,~~~,
~.
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
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Special Session
Monday, March 25, 2002
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
PRESENT: FREDERICK L. HENNEKE, Kerr County Judge
H.A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
LARRY GRIFFIN, Commissioner Pct. 4
2
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
I N D E X
March 25, 2002
PAGE
--- Commissioners Comments 4
a7~~9
1.1 Pay Bills ryy'~ ~7~/72 a7.~73 14
1.2 Budget Amendments aj7y70, 2 / 15
1.3 Late Bills a7yq~. ,2775 19
1.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports ~ 7gC 7lj 22
2.1	Presentation by Karl Beuchler, CASI, on Easter	
		23~~SC ~
	Weekend events at Flat Rock Park	
2.2	Consider financial help for rental of HCYEC for	
	Center Point HS Class of 2003 Project Graduation	26~~~
2.3	Consider changing road in Pier 5 Subdivision from	
	public to private, set public hearing for same	34 ~~'~
2.9	Award 5-year lease of wheel loader, allow County	
	Judge to sign contract for same, issue hand check	
463~`~~$
	for first payment	
2.5	Recommendation for awarding bid on 6,500 tons of	
~T`{~
	base material for Sheppard Rees project	482
6
2	Consider recommendations, award annual bids on	
.		492
1`~~~
	Road and Bridge materials	-
2.7	Authorize Sheriff's Department to enter Interlocal	
	C wpeiation Contract with DPS to purchase supplies	
		a~4$I
	for Restricted DNA Database sample collection	52
2.8	Consider authorizing expenditure for new forms	
	required by Senate Bi11 7	552-146
2.14	Consider renewal v£ Kerr County Teen Curfew	62114$3
2.9	Set date and time for joint workshop with UGRA	
	Board to discuss Comprehensive Colonia Infra-	
	structure Study and Plan	66~'1~$`}
2.10	Consider County appointments to Kerrville/Kerr	
	County Joint Airport Advisory Board	71~yiS5
2.11	Revision to Subdivision Rules & Regulations,	
	Water Availability Requirements, and routing	
	slips; set public hearing for same	75a'1`ib~
2.12	Consider referring Court Order 27390 to County	
	Attorney for implementation	97a."IV`6~
2.13	Consider amending Court Order 27080 to delete	
	reference to adoption of Kerr County OSSF Program	
`~~
	Procedures for Real Estate Transfers	98~7
2.15	Consider executing & delivering to City of Ingram	
	a quitclaim deed covering the old Ingram Bridge	100~~~s
-- Adjourned 124
r
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2J
On Monday, March 25, 2002, at 9 o'clock 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.
We'll call to order this regular special session of the Kerr
County Commissioners Court. This morning, Commissioner
Baldwin, I believe you have the honors.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, I do, and I have
a special guest to do the opening prayer for the
Commissioners Court, my friend Harley Belew that's coming in
the back door. You may recognize him as a part of the
famous Steve and Harley program, and that's my friend
Harley. Harley, if you'd come to the podium and lead us in
a word of prayer.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Please stand.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Harley.
MR. BELEW: Thank you, Buster.
JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, any citizen
wishing to address the Court on an item not listed on the
regular agenda may come forward and do so. Is there any
citizen who'd like to address the Court on an item not
4
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
listed on the regular agenda? Going once, going twice. One
more time, is there any citizen who would like to address
the Court on an item not listed on the regular agenda?
Seeing none, we'll go to Commissioners' comments. We'll
start with Commissioner Baldwin.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Judge. As
some of you know, Commissioner Williams, Commissioner Letz
and myself went out to Abilene to the annual West Texas
Judges' and Commissioners' Conference last week, and we are
now official members of the West Texas conference.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Good work.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So -- yeah. So -- and
I also wanted to add to that, there's some reasoning behind
that, and this Court has done some good, long, hard work for
a number of years to make these kind oT contacts and these
relationships around the state, and as we -- as we go around
the state and go to our schools, we're recognized all over
the state now. And -- and the reason for that is that I've
always known that there's going to come a time when we're
going to need the contacts, and -- and to have a place at
the table when Lhe negotiations and things start getting
kind of funny with our State Legislature, and that time has
arrived. There's -- there's some things that are going to
come down that's going to cost -- cost us or the taxpayers
of Kerr County some pretty serious money, I think, in this
i
1
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
5
next session, so I think that Kerr County Commissioners
Court has positioned ourselves now that we can go to the
table and visit all the way to the top with the governor
now. So, I commend you guys for your hard work, and I thank
you for your support in doing that. I understand
Mrs. Lavender here probably spent the weekend in Dallas
yesterday receiving a statewide award for some of her
writing, and I was wondering, Rosa, could you tell us what
that was, please'?
MS. LAVENDER: It was the Texas Public Health
Association Media Award for last year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Congratulations,
that's great. One of our own. And, of course, one of my
constituents.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's why we're
called number one.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Proud to be number one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Last, but not least,
I'd like to wish happy birthday today to Judge Karl Prohl.
I think he's in that 39-and-holding pattern, has been there
awhile. That's all, Judge. Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: You're welcome. Commissioner
Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I met a guy in
6
1
~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l~
,,,,~ 13
14
I J
16
17
18
19
20
21
~2
23
24
25
Abilene who could attest that R:ar1 Prohl is more than 39,
thoughts about the West Texas Conference, and it was very
good. We were, in fact, taken in; I would say welcomed with
open arms, and a lot of folks expressed a desire to see
f:errville a little closer and a little more intimately
somewhere down the line. What I found interesting about the
was, but what I found interesting was the quality of the
educational components. I thought they were very good.
Some of the speakers that I had heard before were better
this time. Tommy, you would be happy to know that I heard
your buddy Lalk about GASB, and while I went to sleep the
first time, he kept me awake this whole time, and it was
really a very interesting presentation, and I thought it was
extremely well worthwhile.
I have a couple other items here, Judge, if
you don't mind. I'd like to express publicly condolences to
the family of Robert L. Mosty. ktobert Mosty is an absolute
icon in Center Point and eastern Kerr County, and he passed
away after a long illness over the weekend. The viewing
will be tonight between the hours of 5:00 and 7 p.m. at the
Grimcs Chapel, and funeral tomorrow -- if anybody's
7

I
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
l~
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
interested and knew Robert and his family, the funeral will
be conducted at the First United Methodist Church at 1 p.m.
in Center Point. And, lastly, the -- the last Library Board
meeting I went to, I was reminded by the Library Director
that we still need to present to him in a memo form the
stops that we would like the bookmobile to make in each of
our precincts. Keep in mind that it doesn't have to be one
stop. If you think your precinct would be better served by
multiple stops, two or more, then tell me about that, if you
will, and I'll frame it all in a memo and give it to Antonio
Martinez. The truck is available. It's yet -- it's at the
City shop being outfitted with racks and so forth, whatever
you outfit a library truck with, but it won't be long. And
he's working up the job description, and so we need that
infcrmatiou back from you fellows as quickly as possible.
That's all I have, Judge.
JUDGE HENNEK~:: All right, thank you.
Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LE'1'Z: I just have two comments
this morning. First, I'd like to echo what Commissioner
Baldwin and Williams said about trie West Texas meeting. It
was excellent. And I'd like to really thank Buster, single
him out, because he was the driving force to get us to move
out there. He brought it up to us after he served as
President of the South Texas region. It is a much better
8
.-~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
l~
20
21
22
23
24
25
fit. I think we will -- we learned -- T think I we learned
a lot more, much better contacts, and I think it's an
association that we should be in, and I'm very happy to be
out there. My other comment is, it's spring, which means
baseball season, and just to announce to everybody, Little
League wilt be starting next Monday, a week from today, and
that means traffic on Highway <7 will become very dangerous
for the next two months around the Ag Barn area. Lots of
traffic in and out. we do what we can with parking, but
just everybody -- everyone needs to be careful. Lots of
kids out there, and the kids don't always think like they
should. That's it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Commissioner
Griffin?
CGMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes, Judge. While I
distribute these letters -- or copies of the letter, I would
like to read into the record the text of it, to District
Attorney Curry, in which I say, "Dear Mr. Curry: During the
recently completed primary election political campaign, one
of the candidates, David Nicholson, repeatedly alleged that
Kerr County road funds hate been spent by the Commissioners
Court for political purposes. These allegations were made
both in print and verbally in at least three public
meetings. These are grave allegations, and if true, would
constitute indictable felony offenses by the five members of
9
~~
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
1,
lh
17
18
19
20
2 I
22
23
24
25
the Court, County Engineer, and the Road Administrator. I
respectfully request that you open a formal investigation
into the Mr. Nicholson's allegations to determine if any
criminal activity has taken place in the administration and
operation of the County's road program. I would hope that
Mr. Nicholson would be invited or summoned to present to you
and the Grand Jury whatever evidence he has to support his
allegations. Likewise, of course, County officials listed
above should have the opportunity to answer those
a]legations. I stand ready to provide any additional
information you may request of me, and to testify to the
Grand Jury at any time on this matter. Sincerely." That's
all.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, thank you. Baseball
isn't the only spring sport, as we well know. How about a
track report, Commissioner Baldwin? I mean, congratulations
Lo your son for two first-place finishes at Fredericksburg.
How'd he do at Boerne this past week?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He won two
third-places. He won a third in the 110-meter hurdles, and
a third in the 300-meter hurdles, and the two -- both people
that beat him in both races were from SA schools in San
Antonio, su he is -- he's doing really, really well. He's
doing really well, and we have another whole year. Man, I
can't wait. I'm making reservations in Austin.
10
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1J
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: Outstanding. That's a good
report. At our next Commissioners Court meeting April 8th,
1 will not be present, so this be the first one I will miss
in over a year. As part of the Sex Offender Management
Grant which the County got as sponsoring agency for this
county, Bandera, Kendall, and Gil]espie, there is a
mandatory training session in Washington, D.C., which, in
their infinite wisdom, the Department of Justice has
scheduled for the 8th and 9th of April, so I will be in
Washington. So, those of you who remain behind will have to
choose among yourselves to lead you through the perils of
the agenda on that date, and I'll leave that up to your
infinite wisdom. I'm not about to step into that briar
patch.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I thought we were
taking turns.
COMMISSIONER WiLLIAMS: That's what we said.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think Commissioner
Letz was Lhe last one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's Commissioner
Griffin's l,urn.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge Griffin.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Judge Griffin.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: God, that has a ring
to it.

1
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~4
25
11
COMMISSIONER GRIFFItd: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: May be prophetic.
DODGE HENNEKE: Also, I'd like to offer my
congratulations to Mr. Tinley and Mr. Nicholson, and of
course our colleague, Commissioner Williams, on their
victories in the March 12th Republican primary. Service on
this Commissioners Court is truly public service.
Commissioner Baldwin has -- has often said, and I totally
agree with him, that County government is the government
closest to the people. We're not insulated by staff. We're
not insulated by bureaucracy. We deal directly with our
constituents on matters that have impact upon their lives
and upon their futures. To the new members of the Court, I
pray that God will grant them the wisdom to know what is
right and the strength to do what is right for all the
people in Kerr County; not just those who voted in the
campaign, not just those who made contributions out of their
time or of their treasures.
I'm very proud of what this Commissioners
Court has accomplished in three and a half years. I'm proud
of the improvements in the water situation in Kerr County
which this Court has enacted; the water savings account with
G.B.R.A., the water availability rules, the lot sizes, the
leadership Commissioner Letz has expressed through the
Region J planning group. I'm proud of the additional
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
1S
16
17
18
lU
20
21
22
23
~4
25
resources we've provided to the Sheriff's Department,
putting new cars on the road instead of old cars that were
more of a danger to the driver than they were to the bad
guys; providing additional officers and providing training
and equipment for those officers so they can go out and do
the job that we ask them to do.
I'm proud of the fact that we took the
necessary steps and made the decisions to bring the salaries
for the employees up to comparable levels and proper levels,
because we don't provide the services from this court. The
employees do. And unless you have a well-qualified,
well-trained and motivated work force in the county, you
don't have the excellence of services that this county
enjoys. And if you don't believe that this county has
excellent services, go to some other county and try to get
information from the Clerk's office, from the Treasurer,
from the Tax Assessor's office. I'm proud of the fact, in
particular, that we will -- that when I leave office, we
will leave this county in the best financial condition that
it's ever been in, or it has been in for a long time. We
have increased reserves. We have managed the funds provided
to us by the taxpayers to provide the services that they
command for their government.
Yes, we unfortunately had to raise taxes.
Once. One tax increase in nine years, a tax increase that
13
1
,.,. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2 :3
29
•'-
25
has been directly linked to the renovation of the annex, and
which I fully expect, under the next administration, will go
away in the year 2005, when the funds for this annex have
been retired. And I fully expect that, for the next nine
ourselves to improvement of the situation in Kerr County.
So that when I walk away from here at the end of my term,
I'll walk away from here with my head high, knowing that I
kept my promise to the voters of Kerr County, that I served
all the voters of Kerr County to the best of my ability to
improve their situation, and not only to improve their
current situation, but to leave a foundation and a framework
for the future which will insure, to the best of our ability
as leaders, that this County continues to prosper and to be
an attractive place for all of us to live in and for all of
our children to live in and for all of our grandchildren to
live in. 'Cause that was the mission I felt I was handed
when I started this job, and that's the direction I have
taken in every decision I have made as County Judge.
Obviously, I'm not a politician. If I was a
politician, some of the decisions that I made I would not
have made, had I considered re-election instead of the good
of the county. But that's what happens when you sit up
here; you put those things aside and you move forward for
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2S
the benefit of everybody. And, I want to thank you guys.
I'm proud of the fact that, in the three and a half years,
I've cast a handful of votes to break a tie. I'm even more
proud of the fact that the overwhelming majority of all the
votes that we've cast up here in the last three and a half
years have been unanimous. This Court has displayed an
amazing degree of unanimity in working together for the
benefit of all of the citizens of Kerr County; west, north,
south, in the city, out in the ranches, anywhere in Kerr
County. What we need to do now is what we're going to do
now, and let's get to work. So --
(Applause.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's pay some bills.
Mr. Auditor? Does anyone have any questions or comments
about the bills as presented?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move the bills be
paid.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
DODGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
approve payment of the bills as presented and recommended by
the Auditor. Any further questions or comments? If not,
all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUUGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
15
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Budget Amendment
Request Number 1 is for Permanent Improvements.
MR. TOMLINSON: I think I have maybe one --
the last, final bill for -- for our renovation of the -- of
the annex. I have a bill from Keith Longnecker for $135.55.
This requires an amendment of $218.26, that -- that amount
to come from the annex finish-out construction fund -- or
the account, the courthouse construction account.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve
Budget Amendment Request Number 1 for Permanent
Improvements. 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. Budget
Amendment Request Number 2 for 216th District Court.
MR. TOMLINSON: This amendment is to pay
bills for court transcripts. 1 have total bills today of
16
,~-~
1
L
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
$3,"`71.15. We're requesting a move of those -- of funds
from Special Trials in the 216th court to Court Transcripts.
And I need to -- to approve a hand check to Cindy Snider for
$326.95 for a transcript, another one to Paula Richards
Loetz for $2,722.50. I have another one for Cindy Snider
for a transcript for the Reynaldo Alvarez case.
JUDGE HENNEKE: How much is the last one?
MR. TOMLINSON: $221.70.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And that totals the
number we've got here?
MR.. TOMLINSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second the
motion.
COMMISSIUNER WILLIAMS: Are the mics on?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah, it is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Try it again.
COMMI58IUNER BALDWIN: Tommy, all I can hear
is your natural voice. Is that thing on?
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't believe it is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That may be a good
thing. GAL to be smarter than the machine.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Supposed to be set up before
we start.
17
1
2
3
9
5
H
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
zo
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy, I have a question
before we vote on that, anyway. This is an item that will
probably be short -- or we will be short on the rest of the
year. Would it make sense, to keep from having to come back
and do this every time, to maybe, I don't know, take a
larger sum out of Special Trials and put it in Court
Transcripts'? Or just do it each time?
MR. TOMLINSON: These come only when we have
an appeal. So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ:
MR. TOMLINSON: --
more, but it's hard to judge what
we're going to be short at the en
the district courts' budgets.
COMMISSIUNER LETZ:
Okay.
most likely we will have
that would be. I'm afraid
of the year totally in
Okay. We'll just do them
case-by-case.
JODGE HENNEKE: Okay. I believe we have a
motion by Commissioner Griffin, second by Commissioner
Baldwin, to approve Budget Amendment Request Number 2 for
216th District Court, and to authorize hand checks to Cindy
Snider in the amount of $32b.95, Yaula Richards Loetz in the
amount of $2,722.50, and also to Cindy Snider in the amount
of $221.70. Arty other questions or comments? If not, all
in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
18

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
ZJ
16
17
18
19
20
2 1
22
~'
J
24
J
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Budget
Amendment Request Number 3 is for the County Clerk election
expense.
MR. TOMLINSON: This request from the County
Clerk to transfer $1,260.54 to Machine Repairs, and this is
for repair to the voting equipment on election day. I have
a bill actually for $3,796.76. The other part of this
amendment is really -- is an error. The amount for $13.78
should actually read "Miscellaneous Office Equipment" rather
than "Capital Outlay." But this is to replace the mother
board on part of that equipment, so that -- that should read
-- sLnce it's under $1,000 is the reason it should be a
different account.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court approve
Budget Amendment Request Number 3 for the County Clerk's
office. Any further 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.)
19

1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
]3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number
4 is again for the 216th.
MR. TOMLINSON: I have an additional court
transcript payable to Paula Beaver, $1,318.05. Our request
is to move $1,318.05 from Special Trials in the 216th court.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
DODGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court approve
Budget Amendment Request Number 4 for the 216th District
Court and authorize a hand check in the amount of $1,318.05
payable to the order of Paula Beaver. Any questions or
commentsl if not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
DODGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Do we have
any more late bills, Tommy?
NIR. TOMLINSON: Yes, I do. First one is to
VeriClaims, Inc. It's the firm that -- that is -- the
Cuuu~y contracted caith for indigent health care payments.
And this is $140.69, and it's our commission that we pay --
pay this firm for this purpose.
COMMISSIONER- LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
1/
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
zo
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court authorize a
late bill and hand check in the amount of $140.69 payable to
the order of VeriClaims for commissions on indigent health
care processing. 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.. TOMLINSON: The last one is to Allen &
Allen Lumber Company. It's for $225.80, and it's for an
order for some lumber for the build-out of the Treasurer's
office.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't know if we want to go
forward with that or not.
MS. NEMEC: It has to be special lumber or I
don't want it.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I wasn't going to bring
that up.
MS. NEMEC: I have no idea what they're
talking about.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.

1
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
29
L S
21
DODGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court
authorize the late bill and hand check in the amount of
$225.80 payable to the Allen & Allen Lumber Company for
lumber for the finish-out of the Treasurer's office.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My comment is, it must
not be much lumber for X00-some dollars from Allen & Allen.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Not at prices today.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further 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. TOMLINSON: That's all I have. I just
want to inform the Court that as far -- as part of the
reports, that we plan to have an auction, county-wide, for
surplus equipment and -- and supplies on the first Saturday
in May. Glenn Holekamp and I have -- have visited with
various departments to make sure that -- that that's a good
day, and so far that's okay, so that's what we plan to do.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: At the Ag Barn?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did you pay rent?
MK. '1'UMLINSON: Almost didn't get it, it's so
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2S
22
busy.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Moving right along, at
this time, I'd entertain a motion to approve and accept the
monthly reports as presented.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved -- second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
approve and accept the monthly reports as presented. 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.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, if I can just make
a comment related to the auction?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just because -- and I
don't know. One year I bid on some things. If any
Commissioners deride they want to bid on anything, there's
some paperwork you got to fill out and file with the County
Clerk, just so no one gets in trouble. I had to fill out
some kind of a financial disclosure form. You're eligible
to bid. Ot course, I didn't -- I didn't win what I wanted,
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
z3
2q
~5
but -- but, anyway, if you do bid, there's paperwork you
need to do if you're a Commissioner.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's good --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or probably any elected
official.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's good information to
have. Anything else? If not, let's move along. Item
Number 1, presentation by Karl Buechler on plans and
programs for Easter weekend events at Flat Rock Lake Park.
Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A lot has happened
since the last time we talked about the proposed events at
Flat Rock Lake Park. We had quotations for electrical
service, and we had some negotiations, got those numbers
down. We've had discussions with Mr. Buechler about whether
we put the transformer and pole in the right spot, or
whether we should have moved it over ~ inches to the left.
Be that at as it may, he's here today to tell the Court what
all has been done and what he plans to do on that weekend.
He has some exciting plans. Karl, would you come up,
please?
MR. BEUCHLER: Thank y'all for the
opportunity to be here. And I'd like to thank Mr. --
Commissioner Williams and the Court for all their help and
support in doing what they've done to help this event be a
24
1
2
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1S
16
1/
18
19
20
LI
22
'3
24
25
great success. I do have a schedule of events I will give
everybody before I leave. It is really working out to be a
very good event for this weekend. We have -- we have cooks
coming from all over Texas and Arizona and New Mexico. We
got Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston. It's going to be a record
crowd for cooks for barbecue and chili. I would like to
thank also Carson Distributor -- Distributing and a lot of
other businesses for their help and support in putting this
on. We're going to have a big event for the Easter egg --
the businesses has responded real well in donating stuff.
We will be giving prize eggs that will be -- have bicycles
and tricycles and stuff for the kids that find them. Also,
I would like to invite y'all, the Commissioners Court, to be
there for the judging, if possible. We're going to have
some of the best barbecue in the state of Texas and the
United States, if you would like to come down and help judge
it. Other than that, we're just hoping for good weather.
And it's a good event, planned event; it's organized. We
have everything covered.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What are the hours?
MR. BEUCHLER: The hours, Friday niyhL Lhe
festivities will start -- the cooks will start coming in
Friday evening. We will have a cook's party Friday niyhL,
which will consist of a wild game dinner, which the -- the
meat was provided by Woodbury Taxidermy, Rhodes Taxidermy,
1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
is
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
zs
and Bernhard's Processing Plant. And we will cook that, and
all the cooks will have a big party that night, and y'all
are also welcome to come to that festivities and eat as
well. Then the next morning, restoration will begin
somewhere around -- I don't know, 9 or 10 o'clock, and the
cook-off will actually start at -- at 11 o'clock. And then
the different events and vendors will be setting up at
around 9 or 10 o'clock also. We did have a good response
from vendors. We -- we probably got 30 vendors coming from
out of state everywhere to participate in this, with all
different kind of arts and crafts and items for sale. We
also have the Gunslingers coming; they're going to put on a
good performance on the shootouts and stuff, and we got
Huckleberry, the mechanical bull, which all the college kids
and all the high school bull riders just love to play with.
And it's just -- it's just turning out to be a real exiting
event, and I'm just glad I'm a part of it. And -- and, as
far as the electricity, it just turned out so well. It
just -- it just it worked out just the way it was -- it was
supposed to work out. We're going to be -- the stage will
be under the trees, where the performances are going to be,
and it's just -- y'all just come out and enjoy it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can we have those?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Karl.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
26

,~'~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
y
10
11
12
13
14
15
76
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
zs
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Appreciate your work.
You've really -- the event has really grown in the past
couple years.
COMMISSIONER BALDWID7: Fair warning, I've
judged a couple of those things. It takes about a month to
get over.
(Laughter.)
MR. BEUCHLER: That's the chili, not the
barbecue.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand.
MR. BEUCHLER: 7 will leave a pile of these
back here for the rest of the people, if they would like to
pick up one and also come out and enjoy the event, and have
any questions.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thanks again.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Karl.
MR. BEUCHLER; Thank y'all.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Sounds like a good time.
Item Number 2 is a request from Jackie Keller on behalf of
the Center Point Project Graduation for use of the Hill
Country Youth Exhibition Center. Ms. Keller, are you in the
audience? Come forward, please. Welcome.
MS. KELLEF.: Good morning. Thank y'all for
your time this morning. My name is Jackie Keller, and I'm a
z7
	1
	1
~	
	3
	4
	5
	6
	7
	8
	9
	10
	11
	12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
L L
23
~4
25
parent of a Center Point High School student and I'm here
today representing the students and parents of the Center
Point Class of 2003. The reason I'm coming to you today is
to talk to you about their Project Graduation. And, even
though their graduation is over a year away, planning this
event is very important to them. As y'all know, Project
Graduation provides a safe place for students to be the
night that they graduate. What we are asking for is, we
would like to rent the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center for
their Project Graduation in the year 2003. We've received
prices for this. Renting the hall is $250 for the hall,
$150 setup fee that they charge us to help us set up our
events in there, $150 clean-up fee, which would be refunded
provided that we clean up the hall exactly how it was
presented to us, and then a $25-an-hour security charge from
12 midnight to 6 a.m. the day of the event. And, adding all
that up, I come up with about a $700 figure. And we are a
small school, with approximately 40 students for the Class
of 2003, and we would greatly appreciate any financial
support you can give us for this event.
We do have a lot of fun and exciting events
planned for them that evening for them to really enjoy
themselves, being that this is the last day of high school.
Again, any financial support that you can give us would be
greatly appreciated, and again, thank you for your time,
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
]6
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
from myself, as a student -- I'm sorry, as a parent; I wish
I was a student. As a parent, and all the students and
parents of Center Point High School, 2003 class.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ms. Keller, where is
the event being held this year"?
MS. KELLER: This year it is at the Hermann
Sons in Comfu~L. And the reason we would like to go
somewhere else is 'cause, talking to the students that have
been there in the past, there's not a lot there for them to
do. It's not real big for them to put a lot of stuff in
there for them to do, and we figure in the -- in the Exhibit
Hall, that we can provide them better games and other things
that they could do in there, like basketball or whatever we
can come up with for them in there. We plan on having a
parent meeting to discuss a71 t-he events that we do want to
have for them.
COMMISSIONER
fundraising group?
MS. KELLER:
COMMISSIONER
this year's event?
MS. KELLER:
COMMISSIONER
WILLIAMS: Are you part of the
Yes, I am.
WILLIAMS: Raising funds for
Yes, I am, for the year 2003.
WILLIAMS: As well as this
year's?
MS. KELLER: No, I do nut have a graduating
29

1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
ll
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2J
student this year. Next year I do.
JUDGE HENNEKE: A concern that I have is
that, you know, there's a possibility that the facility may
be under renovation at that time.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: This is May of 2003.
MS. KELLER: 2003.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We're talking about a year
from this May.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's a -- I hadn't
even thought of that. I hadn't even thought that far. I
think, yeah, that's probably a good concern, but the --
they're also -- while that may be, the arena next door would
be available.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 1 think there's an
event in the arena.
MS. KELLER: Yes, sir, there is an event in
the arena next door that night.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that -- but also,
that brings us into another whole thing as to, you know,
what are we going to do with bookings out into the future?
You know, notwithstanding that concern, I mean, I have no
problem at all with waiving pretty much all of the fees,
except maybe the security and clean-up. I mean, the
clean-up would be refunded.
MS. KELLER: Yes, sir.
1
r. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~-. 13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
30
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Then whatever the
Maintenance Department comes up with as a utility amount,
which would be pretty nominal, I imagine. I think it's a
good thing, but I think certain things we can't -- I think
we can't waive, but we certainly could reduce the amount
JUDGE HENNEKE: I would be in favor of
waiving the setup fee and the rent, except for the utility
cost, but I think the security fee needs to be paid, because
those are people that we have to go out and hire off-duty
Sheriff's Department or whomever to work the event.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: When do you need to know?
MS. KELLER: No, I don't need to know right
away. I am going to have a parent meeting with all of the
graduating class of 2003 probably sometime in April to
discuss, you know, what I have come up with here, just to
let them know that I have come in front of y'all and
presented this, and that y'all are trying to work with us on
it. Just a couple months from now is fine. It doesn't have
to be right away. I mean, 'cause we're not going to start
anything major until school starts again in August, 'cause
we want to let the Class of 2002 finish everything that they
have going on before we step in with any fundraisers or
anything,'cause we feel like that's not fair to them. And
31
1
~ 2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~ 13
14
1 J
16
17
lft
l~
20
21
22
23
24
,^-~
25
when school starts up again in August or September, that`s
when we really want to start gettinq all of our fundraisers
going and everything. So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just so the Court's kind
oT aware of -- you know, my thought is it's going to be a
lot involved with the renovation ideas out there. You know,
I think we need to get something -- you know, the Court
needs to decide a direction in the nest two months, to me.
In fact, I'm meeting with -- Commissioner Baldwin and I are
meeting with Bob Dittmar and Glenn Holekamp to look at some
repair/renovation things, kind of get another idea of some
other options that -- you know, out there. But we already
have one concept; 1 think it's been before the Court, and it
may be modified a little bit. Probably -- I've talked with
Commissioner Baldwin a little bit. We're looking at, you
know, what the alternative would be from a repair
standpoint, just a dollar amount figure, what that would be.
And I suspect that we can have something before the Court
sometime in late April, early May, which would give us a --
and I think this Court needs to decide and make -- we have
to vote. Either -- I think we're at a point now, we've been
talking about it for two years. I'm not getting mad yet.
But I just -- but if you can wait that long, I think that
will give an idea as to what direction the Court's going to
go. That's jusC where I stand on it.

1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
32
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think -- I'm sorry,
Buster. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, you go ahead.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It might be
beiieticial to you and your committee if you identify a
backup site, just in the event --
MS. Y:ELLEK: We sure will.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- that we move
forward the renovations that might shut this all down, or
make it grossly inadequate.
MS. KELLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My only comment is
that -- to piggyback on Commissioner Letz, he and I are
going to go meet this afternoon with those folks to look at
another option other than the big plan, and that's repairing
what we have, basically. And 7 can -- in my mind, I can see
us bringing those numbers together pretty fast, and we
already have a plan on the table with some numbers -- fairly
firm numbers, and I think pretty quick we should be able to
get bark around the table the options of, do we want to go
build the big program or do we want to fix what we have?
And this Court needs to vote pretty quick. So, I -- in my
mind, it will be pretty quick.
MS. KELLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I'm -- I agree
33

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~l
22
23
Z4
~j
with everything they said. I bet you get it.
MS. KELLER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If there's a way to
make it work, I think -- my position would be, if there's a
way to make it work, we'll make it work.
MS. KELLER: We really appreciate that very
much.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You might carry back
to your group, however, that it wouldn't be a total waiving
of the fee.
M5. KELLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The rental would be
waived, the setup fee would be waived. You'd probably have
r_o put the deposit up for clean-up, just in the event you
didn't yet it cleaned up, and there would be a charge for
utilities, and you'll have to take care of security.
MS. KELLER: That will be great.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's kind of what
I'm hearing.
MS. KELLER: That will be great.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll get back to
you.
MS. KELLER: Thank y'all very much.
Appreciate it.
rOMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good to see you.
34


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1 J
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. KELLEP.: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Moving right along,
the next item, Item Number 3, consider changing the status
of the road in Pier 5 Subdivision from public tc private,
and set a public hearinq date for the same. Commissioner
Griffin.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. Franklin
Johnston may have -- I'm sure will have some comment to make
on this. Chis is a wholly-owned, platted subdivision that
is out on Ingram Lake. The -- it's owned by David and
Deborah Simpson. They have asked by our -- our procedure.
They have submitted a letter with an affidavit requesting
Lhat the Pier 5 Drive, which is the road which you see on
that drawing, be changed in status from a public road to a
private road so that that community can be gated. There's
probably some question about where that gate would -- would
have to be to be legal and so on, but the purpose here today
primarily is to answer any questions that the Court may have
and seC a public hearing where all of that can be discussed
and -- and the legal issues that would derive from that
discussion can be determined, and that we could perhaps move
forward in accordance with whatever comes out of that. So,
Franklin, d~ you have anything to add to that?
MR. JOHNSTON: That's basically it. The road
is dedicated to the public now, and --
35


1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1b
19
20
?1
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: By the way, this is
not a County-maintained road. It is -- it's a --
MR. JOHNSTON: That's right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN; -- privately
maintained.
MR. JOHNSTON: The issue is, like I say,
where to gate it, because there's some other land -- it's
};ind of a long entryway. There's adjacent property owners.
I tkrink some of those are relying on the fact that road was
public for some of their ingress -- egress and ingress. I
think some of those owners are here. I don't know if we
should hear them at this time or wait till the public
hearing, or --
JUDGE HENNEKE: We'11 let them speak, because
they've signed up, when we've finished with our discussion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The question is,
there's other property owners involved that do not have
access off of Cade Road? There's property owners inside
that subdivision a little ways that --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No.
MR. JOHNSTON: 1 think they have access on
Cade, but they also have access -- you know, this is also a
public road, not maintained, and they also have -- you know,
have access off of it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
36
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1~
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
29
25
MR. JOHNSTON: Due to the fact it's public.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: There's -- at least
from what I can tell from looking at the -- all of the
platted information, there are no landowners outside of this
platted subdivision who this provides the only access for.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It provides some
access, but there are other accesses as well.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's my question.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: This is not the only
i access, except for the platted subdivision. It is the only
I access for it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Are Mr. and Mrs. Simpson here
today?
COMMISSIUNER GRIFFIN: No, they could not be
here today due to another commitment, but they will be here
fur Lhe public hearing.
JUDGE HENYSEKE: Do we know where they intend
to place Lhe gate?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think that's
probably going to have to be determined by the Court, on
where the -- where the abandonment and vacation of the --
abandoning and vacating of the road would take place.
MR. JOHNSTON: I think at this time they want
to place it at the entrance off of Cade Koad, at the very
37
1
G
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1J
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
bottom there in the drawing that you have. I think
that's --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We would have to have
that proposal from them at the public hearing, exactly what
it would be.
MR. JOHNSTON: I think some of the other
landowners here that are adjacent to it have questions about
it.
DODGE HENNEKE: I'm not -- I'm not sure we
can have a public hearing until we know where the gate goes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It would have to be very
specific.
DODGE HENNEKE: Critical information for the
public to have in order to make an evaluation on the
proposal. I don't think that we can -- we can have a public
hearing on it --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We can set the public
hearing.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- on a gated subdivision
without knowing where the gate goes.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We can -- the way
their affidavit reads is that -- is that all of Pier 5 Drive
would be abandoned and vacated. We can have a public
hearing on that basis.
COMMISSIONER BHLDWIN: That's my question,
38

1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
IL
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
23
24
ZJ
is -- I mean, you're vacating -- Fred, I don't want to argue
with you, but here's a little argument. If you're going to
vacate the whole road, what difference does it make where
the gate goes?
JUDGE HENNEKE: We11, I, quite frankly,
haven't looked at it close enough to --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: They want to have the whole
thing vacated?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If it makes it easier
to do procedurally, then I would think that the public
hearing would be on vacation -- vacating and abandoning the
entire road.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Well, that -- that
actually --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And we can set the
public hearing. Now, if information comes out at the public
hearing that that's not the thing to do, then we can back
off of that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And I will make -- at
the proper time, make a motion to that effect.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Mr. Terrell?
MR. TERR.ELL: Well, Judge, I understand that
today is not the hearing on this application, but merely to
1
1
1
1
1
~ .-.
t
1
2
3
4
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
39
put it on the agenda for a public hearing. I think that's
right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's correct.
MR. TERRELL: But I would like to say that I
represent Mr. and Mrs. Mertl here, and just -- if you'd just
hold up your hand for a minute. And Mr. and Mrs. Wardroup.
And we drew a little poster -- maybe I'll give it to Frank
here -- that shows how their driveways are and such physical
details as that on the ground. But, just right up front, to
say where the private road er.its onto the Simpson property,
where the Simpson property -- where the Simpsons own both
sides of the road, we have no problem whatever putting a
gate there. And it looks to me like, if their objective is
to have a gated community where they have some kind of
little development down there -- I'm not sure what they have
in mind, but that that would serve their purpose just as
well as having the gateway up there at Cade Loop Road. We
do object strenuously to the portion of this dedicated
public road that adjoins the Mertls' and the Wardroups'
property being converted from a public road which they can
use to a private road which they cannot. And, like I say,
we have a little poster showinq the physical layout of the
properties and where their driveways are and such as that,
but I understand this is not a public hearing today, and I
don't want to take up 15 minutes of your time here.
40
1
1

1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~5
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I do have a couple
questions, Tom, if you will. The Simpsons -- what -- which
is their property? Lot 1? Lot 12? Or where is their --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: All of it.
MR. JOHNSTON: All of it. All of Pier 5.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Everything.
MR. TERRELL: Maybe this will help. Maybe,
Frank, if you can hold that up for me. See, here's where
the Pier 5 Road comes in from Cade Loop.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
MR. TERRELL: Like this. And the Mertls have
this tract right here, and Mr. and Mrs. Wardroup have the
tract over here, and their house is back here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
Mx. 'TERRELL: So it runs right along -- it's
only 12 -- it's about a 12-foot-wide road.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah, I can see.
MR. TERRELL: Can you see? And so, as I
understand what the Simpsons want, they want to put a gate
up here and turn this into a complete private road, which
means that these people -- and these people couldn't use it
any more for any purpose, I suppose. But we have no
objection whatever to where it leaves the Mertl property
here and curves this way onto the Simpson property. So,
gosh, we think that -- that the best way out of this for
41
1
2
3
4
J
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
1~
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
29
25
everybody is just to put the -- put the gate right there,
which would serve most of their purpose and preserve our
public -- uur right to use the road.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask a question.
And I'm -- I'm almost in agreement with you. But, coming
off of Cade Loop, if that became private property, if we
took it off tiie -- off the county system and it became
private property, then that -- then that property reverts
back to that owner, does it not?
MR. TERRELL: This road here?
COMMISSIUNER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. It reverts
back to the Wardroups -- looks like it's just half of it --
half a road there, anyway. Looks like it's all on --
MR. TERRELL: No, 'cause what happened over
time, 2 gucsc at oiie time --
MR. JOHNSTON: This is actually part of the
subdivision. The little gate right here is part of the
subdivision.
MR. TERRELL: The under -- the land
underneath this little strip here is actually ocaned by the
Simpsons, because that's the way --
COMMISSIONER- BALDWIN: I see.
MR. TERRELL: Whoever owned this to start
with conveyed out this, conveyed out this, and then conveyed
this nut as part of -- part of this down here.
42
r
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
75
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see, okay.
COMMISSIONEP, GRIFFIN: And that's the
ticklish legal issue, because I -- I've never seen one -- at
least I've never seen one like it.
MR. TERREGL: It's a bizarre situation.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A flag lot, i£ I ever
saw one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a flag subdivision.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It's a flag
subdivision.
MR. 'PERRELL: Is that called a panhandle?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So L think we -- I
think a public hearing to hash all this out and to qet --
perhaps get the County Attorney's office, if we might --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
MR. ~OHNSTON: I think the whole subdivision
is only, like, 5 acres, so -- really just one lot.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Twelve lots and --
MR. TEKRELL: What's the total acreage down
here?
MR. JOHNS'ION: About 5 acres.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Larry, I mean, I don't
know -- it seems to me that I can't see that we're goinq
to -- to me, the gate should go up there where the road goes
off to the subdivision. 1 can't see that we're going to --
43
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
would abandon that lower portion. Would it be possible to
delay setting a public hearing until our next meeting?
Because, iL we don't, we're basically causing two families
to hire an attorney or representatives to come in here and
argue before us, when in reality, the Simpsons may be happy
with the gate where they --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Have any of those
discussions taken place?
MR. TERRELL: Well, they had a little meeting
over at the Wardroup's house Thursday night, and there was a
lot of discussion. They thought maybe they had it settled,
but the -- let me get this straight, now -- but the next day
the Simpsons called and said forget that.
MR. MERTL: No, last night. Last night David
called and said he wanted the -- he wanted to get his land
back, quote, unquote.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, Well, maybe a
public hearing is the way to go, then. Let us decide it.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Let's hear all the --
MR. MERTL: If I could just make one -- I'm
Bob Mert1.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Come forward, sir. Come to
the podium.
MR. MERTL: One of the problems that I'm
dealing with is that my front gate off of Cade Loop Road is
44

i--
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
l~
14
15
lh
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
a stone arch. The middle of that arch is approximately
19 feet high. I had an experience when I moved in here, as
an example, and -- and we've used the side entrance on other
occasions, but I had an experience when I moved in that the
moving trucks from Georgia, and there were a pair of them,
could not get through that gate. In other words, they were
-- they were just at 14 feet, but because of the width of
the box, so that they did use this road. Okay. And that's
one of the things that -- that the previous owner had in
mind. He had a lot of heavy equipment. Bob Cade, if you
know the Cade family, he had a lot of equipment, and he
would come in one entrance and go out another. I gated it
because I had dogs -- I have dogs, but essentially that's a
safety valve for me. And, as such, I'm opposing putting a
gate up here. I don't care what David does down below.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Okay. Public hearing's
the way to go.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. I'll make the
motion, then, that we accept this package from the Simpsons
for consideration of changing the status of the road in the
Pier 5 Subdivision from public to private, and set a public
hearing for -- what date?
MS. SoVIL: You've got the 8th or the 22nd.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Actually, it actually needs
to bP the first one in May.
95

1
Z
3
4
5
5
S
9
10
11
12
17
14
15
16
17
1S
19
20
L 1
22
23
24
2d
CUMMISSIONER LETZ: May. Thirty days.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Gct to be 30 days.
JUDGE HENNEKE: You're looking at the 11th --
is the 11th the meeting?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Is it the 11th?
MS. SOVIL: May the 13th.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: May 13th. Set a
public hearing for 10 a.m. on May 13th.
MR. TERRELL: May 13th, you say?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIYI: May the 13th.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that
motion.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
accept the request Lrom Mr. and Mrs. Simpson to abandon all
of the Pier 5 Drive located in Pier 5 Subdivision in
Precinct 1, and set a public hearing on same for 10 o'clock
a.m. May 13th, Year 2002, here in the Kerr County
Commissioners Courtroom. Any Yurther questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One more question,
please, Hold your little sign back up. How do the -- how
do the Wardroups -- where is their driveway?
MR. TERRELL: Right here, They come around
on a little road that's called Paradise Retreat to get to
their house.
46

1
7
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
l~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2~
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah.
MR. TERRELL: They hope some -- maybe this
might be -- this slopes down real fast to the river, and
they hope -- this is a pretty good site right over here. Of
course, there's nothing there now, but --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thanks. I know
where it is now.
MR. TERRELL: Okay.
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. All right.
Next item is Item Number 5, consider awarding a bid for
five-year lease on wheel loader, authorizing County Judge to
sign the contract Tor same, and issuing a hand check for the
first payment.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Item 4.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Item 4, okay.
MR. JOHNSTON: Holt was the low bid with the
Caterpillar 924-GZ loader, total bid of $67,745, and they
kia ve a $7,232 buy-back at the end of five years. We ask the
Court to award the bid -- to consider awarding the bid to
Holt, and give the County Judge permission to sign the
47

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1J
16
17
18
19
20
~l
22
23
24
~5
contract and issue a hand chec}: in the amount of $1,126.50
for the first month's payment to Caterpillar Financial
Services Corporation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
award the bid for a five-year lease for wheel loader to the
Holt Equipment Company.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Caterpillar -- isn't the
lease wir_h Caterpillar?
JUDGE HENNEKE: The lease is with Holt. Is
that correct? lt's Holt?
MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah, Holt was the bidder.
JUll(;E HENNEKE: Holt is the lessee.
MR. JOHNSTON: But we pay Caterpillar
Financial Services Corporation.
JUDGE HENNEKE: The motion is to award the
bid Lor the five-year lease of wheel loader to Holt
Equipment Company, authorize County Judge to sign the
necessary contracts, and authorize a hand check in the
amount of $1,126.50 payable to the order of Caterpillar
Financial Services for the first month's lease on the
equipment. Everybody got that? Any other questions or
comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
48

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
75
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
~3
24
l5
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number
5 is to consider recommendations and award the bid on
6,500 tons of base material for Sheppard Rees Road.
MR. JOHNSTON: Again, 6,500 tons of Type A,
Grade 2 base material for Sheppard Rees Road. We had -- the
low bid was S6.9S per ton, delivered to the site, from Lucky
3 Materials. We recommend that bid.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
award the bid for b, 500 tons of Type A, Grade 2 base
material for Sheppard Rees Road to Lucky 3 Materials at an
amount of $6.95 per ton. 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.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I did have a
question.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Sorry.
99

1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~1
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONEF. BALDWIN: Oh, no, it's okay.
But I can't ask it because it's not part of the agenda item,
but if I was going to ask it, it would be something like
this. How are we doing on our piece of land out there with
the County Attorney and a11? Are we moving forward? Or --
MR. JOHNSTON: I haven't had a recent update
since we've turned it over to him. I really haven't heard
anything on it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Next item is Item
Number b, consider recommendations and award annual bids on
base material, cold mix, black base, paving aggregate,
asphalt emulsion oil, corrugated metal pipe, and equipment
by the hour.
Mx. JUHNSTON: The following are
recommendations for the annual bids opened March 11th, 2002:
Road base material, Type A, Lur_ky 3 Materials. Type B,
Drymala Sand & Gravel. And Type C, Rountree Materials. Hot
mix, cold laid asphalt; low bid, b7.ack base, Smyth Mines.
Cold mix, Smyth Mines. Paving aggregate, Type B, Grade 3,
Wheatcraft. Type B, Grade 4, Wheatcraft. Type B, Grade 5,
Wheatcraft. PB, Grade 3, Smyth Mines. PB, Grade 4 and
Grade 5, Smyth Nlines. Trap rock, Grades 3, 4, and 5, Vulcan
Materials. Emulsion oils, CRS-2 and HFRS-2 is Ergon Asphalt
and Emulsions, and AEP is also Ergon Asphalt and Emulsions.
50
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
1/
18
19
20
2l
~z
23
24
25
Corrugated metal pipe, all sizes we had specified, low bid
was Wilson Culverts. Equipment by the hour, they're ranked
according to bid, the low bid being Schwarz Construction.
Second low bid is M.P.B., Mike Butler, Incorporated. Third
is Edmund Jenschke, Incorporated. And fourth is Bobby
Jenschke. We wish to accept all bids and use in order of
their bidding; in other words, the first -- the low bid
being called first, or if his schedule is full, we go to the
next bid, et cetera.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Franklin, question on
the -- going back to the materials. This is just overall.
Is the -- are we hauling all this ourselves? I mean, are we
sending our truck to --
MR. JOHNSTON: Most of it, we haul. I think,
like, on the one on Sheppard Rees, we had it bid --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. That was bid --
MR. JOHNSTON: -- to the job site, but most
of it we transport.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I was just
wondering because of the variance in the cost; it looked
like we were hauling, because usually there's a freight
balancing out --
MR. JOHNSTON: Those -- some of them are in
Uvalde. There are different materials in different places.
We use our 30-yard live-bottom to haul a lot of that
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
10
20
21
22
23
24
20
material.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think you said it,
but just to emphasize it, all of these materials bids, you
are recommending the low bidder?
MR. JGHNSTON: The low bidder, yes.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: All right.
CUMM1SSlONER LETZ: I'm real happy with the
number of bids we had, and actually, it looks -- it's
interesting that we're spreading it out to --
MR. JOHNSTON: Some of the asphalt bids were
good prices, I think, too. Lower than last year.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I was going to ask, how would
you characterize the overall bidding'?
MR. JOHNSTON: I think on the asphalt per
yallun, iL's 3-point-something cents lower than last year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's good.
MR. JOHNSTON: Some of the base material was
higher, though, so it averages out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll move we accept all
the base materials, cold mix, black base, paving aggregate,
asphalt emulsion oil, corrugated metal pipe „ equipment by
the hour as presented.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court award the
52
i--
1
L
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
l~
13
19
L5
16
17
18
19
~0
21
Lc~
23
24
25
annual bids on base material, cold mix, black base, paving
aggregate, asphalt emulsion oil, corrugated metal pipe, and
equipment by the hour as recommended by the -- as
recommended and presented by the County Engineer. 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. Thank you
Franklin. Next item is Item Cdumber 7, consider and discuss
authorizing the Sheriff's Department to enter into an
interlocal cooperation contract with Texas Department of
Public Safety to purchase supplies to use in Restricted DNA
Database sample collection. Is all that necessary?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Unfortunately. Buster
was talking about some things the Legislature's going to do
this year. Well, they got us right now on some things. We
are required by law now to take DNA samples from anybody
arrested, charged, convicted or otherwise for any type of
sexual offense. The UNA samples have to be submitted to
D.P.S. in Austin and put on a database there. And the thing
15, We'Le regUlred a1S0 t0 enter lnt0 a COntYaCt Wlth D.P.S.
in Austin for them to do the processing of that, and we're
required Lo buy the supplies from D.P.S. in Austin, so this
53

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
5
10
11
12
13
14
1~
16
17
18
19
~0
2l
22
23
~4
25
is one of those deals where -- unfunded mandate or whatever,
but we don't have any choices.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the amount?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Those kits, from what I
understand, D.P.S. hasn't totally gotten all that figured
out, but right now it's between $9.50 and $5 each for blood
sample kits.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: From a budget standpoint,
how much are we going to need?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This year it won't
affect -- L'll get it out of Operating Supplies. I think we
have enough, thank goodness. I hope -- I'm trying to look
back, and I hope this is extremely high, but I hope we never
need more than 100 of those a year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Say it again?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: A hundred.
Unfortunately, there are quite a few arrests that would fit
into that category. I think it_'s a very well -- a very good
law to have it; it will help solve a lot of unsolved crimes.
It's just going to be a budgetary thing. We're going to
have to look at mainly next year. This year, we can do it
with what we have.
COMMISSIONER BALllWIN: So, you're saying that
the State's requiring us to do something and they want the
taxpayers oL Kerr County to pay for it?
,~-~
1
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
54
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You got it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: What a novel suggestion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What a novel thought.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Wait till we get to the
next item, Buster; you can go off again.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can do business
with their monopoly organization, right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move we authorize Kerr
County Sheriff's Department to enter into an interlocal
cooperation contract with Texas Department of Public Safety
to purchase supplies for the Restricted DNA database.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court authorize the
Sheriff's Department to enter into the interlocal
cooperation contract. Any other questions or comments?
CUMM1551UNER LETZ: And authorize County
Judge to sign same.
JUDGE HENNEKE: And authorize County Judge to
sign same. Any other questions or comments? If not, all in
favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Vpposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. ltem Number
55
1
r-
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,^^
2~
8, consider and discuss authorizing expenditure for new
And this is another one
Defense Act, which I don't really have a problem with.
Actually, the Sheriff's Department part of this bill is just
that we're required to make sure everybody arrested sees a
magistrate within 48 hours. Okay. There's no funding
requirements on the Sheriff's Office specifically, but what
the magistrates have to do is make sure that everybody
arrested is given the opportunity that, if they want a
court-appointed attorney and cannot hire one, cannot afford
one, they get it right then, not once they come to court on
their first court date or anything else, like it's really
been working all the time. They usually wait till the first
court date and they ask the Judge for a court-appointed
attorney. But under this new -- new legislation, they're
entitled to get a court-appointed attorney within three days
of being arrested.
This is going to -- in my opinion, this is
going to have a devastating effect on the counties all the
way across the state, because right now, ]ike the County
Court at Law here, their first court date may be six weeks
down the x'oad, and if they get out of jail, they wait six
weeks to come to court. They sit down with the County
56
1
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1G
r 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2~
23
24
25
Attorney and them and see if they want to work out a plea
bargain or something, and most of -- the going rate for
those court-appointed attorneys is going to be anywhere from
$40 to $70 an hour that the County's going to have to start
paying, which is really going to be the big expense of this.
The problem is, all this stuff has to be done in writing, in
forms.
The District Judges and the County Court at
Law Judge have already entered a plan that's been submitted
to the governor and put on file there. The forms that go
along with Lhat, each J.P. conference, the magistrates all
have their different forms, each county that we're using
theirs, su I took them all and we tried to combine them down
to the ]east number of forms that we would have to have. I
sat down witY~ Judge Ables, and him and I talked about it,
made sure it met all the requirements. And we're going to
have to have femur forms, which all four of those have to be
in triplicate, because the Court will get a copy, the
magistrate will yet a copy, and the defendant will get a
copy. The jail won't even keep a copy of these forms.
we'll just document this stuff in the computer system. But
57

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
~~
24
25
when you do that many forms in triplicate, it does get
There is a task force that the governor
appointed to study this implementation and how it's going to
work in the future, and see if they can synchronize it, so
I'm not trying to get a lot of forms right now. I'm trying
to make sure we're in compliance with what we have to do
now, and then we'll wait and see what that task force out of
the governor's office actually comes up with in finalizing
it. But the best I can do right now are the four forms. I
think y'all each even have a copy of it. We've actually
combined -- like, on one page of this we even combined three
different parts of it on one form, which was the transmittal
where the J.P. orders us to transmit this request to the
proper court within 24 hours, and the inmates or the
defendant's actual request for the counsel to be appointed,
and then the proper court actually ordering that, the
appointment of certain counsel. So, it does get -- then
there's an Affidavit of lndigency and everything else. So,
the price that we came up with so far so that I can get
these and be able to comply now is $783 on this form. I
don't have that in my budget, not for just new forms. If
this goes through, this cost will end up being pretty close
to -- anywhere from $10,000 to $15,000 a year in forms.
That's a change.
58
,^~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
]9
20
21
22
:3
24
25
The other big thing on this -- and I don't
know how the J.P.'s are going tc handle it; 1 don't know how
we're going to handle it -- is that also -- and it's even
mentioned in one of these forms in the -- in the
magistrate's affidavit certification, where he had to advise
these people -- the defendants of everything, that it also
states, under Number 9 in there, if the accused does not
speak or understand English language or is deaf, I have
informed the accused in a manner consistent with Texas Code
of Criminal Procedures, Articles 38.30 and 38.31. What
we've always done is used jailers as interpreters. Under
those articles, it says it has to be a non-involved or other
party doing Lhat, and you also have to be qualified under
those articles to be an interpreter, which is going to -- to
really cost us somewhere, because we're going to have to
have an interpreter available at any time that a magistrate
sees a - a person arrested. And the way current things are
i going, a weekend for us alone is normally averaging at least
50 arresto, people being brought into that jail, and those
interpreters are entitled to their fees, up to $100 a day
or -- or whatever. And it's just going to be another one of
those very expensive things that we have to do.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't even see that
working. I don't see how that will work. I know there's
times -- I remember Limes in District Court where there
59
.~-~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1~
18
19
~'0
G I
22
23
24
25
wasn't an interpreter available, and we had to get one out
of San Antonio. How would you do that for a full weekend at
tkxe jail?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's going to be a
good -- some of the requirements, because we're less than
50,000 population -- don't ask me what part that plays for
the defendant, but some of the requirements on the
interpreter, they don't have to be certified, which are --
your court ones do. 'f hey do have to be qualified. And
then, an uninterested party. And it's going to be -- you
know, I mean, I don't know. There may need to be some
meetings or whatever with all the J.P.'s and everyone on how
we can hire someone -- the County hire someone or have
somebody available to interpret every morning, and sometimes
in the evenings and all through the weekends.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's interesting, this is
a -- this - the other side of this was brought up at the --
at the conference in west Texas, and they neglected to tell
us the part of this ghat you're telling us now.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LE'1'Z: The -- the idea of it was
to speed the process from arrest through trial, and their
idea was that -- and their numbers -- and I forgot which
group it was that pushed for this. I'm sure it's a lobby
group.
Eo
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~3
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: In reality --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They want to -- the
quicker you get them to trial, the cheaper it is for the
County, is what the logic behind it was. I had a lot of the
questions that you're bringing up. I was thinking at the
time -- I said, well, seems to me if we appoint somebody
sooner, it's more fees to be paying that person. But the
other side of this is, what it's going to mean is we're
going to have to -- well, hopefully -- is speed the trial
process. And I don't know if that's possible. I think
we're pretty efficient in this county.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: In my opinion, it's
going to slow it down drastically, because the best way for
a defense attorney to get the best deal for his client,
especially if they have to call these court-appointed
attorneys, is to postpone and postpone and stack up the
dockets, and you're going to see the dockets in this county,
especially County Court at Law, get stacked up so bad that
they're goiuy to have to be cutting special deals or
whatever just to clear dockets out.
COMMISSIONEK LETZ: I think you're right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's what
was told to us in Abilene; this really was a defense
attorney work protection act.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's going to guarantee
61
1
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
ZJ
them a job. Now, you know, there are -- even if they are
indigent, if a person does get convicted, there are ways
that they can still, as part of that conviction, be ordered
to pay back those -- those court appointment fees. But, you
know, you can only squeeze so much blood out of turnips.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're telling me you
don't have $783 in your budget?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I cut my budget real
close.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You got a paycheck
coming this week. Come on, let's have some commitment here.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Give me yours, Buster.
JUDGE HENNEKE: What we need to do is
authorize the Sheriff to purchase the forms, and then when
the bill comes in, he'll have to get with Tommy and find a
place for the money.
COMM1SSlUNER BALDWIN: That's true.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Correct, Tommy?
MR. '1'UMLINSON: Sure.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move to do so.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court
authorize the Sheriff to purchase the new forms required by
Senate Bill 7, as presented.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1S
16
1/
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
62
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or
comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I'd like to say
I am thrilled that there are some folks in the public here
from Kerr County that pay taxes, that are forced to pay
these kind of tares that the great State of Texas tells them
that they will. So, it's not -- I mean, it's a good
education.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, on the other
side of this -- this is something else I learned, and I
presume what we were told is true -- that under GASB 34 or
39, whatever it is we're doing, a lot of this will become
much more apparent. It's going to be very obvious, when the
new accounting is in place, that it's going to show where
this money's going.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any more 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: Let's skip down, if we can,
to Item Number 14 so we can allow the Sheriff to go back to
catching the bad guys if he needs to. Item Number 14 is
consider and discuss the renewal of the Kerr County teen
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
63
curfew. As y'all may recall, this curfew was enacted
approximately a year ago. Section 4 of the actual order
provided in your packet has a sunset of one year, the
anniversary of which will be April lst. If you're willing
to continue the curfew in place, we need to take action to
extend the order and the curfew. Sheriff, what are your
thoughts on this matter, sir?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Thank goodness, we don't
write that many citations actually in violation of the
curfew. We do write quite a few warnings and things like
that. I think it's been an excellent tool for -- for
parents and for law enforcement on controlling a lot of
things after the hours of midnight with the kids under 17
years of age. It's -- it has really benefitted us. We
don't see near as many kids out during those hours, which
consequently, I could never say what crime's been saved from
happening, but I think it is a crime prevention tool and I'd
like to see it continue. And I'd still like to see the City
adopt one similar; otherwise, we're going to keep pushing
the kids back in the city.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd just like to point
out, as per the court order that's in our -- the original
court order that's in our packet, that I voted against it,
and I will again today, due to the fact it still doesn't
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2~
69
make any sense to me that the City of Kerrville does not
have any kind of ordinance, whereas out in the county we do.
It just doesn't -- it doesn't make sense to do the county
and not do the city. I mean, if the City was to go along
with it and put something into place, then -- then I think
my mind would be changed. But it just -- we're just pushing
kids around. We're doing nothing -- we're doing nothing
with this thing, in my opinion.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think we're doing a
lot. The City of Ingram does have one in place, and that's
where we mainly -- you know, City of Kerrville also has, you
know, a lot more officers on the streets than the County and
City of Ingram can afford during those hours, which it does
help in that. And, being perfectly honest, being a parent
of a 16-year-old, you know, it does help the parents, in my
opinion, when you tell the kid you have to be in before
midnight or anything else, 'cause it is a curfew violation.
It is a law violation. I think that has helped a lot, you
know.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I tell my kid to be in
before midnight because he needs to be in before midnight.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I agree.
COMMISSIONEP, BALDWIN: You know, that's
bottom line.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If I could make a
1
1 .-.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
~~
23
29
25
65
comment, I'm sure some of you have -- I originally voted
against it, was pretty outspoken against it. I still don't
like it. I know the Sheriff likes it from a law enforcement
standpoint, but I still am not in favor of a curfew.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: At the time we adopted
the -- the original order, there was a very impassioned plea
by a group from my precinct, my constituents, Wayne Este and
others, and I thought that their arguments were very good in
favor of that at that time, and I still do. So, I will vote
in favor of extending the order.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You consider it a
useful tool? Did I hear you correctly?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, I do. Like I said,
we don't write very many citations, thank goodness, at all.
But I think it has been a useful tool, and most of the
businesses that get affected by it during the summer;
namely, like Crider's or places like that, we've had a few
little bumps in the road with them, but most of them have
now gotten to where what they do is, they announce it at
each one of their -- their dances and rodeos, that this is
the curfew, and they've really been helpful with us in
enforcing it.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Works well.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Do I have a motion to extend
6b
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1L
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
;, ~
the curfew?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court
extend the Kerr County teen curfew. Any other questions or
comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(Commissioners Williams and Griffin voted in
favor of the motion.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(Commissioners Baldwin and Letz voted against
the motion.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: County Judge votes aye.
Motion carries. That takes me up to six, guys. What's the
deal here? Gkay. Let's return to the regular order. I
think we can take up Item Number 9; then we'll take our
break. Item Number 9, consider and discuss setting a date
and time for joint workshop with U.G.R.A. Board members to
discuss Kerr County Comprehensive Colonia Tnfrastructure
Study and Plan. Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIUNER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge.
I'm passing out to you -- and one for the clerk, and here's
one for Kathy and here's one for the press, if they want
r_opies. This is a copy of a draft of -- of the
Comprehensive Flan which is currently being worked on. As
67
,~
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
yc~u know, we've received a grant from the State for about
$90,000, I believe. The Grantworks people have done the
mapping and are developing this particular plan, and what we
need to do is have an opportunity to go over it, let them
make tkie presentation, make any final corrections and so
forth on the maps. I gave Commissioner Baldwin a stack of
maps, almost blew his mind. Have you done your homework
yet, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, but you
I
can't have them back yet.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. But, anyhow,
what I'd like do is set a date from that workshop and a
close examination of the draft and of the maps. We'll come
up with a capital improvement schedule, and it will identify
those very areas in Kerr County that are under -- that have
infrastructure needs and housing needs. And the capital --
the capital improvement schedule would be one that we could
work with to find the grant moneys out there to be able to
do some of these things. So, the suggested dates that would
be in conjunction with the U.G.R.A. -- 1 think their board
indicated that whatever date we selected was suitable with
them. We're suggesting April 9th or 10th at 3 p.m. in the
afternoon, and it`s up to the Court at this point.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What days of the week are
those?
68
I
2
3
9
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
73
14
15
1F
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~4
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tuesday and Wednesday.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tuesday and
Wednesday.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: April 10th, I will not
be able to attend.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I definitely would not
be able to attend on the 10th.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Nor will I, the 9th or the
10th.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'll have a little
trouble on the 9th. What time?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 3 o'clock in the
afternoon.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'1L be in Austin.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, the 9th would be
suitable?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I won't be here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Judge, I would
move, then, that we set the date of April 9th at 3 p.m. for
a joint workshop with the Upper Guadalupe River Authority
Rnard of Directors to discuss the Kerr County Comprehensive
Colonia Infrastructure Study and Plan.
COMMISSIONER LETG: Commissioner, S hear a no
here and a maybe here. I think it's too important; I think
we need to have the full Court present.
69
r-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ll
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it would be
nice if we did, but if we just keep -- we've got to get it
done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I --
JUDGE HENNEKE: What if we had it the 2nd,
which is our second April court date? Do you think that's
too late, or --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:
for everybody, we can do it then.
DODGE HENNEKE: We're
court on that date. Let's do it that
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN:
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:
the 22nd.
No. It that works
already committed to
afternoon.
That would be perfect.
I would amend it to
COMMISSIvNER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; 3 o'clock?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, ser_ond by Commissioner Letz, that the Court have a
workshop jointly with U.G.R.A. Board to discuss the Kerr
County Comprehensive Colonia Infrastructure Study and Plan
at 3 o'clock p.m. on Monday, April 22nd, Year 2002. At the
U.G.R.A.?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, big classroom.
JUDGE HENNEKE: At the classroom at the
U.G.R.A. building, 125 Lehmann. Any other questions or
~o
1
2
3
9
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2~
comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a comment.
Just -- phis is one of those things that -- that we -- that
we get involved in and don't have any questions about it,
and we throw -- we begin to throw the word "colonia" around
pretty heavy. And I think maybe there's public -- 'cause I
know the first Lew times S heard it, I was real
uncomfortable with that word being in our county, but I
think as we go along, we may want to bring that up and talk
about what the -- the criteria is for being a colonia.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which I think w2 can.
I agree, it's a good point, Commissioner. I think a lot of
that is embodied iii this document that I handed out to you,
and this has to do with infrastructure and substandard
housing. And, suffice to it say, we have a good bit of that
scattered around in pockets throughout the county.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Ukay. Any other 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 resp~use.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge?
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE IIENNEKE: Okay. We've had a request to
71
1
2
3
9
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
take up Item Number 10 before we take our break. Consider
and discuss County appointments to the Kerrville/Kerr County
Joint Airport Advisory Board. And the terms of the current
appointees expire March 26th, Y"ear 2002. Commissioner
Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I put this on
the agenda because we were in receipt of communication from
the City of Kerrville, over the signature of Megan Caffall,
who is the Airport Manager, that two of the appointments --
County appointments expire tomorrow, as a matter of fact. I
share some of the concerns that have been expressed to me
from other Commissioners about the manner in which the
memorandum came down, sort of presupposing that we may want
to appoint the same people who have currently -- who
currently hold tY~ose jobs. And, without casting any
aspersion on the quality of their representation -- they've
done an excellent job, making the most of the meetings;
Ms. Priest, who's the president of that board, can attest to
that -- I think we do have an obligation to find out who all
may be out there in Kerr County that may be interested in
serving on that board. The airport is a major part of our
infrastructure and serves a vital need for this community.
I personally know oI two other individuals who have
expressed an interest in serving on that board. So, what
I'd like to suggest is, rather than reappoint or appoint any
72
r-~


1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
particular members that I -- names that I might throw out or
Commissioner Griffin might throw out, I think I'd like to
take a page out of trie City's book in which we let the
public know that there are two positions on a very important
advisory board available, and if they have a desire to
participate and be considered, that they let us know of that
desire, and we'll go from there and set a date for doing
that about one month out from now.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAYriS: That would be in the
form o£ a lengthy motion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to hear Fred
repeat it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll second the motion,
and just make a comment that I think that we need to -- it
is a very important board, and I think we need to open it up
to the public and get to know our appointees, whoever they
may be, and have them come in, talk to us. Or whoever wants
to be nn that board, have them come in, talk to us, and
we'll make a selection.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which, I might add,
would not preclude the current board members from asking the
Court to reconsider their -- re-upping them for another
term.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure, I agree.
73

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
lfl
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Sounds ]ike a good
idea, and I would echo what Commissioner Williams said. The
current appointees have done a fantastic job. They show up,
and they know what they're talking about when it comes to
airport business.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ms. Priest, can you tell
us real quickly, how long has Dr. Davis been on? Do you
recall?
MS. PRIEST; Uver 10 years
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Over 10 years. How about
Mr. Miller?
MS. PRIEST: Pardon?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mr. Miller, how long has
he been --
	MS. PRIEST;	Less.		
	COMMISSIONER	LETZ:	Less?	
	MS. PRIEST:	Yes.		
	COMMISSIONER	LETZ:	Okay.	
	MS. FR.IEST:	1 thi	nk Dr. Davis went on	about
'87 or '88,	around in there.			
	COMMISSIONER	LETZ:	Okay, thank you.	
	JUDGE HENNEKE	: We	have a motion by	
Commissioner	Williams, secon	d by	Commissioner Letz, t	hat the
Court accept	expressions of	inter	est from individuals	to
serve as the	County appointe	es to	the Kerrvi11e1Kerr	County
1
2
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
IL
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2A
25
74
Joint Airport Advisory Board, with such expressions of
interest to be received not later than April 17th, to be
considered at our meeting on April 22nd.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, will we ask
them to submit a request in writing to the Commissioners
Court office? Or --
JUDGE HENNEKE: I think that's up to the --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you want to give
them Bi11's home number or what?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we should do it,
and I think that probably we should -- since this is a
little bir_ different than we`ve done in the past, I think we
should authorise the Judge or someone to write those two a
letter asking them, if they are interested, to resubmit
their names.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Do we want the expressions of
interest to be submitted in writing?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's part of the motion.
Any other questions or comments? If not, all in favor,
raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDCE IIENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Okay. At


2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
75
this time, let's take a break and return at a quarter till
11:00.
(Recess taken from 10:30 a.m. to 10:45 a.m.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's resume the regular
special meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court.
Next item for consideration is Stem Number 11, consider and
discuss revisions to the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and
Regulations, Water Availability Requirements, and routing
slips, and set a public hearing for the same. Commissioner
Lets.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I've spent quite a
bit ~f time in the past couple months, since I first brought
this back, kind of going through the rules again and trying
to comp up with some revisions that I think kind of meet the
spirit of what we talked about originally, which is mainly
the revision of plat area, but going through documents, I
also found a couple of other things I had questions about or
errors that we had or typos or things of that nature. So,
what 7 think we'll do is just go through it, the handout
that everyone has in their packet. It starts out with the
Section II definitions, and the first item here is a
definition of "Authorized Agent," and I'm not sure that's
the definition we need in here for this. I've asked Truby
to do a word search on "authorized agent" in a document,
76
1
.-. 2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,~. 13
14
1
1J
16
17
18
19
20
L1
22
23
24
•^-
25
because if we're only using that relating to septic, I think
we ought to narrow this, I mean, really look at the
definition to make sure it applies. That has not been done
yet. But, anyway, we're looking at that, and that's
something that we're working on. On page -- second page of
the handout, on Page 19, there was just a typo in the
previous version. It should be "6.02.C.3." As I recall, we
had "6.03," I believe. Just a typo on that one; I think
it's been corrected.
The main changes that -- that are in the rest
of the packet relate back to revision of plat or minor
plats. And what I've done, I've gone through the
agreement -- or the document, and we're trying to come up
with a -- a way to do a minor plat that's in compliance with
slate law, and easier on landowners, property owners, and
developers. And, basically, if you're in a subdivision, on
new plats, if you're less than four lots, you can combine
the preliminary plat and final plat in one meeting to the
court. But, you -- you know, that's just the way it's done.
It's basically -- you're doing it at one time. If it's a
reviei~n, you still have to do the public hearing, which is
required by state law. However, it could also -- if it's
less than -- if you're revising less than four lots, you can
come to the court at one time, but you still would have To
have a public hearing there. The language in here hopefully
~~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
L I
~2
23
24
2 J
accomplishes that. P.nd the other area that I made some
changes is -- and it's really probably easier to go to
Appendix B, if everyone has a copy of that.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What page number?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a separate stapled
area.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay, got it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And a number of our
certifications that are on the plat I looked at, and a lot
of these, I've had some feedback from those that sign off on
them, and others I have not heard back from, but we were
having things -- or were asking things be certified that I
didn't think were proper. As an example, with the
Designated Representative for O.S.S.F., during the interim
we changed our rules a little bit on O.S.S.F., and the state
law changed a little bit too, so we tried to come up with
something a little bit different there. That's under Item
~, Certification by Adrninistrator of On-Site Sewage
Facilities. And I put a note on here; I said, "This
certification is only required if any lot in the subdivision
is less than 2 acres." It didn't make sense to me, and
doesn't make sense to me, to require our Designated
Representative to review every plat. It is clear that in
a -- in a place that we're going to put a plat note, or
recommended we put a plat note that goes on every plat, that
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
just says pretty much, "You're going to have to comply with
county O.S.S.F. rules at the time you make any improvements
on the lot," and only are askinq the Designated
Representative to look at the plat if it's less than
2 acres. 'That's an arbitrary number. It could be 3, it
could be 1, it could be -- could be 5. But it seems to me
Lktat you're -- if you're at least 2 acres, there is a way to
put a licensed septic system on that lot.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You're talking about
in a case you know where there's -- there is unimproved
properly in the subdivision?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: But they would still have to
gc through Lhe process.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Doesn't change anything.
JUDGE HENNEKE: All it is, is we're talking
about a certification on a plat.
COMMISSIONER GR11'F IN: On a plat.
DODGE HENNEKE: We're not talking about the
actual --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It means that if you're
on a 5 acre lot and you're going to have a septic, there's
no reason to ask, in this case, Stuart Barron to go out and
lcok at it. I mean, 5 acres, rhey're going to be able to do
79
1
,~-. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1 L
13
14
1 J
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
^4
~--
25
something. It may be an aerobic system; it may be
out there. That bridge would he crossed at that time that
they decide to make the improvement. So, basically, we're
speeding up the process. Most -- or a majority of the plats
would not have to go through the Designated Representative
for certification. Un the one before that on the packet, I
got kind of got -- on the Certifications by Registered
Professional Land Surveyor, I deleted the language related
to the floodplain, 'cause it didn't make any sense to me to
have the surveyor talk about floodplain and the floodplain
representative talking about floodplains. So, I put it all
where the County has the responsibility and the control,
under Floodplain Administrator.
Under Headwaters, Certification Number 3, the
current certification somehow says that -- or I wrote it, so
I should know this, but it says that the certification is
that tkie person -- or the plat is going to abide by
Headwaters' rules, which doesn't make any sense. All we're
asking Headwaters to certify on the plat is that they're in
compliance with water availability, and would narrow the
scope down to Lhat very specific item, so that they will
only look at it -- and that determination, whether it goes
to ieadwaters at all, will be made by the County Engineer.
80
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
I J
16
17
18
19
20
~l
22
23
24
25
So, all plats will not be going through Headwaters. The
County Engineer will look at it and decide if it needs that
certification or not.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I thought that the developer
had the option of either having their engineer certify the
water availability, or sending it to Headwaters.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think that can
still happen, but some of them don't need to go there at
a11. I mean, right now every plat has to go through
Headwaters.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yeah, right. I mean, like, a
community water system --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- that already existed.
Tlieie's no need for it to go to Headwaters at all.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Or if it's --
1~ts are all less -- greater than 10 acres, it's exempt from
Water Availability Requirements. Therefore, Franklin just
says iii, it doesn't have to go there on the routing slip.
So, it's going to put a little bit more work on Road and
Bridge Co say on the routing slip where they have to go.
MR. JOHNSTON: Whatever meets one of their
exceptions, we can just eliminate them?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, eliminate them from
the routing slip. Then the other one is Certification
1
,~.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.-- 1 3
14
1
15
i 16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
~3
24
25
81
Number 5,	which is	911,	and it'	s a --	it	just	really narrows
the scope	of this	work	a little	bit.	It	says	that 911
certification. To me, that was not applicable either. So,
these are the provisions, or the appendix changes.
And then, to go through them before we
discuss them, under Water Availability, which is the last
handout, there was -- there was basically, I would say, not
a typo, but just an incorrect way of looking at it. Under
1.04, Public or Community Water Systems, it was previously
worded 16 or more, or more than 16 -- more than 15 and less
than 15. Basically, we eliminated 15. If you had 15
connections, you weren't subject to anything. So, we
modified the language to 16 or more, 16 or less. And also,
Headwaters' name has changed since we did these, and we're
going through and making all the changes to "Headwaters
groundwater Conservation District," as opposed to
"Headwaters Underground Water Conservation District." Those
are the changes.
Where I think we -- you know, recommend we go
from that now is, iL the Court is agreeable to this, I'll
get with Road and Bridge and Truby and we'll get a draft
document complete with all the changes put together, and
82
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~3
24
25
then make it available to the public within, you know,
plenty of time for the public hearing. Set the public
hearing for the first meeting in May. That will give Truby
and I a week to get it -- to get copies to the County
Clerk's office and anywhere else. Any questions?
MR. JOHNSTON: I had a question about the
minor replat revision, if it requires a public hearing. You
say it only has to come once. Doesn't it have to come once,
request a public hearing, and then come and do the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It would have to come to
get -- I think Road and Bridge would have to set the public
hearing. It wouldn't be a preliminary plat. The -- all
we're doing is saying you don't have to come for a
preliminary plat and a final plat.
MH. JOHNSTON: They won't have to submit
their plat to get the public hearing, so we can see what
they're doing? Almost a two-step thing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. But they -- they'd
have to submit it early, but it would just be still one --
MR. JOHNSTON: One time, and they actually do
the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: One time the developer
would actually have to come, I think, or the -- you know,
their representative. But it would take -- you're correct.
And I may go back to -- does it read that way right now? Is
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
~~
~ L
23
24
2~
83
that clear? Or should we change it, do you think, the
language?
MR. JOHNSTON: I'd have to go back and reread
it. I was just going by what you were saying.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, if we need to make
that a little bit clearer, I can do that with Truby when we
prepare the final draft. Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner, on
Number 5, Certification by Kerr 911, "I hereby certify that
the subdivision name platted hereon and road names hereon
are in compliance with Kerr 911 guidelines according to..."
blab, blah, blab. Is that sufficient? Or do we need to
mention a separate item and say, "and are not duplicates of
any other names in Kerr County," or do you think that's
sufficient to get the job done?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If they're in
compliance with the guidelines, then they are not
duplicates.
CUMMISSlUNER WILLIAMS: Okay, fine. That's
the thrust of my question.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I also think there's --
and the issue on that, the fact that, I mean, they may not
-- you know, may choose not to sign it because of a
duplicate issue or a name, and if the developer and Road and
Bridye wants, they can bring it to the court and we can
84
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
29
25
still -- you know, there's some roads that are -- situations
that could come up and the plat could get approved without
that certification on it, because I don't think that 911 can
hold up a plat. It's more of a notice to us that, you know,
that they're in -- the guidelines are in compliance. But we
still have a choice on road names. I don't see that
happening, but it could.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On Number 3 on Page
4, it has to do with test well. B, test well should be
"well," not "will." And you might want to think about
changing "will be" to "is." Test well "is" required.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We11, on that item, again,
the trigger is not the test well. The trigger is whether
the developer has their own engineer that's going to give us
a water availability certification, or whether the developer
is referring the issue to Headwaters for their
determination. So, it's really -- it's not whether a test
well will be required -- shall be required. It's whether,
under Section 1.05.2.B, the developer has requested
Headwaters to certify its water availability. 1.05.2.A is a
situation where the developer's engineer himself provides
the certification of the water availability. 1.05.2.B is a
situation where the developer does not have an engineer, or
the engineer is unwilling to give the certification, and so
it's referred to the Headwaters, which really are limited
1
,,.., 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
y
10
11
12
~	13
	19
1	
	is
1	16
	17
	18
	19
	20
	21
	22
	23
	24
	25
85
situations where not -- not that test wells have been
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But under 1.05.2.A,
Headwaters still -- under the Water Availability
Requirements, they still look at the data submitted by the
-- the developer and look at -- we never look at that data.
So, either -- on Section 1.0 -- 1.05, either way, Headwaters
certifies that they received that information.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's not the way it's
written. 1.05.2 says, In addition to test results required
above, submit to Commissioners Court either a certificate
from a Registered Professional Engineer or a letter from
Headwaters. Now, it's true that Headwaters gets all the
test data, but that's for the purpose of Headwaters'
database, so that they'll have more testing data information
on wells so that they can build a better database so that
they can do a better job of scoping the aquifer. The second
is really designed so that the developer is not tied into
Headwaters' certification, so that the developer has the
option of hiring a private engineer who will take the test
results and certify those results as far as water
availability. Now, if that's not where we want to be, then
we need to look at changing the whole intent of that, but
that's the way that it was written up in the Tirst place.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2~
86
Headwaters gets all the data.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: But that's for purposes of
their database. They only provide a certification if the
developer does not have an engineer or, as you pointed out,
if it's a community water system with less than -- 16 or
fewer --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Connections.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- connections.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, without going back
and rereading the whole thing, when it is deemed that the
well is sufficient if it has a certain minimum flow -- if it
meets the flow criteria, and doesn't Headwaters -- they look
at that to -- to check that out? We never look at that
information, so Headwaters --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, that's -- that's what
I'm saying. We get a certification from one of two sources,
a Registered Professional Engineer who gives us a
certificate saying, I've done -- we've done the test, here
are the test results, and in my opinion, there is adequate
water.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Or the test results are
provided to Headwaters, and Headwaters provides us with a
leL~eL which says, Based on the test results, it's our

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1/
18
1N
20
21
L 2
23
29
25
87
opinion that there's adequate water. It comes -- can come
from one of two different directions, and the whole intent
of that was so that the developer had an alternative to
Headwaters.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We may need to -- I mean,
I agree with it, but I'm wondering -- the question comes in
now is that it seems that it is best for us and for
Headwaters that, if they're going to -- the developer's
going to rely on a third-party engineer, not -- not relying
on Headwaters, that we still want that letter to go to
Headwaters and at least acknowledge that Headwaters has
received the letter.
DODGE HENNEKE: Yeah, we could -- we can
require that the developer give -- that the engineer provide
a copy of the certificate to Headwaters. I don't know if we
want to allow Headwaters to come in and challenge the
certificate or not. But the whole -- I mean, again, the way
it was created was really -- there were two needs; one for
Headwaters to get the data, 'cause we all know that the
Trinity Aquifer is an understudied aquifer, and they need
all the data they can get. Secondly, to allow the developer
to have two alternative routes; a private engineer who's
putting his Registered Professional Engineer's license at
risk, or the Headwaters, in the event the engineer wasn't
available or wasn't willing.
1 ~..

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
88
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I still think that we
would want the -- the data -- we want the data to get --
well, Headwaters should then certify that this data --
they've received the data.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Yeah, we can do that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Say that again.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Certify that --
Headwaters certifies that they have received the data, and
that they're being asked to -- and as long as we're saying
that in 1.05, which I think we do right now, that they would
receive the data, then we can just refer to Section 1.05 and
say that they're -- that the developer is in compliance.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, I see where you're
headed. That they're in compliance, in the sense that
they've either --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: They've done one or
the other.
JUDGE HENNEKE: They've received the data,
or --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or --
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- from a private engineer,
along with the certification, or that the Headwaters has
reviewed the raw test well data and made a determination
that there is adequate water.
89
~ .--

1
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
zl
22
~3
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, I follow that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I was --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sorry I wasn't clear as
to where my mind was.
JUDGE HENNEKE: This is something we've
chewed on now for two years. Why should we be clear about
it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So -- but the
certification, then, would say -- well, instead of -- I
mean, I agree with you that we should delete the language
about test well, and say that the development is in
compliance with Section 1.05.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's good.
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. Does that make
you feel better, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I feel a lot
better.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Jonathan, could we
back up a minute to Page 23, as it is in the book? Under
Section 6.03, the highlighted portion that you have there.
In the paragraph that's in quotes, that says that the
following plat note --
90


1
7
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
1S
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
L L
23
29
<5
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- will take place.
And this goes back to your question about an authorized
agent; is that the correct definition. I think the short
answer to that is no, it's not the correct definition if it
only applies to O.S.S.F.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Because we, the Court,
are the authorized agent, T.N.R.C.C.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So I have -- I would
strike "Authorized Agent for," and after O.S.S.F., strike
"or its." I'll read the whole thing in a minute. And then,
approved -- at the end of that statement, "approved by the
Authorized Agent," I would say "adopted by Kerr County." So
that it would read now, "Prior to construction of any lot,
the owner of said lot shall contact the Kerr County O.S.5.F.
Designated Representative to determine if the proposed
improvements will meet the exemption criteria. All lots in
the subdivision are required to comply with all current and
future O.S.S.F. regulations adopted by Kerr County," is the
way that would then read.
COMMISSIUNER LETZ: Ukay.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And the next paragraph
down there, Headwaters' name didn't get changed.
91
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So that needs to be
corrected.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Stuart, does this work
Lrom -- with you? 1 mean, I tried to take the language that
you gave me and then make it fit.
MR. BARRON: The way -- what he just read
there sounded good to me.
CUMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. BARRON: I didn't get a copy of it, so --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, if you have a
comment, you have time to comment. You can look at it, if
you would, and get it back to me later this week before we
get the final draft. i really -- on that language, I worked
with Stuart Lo try to get --
MR. BARRON: Could you e-mail me a copy of
that so I can have a copy of it on -- or get me one?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: we'll give you one. I'm
trying -- I haven't figured out how you take a page out of a
document and then send that one page only on e-mail. I'm
not that sophisticated yet.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Easier to create a new
document with just that page.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, no, I didn't e-mail
it to you. Not that I didn't want to; I just couldn't
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1 J
1 6
17
18
13
20
2 1
L2
23
24
25
92
figure out how to do it.
JODGE HENNEKE: Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Any other questions?
MR. BARRON: I'd like to make one comment, if
I could. I know y'all -- we've proposed to shrink the size
of the acreages down to an acre or 5 acres, and it may be
easier for the public to understand, since we have a 10-acre
exemption, if it's anything under 10 acres, then it goes
through the platting process at U.G.R.A. And it will just
be for the simple -- for the public, to make it easier for
them, instead of if we're in a subdivision scenario, we're
at 2 acres. Then we don't have to bring it to the
Authorized Agent -- or the Designated Representative. And
if we're not, if we have more than 10 acres, we don't have
to yet permitted at all, just to make it easy for the public
to understand. If we have more than 10 acres, we don't have
to d~ this, this, and this. If we have less than 10 acres,
we have to.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We could put that on the
plat note that -- I mean, I wouldn't have a problem with
pur_ticig i*_ on the plat note, saying that you're exempt if
it's over 10 acres. Only problem then comes that if we
change -- if the rules change from T.N.R.C.C. at some point,
then we need to make sure we change that plat note at that
same time.
93


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
l8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if we just say, you
know, that you've got to meet -- before you do any
improvements, you have to be in compliance with the rules,
we`re covered no matter what. That's the reason I did it
that way, but I don't have a problem with saying that, you
know, if you're over 10 acres, you're exempt from the
O.S.S.F, rules.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I agree with you, because
we'd have to be more specific than that.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Permit, not the rules.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We'd have to be more
specific. I mean, we'd have to say that, A., O.S.S.F. --
one O.S.S.F, system serving one residence on a lot greater
than IU acres, 10 acres or greater.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
JUDGE HENNEKE: So I prefer to do it the way
you've set it out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's safer for
the County and for the pubic to know, when they're getting
ready to do improvements, they need to check with the -- our
Designated Representative, whoever that is, to, you know,
find out if they have to do anything or not, and then they
can be told they're exempt or not exempt at that time.
MK. HARRON: And one other comment about the


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
1J
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~~
G J
24
~5
94
floodplain. I think what we had the surveyor certifying
there, actually out on the ground certifying, taking their
metes and bounds measurements to see if it does meet the --
or if it's inside a floodplain. When we get a map, I don't
know if y'all -- I'm sure y'all have looked at FEMA's maps,
but they're really hard to interpret where they're at with
the little portion that we get on a scale from the surveyor.
So, it may be -- I go back and I look and determine where it
is, but if they're looking at metes and bounds and
determining if it is or isn't, then we can make them certify
what they need to show on there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's still
covered. I thought about this when I rewrote it, but we
didn't change anything about, you know, the floodplain being
desiynaLed on the map or the BFE's and all the other
language in the other documents. All we changed was the
certification, and the surveyors are already certifying that
the data on the plat is correct, whether that includes a BFE
or nut. All we're saying is that everything that -- on the
plat is already being certified by them, but they're not
being asked to pick the BFE and all that. That's -- you can
tell them they have to do it before they -- you're going to
get the plat through -- or, I mean, it's got done on the
plat somewhere, how they do it.
MR. BARRON: I think the only ones that they
95
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
29
25
really certify is that if they -- they were not inside a
floodplain situation, they certify that it was not in a
floodplain, give the map and date, on the ones that I've
seen.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And we talked
about that, and the Judge brought up a point here; that it's
probably better to have the Floodplain Administrator certify
it's not in the floodplain, since we're responsible for the
program, as opposed to have the surveyor certify it's not in
the floodplain. And it means that you're going -- you may
have to look at more plats, I mean, since you wear that hat
as well. Every plat's going to have to come through the
Floodplain Administrator, and I think that's, you know,
probably good. I think that is really -- it should be the
administrator's responsibility more than the surveyor's
responsibility.
MR. BARRON: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thanks, Stuart.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if the surveyors --
you know, people object to that, tell them to come to the
public hearing and let us know, and we can -- there may be a
reason to do it the other way.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or
comments? If not, I'd entertain a motion to approve the
revisions to the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and
96


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2~
Regulations and Water Availability Requirements, routing
slips, and set a public hearing for -- let's make it
11 o'clock in the morning on May the 13th, Year 2002.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Those changes will
incorporate the changes that we discussed today.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court approve the
revisions to the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and
~ regulations, the Y.err County Water Availability
Requirements, and routing slips, as amended today, and set a
public hearing for the same on Monday, May the 13th, Year
2002, at 11 o'clock a.m „ here in the Kerr County
Commissioners Courtroom. Any other questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A comment. I will
have -- a copy will be with the County Clerk by nett Monday.
That will be the basis for the public hearing. We'll get
the changes incorporated by then.
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. Good work.
97
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
I J
16
17
18
19
20
L 1
22
23
24
25
Next item is Item Number 12, consider and discuss referring
Court Order Number 27390 to the County Attorney for
implementation. Commissioner Griffin.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. In your packets
there, you have a copy of Court Order 27390 that we did back
in January, which authorized me to get with the owner of the
building in west Kerr County, where the West Kerr County
Annex is in Ingram, to draw up a new lease. The rent, by
the way -- or the lease right now is going on a
month-to-month basis, in terms of the lease, but that we
would up the monthly rate to $450 a month, and multi-year --
in a multi-year contract of some sort, and that I was
authorized to negotiate the final details and bring it back
to Court for final approval. 1 have tried repeatedly to get
hold of the owner, and have been unsuccessful. I've left
notes, I've left phone calls, voice mail messages, messages
with some of the folks in his offices. I can not get a
response. So, since there is a legal obligation here, I'm
going to recommend that we request the County Attorney try
to get in touch through the proper channels with the owner,
and let's see where we can go with renewing the lease. And
I'll make a motion that to that effect.
COMMISSIONER BHLDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
98
1
2
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
I7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
refer implementation of Court Order PSumber 27390 regarding
renewal of the lease for the West Kerr County Annex to the
County attorney for action. Any other questions or
comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If I remember
correctly, he's the one that was nervous about getting the
new contract going.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the new numbers
going.
COMMISSIONER. GRIFFIN: And the $50 bump. I
think they called you first.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Called me first.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Number one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or
commends? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: A11 opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item is
Item Number 13, consider and discuss amending Court Order
Number ?7080, adopting rules of Kerr County, Texas, for
On-Site Sewage Facility, to delete the reference to adoption
of the Kerr County On-Site Sewage Facility program
99

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
~l
22
23
29
25
procedures for real estate transfers. Commissioner Griffin.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. Let me say up
top that this amendment to that order that's being proposed
in no way changes the O.S.S.F, rules or the real estate
transfer inspection. It only changes the way that the rule
is implemented procedurally. I got a call from Ken Graber
at T.N.R.C.C., and he said that, in reviewing our last
order, we had tied two orders together; the one that has our
basin O.S.S.F. rule, and then this other order where we had
laid out some procedures to be fo]lowed in the real estate
transfer inspection. They don't have any problem with that,
except for the fact that if we're going to tie those two
orders toyather, this order that had to do with the real
estate transfer procedures would have to be an integral part
of our rule, which we don't want to do. So, procedurally,
if we will just amend the Order Number 27080 to delete the
reference to the program procedures for the real estate
transfers, then the order's right, T.N.R.C.C. legal is
happy, and we've y~L a clean order. lloesn't change
anything, as far as what we do.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we need to create a
new order for the real estate language, though?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No, we've already got
one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
100
~^
.~'^
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1L
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER, GRIFFIN: But it's just that we
don't tie them together in our order that implements our
rule. That's the only thing we're doing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm hip.
JUDGE HENNEKE: What specifically do we need
to amend? Do you -- is the language --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I would make a motion
that we amend Court Order 27080 to delete the reference to
adoption of the Kerr County On-Site Sewage Facility program
procedures for real estate transfers. I don't have that
number, but -- that's the order, 27079. So, we would -- we
would just delete the reference to 27079.
DODGE HENNEKE: Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court amend
Order Number 27080 to delete any reference therein to Order
Plumber 27079. Any questions or comments? If not, all in
favur, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Okay. The
last item for discussion today is Item Number 15, consider
and discuss executing and delivering to City of Ingram a
101

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2~
quitclaim deed covering the old Ingram Bridge. If I can,
Commissioner Griffin, let me set the table on this. We're
talking about the old Indian Creek Bridge. This was a
structure that was built in the 1930's by the W.P.A. It was
used for decades by TexDOT as the road across Indian Creek
there. When TexDOT built the new crossing, they abandoned
the use of what is commonly known as Indian Creek Bridge.
Kerr County has no record of any ownership interest in this
structure. Road and Bridge has reviewed its records.
There's no indication that this structure ever accrued to
the ownership of Kerr County. It's -- I believe it's not
covered on our insurance. We don't maintain it. It's not
ours legally, to the extent that anyone can figure out. I
have indicated that I thought the Court would be willing to
entertain a request from the City of Ingram that we would
quitclaim to the City of Ingram whatever interest we have in
that structure so that they might have it and continue the
benefits to be derived from it. It's never been discussed
in court before; this is the first time it's ever officially
come to court. You have in your packet a letter from Mayor
Schlabach requesting that the Commissioners Court formally
consider the issue of transferring whatever interest we may
have in this structure to the City of Ingram, and so that is
where we stand as of today. The mayor is here, as well
Danny Edwards, City Attorney. We're prepared to discuss
1
~,
3
4
5
6
8
5
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2J
102
this with them and see where we can get. Commissioner
Griffin, do you want to add anything?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: The only thing I would
add is that, on the maintenance side, the Road and Bridge
Department has, on occasion, done repairs to the -- to that
flume area, that plate that was in there. There was some
grating several times that the County has -- as a health,
safety, and welfare issue, has gone in and repaired that so
kids can't slide down through there and get trapped in there
or something of that sort, and it has been, I understand,
most recently repaired with a larger, heavy -- more
heavy-duty plate in there so that that -- the chances of
falling are much less now than it was before. But that's
the only thing I would add to what you just said, Judge.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions or comments
from the Commissioners Court?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Repaired by Road and
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Road and Bridge
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question.
What about -- what about the issue of the County obtaining
property by prescription'? By the -- I mean, I guess -- I
guess it -- I mean, doesn't it say something like -- Danny's
going Lo know this better than anybody in the room,
103
r
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
13
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
probably, but if the County used and maintained a road on a
regular basis for a certain period of time or something like
that, it becomes public-owned property by prescription?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm not sure a political
subdivision can acquire property by prescription. I'm not
sure. I haven't looked at that section --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right-of-way.
Right-of-way, but not ownership.
DODGE HENNEKE: I don't think that we ever
really maintained the road, 'cause it was a TexDOT -- I
mean, up until the time -- my understanding is, up until the
time they built the new crossing, it was TexDOT who took
care of that particular bridge.
COMMISSIONER BALDWLN: As a Commissioner out
there, I don't recall ever doing anything other than putting
those grates over the old -- under the spillway thing.
But --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And your question, I
think -- but I think it brings up a point, and this would, I
think, have to be addressed if there's -- if we do a
quitclaim. Or make sure, I guess, that that would cover --
I mean, prescription doesn't transfer ownership. It only
transLers maintenance, basically, and use. 1 mean, other
roads that we've acquired by prescription, we never own that
land; we just own the road, as I understand.
104
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
y
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2,
COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: The right-of-way.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You have a
prescriptive right-of-way. You don't have prescriptive
ownership.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That still doesn't answer the
issue of ownership.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's right. That's
exactly the point.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, let me ask you
this, then. If we don't own something, we can't give it to
somebody else.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, but we're not giving it
to them. We're giving whatever interest we may have, if
any. It's a request situation where we're saying, hey, we
don't claim it. We don't have it on our books. As far as
we know, it's not ours, but we'll give you whatever claim we
might ever have to it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you looking for a
second to that motion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How do we deal with
the presumed assumption that we're going to maintain it?
We've done maintenance in the past. Is there not some
presumption that we'll continue?
JUDGE HENNEKE: We've done very limited
maintenance on a health, safety, and welfare basis.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
105
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. There's no
need to deal with that?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't think so. I mean, I
guess the County Attorney can advise us of that. But --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The question I had is
the -- in the attachments, the -- a bid for concrete work.
JUDGE HENNEKE: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's not related? I
mean, the City's doing that concrete work?
JUDGE HENNEKE: No. Danny, do you want to
address us now at this time? I think it's appropriate.
MR. EDWARDS: Thank you, Judge,
Commissioners. The -- the position of the City has been
from the -- I'm Danny Edwards, City Attorney for the City of
Ingram, Post Office Box 379, Hunt, Texas, 238-4925. Thank
you. The position of the City of Ingram has been, from the
inception, that we would be happy to accept the quitclaim
deed from the County; however, before we would accept it,
the bridge would have to be put into a safer condition. And
I had a meeting with the County Engineer and Mr. Griffin --
Commissioner Griffin on October the 9th, 2001, and at that
time I think we so expressed ourselves to Commissioner
Griffin, that we would accept it if it were properly
repaired, and Commissioner Griffin indicated that we should
all -- pardon me -- make a joint effort to try to find the
106
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
funds to make these repairs.
I talked to Commissioner Griffin on the 24th
of October, and he indicated that he had found about $3,000
in the budget that could be put toward this. That was
passed on to the commission -- to the City Council. I
talked to him on December the 5th, 'Ol. He said he found
$5,000, so I passed that on to the City Council. And we've
been looking for funds also, and we really couldn't do much
until we knew what the position of the County was to begin
with on how much they were willing to contribute, or if they
were going to help us with it. And, finally, we -- at the
suggestion of Commissioner Griffin, we tried to get bids on
this, and we had two or three people show up, and they never
gave us a written bid. And we finally got two, and we sent
to the Judge on -- I think on the hth of September, or 12th
-- 17th -- 6th of February, a copy of the lowest bid that we
had been able to receive. And that was not a bid for the
complete work that the City would like to see done to it,
but the council did agree that if they would do just that
minimum amount, we'd go ahead and take it, and in future
budget years try to put budget money into our -- our budget
for repairing the dam or bridge on a further basis. But we
really don't know how to jump on this until we know what the
County's participation in it is going to be, if any.
Two things that we needed to have done, which
107

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
23
24
25
we discussed with the County Engineer, was there was a grate
that needs some welding on it, but it's -- one of the bars
has broken off. It's big enough for a human being to be
sucked into it. We thought that could be repaired. And
then the surfar_e of it needs to be resurfaced, concrete. We
have the same concerns that the County does, and that's to
the structure and integrity of it. If you're worried about
the structure and integrity of it, we ought to be worried
about the structure and integrity of it. So, we're trying
to complete some -- have some kind of a compromise as to how
we can accomplish what we think is the will of the people of
west Kerr County, and that is they don't want that bridge
torn out. And, of course, I don't think it's economically
feasible to do it; you'd have the biggest study to be done
for the EPA, that it would cost us more than it would to
rebuild that bridge, probably. So, we're happy to take the
bridge, take the responsibility Tor it if it's put into a --
a structurally sound condition and a safe condition. And
we're just looking for cooperative effort -- and I know you
are cooperative, and we appreciate it very much -- to see
how we can accomplish the -- accomplish that purpose.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A comment in general, and
considering -- and I know very little about this, overall,
other than what I dust heard today, but my preference would
be, if we find some Tunds, that we give the -- if we're
1os
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1L
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
getting rid of the ownership of it, if we have any
ownership, which we probably don't, I'd rather the City of
Ingram do the repairs than us do the repairs. I'd rather
give them money and let them -- 'cause that way we're
clearly -- you know, we're not going to be responsible.
Because, I mean, the money or the cost to repair and to
get -- I mean, the liability is pretty high with this. Lots
of things that can come up. So, I'd rather let the City do
it, as opposed to the County doing the repairs. If, indeed,
we can find the funds to do the repairs.
MR. EDWARDS: I can't comment any further
than say that the mayor will testify, I think, that they --
that the County has repaved that bridge several times. It's
been maintained by the County, and I -- I'm sorry, I didn't
get it at the time, because it was of no consequence to me,
but a young man appeared before our City Council and
testified and gave the page and number that there -- that
this bridge is mentioned in the City -- in the County
Commissioners' minutes about repairs, et cetera, et cetera,
way back there. And I didn't write them down because, as I
said, at the time it was of no consequence to me; I didn't
care. So I don't know what the status is of the ownership
in it. He claimed that -- his statement was that the County
that, but I can't give you the page and number, date, time
109
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~4
1S
or anything.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My view is that -- you
know, and then I'll be quiet on the issue -- is that, you
know, the bridge is of benefit to the county and the
residents of the county, and I think we certainly don't
want, you know, the -- it to fall apart. I mean, but
it's -- I think it puts us in a little bit of a precarious
situation, being able to spend money on it if we don't think
we own it. But I think you can do something -- health and
safety we can do somewhat, and I think it's a good time to
clean it up.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, as Danny -- and
if I might interrupt, as Danny and I, I think, had
discussed, and I think I mentioned it to the mayor as well
in the letter, is that -- that I think we can jointly go try
to find grant moneys also to try to defray all or part of
this cost, and we could do that in lock-step, which 1 think
would be good. The -- the issue was -- and when we
discussed bids, is that we needed to see how big the
enchilada was. Is this a -- is this a $2,000 problem or is
it a $25,000 problem? We didn't know. And my suggestion
was -- was, hey, the people who do that kind of work ought
to be willing to make bids on it, and we'll find out, get an
idea of how much that's going to cost, and then we can see
what the -- develop a strategy for getting whatever funds,
110
1
7
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
if it's from the County coffers, the City coffers, or grant
moneys or whatever. And there may be some T.N.R.C.C. money
out there, even, in the dam work. And, by the way, I don't
think this has been used, quote, as a bridge --
MR. EDWARDS: No.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- legally for a long,
long time, since the new road -- since the new bridge was
built. So, it's really a dam. It's -- and so we need
someone who's got expertise in how do you cap a dam?
Because it's the top of it that's coming apart. If you try
to just pave it, the first flood peels the stuff right, you
know, off, and it all ends up down in Kerrville somewhere.
So, we need to probably get some -- some good technical
expertise on how would you do it. So, I don't know. I
think if we get rid of the -- if the County quitclaims its
ownership, then I agree with -- with any ownership it may
have, which it may have none. But I think, then, that
Jonathan's suggestion that -- that we try to support
financially and be out of it, as far as the repairs go, and
let's let the City handle it so you've got that continuity
of how the work was done, who did it, and so it's all under
one roof.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Another -- go ahead.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Danny, if you know,
the bridge is -- or the dam, whichever it is, combination of
111
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
both, is within the corporate limits of the city of Ingram
or the ETJ or not? Both?
MR. EDWARDS: No, it's not in the corporate
limits, to answer your question.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's in the ETJ?
MR. EDWARDS: In the ETJ, but not in the
corporate limits.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we have to
deal with what I said earlier, the implied ongoing
maintenance that's been mentioned. There is something
implied.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that -- and related
to that, also, if it's not a road, I don't think Road and
Bridge has the authority to do anything on it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't know. I wonder what
authority -- if we have any authority to do anything on it.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: See, that's why
that's -- the logic track you keep coming around to is, who
owns it, and who should be working on it? And -- and, like
I say, the Road and Bridge, on health, safety, and welfare,
on that basis has done repairs to those grates. And if --
in fact, I think the latest thing that you mentioned,
Danny --
MR. EDWARDS: I don't know if it's been done
or not.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
~3
24
25
112
MR. JOHNSTON: It's done. It was done a few
days after we talked.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah, it has been
done, and so that part of it's solved for now. So the
question is, though -- still would come back to, who owns it
and how do we get this thing done? Everybody's interested
in seeing that it gets done correctly, but there are
ownership and liability and maintenance responsibility
issues that have to be resolved.
MR. EDWARDS: I would suggest -- how do I say
this? I would comment to the Court that if I were you, I
would not go to T.N.R.C.C. for any assistance in this,
because I have talked to T.N.R.C.C., and I know their stand
on it, and you wouldn't like their stand if we got to push
this issue. So, I -- just get away from T.N.R.L,C,
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Once you get into dams
with them, you -- you go up three or four levels.
MR. EDWARDS: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And it's a whole
different world when you start dealing with dams and --
MR. EDWARDS: You're right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- holding water.
MR. EDWARDS: That's a world you want to stay
away from.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 'That's correct.
113
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2~
29
2_`
JUDGE HENNEKE: As a person who permitted
probably the last dam in Kerr County, I absolutely amen that
one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tell me again, what
is -- where is TexDOT in this thing? Do they own the
bridge? I mean, did somebody just say that? To kind of get
it out of here, we can do an unfunded mandate to them, order
them to fix their problem.
DODGE HENNEKE: Franklin --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't send any money.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Franklin, what's your
understanding on TexDot's position?
MR. JOHNSTON: I don't know if TexDOT ever
owned it. They made inspections on it when we used it, and
when we built the new bridge and -- and, you know,
essentially abandoned that, they no longer inspect it. So,
I don't think they have ownership in it either.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it was --
MR. JOHNSTON: I don't think they own those
bridges. They do their annual inspections, or semiannual.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it was a TexUO'1' road
when the -- before they moved the road.
MR. JOHNSTON: That was before they moved the
road. They don't do it any more.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Indian Creek Road is a
114
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2q
2`
county road?
MR. JOHNSTON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Out to the city. And
just -- in my mind, I've always considered that bridge a
part of --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Indian Creek.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- Indian Creek Road.
It's just the way I've always looked at it. Does TexDOT own
the new bridge? Do they own the new bridge that we bought?
MR. JOHNSTON: I don't know if we ever talked
about it, who owns it. They -- they paid -- they paid,
what, 80 percent and we paid 10? They paid 90 percent, we
paid 10.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, actually, the
federal people, with our money.
MR. JOHNSTON: I don't -- yeah.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We paid 100 percent, in other
words.
MR. JOHNSTON: So they --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, we paid 100
percent for it, believe me.
MR. JOHNSTON: I don't think they issued the
contract. They oversaw the construction, but I -- as far as
who owns it, I don't know who owns it.
COMMISSIONER BALUWIN: So, 20 years down the
115
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
road we're going to be going through the same thing again,
or somebody will be.
MR. JOHNSTON: I would assume it's a Kerr
County bridge. They'll make future -- you know, they make
inspections on it, like all the other bridges.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think -- I mean,
if it's just like Hermann Sons Bridge, we're going to own
this bridge when it's rebuilt. It sounds like it's the same
80/20; the new bridge, anyway.
MR. JOHNSTON: As soon as the County assumes
ownership after it's built.
MR. EDWARDS: Who will maintain the new
bridge?
MR. JOHNSTON: I've never seen any paper or
anything on it.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We maintain the new
bridge; is that correct?
MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah, we maintain all the
bridges that are on county roads. If --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, it's a county road
across the river, huh?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: County road across
the state dam.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well-fed dam. See,
that's the -- the issue was here -- I think what got this in
116
1
.--. 2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
the predicament that we're in, trying to figure out who owns
it, was that it was a W.P.A. project, and the feds did that.
government W.P.A. projects, ever transferred much of
anything, so it's probably by assumption, and people just --
eventually just did it. I mean, they just took ownership.
At this point, I -- I think if we could get the legal minds
together and come up with a solution -- and I'll be glad to
do whatever I can do as Commissioner from my precinct,
and -- but whatever will work is what we ought to try to do,
but it's got to be something that everybody can sign up to
legally, so I think we've got to have the legal side of this
in the equation; we can't just do it off the top of our
heads. That's my view.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree a hundred
percent. We can't -- I mean, I just don't see us sending a
bunch of money somewhere where we really don't have any
responsibility. If	we have some	responsibility;	i.e.,	the
grates under there	-- I mean, I	think we ought to	not	drive
out there. We ought to get the police to drive us out there
to get that fixed.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's been fixed.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand that.
But, I mean, if -- you know, in that case we need to take
care of that. But if we don't -- if we don't have any

r-.
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
117
ownership, I don't know -- I'm uncomfortable with spending
taxpayers' money on something that we don't own, But -- so
how do we -- who -- are you going to go hire a lawyer, or
what are we going to do?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We got one
downstairs.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah.
JUDGE HENNEKE: You seen him lately?
MR. EDWARDS: Pardon me. I think one thing
you can -- should consider, Commissioner Baldwin, is if
somebody gets hurt on that, who's going to be looked at'?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a very good
question. Where is the liability?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree with that, but --
MR. EDWARDS: It's not going to be Ingram,
'cause we've never owned it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How about Oncle Sam?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the liability also
goes -- if it is a dam and it's not repaired properly, the
County does that repair, then I think there is a -- a
liability on the County for not repairing it properly, too.
I mean, that liability goes on down. And I have no idea,
until we -- I think what Commissioner Griffin says, we need
to get someone who understands the structure a little bit

r~
1
2
3
9
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
L 1
22
23
24
25
118
that can tell us what it's going to cost to fix it. I don't
know that we're gong to want to know that answer.
DODGE HENNEKE: Well, I agree with you that
if we're going to transfer the quitclaim to the City, we'll
make a financial contribution to whatever repairs they want
to do. We should get the financial contribution and not the
repairs. I think what we need to focus on is the dollar
amount and where we could find the funds and under what
legal authority we can make the contribution, if that's
where we want to go. I was out there and looked at that
thing the other day, and I'd like to sign the deed today and
get rid of it.
MR. EDWARDS: Pardon me. If it will be of
any comfort to you, I jumped through all the hoops we had to
jump through to determine how much water the bridge was
holding back volume-wise, how many acre feet, et cetera, and
we have reported that to our insurance carrier, and it's
economically feasible for us to insure it. So, once we take
it over, it will be insured, and the liability question then
becomes minimalized.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, why can't we
proceed with the quitclaim?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do that now, quitclaim
whatever we have. If Ingram's willinq to do it -- City's
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
<4
25
119
willing to take it, let them have it, and then with the
understanding that we will work with the City in trying to
figure out how to fund what needs to be done that's
reasonable, in effect, to get it in better shape. Does that
work?
MR. EDWARDS: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, it doesn't work.
MR. EDWARDS: We want the cart to go with the
horse, at the same time. We want to know where you -- what
we're getting when we -- when we take the deed. I mean,
that`s -- I'm speaking for the mayor, and I think I've
interpreted his position correctly, but if you wish to ask
him that -- we're not willing to take it with a -- with a
promise.
JUDGE HENNEKE: So you're not going to take
it unless there's cash with it?
MR. EDWARDS: We're not going to take it
unless there's -- it's either made structurally sound to the
point that we have agreed to, Judge, in the letter that we
wrote you, or agreement has been made concerning the -- how
the money will come to us to let us make it structurally
sound when we do receive it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Money in the amount of a
517,000 --
MR. EDWARDS: Well, I'm with Commissioner
120

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
Griffin there. I think that if we knew where the County
stood on this thing, that we have one entity out in west
Kerr County that's indicated that they would maybe
contribute to it in some fashion. But we just --
DODGE HENNEKE: I think the position of the
County is pretty clear. We would like to quitclaim it to
you. What you're saying, though, is that you won't accept
the deed unless we come up with the cash. And I'm saying
are you talking about cash in the amount of 17,5 or are you
talking about cash in an undisclosed amount?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think there's
another issue, Judge, and Mr. Edwards said it, "structurally
sound." By whose definition, and what does that mean?
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's what I'm trying to get
around -- I'm trying to say. Are we going to get a dam
engineer to come look at that?
MR. EDWARDS: I don't know that -- pardon me,
I'm sorry.
DODGE HENNEKE: You're presenting us with
this bid for 17,5. The question is, is that the amount that
the City wants?
MR. EDWARDS: Our -- our -- the City's
position is as I stated in my letter back on February the
12th, is that we will accept the bridge if it's brought to a
safer condition, and that consists of resurfacing the travel
121
1
.-~ 2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2?
29
,~-.
2`_
-- the old travel part of it. And if you would go out and
look at it, you will see that if you -- there's some asphalt
on it, but if you scrape a little of that asphalt off of it,
water starts shooting up through the base of it. So, we're
not certain that resurfacing it under the bid that we've
gotten would meet anybody's definition of structurally
sound. We're just trying to work a solution on this thing
at a minimum of cost. Our other bid was $35,000 to do the
surface, and another $35,000 to reinforce the surface of
it -- or $17,000, I think, to resurface it. And the two
bids that -- this last bid that we got in, the
17,000-some-odd dollars to do the surface, and we were going
to go up and rebuild the lip part of it that goes above the
road surface. It actually constitutes the dam portion of
it, and that was another $17,000 or $18,000. So, the City
Council met and said, well, let's compromise on this, and
said, you know, let's just get the surface done and we'll
worry about the dam part of it in the future in our budgets
once we get it. So, the City Council feels like they've
already tried to work with you, and -- or with anybody to
get this done at a minimum of cost by waiving the necessary
repairs to the lip part of it that constitutes the dam. And
it's in pretty bad shape. But, again, in response to
Commissioner Letz' question, if we can get it transferred
satisfactorily to our name, we will insure it.
122

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I take a little bit of
offense. You haven't come -- wait. You haven't come to us
with anything to ask -- I mean, you're coming with a general
letter. We haven't said no. We're trying to figure out a
way to do it. And, you know, I think, to me, if the City of
Ingram will come to us with -- say, with a definite, "Do
this," you know, if the County will spend "17,5 and, you
know, then y'all will take the bridge, I think we'll
probably get this Court to do that, but I don't know wYia~
you want. I mean, I can't get that -- you know, until you
tell me what you want for sure, I can't pass it or make a
motion on an order to do something.
MR. EDWARDS: It's my understanding, Mr.
Letz -- and I can't answer it any better than what we've put
in writing, and that is if it is repaired by whomever,
whenever, however, to resurface -- this is for resurfacing
the traveled area of the bridge through -- though the riser
part that acts as a dam. Also, these repairs -- the City is
willing to accept the bridge with a resurfacing only acid
hope that in the future we will be able to do additional
repairs.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. You get a deed
together like that --
MR. EDWARDS: That's as clear as I can make
it.
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
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, it --
MR. EDWARDS: That's the mayor's letter, not
mine. Not my words. That's the mayor's letter.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Are you suggesting we do the
resurfacing again, or we give them -- what I want to heat is
they'll take the bridge if we give them the 17,5.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's what's I want to hear.
And I'm not hearing that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm not either.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, that's --
MR. EDWARDS: That offer's never been put to
us, so our City Council never heard it either. We can't
respond to a comment we've never heard.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Perhaps it would be a good
idea for you to go back and say that the Commissioners Court
has indicated a -- a willingness to transfer Litle and pay
up to 17,5 for your use in repairing the bridge. Now,
that's assuming we can find the legal authority and the
17,5. The question becomes, will you accept the deed along
with a commitment for the County to fund up to 17,5 for your
purposes? That's the issue.
MR. EDWARDS: l'll be happy to do that.
Thank you very much for your time.
DODGE HENNEKE: Okay. Any other questions or
1
2
3
9
6
7
fl
9
10
11
l~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Z1
22
23
24
25
124
comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I don't -- I
don't know if it ought to be on the 17,5. I think I would
have done half of it or something like that, but whatever.
It's not going to get done today.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else today? If not,
gentlemen, ladies, we are adjourned. Thank you all.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 11:96 a.m.)
125
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
STATE OF TEXAS ~
COUNTY OF KERR I
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as
County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County,
Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 29th day of March,
~00~.
JANNE,~T/T PIEPE{~R~,, K~e/err County Clerk
BY : _ _1,_ L~L,~1~-_--
Kathy Ba~, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter

CI_.r",IY<!~ f-~1tJ;~ RCCOJtJT~.
_ ...... da'y ,f i"l aat ctr e.'<: ~:r~_, r:_a.me i;o Le cons: dt: r•ta ~_, C:. 'i
;.
.roc ._~ rt '.emu :c;~,s .::n~n> ~ .l~aFrr' ' ;:;re ncLs, wl° i-'': rid C 1. :..mom
s.r-: c'. i,...co~ant~> are:
- - --•~ --r- ' -
... , _J~ J.... I'<IJ ~ti G i1, 7.:1~~~ .f: .)1". a~~... ~:~, ~~~..1~. .J ~-Fy
c.~-~-5~_n~et-iil Esi sx i.e f--aid 'r"•.rnd for ~~El, r:~;?E;. '~l4!!~ .=7-.7 ~_tv Int erts.ve
-'rt~,j u::_,te .a.c 1-!tnu ror ;'r,.,--,.;..~~ig ._,.;'kecn~-d=_'~I_.ntigemE=r~t ...
~'reservati.on for ~'r,4~4~.~!±c"~; 31-F'i,rl,~ for dc:y~t'ZJk'i.lN~ ~:k~-Inciiy-ant
_..., _
I-ea:tFt C~eYr"~~ for• 'i.=s,!3~+. gag ';Z; i-~e;'m._,nu~-, 1, l.mpro•.'cment rnr
/~ ~iJ _)I[IJ. .~~ ~[~-`_T'._tv en i,le :.1 it Erlt ipn F.. :l i.i T't.;r n.. .,--{~+i:1 ~.
r~~.i;d r_'d°-5:. 7. i_~t l-i iii. :a$ Fit'_u:"n e.y I=ar- ,..-: -•~~_ (_c'; 3e, ~-~'I. ,-~.,_~ i=iand e~::1 -.:.l E:,L~~
. .J ~Iu
Cis Grctr far $:3, 9~i Fem. 3; iz ;'--S~k awe Funded--Gocn:n.tr ity Gu rr._~~ct. or-~r.
-'~ OTriL. CR'if-I RE:,!U I FiET? F"Qft RL..L 'r" UPdI?S I ", N=ri ~, ? 1 1 . E11
Ul:ncn motion mach by Commis>sioner- 4J.iiiiams, si=ccn:i~ d t_y
Commi.ssiorr~r Paldwiti, tl-re C:_:~_trt unanimously approved 6y a vote
of 4-@-0, ~bo pezy aa.id tacco~_nrt rd.

'•CJliiui:_T 4'r':I:il`IDIv{EI`iT
i='I_RP~IAI'JEPdT ~hii='ROV=~^1EI`dT
On tt',i; the cSt-h cl;1y oi= Ri<arcF; ~tir~?4_, +.ipor. mating me=,ce t;y
Carnmisiarer- Lets:, .=_.ecnnderl h'; Comm i.;si.nr;er R~tidwin, ti7~
Cctar-t unanimously approved 6y a vote of 4-a-~~ to tr a.nafe
-' ~.._c. i'rnni -n7e ..tr_m I'aa. ,.. E~?'i-~~~..- flnnex Fine=' 0~_tt o ire
1+.cin tdo.74'~--E-'r't,1 Courtl-ta:u,e Cor;str!."-t:ior7 ;_u-;d ~:,,.~prave 1;1-,e
fctli.cwi?ty la';a dill. TI-:_~ Cni_urb; A~.iditcr ._inc G~~_ur,y Trea~~_rr er
ar~„ tter~'I!} eu_tthori::ed to wr t:e - - ' '..
I~.:t;r~ ci7ecr< -.n the c.,mo!~.nt r:~.
1%: ~. a`~ made pa,dble to R. i';ei~;7 Lonyni=c4ie~'.

I=.I.JI?t~F_'T ili+lE=l`Jlii~IGNI"
Jn tnis thr, ~5'tt~ d.a•y of hlarr_I-. ~=t~~=, !apon motion made guy
cmmis>==ioner~ Griffin, =,ecune:;ed 6y i_c.;niriis>ionar Laldw.irr, the
G1~.i,-t ~.tnanimously approved by a vote of 4-~-Qt, 'to ti an~'.=e~
~.5, C t .:. ... .J I' f U f!i ~- :L it ([ 1'F k tl~. %'.1 i~ , 1 41'-'+.i J"-'P 1 i ] jJ 8 U 1 <fe l I T' 1 d l fi t t_ I_ l n i'
L„em i`o. kr-r~,.~ +r Lo!_irt „~!n>cr:.pt:s ._tnd aF:4:,r'U~-'E' tie foilow..ny
l~t~: gill:;. l"h r:' County Fiuditor and the Co!..rnty l'reas!.trer a;rc:
i~erehy :a!_tthorized !.o aari'.:c. 'icinc] cliecii>; 9t~,'_.,_..~ki mace ;~ayat?le
Lo 1='a~;la Ri.ctia~'c9s 1._::,r-t,=; °~:~'~[. ~`_' madi~ p..ayahle i.c C'.indy E.. e,
Snider; ~~c1. r ~ iria_i pay'cxL1e L-o Cinc7; E.•~e Snic!t~r-.

I':1DCil1" t1f~iE;!i)p'6=:Y~aT
C:;C?IfNT'r CL...ERI:
(1n thS.:, tl-re ~St'r, d•_vy of h1<arch ck4"c_9 ~_rpnn ;nnt:itn: m<adi~ f:>
C?mmi>s:ianer '_"caL:_, .~,ei::onded lay .:ommis=icrier iJi7.lia.m_, tF,e
i:o~"lr--c ~"rnanimo~_rsly approved by a vote of 4-rD-Qr, to trans4=rr
?:,'~6V~.54 From ~_ir:e Il:em :d~;. 1Q+-4~Z~C-a'?~ C<_a.1a.iGa.i ;]_rCla.y w:~~:lr
~i,c46.76 to I_i.r-~r:~ I':Erm i~i~. 14'-'~tk7'~;-CFi-: ;~-~.c:frine Repair s n~
-.
~ ::.lt; Lo ' "r Il.err No.1c~_•i.~~!' 57t? C~:.isa~eliare~.r_r> CFFr.c:e
Equ:~rmeni:.
CIRIiEF2 PI_`;. ;i:.7~r73
~I~~GE_l- AMF_IVli~MENT
216Tt-I UI'~'fRtiCT CCUR"f
_.: ,
n i~,.3 ._~i~ a'I:7 n_~y of P1<arr..P~ ~141~, ~i.p.~~.i mo!.ir~t; m_icar= crY
C:.ainmi~_sicrrer ~ei:_, seconded by Co~;imi_:siuncr Griffin, i:hF_~ Co~_v L:
unanimously approved 6y a vote of 4-~-5, '::o tr-ansF~r '6i, i~:~.i~i
i~r:,m L_intr Ii;eu~ h1::~. iv'~-135-<'+i7 ~;:~ecia'. Tri.ais ~L-o I_i.ne Ti;em PJ,,.
1l?-<'t35--497 C;o-:rt 'i'ranc? i.t~ls aril a.F?rrrove a 1_,te bill. The
County (i~-u:iitor :arid ki;e Co~.inty lrea<.a~_rr'er- a hereby a~~Cl°~orizecl t;o
wrl~ce a hand Ctler:k in +~he amo~_ini of as :L,31Ei.t~~Ei ma.;=~~ p<ciya.bl.e i.0

L_~TC L•'il..l_
Jc:RICLf-IIPiSy II`dC.
On '_h:is the c~-1;1": d_ay of t4a, ::_h~ ~.'th~i, ul:aon m:a
Commissioner Let. :_, seconded t,y Cou;nl.i=.,s,.oner
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-iD, to
l;~l.;;; I'.iil: i.'~a 'Jer'ir'laim:,, :[ru:_. :in the _smo~_urt
L..ine Item No. 50- G~r1-4FE, Fr~~^ on p~iid claims.
I~.l4d It pr a.nd tl"ie Coi.,. ilt'j ~';'l?Ei'J ~.t'r'(?T' i?~t t i'IBr"(4 i.a y'
Uar i.t~~ a hand cF~,eck in tl~i~~ alt,a~_tnt uf' 3s14~~w.63
Vericl?.ims, InC.
l:i.on made by
rl-iifin, ~t,e Co~_u',
of t14~.6a f=rom
T~-,e Cr:,_tnty
L9 t.tt1101'.."f' r~
made payabi~_• t:o


F1L_.E:f,l n Rl_L.E:N Li~Y4PEf2
Clr. this the .=5th day of M_+r~_h i:.~~Cy ~_l~iQii n;o'aior: made try
Coinmic~;s,.ioner i'.aldwin, seconded by Co:c~~mi>_iuner- L_etz9 tt~~:> ~o~.ir-t
:_rnanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to ,?<ay tt.e f.:'..1 nai-~g
'_ate bill to (tli er 3. filler I_:am6._>'r i.n the --.m r: ,_ur L- cr t','c_. 3k'!
fru:n Lime Item No.7t~--67:~i--SfS~ Special order' cn: i,_~mbr=r~ for C.{.,
T-eas!,r rar (``ice Pro,jecL--, The r~~ii.rrty R,_ijitor- __~nd 'ti°.e Co;an':}:
Tr c:_,s,..rr•er are I~erEaby d:~~_{thor,i_ed tU :NT'L4e a P,arid chec:i- ir; ..he
amo,_cnt ni= $c'c'S,~3k ma.:J:_ pay.:able ~l:o fili.en ,., filler L~.unLEr.

GiF'F'IiOl!'~ i1NU ACCLf-'T i101`dT~iLr' 2f-__-i'ORT
Cis !; hii.> '.It_~ cSgh day of March ~k'-', upon mol:ic,,i m<+~iE., y
r'Umr11 i.5510n 1-`t' Griffi.n, ~~~.cotided t,y Com'iiiss:iurer P.aldwi~~, t: hie
Cc~_!r ~ananimor_tsly approved by a vote of 4-0-0, 'I:r~ acc~=_pt trite
Foli~n<~ing ri2por-ta :1 i1 i1 _11r'BC:'G :h'IaL the' b~ i=ilc=d r.~i!.I-~ bl;c>
C t.i i_tri t y C 1. ~.~ r k for- f ~_t t ~.t r e a ~_uJ i L s
Linda IJecl+er, Pistr:ict L:ler•f<
Vance Elliott - ,J. F'. -0#1
FE.,tr wary c'0lc
eUT lt.:v"y' c'4J k1 ~:
6rill:iam E. ~aysd=,~~ -- J.~'. #P4
L'RDI-Fi PJC. ~?47l
ST'f1TU5 CF RCItiD I IV F' S E';Ft L; SUF~D I U I'; I Q.`d
iatdD SET i='UF31._I[: I-iF"RRIFiG
I 1 4 "~r: k -..
n i,;-i l.~ ale :._JCiI ~+'f [ ~'•_i: i_il ckikc, ~:~Gll lil (iJ l.Orl aI EU"[ ~
CirifFi:;, _e~ot~deu L,y C,:irunissioner Rald4a:in, tFle
Co~umis=ia~~er -
Ca~.r~~t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, L-o acrel;]L ttu~
r-eeq~aeaL from hh. .:ar:d t~1~ _~, `?iril:~>un L, ;, ab<_ini „n al of th-.s= F'i:=. _:
Dr•ivc ior..~~.ted i.rr f'ii_~r S 5~_~bdivi.si.orr in F='r ec..rrct ~+, ar:d set ::~
Ft~:l.~l.ir_ I~eariny o.. Mme fur 1k't o'cloclt ra.m. Maf 13tt-~, 'r'ear
[_~9Z~~', hire in tI'lE i;r~ r County Commissioners Cor.trtroom.
(1=~ri-~= Sao. ,_~~r47~
"i:i~i?D 13 :[P !•-C=R '~-1'C(?F:. i_I=A~;C= rr l•JI-iEEL_ I_Cf,;1]'c.°
FC~Fti? 8 F~ZF<iPGE
Cl.. {:h~a tl"~e ~_S"!.h d<ay aF t'i<7.r•!:it ~JT~+r, up~:~t~ m~:~ti.un made b~
Commissioner- 6Jilliarns, _t~ci:nded try Ccmmissint°~er flaldwin, the
Co~ar t ~_manimo~.tsly approved by a vote of 4-~-0, c::r :aw<:; .:~ the
b:irJ for' a i`:ive°ye~r leas= For .vheel loader to thie i-1„1{;
:==yiai~,me,lt CamF,.:arly, authur.i~ e (. c.~_lnty ..Judge to sign the
fle Ce 3s 3r'y COiiL r'2: i_~:"-., E?. t7 CJ e, 41t 1_.,O r`1 ~e a LiS `rd :_h F~Ci-; lfi tih8 Am Oll it {:
of 9s1,i~r'_;.Sh7 pa;s,t,le tc: the or'~Jer' of ~;~iterE:r.llar f-inan~i;,l
Se~-vi.ca<~ (or the First mi_~nth''a lr:ase on the ey~_lipmfant.

ciRnEft rya., ~ r4 -•~:
tilrlfil?D x?i?i 01`J 6.,::.4'~r~ °fOr:lg (~cr '3Fi~,i-
h1ifTG:RI~'~L. FQR Sf-IEf''F1RD RfcE~
Gr t~`ri:a 1„~-, c= ;2~~I:I~r day u~F March
Coinmissic;rer- Gr iff:.rr9 ::e~onde
an~...r-1. unanimoraely approved by
h:id fcr 6, '::-iiP~t i:or: .:if TYP' ~''s
Sheppard Rees ftc,ad to L~.~.;..4<y 3
per' ton,
~0(_i~=~ ~.zpun r!;rtian made= ~y'
i-ry C~.,minis_siarlBr~ R-~ldwinr Lt~~e
a vote of 4-5~-0, I;o ]1.1N._~.T'd tPre
`::, r'~.d a• ;_. b<3st9 III ESL i3r i:. Vii. r:~t
Ma er i.al. _: a~i an c~.nou.nt cf 9sE.

,'3Pp'Ri~'Jr`,I_ OF f-;IVNURi- Y:.IDS
fiGRD 3 flR T i)6E
;fir-, i;h:i ~a !., t•. ~ .='~i.h ciey cf Mar~Cl'i ~:2ti~'v=, apron mo';, i~,n made try
D,:mmi_i.or;er~ l_ert._, sec_encic:d 6y Ccmm.i.>sioric-~r Wi.lliareis, tF~e
i.:~~~_irL rananimously approved by a vote of 4-~-0, to asa<a.rci CI-ua
~:~..,
ann~.i<:i. s r ~ as-. rn.z:irr-aal, cold mix, blear.-~. ba~_~a, p.:_.s.~r;g
~3ggr,egate, r~sphal{; em~_{l.sic,n oil, c:orr~-gated metal pipe, and
=y~.ii;_m:~n#; i:~j i;hrg I~o~-~r -a. recummenric_~d ~:arui pre<.aenteci by L-hE
C~_;~_mty Engi.ne~r .

AF'F-'F~.'V(-~L AUl'I10RI Ihf_': I':F.R(? Cr":UrJTY Si1EftIri: ' S ^.~rF'("iR"I"M~I`,;T
"":.' _.i~ITEf? ~ IPdTERLOCRL. COOT=E::Rr'1T1'ON CONt^RCi
W'iTFi 1'DPS l"0 G"'LIRCHC;~si- 1iJt"'F"._..1.-5 '0 LISe_ ,T^d fiES'TIY'ICTED
DNry DF1Tf;~+ASE SF1I~It''Lr'= CC:L..~i:_TI~N
!?n th~i~; 'blre ~S''.ii day «f t8ar-c_t'i 21~~1', vapor:. motion made b•y
....u~rim; ;aa.c;ner- L..et;:, sec:ondc,d try Comm:a;~sioner G.,.ff:rn, th~r Co~.n!
unanimo,_rsly approved by a vote of 4-~-VJ, r.o .zntF;or~:i~e
SF~er-if°--, s Depa.r'tmont to enter- into an interlocal r_n._,pr:ratici
.. ac ': w.':: r ie><<.r; I7~;aarLin~~nt of ;-'!tl?~.i~: ..~".. G.,t:y tr_' pi.rrcF,a:~t,
'1 •_il:~;:.:aie:; f~:~r L:~ie F';a;;tr:ici:ed DtdG dat;ah~trse.
taF2I)Fli tJiJ. ~..'r ~rlvc
Af='i='f20~1F1I_ A!)l"HORII`•I~ ~='rt"'~t~J%~I1"Ulifr F"GR
t,IG"LJ FORh1S RFi~UIi~fD L1'f ilf="J'~TE P.II"L 7
On I:;ii ci;r ;:'Stl`~ d:a.y of bt<a.rcl~ ~='~?~lh~='Y i_ipr~n moi;ion m<:,.r9i~ i~Y
Go;nriiss.i.nr~er P•a;~dwir,, ecunded L,y ~amrn.is:ioner Gr-iffi.ri, tt~e
Coy-trt unanimo~"isly approved by a vote of 4-0-Q~, to <authcri~e
the 'Sheriff' n n~p=~r en~F=„t ':n hp~_u^ch ::;e th"~e new for'rt:1 rc~:J.;ire~.:1 by
c;eriate F3i11 7, a=_. ,;r r.a.ented.
CiRDEF NCI. C'_74.93
i1F='PROURL iiUTHOF?IE'IP,I~_~ RL_I`dCWfi[_ OF I;i_RR
C'nl._1N7~' TiFN CUF2F EW
On thi+_: 17iu= ,._.ith _L_~y of ht<_ir°cir ~V743c, t.r):~r~n rn.~!:iun made hY
-,..
ommi<.=.iim~_~r ir-.r; tn, sec:,nded 6y Cc~mmissa.;rif:r '>Jill:a,.rus, wi';:I-.
Cuinmi~sionera Gr Fi=in, Williaris, and Co~_u~ty l~.adge I-ier~rEhr
~~
<<~-ir~y 'FaYE. and Gc;m;ni>sic;rre;~es F31rIiV;.I'I U7d ~_e'c cotiny "hJ~\"',
ss;id mnti:±n C2ii' y:ir•! try :., ,~i-?.jnrity ~;ute, approrir-~~ I:ili3 I{err,
C:a_,r~cy Lc~en Cltr f'F.W.
ar?nE_r? Iva. _'~ ~~;-;~,
AF'PRnt,~(JL_ FaR R JaiNl' WCIRI'S}iC'F' W:f.TF' UGRPi
L-tat=iF?P I*1EMRE`r: Ta DISCUSS KERft CC1UhJTY' Cal*iF'Ri_HEIUC`,.VG
Cai...atl%R Nf"(?Fa.~•l"i<UCTURr STUC~'v' FttJD PL_flh•I
C,t I; ii :i. i;he _.~~th ci a, ;' irF I~.~r'ch ~=Gi"v5c, ~,p~~n mr.~t for made s;,r
Com«ns_iuner' Wil.li~tm~=, scr~.onded ciy Comrrii.ssiora:r Let z, the
CnUrt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, 'to ha'.'e a
wOr"!-~shnp joi. r~'~ly tr i.tF.t U.(}2. f-1. L'~uard to di=ci_t ,:; !; !.Ii ~_~ i.,r~,...r..
County Comprehtensive Colenia Infr astt•~_tct..tr e EZ,1:~_tdy F''la~n at
o'cl~., n p. m, on ht:n~day, Al:~riJ. ~=2nd, e<%r c2'[14.ryc.

CJRDER hJ;1.1=7~rt;
Rf'f-'RC1V~1t_ C?F CCUYu'rY f-1F'F ^II`~TI'rIENT: TC) '-I-IE
F.F:~F~'JILLE_:--'r:F=RR COUh.i?'>' ,.TOINT ~IRF'CR-f r;I?V7:SC~F2Y F+L~F1Ri?
Cln t'-::i :; i:.'ne I-'tl. derv of M<:ir~._h ca~~~~'_, :-r F, .,n mrt iun rt~ade ;ry
Curnmi._••=.inr:er 4i:illiezni~, sec::Ui~ded try C;oriimi<;s:ioner Lei: z, chhe
U'~:_:.rt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-~, i,a t-.ccef;t
ir::i:n essior,s of .irrter~_:~t Fr'nm indi~:id:_inls to ser~~~e <as the
~ou.nty apF.,n:ntees to ttie F:errviile/Kerr Co:.xnt:y ..Ioi.nt Fli.rpart
G:a~:iscr y 1:~1,_a.rdy ;i:i.ch: ..,:!.ch ex~ir?scions; of inter esh to be
'y iabmitte;•d i.n wr i.t i.nu, :.u:d r Ui-~:•ved ni! Iatt et~ tf~r 2itt Fa F: r'ii i.?ti-~~,
to br_• consider=d t~tL o:~,r meeting or. 6"ir;,..il c.-nd.

,~•~

AF"~F'RI:1'J('rL Of-- R~'JI ;I01`d TO THE I~`.ERR CCUNTY
.3U't}I?Il'IiIf1I`1 I?:.ICES fl-NIi RE:6ULRTICI'd~iy t;ERR i:~C':UI`dTY t+:l'1-'C.R
(={;'FII...R~'~ILITY RE_~~L'Iiil:=l"1ENTS RNIi I~OI!TIi'dG
'~L_IF'^ ~"il'•II? SE"I" t'UF.~!_IC: ;-IMF-iRll`JCn
On tt7i<:; i,tie ~".~th d:_ry of htarcl-i ck'Ikl;''p :_!r)or! rrtaon ma+.de tr;
CCmmi.s_i.ol'ier L={::eP sea c:or:derc t::y Cemm:i.ssior::_~r Gr iPfin, tFle Cci_I, t
I_{nanimolasly approved by a vote of 4-0-0, +,hle rFavis:i~;•, i. .;, i;t,,.
her•r Col_u-~ty S~!.I:)div:is;.on.; f~l_ll:=s dnCj F<a?yi_{i~:.l:ini{:, 6Fie Kerr.
_utmt' Wal;.•r' ~'r~~-ai.latu yL Ftec. {ir ,.nt.':, ~. ~~ s: ,..ps;,, .~
amein.i 4?L~ :O(j _3 ~! ~i it (I .~.''I. ~i I:)i.{f:I lr') I'1 e:_I Y'1!'-i~ fOr, +.F-i E? ~:91tl i? Gn
hicnd<.t'y~, h1a:;y +~Fle 7.:?t.Fi~ Year c'k7tc:, .~t; a a c,' cioc4r ~:i, ri. , :I~; e i;!
ftlB I'i?r I" Cr,)n.i11;5' "(i10I1LI'iSA.Vf'~er i:; Co~_lr'troom.
i^'^

R~r_'PROV6~l_ hiEl-T:_Rri:[hJG COURT orn6:P. No.2=73`?t:1 To TI-{r
f,'oi_1NTY ATTOFdNE_Y' F-OF? iM{"'LEN;-1`!-I"r;TICPd
(I?c:_fJiWgL_ L_1=:i1E. 1=oFi WEST !':L=R(i COL1t~lT`r' ~aiV!`JCYi
Ur, thin the ~:°_!:h t.1.xy oi' h1.a~-.h c:4~t%1;:.', _,pon mol,.ion in,-Zd: I::;y~
_ ,
auuutssiar~arr- -,r>t i.r~, ::;e~:orr~led b,, Lurnmisa;ianc:r Rt_~ldw>n, i;ne,.
Co~ai•{; r.an animously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to r ~-: i=.:<r
i.mla'. emu=~~~babior, of Cr.,i_trt Or Baer' hd!ti..I:-.~~r .:='7:?9i•'~ regar•di~ny :•en,=ww7.
,f the le-iyF, fn, I,tre tilerst I.err Ca~~mty Aruic~,c to thi§ C~!;nt,
Ai:Lo'r'i;e;, fOr' 23:.:_L:i tJ ;1.

i~PF'i',OVRL ~Y*1EPJDipJG CUUR'f QP?DI=R Ni?~;=•7V~fa,',
UN-STTI_ 'iL.IrJRGI= 1=-faI_ILITIES
On -:hi:; the mat l-+ da.y of P1ar~+_I~+ i_'l4?
G'onimissioner Griffin, e,e..onded t;y
unanimously approved by a vote of
hl+.unb_r~ c7~+t10 and c7k7'r`? to delete
of the I!er-r Co+_mty On-Site `cie~yage
for real es±:ate transfer's".
', upon m;~ticn m-tde ~y
Comini,siuner' Let z, the Court
4-0-0, to amer-~d Order.
the reference to "aJop'i.an
Facility program proved+.tres