge installs signs." We're stopping both of those things, 'cause no more notifications are going out to anybody. And looking at the list, those are the only two -- JUDGE HENNEKE: I think we need to change -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And our procedures -- our internal procedures, we're going to stop sending out specific notices. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. MR. BALLARD: Period. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that's y'all's. JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I think under 1, we need to change (b) and -- and second (c) as well. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, yeah. Under -- yeah. Both -- yeah, (b) and (c) under 1, Private Roads, and (h) and (i) under County Maintained -- (f) and (i). JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: My other -- my other 137 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ~3 24 25 question is -- I haven't been able to get this question answered in four years. On private roads, when we do the address changes, if you get -- if there's an address on a private road once we get all the name changes, get rid of the rural route names -- or rural -- instead of saying Route 1, Box 71, okay, say -- do we put -- do the private -- does the Post Office recognize private road names? MR. ACEVEDO: Well, I'm not -- you're asking me, right? COMMISSIONER LETZ: MR. BOHNERT: We r not -- as a delivery matter, yes, we'll have a side road that comes COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well -- =cognize them, but they're there's occasions where in on our delivery route. And there's a box on the -- MR. BOHNERT: The box is actually put out on the delivery route, but we do not deliver down private road lanes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But you recognize -- MR. BOHNERT: It's recognized as an address, correct. MR. SANDLIN: On the mailbox, it would say 1133 Purple Cow Road. Even though Purple Cow is a private road, that's what would show on the address, the face of the address box. 138 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~~ L t 23 24 25 MR. BOHNERT: Right. MR. ACEVEDO: All in the line of travel anyway, so whatever name is -- is determined to be the street name, whether it's private or it's county road, it's going to be delivered as soon as we scheme it and get it on there. So -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Is that the answer you were looking for? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, I was looking for one; I just wanted an answer. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. MR. BOHNERT: It's recognized. DODGE HENNEKE: Jonathan, do you think we need a motion to dispense with those four items? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, I think that -- I'll make a motion that, until further notice, we instruct the County Clerk to stop notifying people of road name changes, both for public and private roads, and we instruct Road and Bridge to stop installing road signs on both public and private roads until further notice. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Ontil we get the new procedure -- or the more streamlined procedure down here. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that motion. 139 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: T. wants to say something. JUDGE HENNEKE: Just a second. Motion by Commissioner Letz, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that until further notice, the Court instructs the County Clerk to cease notifying people of private or public road name changes, and that the Road and Bridge Department cease installing signs of new road names. Okay. T.? MR. SANDLIN: And would we also receive direction from the Court to not send out any address notifications until we get that point cleared up? DODGE HENNEKE: Yes. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: As part of that, I think we should. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, but I don't know why we have -- we're telling you to do that, anyway. JUDGE HENNEKE: As part of the guidelines. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is this in the guidelines, that you notify them? MR. SANDLIN: Yes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MR. SANDLIN: As you appointed us as your -- MR. BALLARD: We're your agent. JUDGE HENNEKE: Is that an amendment to the motion? 140 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. JODGE HENNEKE: Anthony, you had a question or a comment? MR. BOHNERT: I had a question. Although we're just on the eastern portion of the county, and -- but with the phenomenal growth in the county, we continue to have new streets and stuff come online. What percentage of the change has taken place? I mean, do we have 90 percent done? Do we have -- MR. SANDLIN: You're talking about in the eastern part of the county? MR. BOHNERT: Yes. MR. SANDLIN: I can't give you an exact percentage on that, because we're working from west to east. We just redid -- MR. BOHNERT: Bear Creek? MR. SANDLIN: Out off of -- the subdivision off that -- actually getting off 187. Is that -- Falling Waters. We had to completely go through and redo that, and I think y'all got the notifir_ation on that. And we're -- as we're coming around, we're skipping over the northern part of 78028, and in the next few weeks we'll be in that area, which is County Precinct 3, coming down, like, Cypress Creek and heading out towards Center Point and Comfort. MR. ACEVEDO: When you did the changeover 191 1 2 3 9 5 H 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 in -- what you said -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Falling Waters. MR. ACEVEDO: -- Falling Waters, did you work with the people in -- in Kendall, too? Because they had their own numbers, right? MR. SANDLIN: What we did was, they initially numbered that, and we extended the numbering off them so there wasn't any breaks, and apparently there's some that got jumbled out there. MR. ACEVEDO: There was some overlapping on the numbering between what Kendall was saying and what Kerr was saying. MR. SANDLIN: I think we got that all -- 1 think we got that all lined up. MR. BOHNERT: Okay. JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone have any questions or comments regarding the motion that's before the Court? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Anything else under this agenda item? Jonathan? COMMISSIONER LETZ: My only comment is, everybody -- everybody needs to keep on going. We're just 142 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 y 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 not notifyinq. MR. SANDLIN: We'll keep on doing our work. JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or comments? MR. BALLARD: Who do we send it to? Did we resolve that? Our product. Who do you want us to send it t o'? JUDGE HENNEKE: I think they're going to work that out with Cindy. MR. BALLARD: Okay. JUUGE HENNEKE: Ms. Guerrero. Anything elseY MR. BALLARD: Cindy at one time wanted us to go through the Post Office to her. Now it seems -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Now she doesn't. MR. BALLARD: Now it seems better to go directly to her JUDGE HENNEKE: When we have this sit-down day after tomorrow, we'll get all this worked out. MR. BALLARD: What time, Judge? / a.m.? JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm there. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why so late? JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else? If not, we are adjourned. Thank you all. (Commissioners Court adjourned at 2:05 p.m.) 1 L 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 143 STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF KERR The above and foregoing is a true and complete transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 14th day of December, 2001. JANNETT PIE PER, Kerr County Clerk BY: __ _~__~~_ Kathy B ik, Deputy County Clerk Certified Shorthand Reporter ORDER NU. 27339 CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS On this the 1@th day of December ~@@1, came to be considered by the Court var•io~_rs Commissioners' precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are: 1@-General for' $116,123.53; 14-Fire protection for $15,228.34; 15-Road R Bridge fur $54,669.88; 19-p~_iblic Library for $31,43L34; 27-Juvenile Grogram-State Aid F~_ind for $~@1.5@; 5Qi-Indigent Health Care for• $18,959.75; 7@-per•ment Improvement for• $2,854.@@; 83-State Funded-216th Dist Rttor•ney for• $1,3@1.41; 86-State Funded 216th Dist probation for• $94@. 89; 87-State Funded-Community Corrections for• 4,854.28; TOTAL CASH REG!UIRED FOR ALL FUNDS IS : $246,564.92 Upon motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Paldwin, the Co~_ir•t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-@-@, the bills as recommended and presented by the Auditor^. ORDER IVO, c7340 RUD~ET AMENDMENT YOUTf-I EXHIBITION CENTER On this the 10th day of December X001, ~_ipon motion made by Cortimissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner 6r•iffin, the Coy-ir-t unanimously appr^oved by a vote of 4-0-0, to tr•ansfer• 81000.00 from Line Item No. 10--66G--50 Major Repair to Line Item No, 10-6E,6-4E1 Lease Copier Expense as requested. ORDER NU.. :7;?,41 I_RTE PILL FIRST INSURGNCE AGENCY Un this the lath day of December c~01, upon motion made by Commissioner Let z, seconded 6y Commissioner C,r•iffin, the Co~ar•t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to pay the following late bill to First Ins~.ir•ance Rgency in the amo~_int of Si35.0~ from Line Item NO. 10-JJG"'c~6 ~~ Year• Official Pond Renewal for•: Const F'CT #c'-Ayala, Joel, Jr. (i/i/~c-1/i/05) the County Ruditor and Co~_mty 1"reas~_mer are hereby a~_ithori~ed to write a hand check in the amount of 1~5.~~ made payable to First Insurance Rgency. ORDER N0, ~'734c AGGROVE TO ACCLGT I'M1INU'1'ES AND WAIVE READIIV[i On this the 10th day of December ~0~1, ~_ipon motion made by Commissioner- Williams, seconded by Commissioner- Baldwin the Cour^t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to waive reading and 'approve the min~_ite5 of 1=r^iday, November- S, c0~1-'3:~~ a. m. Y.err Co~_inty Commissioners' Co~_irt Special Session; T~_:esday, November 13, 20tZ~1-9:~'b a. m. Kerr Lounty Commissioners' Court Reg~.ilar Session, Monday, November c6, c0~1-6:30 p. m. Ker^r^ County Commissioners' Cour^t Sper_ial Session. ORDER N0. c7343 .-, RF~1='ROVE RND RCCEPT MONTHLY REPORTS Dn this the 10th day of December^ c001, i.ipon motion made by Commissioner Lets, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, the Co~.ir't unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to accept the monthly r•epor-ts pr^esented and direct that they be filed with the County Clerk for- f~at~ar^e a~.tdit. W. R. Hier•hol~er•, Sheriff Civil Report-November c001 Dawn Wr^ i gh't -.7. G. # November-c001 ORDER N0. X7344 CAFETERIA FLAN INSURRNCE OPTIONS On this the lath day of December c~ibi, ~_ipon motion made by Commissioner 6rif~Fin, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Co~_ir•t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to adopt the proposed Iier•r• Co~_inty health insurance plan allowing for• thr-ee options for the calender year- cQ~Q~c, to be effective January 1, Year^ c~02. ORDER NO. '7345 SHEPPARD I~EES PROJECT RIGHT-OF-WAY ACG!UISITION On this the 10th day of Decein6er• X001, ~_~pon motion made by Commissioner Paldwin, seconded 6y Commissioner Let z, the Co~_!rt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to refer- with the Coi_inty Attorney on 'the iss~_ie of acq~_iisition of the right-of-way from Mr. Rick McCray and request that the Co~_mty Attorney provide us with his response within two weeks of today's date. ORDER N0. c7346 ~- CONSIDER ABANDONMENT OF GULCH RANCH ROAD AND SET F'URL_IC HERRING On this the 10th day of December c0~2J1, ~_ipan motion made by Commissioner- Griffin, seconded by Commissioner t_etz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to set public hearing at 10:30 a. m. on Sanuary 14th, Year cN~c, at the Kerr• County Courtho~.ise regar^ding intention of the Kerr Co~.inty Commissioners Cour-t to abandon, vacate, and discontinue G~_~lch Ranch Road, former-ly a portion of Sauth 1='ar•k Road, as pr°ovided by 'the Texas Tr•anspor-tatian Code. ORDER ND. c7;;41 r PRELIMINARY REVISION OF PLATS CREEKWDDD V AND 'TWIN SPRINGS RANCH II On this the 10th day of December X001, ~_ipan motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, the Court unanimously appr^oved by a vote of 4-0-0, preliminary revision of plat fot• Cr^eekwood V in precinct ~, and also yr^ant approval of preliminary revision of plat for• Twin Springs Ranch II in F'r-ecinct 2. ORDER NU. X7348 REVISION OF pLRT FOR FiRRTSHORN COUNTY SITES On this the 10th day of December cQ~01, ~_rpon motion made by Commissioner Paldwin, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, the Co~_rr•t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, revision of plat for Hartshorn Co~_rnty Sites, s~_rbdivision recorded in Volume 1, pages E8 to 6'3, located in precinct 1 in Kerr County, Texas. ORDER M0. ~7~49 ~" FTNAL PLRT FOR ,7RMES AVERY CRAFTSMRN On this the l~+th day of December C~pil, ~_ipon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Co~_ir^t unanimously appr^oved by a vote of 4-~-0, the final plat for the James Rvery Craftsman Subdivision located in precinct 1, Kerr Co~_mty, Texas. ORDER N0. X7.:50 ^ NAME CHANGE5 FOR COUNTY MAINTAINED ROADS IN ACCORDANCE WITH 9-1-1 AND 5F'EED LIMIT SIGN On this the 10th day of December ~~G1, upon motion made by Commissioner Griffin, seconded 6y Commissioner Let z, the Co~.ir•t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-~D, to add the previously approved name changes, changing the name of current road Windcrest in precinct 4 to Yavo, a continuation of an existing road, such change tv also be considered at the p~_iblic hearing to be held on January 14, Year c~0c, at iG o'clock a. m., in the Commissioners Court in Kerr Co~_inty, Texas. ORllER N0. X7351 c16TH JUDICIAL DIS1'RICI" NRRCOTICS TRSK. FORCE On this the 10th day of Decem6er•'EO~Ziir upon motion made by Commissioner Raldwinr seconded by Commissioner- 6r•ifFinr the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-fir the resolution authorizing FCerr County to participate in the c1Eth Judicial District Narcotics 1"ask Forcer and a~athor•ize County Judge to sign the inter'•agency agreement as well as the resolution. ~- ORDER NO. c7:~Sc RRINWRTER HARVESTING TAX INCENTIVE GROGf2RM On this the i~th day of December cQ~01, upon motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, the Co~ar-t adopted 6y a vote of 3-'c'-0, with Commissioner Paldwin and Commissioner Letz voting against, the Rainwater- Harvesting Incentive F'r-o gram as a component of the f:err- Co~_rnty Water- Conner-vation policy. ORDER NO. c735?, ^ FiILL COUNTRY YOUTH EXHIRII"ION CENTER ELIGIBILITY FOR DISCOUNTED FEES On this the 1@th day of December•'~@@1, ~_ipon motion made by Commissioner Let z, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Co~_irt ~.inanimously approved 6y a vote of 4-@-@, to adopt a policy that nonprofit organizations, being defined as or-ganizations that have a ~@1(c)(3) exemption from the Internal Revenue Ser-vice, or nonpr-ofit cor•por•ation status from the State of Texas, headquar•ter•ed and based in Ker•r• County, receive a 7~ percent reduction in the rates, and that a nonprofit organization, defined the same way, based and headq~aar•ter•ed outside of tCer•r• Co~_inty receive a ~@ percent reduction in rates, with the exception of the Kerr' County Junior- District Livestock Show Association, which is covered by a separate agreement. ORDER N0. G7354 ^ COUN"fY TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION WORI:SHOG On this the 10th day of Decem6er• c001, i"tpon motion made by Commissioner Griffin, seconded by Gommissioner• 1_et~, the Co~.~r•t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to set a workshop on county technology ~"itilization for January ^c E3, Year- c00~, at 1:30 p. m., here in the f:err County Courthouse. ORDER NU. 2755 ^ RPPRUVRL" OF SLRTE OF GUNNISSIUNERS FUR KERB COUNTY RURAL_ FIRE DISTRIC"f NU.1 On this the 1@th day of December' X001, upon motion made by Commissioner Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, 'the Co~.ir-t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, the slate of Commissioners for' the Kerr Co~.inty R~.iral Fire District N~_imber• 1, as presented by letters dated November- c8, c:001, from Elaine Casteel, President of the Ker'r• County Rural Fir^e District Number 1. ORDER NO, c"7356 COMMISSIONERS COURT EVALUATIDNS OF DEPART"MEN"f HEADS AND COUN"fY PERSONNEL RF'pOIN"fED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT On this the 10th day of December ~'OQiI, upon motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner- Griffin, the Co~.rrt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to adapt the pr•oced~ar•e that the eval~.tations of the non-elected department heads or other individ~.~als appointed or• employed directly by the Commissioners Cn~_rr•t will be cnnd~_icted in a workshop in the month of Jan~_rary, following receipt of all prior to the eval~_ration, and that any personnel action that's req~_rir•ed as a res~.tlt of the eval~_rations will not be taken at the workshop, but will be scheduled for- a separate Commissioners Co~_irt meeting, ORDER NO. c7357 -- SHERIFF'S DEF~RRTMENT RRDIO F~ROJEC'T On this the iQ~th day of December 2001, upon motion made by Commissioner Griffin, seconded by Commissioner^ Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to a~_rthor•ize retention of outside counsel to complete the lease negotiations for• r^adio tower^ leases in conjunction with the Sheriff's Depar^tinent t^adio pt^oject, and to take the money for^ such services ft•om the pr^ofessional Ser^vice line item in the Commissioner^s Court 6~_rdget. ORDER N0. c7.:.58 ~^ COUNTY NOTIFICRTIDN PROCEDURES TO RDRll NRME GHRNGE5 RND ail On this the 10th day of December c001, upon motion made by Commissioner Let z, seconded 6y Commissioner Baldwin, the Co~_ir'~t; unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, that until fur•ther• notice, the Co~_n•t instructs the Ca~_inty Clerk to cease notifying people of pr^ivate or• public road name changes, and that the Road and bridge Department cease installing signs of new road names.