...-~..

1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KERR COL3NTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Special Session
Tuesday, May 28, 2002
6:30 p.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom and District Courtroom # 1
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
PRESENT: FREDERICK L. IIENNEKE, Kerr County Judqe
H.A."BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
LARRY GRIFFIN, Commissioner Pct. 9
1
~.., 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ll
]2
	13
	14
	15
	16
	17
	18
	19
	20
	21
	22
	23
	24
	
	25
I N D E X
May 28, 2002
Visitors' Input
2.16 Set public hearing for considering County's 2000
Colonia Comprehensive Plan for June 3 @ 6:30 p.m
1.1	Pay Sills
d	1 _
~ -
`o2~15C	_
~~~~~
1.2	ments
Budget Amen	o	
1.3	Late Bills	'~~S~eS-	u1.-~ 7~p~
1.4	Approve and Accept	Monthly	Reports
2.14 Accept resignation of Constable, Precinct 1
2.1 Long-Range Planning Committee report for Kerr
County Sheriff's Office
2.2 Approve contract between Texas Department of
Protective and Regulatory Services & Commissioners
Court to continue maintaining child welfare board
2.3 Consider variance to 6.02.E.3 of Kerr County
Subdivision Rules & Regs to extend preliminary
plat for Cypress Springs Estates, Phase II
2.4 Approval of court order abandoning & vacating a
portion of Pier 5 Drive per agreement of property
owners ~ Commissioners Court
2.5 Approve Resolution declaring June 2, 2002, as
Ernestine Wilson Zimmerman Day
2.6 Discuss comments from Office of Rural Community
Affairs re Comprehensive Colonia Study & Plan
2.7 Discuss Rules & Regulations for use of county-
owned parks, dams, and recreational areas
2.8 Discuss revisions to Kerr County Subdivision
Rules & Regulations
2.9 Approve relocation of Collections Department to
space currently occupied by Treasurer's office
2.10 Approve job description for Collection Officer
2.11 Discuss becoming a member of Association of
Rural Communities in Texas
2.12 Discuss resolution calling for increased tax on
fuel, distribution of proceeds to counties to be
used Lor maintaining county roads
2.15 Authorization to pursue procurement of legal
services from McGinnis Lockridge & Kilgore, LLC,
to create wastewater treatment service agreement
2.13 Approve offer Lo purchase right-of-way for
Sheppard Rees Road improvement, authorize County
Attorney to finalize purchase, authorize payment
by hand check if necessary
- - Adjourned
2
PAGE
19
3 6 ~~
38~ZS~C
38
41
94'02
44 °~Z~e
47~~
71 c~-?`-~
7 6 ~75'TI
7 8 ~ZS~
8 4~--IS`"l3
~~~~
8 sQ~S~
9 9D ~~~
112 ~-lS~y
113'd'( S'?S
118 ~-I~"?~F
12 ~~
~_-1 `'
130
~~~ 7~
13 ~
135
3
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
On Tuesday, May 28, 2002, at 5:30 p.m., a special 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 evening, everyone. It's
6:30 on Tuesday, May the 28th, Year 2002. We'll call to
order this special meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners
Court.
AUDIENCE: Can't hear back here.
AUDIENCE; Can't hear you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Is that better?
AUDIENCE: Yes.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. We were calling to
order this regular special meeting of the Kerr County
Commissioners Court. If y'all will please stand, join me in
a word of prayer, followed by the pledge of allegiance.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Be seated,
please. At this time, any citizen wishing to address the
Court on an item not listed on the regular agenda may come
forth and do so. Is there any citizen who would like to
address the Court on an item not listed on the regular
agenda?
MR. RACKLEY: Would you please pass out the
s-2a-o~
4
,~--
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~2
23
24
25
agenda? I don't have a copy of the agenda.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Copies of the agenda were
available in the back. If we've run out of them, maybe you
can share with a neighbor, sir.
MR. MOORS: I was one of the very first
people in this room, sir, and there was no agenda posted
anywhere at that door. There was a form to fill out if we
had any discussions to be made, and most of us have filled
that out. No other paper was there, sir.
MS. PIEPER: The public participation form, I
did make more copies, and they're in the back.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, can you make some quick
copies of the agenda?
MS. PIEPER: Yes, sir.
JUDGE HENNEKE: The agenda is posted outside
on the bulletin board as well as outside the courthouse on
Lhe public bulletin board. Yes, sir?
AUDIENCE: Sir, would it be possible, since
we have a couple dozen people still standing in the hall,
that we go to a larger courtroom where people can be
comfortable and heart
JUDGE HENNEKE: We're going to -- after we
have the Commissioners' comments, it we still need to, we'll
take that up. Sir?
MR. RACKLEY: Since copies of the agenda were
-_a-n.
5
1
2
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1J
16
17
18
l9
20
2 1
22
23
24
25
not available to be passed out and I haven't seen them, I
bet other people haven't, would you please read the items?
I don't think that would be too much to ask.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'll read them briefly. What
we will do is to move the citizens' comments to the end of
the meeting so that anyone who wishes to make a comment on
an item not listed on the agenda may do so at the end of the
meeting. The items for consideration today are as follows:
Number 1, consider and discuss Long-Range
Planning Committee's report for the Kerr County Sheriff's
Office.
Number 2, consider and discuss approving a
contract between the Texas Department of Protective and
Regulatory Services and the Commissioners Court to continue
maintaining a child welfare board.
Number 3, consider a variance to Section
6.02.E.3 of the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and
Regulations to extend the preliminary plat approval for
Cypress Springs Estates.
Number 4, consider and discuss approval of a
count order abandoning and vacating a portion of Pier 5
Drive in accordance with the agreement reached by the
property owners.
Number 5, consider and discuss approving a
resolutiuu declaring June 2, 2UU2, as Ernestine Wilson
-ze-r~~
6

1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
2l
22
23
24
25
Zimmerman Day.
Number 6, consider and discuss comments from
the Office of Rural Community Affairs regarding Kerr
County's Comprehensive Colonia Study and Plan.
Number 7, consider and discuss adoption of
Rules and Regulations for use of County-Owned Parks, Dams,
and Recreation Areas.
Number 8, consider and discuss approval of
revision to the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and
Regulations.
Number 9, consider and discuss the approval
of relocation of the Collections Department to space
currently occupied by the Treasurer's office.
Number 10, consider and discuss approval of
the job description for Collection Officer.
Number 11, consider and discuss becoming a
member of the Association of Rural Communities in Texas.
Number 12, consider and discuss the adoption
of resolution calling for an increased tax on fuel and
distribution of proceeds to counties for use in maintaining
county roads.
Number 13, consider and discuss an offer to
purchase riyht-of-way for Sheppard Rees Road improvement.
Number 14, r_onsider and discuss the
resignation of Don McClure as Constable, Precinct 1.
-.a-o'

•--
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Number 15, consider and discuss authorization
to pursue procurement of legal services from the McGinnis
Lockridge and Kilgore firm to negotiate a wastewater
treatment service agreement between the City of Kerrville
and U.G.R.A. for the Kerrville South Wastewater Project.
And finally, Number 16, consider and discuss
advertising and scheduling a public hearing for the County's
2000 Colonia Comprehensive Plan for 5 o'clock p.m. on
Monday, June 3, Year 2002.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, with your
permission, in light of the fact that we intend to do what
the State asked to us do with respect to a public hearing on
the County's 2000 Colonia Comprehensive Plan that will be
advertised by Grantworks and conducted by Grantworks at
5 p.m. Monday, Lune 3, in this courtroom, in light of the
fact that that agenda item is at the tail end and will be
introduced, I would withdraw, with your permission --
Court's permission, Item Number 2.06. It has to do with
discussing the Office of Rural Community Affairs'
Comprehensive Plan.
AUDIENCE: Pardon me, sir. We're not hearing
back here in the front. Do you have a PA system?
COMMISSIUNER WILLIAMS: Well, we have one.
Sometimes it functions and sometimes it doesn't. But what
I'm saying is that we will -- we are planning to have a
-_~e-oz
8

1
2
3
9
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
public hearing scheduled on that plan on Monday at 5 p.m.
And, in light of that fact -- and that public hearing will
be conducted by Grantworks, the people who did the work in
producing the plan, I am asking the Court to allow me to
withdraw 2.6, which would have been a discussion of the
State's comments to it, and the State's comments will come
after the public input on Monday, June 5.
MR. COSBY: With the Court's permission, sir,
these people are here to talk about that issue tonight.
AUDIENCE: Yes, sir.
MR. COSBY: They work. They can't come in
the afternoon.
AUDIENCE: That's right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: The public hearing is
proposed for 5 o'clock p.m. If necessary, we can move it
back to 6 o'clock. Does anyone have any objection to
pulling that --
MS. HURAYT: Excuse me, I have --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Just a moment, ma'am. Just a
moment, ma'am. Does anyone have any objection to pulling
Lhat item?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN:
COMMISSIUNEIR GRIFFIN:
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN:
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS
I don't.
I don't.
6 o'clock's even fine.
Six is fine.
5_-,;~_ ,
9

1
2
3
9
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
1`~
20
21
22
~3
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Actually, based on the
agenda item, 2. 6, I don't believe we could have public
comment on that topic, anyway. We're talking about -- that
item is talking about --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: The State's --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- State's comments. And
it would not be appropriate, under the agenda item, to get
community input on that topic, unless you have comments on
what the State told us.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's precisely the
reason for pulling it and putting the public comment --
gathering that on Monday, and then the State's comments
following, and we can hopefully discuss them.
MR. COSBY: The problem with that, Mr.
Lets -- one of the problems with that, sir, is these people
didn't have enough time to organize after this colonia study
came out in the newspaper, so that they could qet here in
force to talk to you people about what they feel about it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wait, let me make a
comment on that. The problem is, we're governed by law. We
can only discuss what was on the agenda. We can't just open
up a court meeting to a general discussion. It has to be a
posted item. And that topic -- I don't see how you can
discuss general comments from y'a11's position unless you're
g -_p_ri_
10
r
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
ZS
16
17
l8
19
20
21
22
L J
29
25
commenting on what the State has told us in their comments.
And we just can't open up to general comments. Isn't that
correct, Judge?
DODGE HENNEKE: That's right. I mean, the
agenda item is to discuss the comments from the Office of
Rural Community Affairs. The comments from the Office of
Rural Community Affairs, not the general comments from the
public as to how they feel about the Colonia Study and Plan.
That's the purpose -- if you'll let me finish, please, sir.
That's the purpose of the public hearing. Now, if -- if
5 o'clock on Monday, the 3rd, is not a convenient time for
the public hearing, we can schedule it for 6:00 or 6:30. We
can schedule it for a different day. The only question is,
you know, what will be a better day?
MS. MITCHELL: How about Saturday morning,
10 o'clock?
AUDIENCE: NO.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm available.
MS. MITCHELL: Not this Saturday, but, you
know --
AUDIENCE: I have to work Saturday.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We appreciate that
people do work, and that's the reason why these are
scheduled, just like tonight's meeting at 6:30, to allow
people who work during the day to have the opportunity to be
s-'~a-a.
11

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
here. But the fact of the matter is, the public hearing is
not scheduled tonight, but will be advertised and scheduled
for Monday.
JUDGE HENNEKE: The only question is what
time we want to have it on Monday. And I'm seeing that it
would be better if they would have it later, so --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let's change it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: There's no reason, when we
come to that agenda item, we can't make it at 6:00 or 6:30.
MR. COSBY: A lot of these folks took off
tonight so they could be here. Some of them work at night.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess --
MR. RACKLEY: Can I ask a question? You
asked earlier if anybody wanted to speak on an item that was
not on the ayenda. Is that still available, since that's
not on the agenda? And there's obviously a lot of people
that want to speak on that item that's not on the agenda.
JUDGE HENNEKE: If people want to stay and
talk about ati item that's not on the agenda, yes, that's the
purpose of the public comments, and we'll have those
comments at the conclusion of this evening's meeting, okay?
So as long as everyone understands that Item Number 2.06,
which is -- which was scheduled for discussing the comments
from the Office of Rural Community Affairs on the
Comprehensive Colonia Study and Plan, is not going to be
S-^_fl-G2
12

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
considered this evening. We will consider setting a public
hearing for Monday, June the 3rd -- at 6:30?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Fine.
JUDGE HENNEKE: 6:30, here in the
Commissioners Courtroom, to take public comment in general
on the Colonia Study and Plan. That item will be taken up
later in the agenda, but I think you can rest assured that
that item will be adopted.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It will be advertised
in the newspapers as such.
JUDGE HENNEKE: It will be advertised in the
newspapers as such, yes.
AUDIENCE: Is there -- any non-item
discussion after the official meeting is just discussion,
but not official comments, correct?
JUDGE HENNEKE: All you can do is make
comments. There's no discussion. Yes, ma'am?
MS. HURAYT: Why was this not publicized
prior to this study to all the citizens, letting them know
that this study was going to be done?
JUDGE HENNEKE: There was a public hearing
on -- we had to have a public hearing, which was published
in the newspaper -- it's a requirement of the law -- as to
whether or not we would conduct the study, and that public
hearing was held before we ever -- before we ever undertook
s-~a-o
13
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
L 1
22
23
24
25
the study. Actually, before we actually got the grant, I
believe.
AUDIENCE: Can you tell us when that took
place, sir?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I would have to look it up in
the record, but it is an official public hearing, and it's
documented. It had to be held. It had to be part of the
transcript when we applied for the grant.
AUDIENCE: Who initiated it?
AUDIENCE: Was it during the day when people
can't come?
JUDGE HENNEKE: No, I believe that hearing,
as most of the hearings that we've had with regard to grant
applications, was held at 5 o'clock here in the courtroom.
I don't remember the exact time. I don't remember the exact
date. I'm telling you that the general practice is that
those hearings are held at 5 o'clock.
MS. HURAYT: Does not our local newspaper
cover any of this?
JUDGE HENNEKE: You'd have to check with
them. There was notice of the hearing published in the
local newspaper.
MS. HURAYT: I would like to respectfully
request that, seeing as we've all come here to make a
comment that is now not on the agenda, number one, to be
,_~a_~,
19



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
told if we need to fill out a different form.
JUDGE HENNEKE: No, the form -- the form is
fine. I mean, anyone who wants to use the form they filled
out about 2.6 to make a general comment about the colonias,
no, we're not going to make you jump through some silly
paper hoop in order to make a comment.
MS. HURAYT: Okay. Tonight, what --
AUDIENCE: Whose idea was it to delay this
comment procedure?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, the gentleman here said
he hadn't had an agenda and he didn't know what he might
want to comment on, so the decision was that we would delay
the comment until the end of the meeting so people would
have a chance to look at the agenda while copies were being
made, so that we could go forward with our business. We
have a fair amount of business to conduct here outside of
this issue.
AUDIENCE: It's a business issue, though.
You've got a lot of people here concerned.
JUDGE HENNEKE: You'll have an opportunity to
come on the 5th if you want to.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Third.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I mean 3rd, I'm sorry. if
people would like to -- you know, if everyone's satisfied of
their opportunity to -- to decide whether they want to make
s-,R o.
15
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
public comments or not, we can go ahead and have public
comment at this time. I mean, I'm not opposed.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Let's go ahead, since
it's not on the agenda. Why don't we go ahead and take
public comments?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree with Commissioner
Griffin. I mean, let's do the public comment now. But I
just wondered, from y'all's standpoint, if you're concerned
about the colonia issue, if you want your comments part of
the official record, you need to come to the public hearing
and do it, because this is just a public comment period.
And we'll hear it from the Court standpoint, but if you're
interested in getting it in the official record, you need to
do it at the public hearing in addition to doing it tonight.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's right. Any comments
we receive tonight will not be part of the official record
with regard to the colonias plan.
AUDIENCE: I think it's important, though,
that our elected officials know where the people stand.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Absolutely.
AUDIENCE: Even if it's no more than a
comment. I think that you're going to take this, you know,
well at heart. I would hope you do. Whether it's on the
books or not.
JUDGE HENNEKE: we certainly will, and

16
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that's --
AUDIENCE: 'Cause at election time, I tell
you, a lot of people here to vote for you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Some of them did, some of
them didn't.
AUDIENCE: They're here. They're concerned
citizens, Your Honor.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, that's the reason we
have meetings at night. We've had them for, you know, the
three and a half years I've been on the court. We started
them at my suggestion. People went along with it. This is
one of the better turnouts we've ever had.
AUDIENCE: Yeah. It's --
JUDGE HENNEKE: I think it's great. I'm glad
that you are here. This is a process. We have to follow
the process. And anyone who wants to make a comment about
an item not listed on the agenda may do so, with the
understanding that their comment is not part of the public
record with regard to the Colonia Study and Plan. Those
comments must be received at the public hearing, which we're
going to vote on later, which will be held Monday, June 3rd,
6:30 p.m., here in this courtroom. Or, if we need to, we'll
move to it a bigger courtroom.
AUDIENCE: Very good.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Now -- yes, sir?
5_~N_g~
17

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2
29
2G
AUDIENCE: I have a question about the change
of the agenda. We now have what you're going to discuss
tonight, but you're going to take the colonia off of it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We're going to take Item 6
ufL.
AUDIENCE: All right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: The comments on the --
AUDIENCE: May we have our discussions now,
and then the rest of your business go on?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, that's what we've been
talking about.
AUDIENCE: May we do that?
JUDGE HENNEKE: The consensus is yes, that
we're going to go ahead and receive any public comments
about an item not listed on the regular agenda at this time.
But, again, I want to reemphasize that public comments
received during tonight's meeting are not part of the
official record.
AUDIENCE: That will be fine, sir.
JUDGE HENNEKE: With regard to the colonias.
AUDIENCE: That will be fine. But you'll
hear it; that's what we want.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We did not change the
agenda to keep you from talking on an item,
AUDIENCE: 1 understand.
--ze-°:
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
8
10
11
l2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
G
24
~5
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It sounded like we
changed --
AUDIENCE: We're still talking, and we can
keep talking, telling you what we have to say.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: What I'm going to do, and --
and you have -- you have a maximum of three minutes to
speak. If everybody speaks three minutes, we're going to be
here a long time.
MR. MOORE: You'll find it's very important.
JUDGE HENNEKE: If you want to speak tonight,
please make your comments cogent and, to the extent you can,
not repetitive. However, I don't want to discourage anyone
from making any comments. What I'm going to do at this
time, I'm going to go down through the list of people who
signed up to speak on Item 6. Sf anyone wishes to speak
during the public comment period, they may come forth and do
so. If they don't wish to, they can simply say, "I don't
wish to speak ar_ this time." After I've gone through this
list, anyone else who didn't sign up who wants to speak on
this item or any other item on the agenda -- not on the
agenda, may come forth and do so. Does everyone understand?
AUDIENCE: What happens if we speak this
time? Can we speak next time, too?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes, sir. We don't curb
5-28-nom
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
L S
speakinq. Okay. Rhonda Mitchell.
MS. MITCHELL; Okay. I have a couple of
questions, because my neighborhood was declared a possible
colonia, and according to the criteria, my neighborhood
doesn't fall into that. According to your own criteria, I
have a one-street neighborhood. I live out in the boonies.
It says 51 percent has to be low to moderate income. Well,
I've got 10 houses on my street. Six of the 10 are not low
to moderate income. All the -- there's 10 houses. Five are
brick, two are brand-new siding. That's not -- you know,
i the only thing we don't have is sewer. And, you know, we've
I
never had that. We've got a water system. We don't meet
that r_riteria, but yet they put us in it. According to one
of your things, the 1990 Census was used. Why don't they
use the 2000? It's been out since January. I mean, if
they're goinq to use old -- old numbers, then everything
that y'all are looking at is skewed, you know. And it's
just -- I'm just concerned about it, because you've lowered
my property values, but my taxes have gone up, because
they've raised my property values. If I want to sell my
house and people find out that I've been designated a
colonia, they're not going to want to pay for it, and I
don't think t}iat's right, especially when you want to keep
raising my taxes. City -- I mean county, school, all of
that goes up every year since I've been here. And, you
5 - H -
zo
r~--
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
71
22
23
29
25
know, it just seems like y'all are wasting money on
things -- I mean, if we were a low-income neighborhood and
i~ would benefit our neighborhood, fine. But this is not
going to benefit our neighborhood, because you don't even
have me, through 2011, as getting any benefits from the plan
that you've drawn up. And I just -- you know, I've been
talking to my neighborhood, and we don't fall under the
criteria -- your own criteria that is put in this thing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: State criteria.
MS. MITCHELL: Ukay. Well, we don't fall
under that. They didn't poll our neighbors. They don't
know how much we make or anything like that. And if they're
going to do something like that, then they need to get out
and go door-to-door and say, "How much money do you make?"
Thcy need to look at the houses, you know, and stuff like
I that. But we're a little one-street neighborhood right
across from the river, so they want to come in -- and I
don't want the U.G.R.A., somebody I didn't elect, telling me
how much money I have to pay. If they're going to
eventually put sewer in my neighborhood, then they could
charge me whatever they want and I have nothing to say about
it, because I didn't elect them. But if I elected them,
they could be gone. So, that's what I have to say.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Ed Shy?
MR. SHY: Between the audibility or lack of
s_e-~~~~
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
l~
18
19
20
21
22
~3
24
2°
it, I really don't know what I can say. But can I speak --
I've heard the response here two or three times, but I'd
just like to make this comment, if I may. And we certainly
respect all you gentlemen and appreciate the meeting
tonight. The point was made here a minute ago, and it's
been in my mind, why are we termed a colonial And I am just
repeatiiiy what has already been said, but you gentlemen, or
whoever came up with that term, should be ashamed. We've
got -- we have many areas in Kerr County, and even in the
town of Kerrville, that have lesser income among the people
and and a lot of restricted -- they should be restricted
areas, neighborhoods. I don't know why we're -- we're
taking on that term. L don't like it. And one thing, I
just will speak to this. I have a feeling that all of our
action here tonight is probably going to be useless. I
think your commission has kind of set this thing up so a few
people will speak, and beyond that, we're wasting our time
here tonight, personally.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Before we go to the next
speaker, we do have a district courtroom set up for the
Sheriff's long-range planning, which has a lot more seating.
Why don't we shift?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. We're going to move to
District Courtroom Number 1, and we'll take up the comments
~A--=
22
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1~
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and proceed with the agenda from there to a certain point.
(Meeting was moved to District Courtroom 1.)
JDDGE HENNEKE: All right. We'll reconvene
this meeting	of the -	- special	meeting	of	the Kerr	County
Commissioners	Court.	Before I	continue	to	call the	list of
those who wish to speak, let me attempt to again say that
the criteria that we used in designating these areas are not
criteria that were adopted by this Court. They are state
and federal requirements, and the purpose of the plan was to
identify areas in Kerr County which may be eligible for
grants in order to improve the water, wastewater, the roads,
the drainage in tkiose areas, as we are doing in Kerrville
South. There was no intent on the part of the Court to
label, brand, stigmatise anybody's property or any
particular area. The words that are used happen to be the
words that are used by the State, and there is significant
money out there that we can tap to improve the living
conditions of some people in Kerr County. In the Kerrville
South area, where we're putting in wastewater at no cost to
the homeowners, we've been able to access $750,000 in
grants, and have applied for another half a million dollars
in grants. Those grants will signiticantly improve the
living conditions of people in those areas, the living
conditions of the people around them, and I would suggest
5-~h-l1~
23

1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
73
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
23
24
25
the proper*_y values of the people in those areas by taking
care of some problems in the infrastructure. And, as far as
whetY~ei or not your comments are effective, I disagree with
your statement that the -- comment that our minds are
already made up. Mr. Cosby came before the Court at our
last meeting, and as a result of his comments about his
area, we changed the designation of his area from "colonic"
to "potentially" --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Eligible.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- "eligible area." And we
have some flexibility in that area. But we're dealing with
state and federal regulations; we're not dealing with Kerr
County-crafted regulations or requirements, and we have to
live within those parameters. So, I hope that you will keep
those explanatory remarks in mind as we move through the
rest of these comments. And, again, I'd ask you to move as
quickly as you can, Lecause we do have a substantial agenda.
When I call your name, if you wish to speak, please come
forward to the microphone that's set up at the podium and
deliver your comments. The next person is Patricia Crisman.
MS. CRISMAN: Just a couple of questions. My
assumption is that these grants are coming from taxpayer
money, and they're going to put in sewer lines and water
lines in our areas. What will it cost us, the property
owners, ultimately? The monthly fees, the connection fees,
5-28 02
24
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
installing pumps, et cetera? Where do we go from here,
cost-wise? Does anybody know?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can't respond.
We're -- this is not an agenda item where we can explain
that. Yes, we know, but we -- we can't get into dialogue
and discussion. That's why we say come to the public
hearing. Then it can be a discussion format.
MS. CRISMAN: Okay. My objection is to the
use of taxpayer money for this, and then the ultimate cost
to the property owners.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Mark Wittlinger.
MR. WITTLINGER: Hi. Thank you for
listening. Comme~it to y'all; treat these guys with a little
more respect. You may disagree with them, but try to be
nice, okay? I appreciate y'all serving. Some comments, and
then some questions, which I realize you can't answer
because it's not official. Uur water is tested every year,
and it's fine. It's never showed any problem, so I don't
see that there's truly a problem. Now, maybe other people
don't test out okay and they have problems, but I don't see
a problem. Also, my comment is that it does seem like a
waste of taxpayers' money that it's not really an issue -- a
problem issue, and if that money could go to an area that
does need it, I think that's much better use of that
taxpayer money. And then I wanted to know -- and y'all can
~ ~r-n^
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
L 1
22
23
29
25
answer this next time -- is this something the State is
forcing on Kerr County, or is it an option? That -- it
sounds like it's an option to me, which I hope everybody
understands that, that it's grant money that we can opt for
or not. And then, if the County decides to do it, is -- are
all the owners required to participate, or can any opt out?
And if you opt out, is that a problem that will be for the
owners who opt out, or are there any negative effects? And
that's -- hopefully those can be answered next time. Thank
you. Appreciate it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Lewis Cosby.
AUDIENCE: Sir? Could the volume on this
microphone be tuned up a little bit? I don't think hardly
any of us back here are hearing what's being said. Is there
II a vnlume control on it?
MR. COSBY: I'll just get closer to it. Can
you hear me now?
AUDIENCE: Hear you better.
MR. COSBY: All right. 's'hank you, gentlemen,
I appreciate it. The goosebump words at the last meeting,
as you man see, didn't help. I've talked to a lot of my
neighbors, talked to people in other areas that were
designated colonias. Even though some of us have been
redesignated as areas that may benefit later, it still
carries a stigma. The Judge, earlier in his comments
. 2a-o'
26
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
downstairs, indicated that the public hearing or meeting
that -- that you folks had talking about this colonia
project, or maybe hiring Grantworks -- I don't know exactly
how that worked, because I never saw it in the paper. I
don't believe the newspaper printed it all, to be honest
with you. The people -- the people are way behind the power
curve here. We got a train that's going down the track full
speed, wherein county government -- it plans on turning over
this wastewater program that you guys are getting money for.
By the way, all those grants, according to your own study,
will not pay for all of it. You're going to have to go out
for money, probably in a bond. But you guys aren't going to
do it; U.G.R.A. is, because you're planning on turning it
over to U.G.R.A., an unelected body. We can't do anything
about it. That's what we're angry about. That's what we're
worried about. Why don't we put it in front of the voters,
let the voters decide? Sunshine the law, something.
We know the people in Kerrville South need
water -- have water problems. We know that they have sewer
problems. But I don't where I live. The people here
tonight don't have that problem either, but they're paying
for it. They are paying for it. You can say what you want,
it doesn't affect your property values. well, guess what?
It doesn't affect your appraisal value. Mine went up
$5,000. It's perception. Mr. Williams, you and I discussed
s-za-,_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
ZS
27
that, remember? It's perception. When a buyer comes in to
buy a piece of property in Silver Creek Estates and finds
out that they were designated or may be designated as a
colonia, do you think that man wants to buy that property?
I doubt it. So you can say what you want; you've hurt us
all, every one of us. And I'm hoping that these folks will
come to the public meeting, to where we can go on the
record. Thank you.
JODGE HENNEKE: Ray Rackley.
MR. RACKLEY: Commissioners, thank you for
hearing me. I'd like to apologize, because I've never
spoken about a subject I knew less about. These two pieces
of paper were placed near my mailbox, and that's the limit
of what I know about it. I stand to say I am against this
designation of colonia or colonia, or whatever you want to
call it. I bought a piece of property in Turtle Creek
Ranches six months ago, put in a septic tank, I put in a
wel]. And now I find out that somebody is going to come
help us. By grants? No, thank you. Grants are like free
lunch, and I don't believe there is one. So, please don't
help us. I'm against it. I'm also against water districts.
I spent four years serving as a director on one. I saw more
trouble, more graft, more waste than I want to waste your
time telling you about. Please, I'm against this, and I
think most of the people in this room are, 't'hank you.
~ a-r~
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
za
JUDGE HENNEKE: William Magill.
MR. MAGILL: I would like to thank you for
hearing me. I intended to say a little bit more than what
I'm going to say. I do realize that the State mandates the
requirements for colonias, but it's obvious that the ones
that you've selected to name as colonias are not colonias at
all, Now, that seems to be a representation of fraud
towards the state and the federal government, so I think you
should think about that. The other thing is, that wouldn't
~t be an appropriate action to bring this before the voters
of the county to see if they approve of this or not'? That's
all I have to say.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Cynthia Hurayt.
MS. HURAYT: I apologize, but I have to work
the night of the public meeting, so I'm just going to read
my thing here. I'm here to object to my property values
being lowered by designation of Turtle Creek Ranches as a
colonia. The colonia criteria states a minimum density of
one dwelling per 3 acres, and 51 percent have low to
moderate income. In Turtle Creek Ranches, 67 percent of the
lots are greater than or equal to 10 acres. Even with a
generous assignment of one dwelling per lot, we have only
0.27 dwellings per 3 acres, far below the minimum required
for a colonia designation. Regarding income, Mr. Hartzell
states in the minutes of the workshop that the 1990 census

I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
1~
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
29
and door-to-door income surveys were used to determine this.
37 percent of the residents on my road were not even there
in 1990, and five of the eight homes on my road have gates.
tither criteria include 25 percent of homes are substandard
and lack central water and sewer. Mr. Hartzell also stated
a drive-by survey was done to determine the substandard
housing. Five of eight homes on my road are not even
visible from the road.
Regarding central water and sewer, we, being
rural, have wells and septics. He doesn't claim a need for
sewerage in our area, but a central water system that will
be operated by U.G.R.A. or a private operator. Hooking up
10-acre lots to a central water system sounds like an
expensive venture, and Mr. Hartzell has let it be known that
the funds the county government are seeking will not pay for
the entire project. It looks an awful lot like we would end
up paying for something we don't even need. Turtle Creek
Ranches is being developed with nice homes in the hope of
increasing property values. Ironically, the same week we're
declared a colonia, our property values and taxes went up
substantially.
There are two points I wanted to make. One,
Mr. Hartzell and Grantworks are paid to get funding for
projects. It is my considered opinion, from the minutes of
that workshop, that Grantworks has deliberately been loose
'a-oa
1
'^ 2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
~ 11
12
13
14
i
15
16
i
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~. 2 9
25
30
and subjective in their compi]ation of data. They have
padded it by including areas that absolutely fail to meet
the criteria. This is fraud. And when my property value
suffers as a result, I will do a]1 I can to bring this fraud
to the attention of the funding authorities. Two, our
elected officials seem intent on making U.G.R.A., a river
authority with taxing capability and no accountability to
the taxpayers, into a major utility company. Even without
my own investment in well and septic, or if I lived in some
of the areas more qualified to be a colonia, I wouldn't want
my utility fees determined and assessed by U. G.R.A., who
answer to no one. I did learn something about Commissioners
Court, U.G.R.A., the Daily Times, when the mandatory aerobic
maintenance contract was being discussed. It seems like it
all was working together. Then, when the public paid
attention, y'all backed off, and then when we stooped paying
attention, it slid through once our attention waned. And
not one bit of information would be reported by our daily
newspaper, as was told to me by a member oT U.G.R.A. when I
asked when this had happened. He told me it never made it
to the newspaper. I suspect we can expect the same from the
newspaper with this issue. So all of us really need to pay
attention, or we're going to be taxed up the nose -- and
that wasn't the word I wanted to use -- to bring the
projects to their completion, and then over to U.G.R.A.
-'_ 0-0
31
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
Thank you for letting me have my say.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Virginia Hurayt.
MS. HURAYT: I decline till next week.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Carroll Smith.
Carroll Smith?
AUDIENCE: He left.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Edward Moore?
MR. MOORS: Gentlemen, I was aghast when I
received some information about what could be done for me
and my property. I live on Molina Road. I didn't move
there by accident. I've improved the property. My
neighbors around my place have improved their property. I
ask you to not push this issue. I ask you not to fund this.
You cannot improve my quality of life with anything offered
in this thing. It will do me no good. I want you to
understand that and please consider that if this funding
comes to question. Thank you very much.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Vicky Lableu.
MS. LABLEU: I decline to speak. 1'll
postpone until the public hearing.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, ma'am. John
Hanson.
MR. HANSON: I decline to make a statement at
this time.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, sir. Gene
s ~a a
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1L
13
14
15
lh
17
18
19
20
21
L 2
23
24
2b
32
Thacker.
MR. TRACKER:
3rd, public hearing.
JUDGE HENNEKE
I'll make my comment on the
Thank you, sir. Charles
White?
MR. WHITE: I'll do the same on the 3rd.
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. Those are the
forms I have. Is there anyone else who'd like to address
the Court on this issue or any issue not listed on tkie
regular agenda?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: May I just make one
comment? At the public hearing, make sure each of y`all say
your address and what subdivision you live in. Just as a
point of reference, it would be helpful, I think. If
it's -- I mean, ii it's general comments about the program
or if it's your neighborhood doesn't fit the criteria,
little bit diYTerent issues, but we'd like W hear both, I
think.
AUDIENCE: I want to thank y'all for
listening to the comments, listening to the public like you
ought to. I appreciate what you've done for us, even though
I didn't address you. I think you guys have done fine in
listening, 1 hope that the 3rd will be beneficial for
everybody.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. We do listen. I
5 ~e-„_
33
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
mean, you know, there -- sometimes -- 1 don't know who it
was -- public gets involved in these things after it's gone
along way down the road. It gets a long way down the road,
though, despite our best efforts to publicize things. But
we do listen, and I can guarantee you that I, at least, will
take very seriously the comments that are made here. This
is a draft plan, and if we've made errors, then we'll
correct them. There's no hidden agenda here. There's no
desire on anyone's part to punish anyone. Now, let me intake
it clear that this Court does not have the authority to
require anyone to participate, nor do we have a desire to.
Yes, ma'am?
AUDIENCE: Is it possible for us to have
available to everyone a copy, or can we make copies of the
grant and the survey that was made? How do we get our hands
on that?
JUDGE HENNEKE: We have -- there are.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Grantworks
representative might be able --
JUDGE HENNEKE: We can make copies of the
proposed plan available in the County Clerk's office.
AUDIENCE: Will that be available for us to
come pick up?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes, ma'am, we will do these.
We'll have those -- some copies made and we'll distribute
ze a~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
l~
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
34
them free of charge. We'11 have those ready starting after
lunch tomorrow.
AUDIENCE: Okay, thank you,
JUDGE HENNEKE: I've forgotten how many pages
it is, but --
MS. PIEPER: Yes, sir.
MR. COSBY: Excuse me, sir, Is that thin one
here, the Colonia Study Plan, the 41-page unit?
JUDGE HENNEKE: No, i think there's a smaller
version, what I'm thinking of.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Perhaps the
Grantworks representative could take note and bring extra
copes for the public hearing.
DODGE HENNEKE: Well --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: They actually need it
before that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: They need it before that.
AUDIENCE: We need it so we can see what
we're talking about.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll have some things
available starting late tomorrow afternoon for people to
look at. I mean, I don't think you want to see the grant.
That doesn't mean anything to most of y'all. What y'all
want to see is the parameters of the draft plan, which I
think is about 8 to 10 pages, as I recall.
s za uz
35
1
L
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
29
25
MR. COSBY: Sir, if I may ask you one more
question, the Kerr County Commissioners Court workshop that
was conducted on April 2nd, that's public record, is it
not? 1 mean, we can -- we can go into the County Clerk's
office, I know we have to pay for it, so many cents a page,
but we can do that; is that correct?
JUDGE HENNEKE: The minutes of that meeting
are public record, that's correct.
MR. COSBY: Okay. Do we have to fill out a
public record request form to get them?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I believe you would have to
go to the Clerk's office and fill out an Open Records --
Texas Open Records Act --
MS. PIEPER: If they just would come in and
let them know what they want, I can provide it.
MR. COSBY: Okay. Thank you, ma'am. Thank
you, sir.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else?
MR. MOORE: I have one question. Can you
clarify what Kerrville South is? Where all this work is
being done? That doesn't tell me anything.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Bi11?
MR. MOURE: Where is it?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Kerrville South is a
pretty vast area.
-a-u~
36
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. MOORS: That's what I'm afraid of.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What the original
plan talked about was that area on Ranchero Road, where the
original grant was given, on Ranchero Road going down to
about as far as the Nimitz School, essentially on the south
side of the road, where there are many, many failing septic
systems that are polluting Camp Meeting Creek. That's the
first phase of the project.
MR. MOORS: Thank you very much. I
appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, with your
permission, I'd like to ask the Court to move Item 16 up now
so that we can take action on it and that the people here
will know that a public hearing will indeed be set for
Monday, June 3rd.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Without objection, we'll call
up Item 2.16, which is consider and discuss advertising and
scheduling a public hearing for the agenda item at 5 o'clock
Monday, June 3rd, Year 2002. I'm sure that's going to be
changed.
AUDIENCE: Six.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Pardon?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The agenda item says
five.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's the agenda item. We
-za-a'
37
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
haven't voted on it yet. I have to read the agenda item as
it's published.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, based on all
the interest in this particular subject, and the fact that a
public hearing is valuable to this process, I would move
that we consider and discuss advertising and authorizing --
advertising and scheduling a public hearing for the County's
2000 Colonia Comprehensive Plan for 6:30 p.m. on June 3,
2002. Public hearing will be advertised by Grantworks and
conducted by Grantworks in a courtroom in this building.
That's the sense of my motion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court hold a
public hearing on the draft 2000 Colonia Plan for Monday,
June 3rd, Year 2002, at 6:30 p.m., in the Kerr County
Courthouse, the exact courtroom to be determined and to be
identified by signs which will be placed throughout the
courthouse. 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. That will be
the public hearing. At this time, let's return to the
5-2b- _
38

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
2S
regular order, if we may. Mr. Auditor? We need to pay some
bills. Does anyone have any questions or comments regarding
the bills as presented?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move we pay
the bills.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Griffin, 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.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carried. Budget
amendments. Budget Amendment Request Number 1 is for J.P.
Number 3.
MR. TOMLINSON: This is a request from Judge
Tench to transfer S6U0 from Conferences line item to
Part-Time Salary. I think this is a result of the
resignation of his -- of his clerk.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMM1551UNER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court approve
5-zd-o
39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Z3
24
2s
Budget Amendment Request Number 1 for J.P. Number 3. 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. Budget
Amendment Request Number 2 is for Juvenile Probation.
MR. TOMLINSON: This request is from Juvenile
Probation to transfer $5.25 from Diagnosis and Treatment
line item to Miscellaneous, and it's -- it's to pay for a
summons issued in Blanco County.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court approve
Budget Amendment Request Number 2 for the Juvenile Probation
Department. 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.)
JUUGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Budget
Request Number 3 is for County Court at Law.
MR. '1'OMLINSON: This request is to transfer
5 28-~2
40
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
I6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
funds for the purpose of paying for court-appointed
attorneys. We have numerous bills totaling $1,680. We need
to transfer $1,625.40 from the Court-Appointed Attorneys
line item in County Court to that line item in the County
Court at Law.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Third.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court
approve Budget Amendment Request Number 3 for County Court
at Law.
MR. TOMLINSON: Judge, I have a comment about
that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm surprised we have that
much left in Court-Appointed Attorneys for County Court.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, we're at the point of
the year where we're trying to anticipate what will be left
in -- in various line items, you know, in all the budgets in
the General Fund, to be able to -- to make the year without
increasing the budget. So that's where we are at this
point.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or
comments? If not, all in favor, raise your xighL hand.
5-za-az
41
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
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Budget
Amendment Request Number 4 is for the 198th District Court.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. This request is for
the same purpose, to pay court-appointed attorneys. We have
bills for the 216th Court for $1,155. We have bills for the
court transcripts for the 216th Court, $151, and
court-appointed services for the 198th Court for $919.06.
And my request is to transfer $2,225.11 from Court-Appointed
Attorney line item in the 198th Court for that purpose.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court approve
Budget Amendment Request Number 9 for the district courts.
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. Do we have
any late bills, Tommy?
MR. '1'OMLINSON: Yes, I do, first one being
5-ze-oa
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
ly
20
21
22
23
29
25
payment to the Texas Court Reporters Association, and it's
for early registration fee for court reporter in the 216th
Court under the Conference line item for $250 for that
purpose.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court
approve a late bill and hand check in the amount of $250
payable to Texas Court Reporters Association. 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 response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
MR. TOMLINSON: The second one is for $600
payable to Kerrville Postmaster. It's emergency purchase
for postage for -- for the 216th Court and the 198th court,
total of $600.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LET2: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court approve
the late bill and hand check in the amount of $600 payable
-~e oz
43

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
to the Kerrville Postmaster. 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.
MR. TOMLINSON: I have one more. It's also
payable to the Kerrville Postmaster for $370, and it's for
postage Tor the Treasurer's office.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court approve a
late bill and hand check in the amount of $370 payable to
the Kerrville Postmaster. 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.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's all I have.
JUDGE HENNEKE: `Thank you, Tommy.
MR. TOMLINSON: Sure.
JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, I'd entertain a
5 - _° 8 - 0 2
44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
y
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
motion to approve and accept the monthly reports as
presented.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIQNER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, 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. At this
time, at the request of Commissioner Baldwin, we're going to
take up Item 2.19, which is really kind of a significant and
sad item for Kerr County. The item is to consider and
discuss resignation of Don McClure as Constable of J.P. 1.
As Don comes forward, Lon has served this county loyally and
faithfully and extraordinarily well for -- how long,
Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIid: No one can count that
high.
(Laughter.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Some 30-some-odd years. And
I think many of us never thought we'd see the day when he
z6-~~_
95
1
G
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
would no longer be here to care of us.
CONSTABLE McCLORE: Y'all kind of had me
worried here for a minute. I didn't come with no weapon.
(Laughter.)
CONSTABLE McCLURE: Thought I was going to
have to defend y'all or something for a little bit there.
But, anyway, it's with regret that I come to offer this
resignation. My term lasts till the end of '04, but it's
time for me to resign, to go into retirement. My health's
failing me, my mind's not as sharp as it used to be. I can
remember things that happened a long time ago, but I can't
remember what happened sometimes an hour ago. But, anyway,
that's -- that's the reason for it. I just don't feel like
I'm able to do the County justice for the remainder of my
term. And I appreciate the acceptance of the resignation so
I can try to get my stuff back together again.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to make a
comment. I -- this is a dark day in Kerr County, Don.
CONSTABLE McCLUR.E: Not really.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, it is. You've
been a -- you've been one of my good friends for many, many
years now, and a great servant to our community, and I just
want tc~ say thank you. And, with that, I'll move to accept
the resignation of Don McClure.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second, regretfully.
,a-r,~
46
1
2
3
9
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1R,
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that we accept the
resignation of Constable, Precinct 1, Don McClure, effective
June 30th, Year 200'2. Any further questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a further
comment, Judge. On June -- Friday, June the 28th, at
11:30 a.m., in this courtroom, we'll have a party.
CONSTABLE McCLURE: I'll --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I didn't say it was
for you. I just said we're having a party.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we'd like for you
to be here, though.
CONSTABLE McCLURE; I'll go for that.
CUMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So that's Friday,
June 28th, at 11:30 a.m. in this courtroom.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Sheriff?
CONSTABLE McCLURE: Appreciate it. Again,
thank y'all. The previous courts that I've been associated
with, I've never had anything but total cooperation out of
all the courts that I've been associated with over the
years. And, again, thank you for the privilege and thank
the voters of Precinct 1 for giving me a job. Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Sheriff, you had a comment,
before we vote?
5-2r ~_
47
1
L
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1~
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I have one comment to
Don. Don got me started in law enforcement over 22 years
ago, and I know Don's the longest-lasting peace officer in
this county. And the one thing I'd like to ask everybody to
do right now is stand up and give him a round of applause.
(Applause.)
CONSTABLE McCLURE: I'd like to commend this
little fella here, toc, 'cause I tried to talk him out of
it.
(Laughter.)
CONSTABLE McCLURE: I was afraid that, due to
his size, he was going to get hurt, but he's proved me
wrong, and I thank God for that. Good luck to you.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Thank you, Don.
JUDGE HENNEKE: All in favor of the motion,
raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you very much.
JUDGE HENNEKE: With great reluctance. Let's
take up Item Number 1, consider and discuss Long-Range
Planning Committee's report for the Kerr County Sheriff's
Office. Mr. Cunningham, or Sheriff or Ms. Bailey, whoever.
5-~8-0~
48
1
2
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. BAILEY: Let me turn this on. We had
some technical difficulties earlier, so I'm a little
concerned.
MS. PIEPER: Do we need to lower the lights?
MS. BAILEY: No, I think it will show up
fine. While she gets that going, Judge Henneke and
Commissioners, we appreciate this opportunity to make this
presentation to you up in this courtroom and be able to use
the -- the audiovisuals that -- that we have here. We felt
like this was important enough that not only should you have
the printed copy of the report that we made, but that it was
important for you to be able to see some of the items that
we were talking about, because many people aren't familiar
with all the inner workings of the Sheriff's Departmen*_ and
the jail.
As you will remember, almost a year ago, the
C~urL appointed the committee members that make up the
committee that have produced this report, asking us to study
the Kerr County Sheriff's Office and jail from a long-term
perspective, with a view towards perhaps being able to make
some sh~rl-l.erm decisions that went towards improvement in
the long run, and we commend the Court for taking that kind
of approacki. In my experience with the County, which has
been 11 years here, it's the first time I've seen a court do
that on a real organized basis, try to look to a long-term
-_a n..
49
1
2
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
L J
24
25
view to a department. I think it's very useful. We
recommend it for any of the larger departments that need to
make some long-term decisions and make long-term budget
concepts work out.
The committee worked hard on this project.
There's lots of information in the document that you have,
and we're certainly only going to scratch the surface here,
but we wanted to highlight a few areas, the five areas that
we felt were the most important to review, and that's what
Mr. Cunningham will talk about. But, before we get started,
I just wanted to introduce to you the members of the
committee, and to the audience. We had -- each Commissioner
and the County Judge appointed one member. The Sheriff
appointed two members, and then we had the Administrative
Assistant to the Sheriff also assisting us on the committee.
The County Judge's appointee was Rod Myers. [Jnfortunately,
he left Lhe community before we were able to finish the
project, so I don't believe he's here today, but we thank
him foL his -- his assistance. Kirby Cunningham is the
Precinct Number 1 appointee. He is an investment adviser
and financial planner with the Acacia Group, although he's
getting ready to retire from that and maybe take on some
more community projects.
Then John Comegys was the Precinct 2
appointee. He is -- has been a resident of Kerr County for
5 - G d - n
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1L
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~3
24
25
about 12 years; began a real estate development company in
Collin County before moving here, and now manages the Brown
Trout Capital Investments Company, a private investment
company. David Burow was the Precinct 3 appointee. He is
an employee of the Hill Country Telephone Co-op, where he
has worked since 1972. Don Townsend is the Precinct 4
appointee. He is a former Air Force member. After he left
the Air Force, he worked on the B-58 -- B-58 Program as an
electronic engineer, worked in Mission Control at NASA,
retired from NASA in 1988, and went to work for Lockheed,
where he worked until he retired and moved to Kerrville in
1995.
Most of you know me. I was Assistant County
Attorney for Kerr County for a number of years. In the last
two years, I've been in private practice, doing criminal
defense and appellate work and general civil litigation in
the community, and practice with two other local attorneys.
Tommy Hall is the other Sheriff's appointee -- I failed to
mention that I was the Sheriff's appointee. Tommy Hall is
the other Sheriff's appointee. He works for the Texas
Alcoholic Beverage Commission as an agent responsible for
Kerr, Gillespie, and Kimble Counties. Then, of course,
Sheriff Hiertiolzer was a member of the committee, and then
his administrative assistant, Nancy Robison.
The committee, when we first started out, we
s ze cz
51
	1
	
r-	2
	3
	4
	5
	6
	7
	8
	9
	10
	11
	12
~-. 1 3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
felt like it was important to develop a mission statement,
because everything that we did, we then needed to relate
back to the mission statement and see if it was in
compliance with what our mission statement was, or if we
needed to amend it. So, we've adopted this as the mission
statement for the Kerr County Sheriff's Office. And, as you
can see, the mission is to provide a high level of
protection and law enforcement to the residents and visitors
of Kerr County in a professional and cost-effective manner
on an ongoing basis. What we did was then reviewed the
operations and facilities of the Kerr County Sheriff's
Office, with a view towards enhancing all of the operations
so that they increased compliance with that mission
statement.
What Kirby is going to talk about next is all
of the top five areas that we felt needed to be addressed in
relation to that mission statement, and I'll turn it over to
Kirby at this time.
Mk. CUNNINGHAM: Thank you very much, Ilse.
Good evening, gentlemen. Overall, the committee found the
Kerr County Sheriff's Department, including the Adult
Detention Center for the jail, to be a well-functioning
division of Kerr County government, but one in need of
significant additions and improvements if it is to not fall
behind iu service obligations. While improvements and
S- 2 H- U 2
52
1
~--~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
]2
~., 13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,... 2 4
25
increased funding over the last few years have brought the
decades in which funding failed to keep pace with
ever-increasing population and even faster-growing crime
statistics. As with most county operational issues, these
problems will require additional funding.
The committee is extremely aware of the fact
that Kerr County sheriff's budget already consumes nearly
25 percent of the county budget each year, and we are
similarly aware of the tact that as expenses rise, so must
the tax burden on our citizens. Thus, we do not make these
recommendations lightly. We will present the department's
anticipated future needs in a format that will allow for
planning and prioritization, which will permit the incurred
costs to be spread out over time, lessening the impact on
any given budget year. For this summary, we have singled
out the five top areas the committee believes are necessary
to accomplish the continued effective and efficient
operation of the department, and those are communications,
personnel, records management, physical facilities, and
optimizing the use of available funds. so, let's take a
brief look at each one of these areas.
First of all, r_ommunications. The emergency
communications system is a vital part of any law enforcement
5-~&-nz
53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,,.~ 2 4
25
emergency operation. As we all know, the current system has
not kept pace with growth in all areas of the county,
resulting in circumstances where law enforcement field
personnel have not been able to communicate by hand-held
radio in 90 to 50 percent of the geographical area within
the county. Once the officer leaves his patrol car, he can
be effectively cut off from all communications with his
fellow officers and with his agency. This is unacceptable.
BuL Lhis part of the communication problem is being
addressed with the de~~ision by Commissioners Court to
purchase a new convention VHF simulcast radio communication
system for our Kerr County Sheriff's Office. This new
system will result in a guaranteed 95 percent coverage for
the geographical area of Kerr County with hand-held radios,
and a guaranteed 98 percent coverage with car radios. With
the signing of the last two tower leases two weeks ago by
Commissioners Court, and full -- and full implementation of
this system in 2002, we expect that this aspect of KCSO's
radio concerns will have been met for the foreseeable
future.
Another important aspect of communications
that has not yet been fully addressed is the need for a
centralized dispatching center, which would combine the
Kerrville Police Department, Kerrville Fire Department and
EMS, 911, Ingram City Marshal's UfLice, and the Kerr County
S-_'S- _
54
I
1
I
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2 i
23
24
25
Sheriff's Office. While there have been numerous
discussions over the past several years between the various
agencies that would be affected about how to accomplish this
goal, it has yet to be implemented. The committee urges the
Commissioners Court to make this a high priority.
Let's take a look at personnel, the second
area. The committee believes that the additional -- that
additional personnel for Kerr County Sheriff's Office --
Jail and Sheriff's Office is a critical need. The current
number of personnel budgeted is substantially below minimum
levels. According to state recommendations and
requirements, Texas state standards generally recommends
staffing at the rate of one patrol officer for each 1,000
citizens. Other standards merely state that there should be
a sufficient number of officers to efficiently and
effectively serve the needs of the population. Thus,
population density and geographical considerations should be
taken into account in formulating an analysis of personnel
needs. The committee recognizes that personnel expenditures
make up the great majority of the costs for the Kerr County
Sheriff's Office, and therefore, it is unrealistic to
recommend that all these deficiencies be addressed
immediately. Therefore, we recommend increases which should
bring staffing to within 80 percent of what we believe is an
optimum level within three years.
S '_ 8 - U 2
55
1
~- 2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
„_., 13
19
1J
16
17
18
19
20
21
ZL
23
,,~ 2 4
25
Let's take a look at the committee's analysis
jail. Since current needs are not being met, future funding
up to the numbers needed today, as well as planning to
provide an appropriate number of employees to account for
predicted future growth. First, the Sheriff's Office. In
one 24-hour time period, the Kerr County Sheriff currently
should have the following personnel on duty for each shift
in order to be fully staffed: For each shift, one patrol
officer -- one patrol supervisor, four patrol deputies, and
twu dispatchers.
We need to note here that in order to fully
stafL -any position that needs L4-riour coverage per day, the
County will need five full-time employees on the payroll to
cuve~ one position. This calculation is based on the
following formula: One year equals 8,760 hours, which
equals 1,095 eight-hour shifts. One full-time employee will
work X40 shifts in a year, on average, taking vacation, sick
days, and holidays into account. 'therefore, it takes 4.56
employees to cover one 24-hour-per-day position. The
committee rounded Lhis 4.56 up to 5 to account for
additional	training	requirements that are	a part of the law
enforcement	officer'	s job requirements.	Additional
5-~e-~~
56
1
.-, 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.-- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,^.~ 2 4
25
full-time personnel needed that do not require the
summarize, seven full-time, 24-hour positions, multiplied by
the factor of 5, equals 35 employees. 29 full-time,
day-only positions added to the 35 gives us a total of 64.
Sheriff's Department currently needs 69, and has 41.
Current personnel are 64 percent of what is now needed.
Additional personnel needed to bring the staffing to the
target 80 percent of recommended number, allocated by year,
2003, 2009, 2005, to hit a target of 51 people by 2005, or
an increase of 10 positions over the three-year period.
Okay. Let's go to the Adult Detention Center
and see what we have there. In one 24-hour time period, the
Kerr County Adult Detention Center currently should have the
following personnel on duty for each shift in order to be
fully staffed: Two booking officers, four jailers, one
kitchen staff, one nurse, two prisoner service personnel,
and two control room officers. And we're going to take a
few minutes here to give you a virtual tour of the Adult
Detention Center with some slides, and these are
self-explanatory.
(Slide show presented.)
Additional full-time personnel needed that do
not require the multiplication factor -- again, not needed
-_a o~
57
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
.-- 1 3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~ 24
25
24 hours per day -- are as shown on the slide. So, to
summarize the jail facility's situation with respect to
personnel, 12 full-time, 24-hour-per-day positions times the
factor of 5 equals 50 employees needed on staff. 13
full-time, day-only positions added to the 60 gives us a
total of 73. The need is for 73 personnel; currently we
have 35. Additional personnel needed to bring the staff to
the target 80 percent of recommended number, allocated by
year in 2003, '9, and 'S, is equal to 58 people, or an
increase of 23 positions in the jail.
The Texas Commission on Jail Standards
requires that the County have one jailer involved in actual
inmate observation and care, not performing other duties,
but 100 percent devoted to actual inmate observation and
care, for each 48 inmates. Kerr County has been averaging
more than 160 inmates per day, on average, which requires a
minimum of four jailers per shift. However, if recent
trends continue, increases even faster than the projections
contained within this report are to be expected. Also, our
increased census of prisoners has diminished our capacity to
handle out-of-county prisoners. In the past, Kerr County
has been able to achieve nearly half a million dollars in
revenue from these out-of-county prisoners. Thus, our
increase in jail population threatens not only to
substantially increase our costs of housing prisoners; it
s_?A_~~
58
1
~ 2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
also threatens to dramatically decrease our income.
Okay. Let's take a minute here before we go
to the other three areas that we're going to talk about, and
talk about the measures of growth that the committee spent a
lot of time developing to try to come up with a projected
percent growth rate per year for the Sheriff's Department
and for the Adult Detention Center. We have projected a
growth rate for the Kerr County Sheriff's Office and the
Adult Detention Center of 5 percent per year, based on
criteria shown on the slide. For the Sheriff's Office, a
2 percent historical annual population growth rate,
11 percent increase in calls for service over the last five
years, and a 29 percent increase in arrests per year over
the past five years. 24 percent per year for the last five
years. The jail criteria were, again, the same 2 percent
historical annual population growth rate, 43 percent
increase in prisoner population over the past five years,
and an astounding, to the committee, 72 percent increase in
bookings over the past five years.
The committee acknowledges that it's
impossible	to	predict with real	accuracy what	future growth
rates will	be,	but since county	population --	the county's
population has steadily increased at ~ percent per year for
many years, and since the crime rate has continued to
increase both locally and nationally at a rate faster than
5 ?a ,.~
1
.-. 2
3
9
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
,~,~ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Z1
22
23
24
25
59
the population growth, we believe that this 5 percent
projection is realistic, and may even be somewhat
5 percent per year for five years growth rate is accurate,
at the end of the first three years, what we show in this
report as 80 percent of personnel needs, that target
80 percent will actually produce an effective rate of only
70 percent of personnel needed for the year 2005, because of
increasing statistics in the area that we've talked about.
L
area of critical
In recent years,
huge increase in
all areas of law
have not kept up
=_t's look at records management, another
need in the Kerr County Sheriff's Office.
the technology revolution has resulted in a
the number of records being generated in
enforcement, while governments in general
with the technology needed to keep up with
this information explosion. As a result, the Kerr County
Sheriff's Office, like so many similarly situated
governmental departments, must deal with a mountain of data
in cumbersome, paper files. Although much of the current
recordkeeping is done via computer, there are vast amounts
of paper that are not duplicated in our electronic data
system.
KCSO is regulated to a great extent by the
Texas Government Code Section 441.158, which provides for
the Texas State Library and Archives Commission to issue
s-za-r~
1
.--~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
60
records retention schedules for local governments. In this
retention schedule, Kerr County Sheriff's Office is required
to maintain and store records for a range of years,
records, juvenile delinquency records, records of writs and
process, permit records and associated documentation,
financial records, personnel and training records, and other
miscellaneous records such as applications for deputies,
convict labor records, estray records, and memos written by
administrative staff, and on and on and on. Kerr County
Sheriff's Office currently has in ex~~ess of 1S0 five-drawer
filing cabinets dedicated to records that are currently
full, and additionally has three storage rooms within the
facility that are also full of boxed records dating back to
the 1970's and even earlier.
Kerr County Sheriff's Office produces new
paper documents at the rate of 42,000 per month, on average.
It should be a priority of this Court to fund a method of
addressing records storage and retrieval. At a minimum, the
Kerr County Sheriff's Office should have dedicated records
management personnel and equipment sufficient to permit the
scanning and cataloging of new records as they are
generated, and at the same time, reduce the existing older
5-' R-li
61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1~
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
documents to electronic form. This would permit the
destruction and disposal of a majority of the hard-copy
documents that they currently have on-hand. 'fhls would also
have the additional benefit of freeing up valuable floor
space in the facility for other use.
Which leads me to the fourth area of
recommendation, physical facilities. When the Kerr County
Law Enforcement Facility was opened in 1996, it was
projected to meet Kerr County's needs for law enforcement
offices and jail for the next 15 to 20 years. Although the
building was designed specifically to allow for easy
addition of more jail and administrative space, it was not
anticipated that this would be needed for the foreseeable
future. These predictions have fallen short. As the Court
is aware from recent news articles, the jail has been full
in excess of its capacity of 192 inmates several times in
the last year. Consequently, Kerr County can no longer
house out-of-county inmates, which brought in additional
revenues of a half million dollars iii 200], as I previously
stated. Currently, without out-of-county inmates, the jail
daily population continues to remain at an average of 145 to
160 inmates. According to Texas Jail Commission
recommendations, the maximum number of inmates that Kerr
County should house in a facility with 192 beds and continue
to be able to properly classify inmates is 153, or
5-:8-0~
62
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
80 percent of the maximum capacity.
The administrative office area is similarly
at its maximum capacity, and consequently, office space that
was designed for workroom areas and conference rooms has
been converted to employee offices, and some
single-occupancy offices are now occupied by up to four
employees. If additional employees are added, as per ttie
recommendations of the committee, there is not current
adequate space to put them without either remodeling or
adding new space to the administrative area. Given that our
2 percent annual growth in county population has been
substantially exceeded by our growth in jail population,
43 percent over the past five years, and that daily bookings
have similarly increased at an exponential 72 percent over
the past five years, it does not take complex calculations
to determine that the current jail and administrative
facilities are not going to last for the predicted 15 to 20
years. Commissioners Court should give immediate and
serious attention to the issue of addiny more physical
facilities at the Law Enforcement Center, because this is a
project that will probably be accomplished over several
years.
The final major area of recommendation is to
present ways to optimize the use of available funds. The
committee urges Commissioners Court to look at not only
5-2H n~
63
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
increased funding to assist the department in its attempt to
upgrade, but also continue to consider and take advantage of
indirect funding sources. For instance, the Kerr County
Sheriff's Office has been highly successful recently with
very limited resources in a number of successful grant
applications. The committee believes that there are a
number of funding sources that will provide grant money for
law enforcement, but most of these require matching funds.
The committee therefore recommends that if it is statutorily
and constitutionally permissible, the Court should establish
a sinking fund Eor the purpose of having an available pool
of money from which the county can provide matching funds
for these grants. If a sinking fund is not appLOpxiate,
then a mechanism for setting aside such funds should be
determined. Inquiries should be made into other appropriate
ways to set aside the -- the matching funds for future
grants to the Kerr County Sheriff's Office and Adult
Detention Center.
The committee notes with approval that the
Court and Sheriff's Department have already taken advantage
of this method of indirect funding. During the duration of
the Long-Range Planning Committee's duties, the department
received permission to apply for a grant for a live
fingerprint scanning system and was successful in that
effort, receiving $114,000 for the purpuse. The system does
-^e-oz
1
,~-~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.-.
14
15
16
1~
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
64
away with inked and frequently unreadable prints,
automatically loads data into an electronic database that is
immediate]y transmitted into FBI and DPS databases. Within
minutes, the department can obtain notification of a
positive identification, if one is available, or inforiciation
that the individual may be wanted.
Not only does this system save time, but it
also dramatically reduces the number of personnel hours
required to take prints, transmit and copy tYiecu, and to
retake them when the unreadable ones are rejected by state
and federal archiving systems. llespite the fact that this
system may appear to have required substantially more
financial outlay in its initial stages lkian the traditional
manual system, when the cost is amortized over time and the
savings are analyzed, it becomes evl~lent that this system --
this new system will save untold amounts of money and time
over its usable life. Luckily, this grant did not require
matching funds, but that's the exception rather than the
rule.
Another example of Kerr County Sheriff's
Office implementing technology to save time and money is the
installation of a computer in various other law enforcement
agencies and prosecutors' office that will - offices that
will enable these agencies to have direct access to the
department's computerized jail records, inmate records, and
s-e-o2
65
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
defendant case information. This project, while having some
nominal initial costs to other participating agencies, will
save an immense amount of time and personnel costs in the
other agencies. The committee encourages Kerr County
Sheriff's Office and Commissioners Court to continue to
pursue this kind of opportunities. Volunteer utilizatiun is
also an important consideration for stretching budget
dollars available to Kerr County Sheriff's Office. In the
Adult Detention Cente
beyond what's already
relating primarily to
Office there are some
most significant is a
its initial stages of
r, there are not many opportunities
being done in terms of volunteers,
liability issues, but in the Sheriff's
opportunities that the -- probably the
reserve deputy program, which is in
being developed, and could have
significant impact in terms of the number of deputies
required at any given time.
The committee recommends that, since a
program of grant applications is so potentially lucrative,
it would be prudent -- a prudent investment of County
resources to dedicate one emp]oyee, at least part-time, to
grant-writing and research. With the expertise that would
come with experience over time, the County could readily
maximize its utilization of this resource. In closing, the
committee commends Commissioners Courl and the Sheriff for
-2a-u,
66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
initiating this planning process. We feel that this is a
prudent activity, and one which will result ~n significant
long-term benefits to the County and to its citizens. Thank
you very much.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Kirby. And, Kirby
and Ilse and Don and John, fantastic labor, and the results
speak for themselves. Sheriff, don't get your hopes up,
though. Do any members of the Court have any questions of
either -- any of the members of the Long-Term Sheriff's
Department Planning Commission?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I have a
comment. Not necessarily -- are you there?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can't see you real
well.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm fading fast.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; Kirby, excellent job.
And, of course, he`s Precinct 1's representative. Very good
job. What -- it's thrilling to me to see -- see planning
going on in county government. It's unheard of throughout
the state of Texas. You just don't plan irr county
governments; it's hard to do. And this Court has done some
budgetary planning, and it's good to see an office do that.
And this is a huge, huge project. And, personally --
personally, I'd like to see us -- I mean, it's impossible to
S Z ~ ~ 2
67
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
catch everything you said. Even though you did it -- you
practiced on me the other day, it's still impossible to
catch all those things. So, what I -- what I think we need
to do is put this exact same program in a workshop, to where
we can actually sit down and spend time and draw circles in
the dirt and visit with one another, get details and get
in-depth on the issues, and start that workshop with a tour
of the jail. And we'd be -- it would be a traveling
workshop. There's -- our staff would be following behind us
in a little car. I've always had this vision of them doing
that.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sut I tkiink it's that
important, to -- for us to slow down and take a very, very
close look at it, and so that's -- that's my desire, is to
have it in a workshop and do this again.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd like to offer my
thanks to the committee, and particularly to John Comegys,
the Precinct 2 appointee, for taking Lhe time and effort to
not only get up to speed on where the Sheriff's Department
is today, but to advance this information to us on where we
need to be in the future. A lot of work went into this, and
we extend our thanks and appreciation for doing that. I
echo what Commissioner Baldwin said in terms of a workshop.
I think it would be helpful. While the -- while the study
ea-oz
68
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that you've completed is comprehensive, it does lend itself
to questions when you start getting into the specifics of
how -- how to do and why to do and what to do. So, I would
welcome that opportunity. I guess the Sheriff will probably
pick up that suggestion and do it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Basically, I concur with
what was said. I'd like to thank all the committee members,
especially David 6urow from my precinct. And I think the
workshop -- I support that, but it needs to be done sooner
rather than later. Probably June -- mid-June, before we get
into the budget. Because this -- the budget impact on the
Sheriff's Department overall is always pretty significant,
and the items here, if we're going to start going down the
road towards implementing the recommendations, you know, in
the time frame listed, the alternative time frame, it needs
to start now and within this budget year, probably.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I would echo, too, the
kudos to the committee. Great work. Because you -- you
developed a good mission statement and theca stayed focused
on the mission statement, which is obvious in the results.
The proof obviously will be, too, when we try to fit a
budget profile to this three-year or five-year plan or
whatever it turns out to be, and that's always where the
devil is in the details. And I would hope that when we get
to that point, that we would have the kelp of the committee
5-28-G_
69
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
members to actively stay involved with us in developing the
budget profiles over those years, because that's going to be
important, and the committee is in a much better position
now, probably, than anyone else in the community on what's
what and -- and what the priorities -- where the priorities
need to be set and so on. But, again, a great job, and --
and thanks to everybody, particularly Don Townsend,
Precinct 4.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Uf course mice's an
Aggie. Does that help any?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Sheriff, you ktad a brief
comment? You had your finger up.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only -- the only
thing I wanted to say is, I personally also wanted to thank
the committee. They did spend a lot of time and a lot of
hours, and a lot of lunch hours meeting over this and
discussing it, and took a lot of time getting into detail.
As far as Buster's recommendation, I would support that
wholeheartedly, because it is a -- a very intense
presentation. I appreciate, all the Commissioners and
Judge, the opportunity to have a long-range planning
committee. It's something that's never been done in the
Sheriff's Office. It needed to be done. We needed to know
where we're going and how we're going to get there, and I
appreciate y'all appointing Ltte members. I think every
-'a-u~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~2
23
24
25
~o
member took it extremely seriously and stayed with it, and I
appreciate their part of it. But I, too, think it's
something that needs to have a workshop. We need to get a
good map of where we're going and how we're going to get
there, because it doesn't matter whether I'm Sheriff or
anybody else is Sheriff; these are things that are going to
have to be faced by this County over the future. Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: When the Sheriff brought the
notion to me and we brought to it Commissioners Court and
got it approved by Commissioners Court, with great
enthusiasm, I think this is what we had in mind. This is
the product that we needed. This is what we had to have.
This is what we need to have. Planning's the fun, though.
Implementing is not so much fun, and that's the next stage,
and one that we will take on with as much seriousness and
commitment as the committee has for the planning. So,
again, the thanks of Commissioners Court and the citizens of
Kerr County to the planning committee and the people who
participated and assisted from the Sheriff's Department and
e]sewhere. Y'all have really come through with flying
colors. Anything else on this item, gentlemen? If not, 1
propose we take a break, and let's reconvene -- we'll just
hold it up here for the duration. Let's be back, if we can,
at 8:~0,
(Recess taken from 8:10 p.m, to 8:20 p.m.)
-~a-na

1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
~1
JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll reconvene this regular
special meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. The
next item for consideration is Item Number 2, consider and
discuss approving a contract between the Texas Department of
Protective and Regulatory Services and the Commissioners
Court of Kerr County to continue maintaining a child welfare
board to administer a county-wide welfare program to meet
the needs of children in the county who are in need of
protective services. Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, thank you
very much. As you see in my note here -- and we'll get to
you in just a second -- my note here, it says, basically, we
-- they have given us couple of options here, and one of the
options is basically what we're doing today, and that's
going to be my recommendation. It`s considered the
nonfinancial contract. And we have with us Bobby Pickens.
He's president of the Child Welfare Board. And, Bobby, take
it from there, please.
MR. PICKENS: Thank you, Commissioners Court,
and thank y'all for letting us come in tonight to request
that -- for this new contract. And 1'd also like to make
note, I have -- Vice President Sharon Coldwell is attending
the meeting as well. Back on March 19th of 2002, I received
a letter from Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory
Services stating that our contract with them -- with C.P.S.,
s-za-oz
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
in
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
7z
with our local office, will be expiring August 31st of this
year. And what they're asking is that we renew our contract
with them and have it effective September 1st of 2002. The
current contract that we have, the last one we -- we dug in
our records, was renewed in 1996. And we have a Child
Welfare Board contract that's a nonfinancial; in other
words, at the graces of the Commissioners Court, we receive
funding from y'all to support our needy children here in
Kerr County, which our -- right now, we're presently serving
between 90 to 95 kids in Kerr County as of -- and our
services have increased there, as well.
I'm asking that the Commissioners Court -- I
gave each one of you a packet. We had our board meeting on
the 13th of this month, and our board has discussed it, and
we have voted on going with the Child Welfare Board
nonfinancial contract. And we ask that the Commissioners
Court support us on this decision and go ahead and approve
this so we can go ahead and get it sent back to the State
and have it -- all the paperwork drawn up, and have it ready
by September 1st. If you have any questions, I'll answer,
and Sharon can help me as well.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone have any
questions of Mr. Pickens? We just appreciate what you do,
Bobby and Sharon, and all the rest of your board.
MR. PICKENS: And we'd also like to -- when
s-ze-nz
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
]0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
73
we get -- if you do approve this contract, we'd like to be
included on the workshop so we can discuss our budget as
well.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, would it be
appropriate to approve the contract effective September 1?
I mean, that's what we're asking to do, isn't it? So, I do
move that we approve the --
MR. PICKENS: The nonfinancial.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- nonfinancial --
that's what I was looking for -- the nonfinancial contract
with the T.D.P.R.S. effective September 1, 2002.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And how long does it
run -- does this contract run? How long does it run?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think it's supposed
to be an annual contract, but how long has it been since
we've --
MR. PICKENS: I came aboard on this board in
'96, and that's when it was renewed back then, but they have
changed a few things up. Sharon talked to the regional
manager and contract manager down in San Antonio. My
understanding -- and Sharon can correct me if I'm right or
wrong -- is that this contract will stay in effect unless
the State comes up with some other changes, but they will
ask -- and along with the Commissioners Court, whoever
serves on the Court, an annual review of what's taken place.
__,~_~,~
74
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Ll
22
23
24
25
Is that right, Sharon?
MS. COLDWELL: That's my understanding.
Usually the contracts are four to six years.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. Did you get a
second?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court
approve the Child Welfare Board contract, nonfinancial, with
T.D.P.R.S. effective September 1, 2002, and authorize County
Judge to sign same. Any other questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a -- hopefully a
brief question. Can someone summarize very briefly the
difference between the two types of contracts? I know
nonfinancial. What's the other contract -- what are the
disadvantages of the other form?
MR. PICKENS: On the other two contracts that
they -- the State was wanting us to look at, the first one
was a County IV-E child welfare contract. Basically, what
it is, is that they would reimburse us with some funds, not
only from the state level, but the federal level. But that
one particularly pertains to the bigger counties, like
Harris County, Travis County, the Dallas/Fort Worth area,
Waco. Being that we're a smaller county, it's in our best
interests to go with the nonfinancial contract. The other
s-~e oz
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
75
one is -- is where they would -- the state and the federal
government would provide funds in agreement with
Commissioners Court and the local C.P.S. office, where they
provide funds to pay for part of their staff to help do
their work.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner Letz, let
me just read you one little paragraph out of the one that --
where the federal and state participate, in their goodness,
with our money. This is -- this contract is at all times
contingent upon the availability and receipt of federal
funds that the department is allocated to contract, and if
the funds for this contract become unavailable -- if it
does -- during any budget period, the contract may be
immediately terminated. I -- 1 don't want our organization
under those kind of guidelines.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, thank you. Thanks,
Bobby.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
MR. PICKENS: Thank you.
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.)
-28-0~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
]2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
76
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
MR. PICKENS: Thank y'a11.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Item Number 3,
consider a variance to Section 6.02.E.3 of Kerr County
Subdivision Rules and Regulations to extend preliminary plat
approval of Cypress Springs Estates, Phase II. Commissioner
Griffin.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'll turn this over to
Dale Crenwelge and let him -- let Dale sort of go through
what the deal is and what -- what he's asking.
MR. CRENWELGE: Last year, May 14th, a
preliminary plat was approved, Cypress Springs Estates. We
have submitted and are on the agenda for June 24th for final
plat, but there was a time period from May 19th to
June 24th, due to housekeeping, to extend the preliminary
plat, so we're requesting an extension of preliminary plat
for six months.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And I would so move
that we do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court extend
the approval of the preliminary plat of Cypress Springs
Estates, Phase II, for six months. If you're on the agenda
in June for final plat approval, why do you want an
za-u,
1
3
4
5
E
7
S
9
10
I1
12
13
14
15
]6
77
18
19
20
Ll
22
23
24
25
~~
extension for six months?
MR. CRENWELGE: We11, we're going to -- we're
going to have to go back in there and probably try to get
another extension, because we're just -- we're just
final-platting a portion of the preliminary plat.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: The preliminary plat
has to stay in force while the preliminary -- even if it
were June -- whenever.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Right. But -- so the final
plat approval on June 24th will only be a portion of Cypress
Springs?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And that was -- and
that would probably then require a new preliminary plat to
do the rest of it.
MR. CRENWELGE: Or an extension.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Or some kind of
extension or modification, an amendment or something,
because you couldn't operate off the old one if only a
portion of it is -- is in the final plat approval. At least
that's the way I understand it.
MR. JOHNSTON: I think that was an issue --
the final plat's only a portion of the preliminary plat.
Just part of the preliminary plat.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It goes back to where --
it's kind of -- it's a subdivision that was started before
s-~a oz
78
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2~
29
2`
y'all -- a bunch of y'all were on the court, and it was a
real large -- we probably should not have allowed that big
an area to be platted under the number of phases and all
that at one time. But, we did it originally as one large
subdivision with multiple phases, and because of that, it's
now being developed in smaller parts.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. Which is the
way it should have been done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The way it should have
been done originally.
MR. CRENWELGE: There's a court order that
was issued last year allowing for 120 here in the future
phase. It's 900 acres, and we're platting 45 lots on the
agenda for June 24th, final plat.
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.
MR. CRENWELGE: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Item Number 9, consider and
discuss approval of a court order vacating a portion oT the
Pier 5 Drive, in accordance with the agreement reached by
the property owners. Commissioner Griftin.
ze-o~
79
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
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Does everyone have in
your packet -- you should have gotten it -- yep, I see it.
Judge, do you have a copy of this shot-down -- okay. The
members of the Court will remember that at our last session,
there was a public hearing on this matter, and the parties
involved came to an agreement just before that public
hearing. And they have come to an agreement that I believe
they have reduced to draft in writing for -- at least their
attorney has, that they may want to make a part of the
record as well. But our duty as Commissioners Court is to
abandon the portion of the road that they agree -- that
everyone agreed that could be abandoned. And you'll notice
there on the sketch, on the shot-down version, that where
that point is, everything north of that demarcation line
would be abandoned as public right-of-way. Everything south
of it remains just as it is. And, so, I actually talked to
the Judge a little earlier about this. I'm going to try to
craft a motion -- and stick with me, because this is a
platted subdivision, and we have to refer to it in terms of
the platted subdivision for the abandonment. Anybody got
any questions on that before I try to wordsmith this thing?
JUDGE HENNEKE: We have -- Mr. Robert Mertl
has requested an opportunity to address us on this issue.
Is he still here? Let's take his comment before we have a
motion, Commissioner.
S 2ri-02
80
,~--
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. MERTL: My only concern is that the --
that the agreement that the Wardroups and ourselves, and we
believe the Simpsons, have reached is interpreted properly
in the final agreement here. That's the only concern I
have. I really don't have anything to say, as long as that
-- I'm satisfied that that's happening.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right.
MR. MERTL: Unfortunately, Tom couldn't be
here today.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Would you look at a
copy of this just to be sure, Mr. Mertl? Make sure that
this -- this line -- and remember, now, that there's a
question about --
MR. MERTL: Yes, that's the point. And we
have -- we have some language in the draft, too, that --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes.
MR. MERTL: -- Tom gave to David Motley.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: But this is the --
this is the point north of this that the right-of-way --
see, the Court can only deal with right-of-way, and this is
the way it's platted now.
MR. MERTL: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If it's correct on the
plat, that's okay.
MR. MERTL: What it is, I've got a survey pin
s-'e-o~
81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
at that point. And that foot and a half to the east part --
to the east of that survey pin is the -- where the line
starts.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. And we can --
MR. MERTL: And so that -- that line
represents -- this lower portion or the southern portion is
public, and the upper portion, northern portion, is David's
to do with as he wishes.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. Okay.
MR. MERTL: That's the agreement we have.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Thank you very much.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Fire away.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Therefore, I'll make a
motion that -- that we abandon a portion of Pier 5 Drive,
as -- described as follows: From the southeast corner of
Lot 12 of the Pier 5 Subdivision to a point 66.6 feet along
the right-of-way, as noted on the plat; that everything
north of that position on the right-of-way would be
abandoned. Everything south of that, by the way, stays --
doesn't have to be in the motion, but everything else stays
the same, but we abandon from that point north. That just
means it reverts to a private road, rather than a public
right-of-way.
MR. MERTL: Show me what you're -- what
you're describing, 'cause the language you've used is
5 '~A-0.
82
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
somewhat different.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, everything north
of this line. And that's the reason I was telling you --
I've seen the sketch that you have where there is a pin
here.
MR. MERTL: Right. Okay.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's okay for the
placement of gates, and you can make those agreements
between the property owners and all and file it with the
plat, but what we have to do as the Court is to abandon this
right-of-way, all of it. Even if -- even if it's
incorrectly platted, we still have to abandon it for that
road to be able to revert to private road, so that's what my
motion does.
MR. MERTL; That`s the point we agreed on, sv
that's no problem. I was just curious about the 66 feet.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, 66.6 feet from
that southeast corner of this lot. 'Cause we have to
describe it legally, along the right-of-way.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
abandon as a public road that portion of Pier 5 Drive which
is located north of that point which is 66.6 feet
southeast -- from the southeast corner of LvL 12, Pier 5
_-a-o
83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Subdivision.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's about it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions or
comments?
MR. MERTL: I'd like to add something, i£ I
might. Considering what I've listened to today that you
guys have to deal with, I -- I'd say we certainly appreciate
your taking on our little problem. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Thank you very much,
Mr. Mertl.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Jonathan?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question.
MR. JOHNSTON: Since this is a platted
subdivision and we're making a change to the plat, do we
have to do a plat revision in conjuTiction with a road
abandonment or not? That's just a question.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I don't think so,
because unless -- this changes the language that is filed
with the plat, so I think that's all that's required, in my
reading of it. But I'm open to suggestion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Going through it -- I'm
thinking of all these things as I'm getting ready to ask the
question. I think all we're really doing is changing the
status -- we're not changing the plat; we're just changing
the, quote, status of the road from a county to a private.
-~e-a
84
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. JOHNSTON: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Public to a private.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Public to a private. So
that's really not changing the subdivision.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No, it's not.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Therefore, iL would not
require a revisLon of plat or plat change.
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.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See y'all next month.
(Laughter.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item Number 5,
consider and discuss approving a resolution declaring
June 2, Year 2002, as Ernestine Wilson Zimmerman Day.
Commissioner Baldwin.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Resolution speaks for
itself. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a little lady that
lives here in town. Her name is Ernestine Wilson Zimmerman.
She was 104 years old a few days ago, and coming up this
coming Sunday -- help me; what chuich is that?
5_,H_~,
85
1
2
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~5
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Calvary Temple.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Calvary Temple is
dedicating a new building that I think maybe Mrs. Zimmerman
was instrumental in building. And if you find the kindness
in your heart to pass this resolution that simply designates
that Sunday as Ernestine Wilson Zimmerman Day in Kerr
County, I'm going to take this to that function and read it
and present it to her.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Good.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second -- is that a
motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That was a motion,
absolutely.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissiuner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court adopt a
resolution declaring June 2, Year 2002, to be Ernestine
Wilson Zimmerman Day in Kerr County, Texas. 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. Item Number
7, consider and discuss adoption of rules and regulations
-^a-u~
86
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
for use of county-owned parks, dams, and recreation areas.
Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just a second, Judge;
I'm signing my name. Thank you. This has been before us
before and kind of sat on the back burner for a while, but
as summer season approaches and more activities are carried
out in county parks, the need to have rules and regulations
governing the use of the park and giving the Sheriff the
ability to enforce the laws pertaining to parks seems to me
to be uppermost, and so I've offered these tonight for
discussion. If you choose to do that, what I'm uncertain
about -- and I didn't style the item to include a public
hearing, but I think if it's determined that it's necessary,
we should do that. So, I'm opening up discussion -- or
i opening the park rules. They would ban the use of fireworks
in county parks, and they would ban the use of them on dams
that are in conjunction to -- with county facilities, that
may be owned by Kerr County. Otherwise, they're basically
the same as was discussed several montkis ago.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, T have a
comment. I know you find that hard to believe. But I think
we just simply have a -- a small philosophical difference
here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could be.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; Yeah, could be. I
-ae-oz
87
1
r- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
just -- I believe that the things -- you know, I kind of
like the idea of controlling the overnight camping and those
kinds of things. I don't have any problem with that. But
those things that we've done in this county forever and ever
and ever, I feel like that we're regulating our citizens too
much. That's my opinion. The way I think is that we
have -- we need to have less government, if anything that we
do here; take some away. Now, some of the things that we're
concerned about are noise levels and -- and probably people
getting drunk and tearing things up. I think there's
already state laws that are on the books, that Sheriff
Hierholzer and his great organization -- if someone breaks
the law, breaks one of those laws, you simply arrest them
and put them in jail, is the way I see it.
I don't see that -- it's just my opinion --
that we don't need to add on, you know, another layer of
rules and regulations dealing -- you know, I don't know what
all you had in mind here about dangerous and unsafe
manners -- acting in any dangerous or unsafe manner. 1
don't know. I'm not sure what that is, but I do understand
what igniting fireworks is about. And 1 just -- I think
we're regulating people and their activities and family
activities and et cetera and so forth. When we're talking
s= a u'
88
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
about maintaining noise and sound levels, I mean, what is
that? I mean, how do you -- how do you decide what -- am I
talking too loud right now, Rusty? He shook his head no.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Jon says I am. That's
my point exactly
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Huh?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that's my point,
you know. Who's going to make the determination of what --
what is too -- too loud of noise? Those kind of things. I
don't know. I just feel funny about -- we need to get out
of regulating people and -- and their freedoms. That's all.
And I know I'm in the minority here. That's fine.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A comment that I'll
make -- and I had these -- I kind of had versions of these
rules three or four times on the agenda. I finally gave up
and gave them to Bill; he could do what he wanted with them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thanks.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think out of all
that -- and it's something that Rusty said at one of his
meetings that -- where l -- I've changed my -- when I
originally first started proposing these, is that how do you
enforce them?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, if I can make a
comment --
.a u~
89
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, let me make my
statement; then you can make a comment. Probably, it goes
back a little bit to what Buster says. There's laws that
require a lot of this, but as soon as we pass these rules
and ask the Sheriff to enforce them, then he has to have --
we refer to a portion of the penal code or something, or we
have to make some penalties and different levels of
misdemeanors and all that kind of stuff, which to me is a
lot of extra work. To me, we ought to have an open the
gate, shut the gate; that's about it. I mean, it's just --
it gets too complicated.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think, for example,
you could -- I don't know how you do it otherwise, whether
you could just do it with a court order, but you've probably
got to have something on paper -- in writing that says when
the park's open, when it's closed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And without a court
order, you can't enforce that, even. At least if somebody's
in there at 2 o'clock in the morning driving their
all-terrain vehicles around drunk on the dam -- I mean, of
course, you can get them on several violations there, but
I'm just saying that if you -- if you're going to open it
and close it, you're probably going to have that in a court
order.
s-z~-a
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
lh
17
18
ly
20
L 1
22
23
29
25
90
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Then it's trespassing if
they're there other than those hours, I would think, which
goes back to other laws he can enforce.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The Sheriff attended
a meeting with me in Center Point here not too long ago, and
at which there were about 40, 45 people present at the
meeting, and a lot of the comment had to do with law
enforcement, its ability and its inability. And I recognize
the park rules could, indeed, pose some extra work on the
part of the Sheriff. But, absent the rules that govern the
utilization of the park, you've got open property that can
be utilized for just about any purpose at any time. Which
may be what you want to do.
You might recall that we had a -- we had
quite a public outcry over the utilization of Flat Rock Lake
Park here about a year or so ago, and this gets to the heart
of the matter in terms of public health and safety and the
protection of property. And you will recall that the folks
on -- that live on the -- on what would be the north side of
Flat Rock Lake -- Flat Rock Lake, itself, complained to
Commissioners Court, most of them very often and very
firmly, that the activities that take place on the dam at
night in the heat of the summer are things that are
absolutely not done normally. And if it is within our
purview to do something about it, we ought to think about
s ~~g n?
1
.~- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1L
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~,,, 2 4
25
91
doing something about it. For example, popping off big
bottle rockets and so forth that fly up and hit their roofs
of their homes while they're still sputtering and spinning.
Most people are concerned about those things. And I think
we have an obligation to address things like that.
The noise level that Commissioner Baldwin
you regulate it and how you -- how you determine whether
it's too loud, not loud enough, or whatever. And I don't
want us to get into that, so -- into that here. But they
could be -- these things can be amended, depending on what
people think is -- is a logical, legitimate approach to park
regulations. We had an event at Flat Rock Lake Park, a very
nice event. C.A.S.I. put on a big chili cook-off. Lots of
people attended; very well-attended. As far as I know, I've
not heard any -- from the Sheriff that there was any
untoward activity that they had to come in and regulate or
stop. I thought it was a pretty well-attended event, but
one of the issues approaching that had to do with, can we
bring our big vehicles in there? Can we camp overnight?
What time do we have to be in? What time do we have to be
out? What can we do and what can we not do?
I think it's appropriate to have rules and
regulations using County facilities. We have rules and
t_,y_o,
1
~ 2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
ly
20
zl
zz
23
24
~5
92
regulations that govern the use of this facility. Why not
have rules and regulations that govern the public use of a
park? And I'd particularly like to see people stay off the
dams at 10 o'clock at night with radios blaring and shooting
bottle rockets that have the potential for destroying
I just -- I mean, I come
period for the parks, gives the Sheriff, you know, all he
needs to get people out of the park. And people who are
shooting fireworks and it's hitting someone else's house, I
think there's already something where we can act on that.
If there's noise that's being a nuisance, we can act on
that.	I don't	see how us	passing	additional	rules	makes
that -	- changes	anything	that much	from what	he can	do, and
it maybe clouds it up a little bit, to me.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd be more
comfortable if the Sheriff would stand up and tell me that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only thing that
that point, the law can take over, because the County would
be filing trespass charges on anybody that's there after
those hours. That's done in a lot of parks around. It's
5-28-;2
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
93
even done in Louise Hays Park. It does help with having the
problem of vagrants or people like that going down there,
setting up tents and staying there. We had that problem in
Center Point. It's hard to deal with that park without
having a law.
When you get into the definition of unsafe,
dangerous noise levels, I hate to see the Court get into
anything like that, because that's, to me -- and David may
be able to help -- that's almost an impossible law for me to
enforce, 'cause who decides what that noise level is? I
don't have decibel meters, which you almost have to use now
to even enforce the disorderly conduct law that's already in
the penal code. You have to actually have a decibel meter
to read how loud, you know, that band is practicing next
door to somebody to see if it goes past certain decibel
levels that are accepted by the -- by the courts. And if
it's fireworks, that sets off a different decibel level. If
it's firearms, it's going to set off a different type of
decibel level. It goes up different, and those almost get
to really be a -- a hard thing to enforce. You know, if
they can put -- if you can do rules that -- that govern the
hours through it, those are pretty easy to enforce, and I
think those would help. The problem you have is -- is
Center Point not being a gated-type park at all, you know,
it's standing there wide-open all the time, and you're going
-2g-p~
94
1
L
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1/
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to have people going in and out of there all the time.
There's nothing you can do. You can't --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If you get a nuisance
call on noise, for example, you usually respond? Your
deputy will respond, right?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We respond to all of
them.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And see what the --
what's going on?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Mm-hmm. We respond to
all of them. We will issue citations based on the noise and
based on the complaints we're getting, okay? If it was an
anonymous caller, there's not much we can do, but if we can
get the citizen to also be willing to be a witness in court,
'cause normally they're the one that heard it, or if we can
get there and park a ways away, to where we can testify in
court to how far it is to where it's happening in our
presence, then we can take other rules. Now, one of the
other things, and I don't know -- I never even thought about
setting rules for parks, but one of the other things that
would probably help a lot in the county parks is if you had
some way of controlling glass containers, okay? We got a
lot of kids -- I haven't seen y'all's proposed rules. I
haven't had an opportunity to review them, but you've got a
lot of kids wanting to go down there, use the parks for what
5- ~ A- C l
95
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
11
18
ly
20
21
22
23
24
25
they ought to be used for, without the trash and the litter.
We can file littering charges. We can do that kind of
stuff, but somebody just down there with a glass container,
you really can't control. And I don't know if there's an
authority in county government to even try and control that
in parks.
MR. MOTLEY: Maybe under some sort of --
there might be just some inherent authority to control the
park it would be under. Or just under a health and safety,
but -- I haven't researched that, but I --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think opening and
closing hours would help.
MR. MOTLEY: -- think on park land, they can
probably do that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Hmm?
MR. MOTLEY: I think they do have the
authority to control and manage the property used as a park,
probably. I would guess that it would.
COMM1551UNER WILLIAMS: Sheriff, a
hypothetical. The evening of July 4th, about every year,
10 o'clock at night, you get a call from somebody who lives
on Bandera Highway, and they complain of a pretty good-sized
party, a lot of alcohol being consumed on the Flat Rock Lake
Dam, and bottle rockets being shot off that hit their
property, hit their roof. How would you respond?
5-?e-az
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
96
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We'd go out there and
visit with the people.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Go out there and
what?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Visit with the people
doing it. And, one, if there wasn't any penal code law
violations that we could enforce at that time, there
wouldn't be all that much we could do, except for starting
to actually look into the disorderly conduct on the noise
level, you know, if it's stereos that are too loud or
whatever. But if they're sitting out there, it's not
past -- what is it, 2 o'clock in the morning to consume
alcohol in the public? Which is a -- a law violation after
2:00 in the morning. If it's not going to violate one of
those, there's not much we can do.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Unless they're drunk
in a public place, which that's a public place.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If they're intoxicated
in a public place, we're going to put them in jail.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. If they're
consuming after-hours, we're going to put them in jail, or
issue a citation at least. If we can find a definite law
violation, we're going to enforce it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then you have --
5 _ ? y _ n ~
97
1
~ 2
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
^,, 13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
	24
.~	
	25
and then you have -- on the other side of the coin, you have
nice, friendly people like me that, on the 9th of July, full
moon, I go out on Ingram Dam with my honey and I go for a
swim, and with my children and grandchildren. Been doing it
for years and years and years. And a lot of people are
tourists -- trying to drive the tourists off. A lot of our
tourists go out on the dam, go swimming at midnight,
1 o'clock in the morning, but they're not breaking a law.
They're not drunk. They're not firing off firearms.
They're not --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, there's a lot of
people that I know -- there's one here in town who loves to
use Flat Rock for catfishing. And I love to catfish, and
most of that's at night. And, you know, what kind of
hours -- what's it going to do to affect those type of
people that really want to use it correctly? You know,
there are a lot of things in there. I also love to travel,
and I have a travel trailer, and 7 know one thing that I was
impressed going north in Texas. What a lot of the smaller
counties do is, around their ag barns -- their public
facilities, like you have the Youth Exhibit Center, they
have designated spaces in those that just have an electric
hookup for an RV'er to plug into overnight, and then they
leave the next morning. There's no charge, there's no
nothing. It`s just a service that county has to keep them
5 ~& U2
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
98
out of the parks, where they want to close it and things.
But it's a nice service for travelers coming through.
Tkiere's just a lot that needs to be considered. We will do
everything in our power to keep the problems down in the
park. I think we do a good job of it. I know especially
Center Point guys don't even go through Center Point without
going through the park. But, you know, there's certain
things that we can and can't do.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I brought it to
the attention of the Court tonight because I think it's
important to open up a dialogue. The Court's heard enough
comments from other people in the past. In fact, we had a
full house one night on this very issue. I'm not going to
require or ask for any action tonight. I will withdraw it
as an agenda item, and I am going to sit with each of you to
determine what level of rules you believe are appropriate,
and then we'll go from there. I know what the answer is
from my colleague tc the right. But, we'll see.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only thing that I
would like -- the only thing -- and 7 think that would be an
excellent idea, Commissioner. Only thing I would like is,
either myself or David to actually be able to be there with
the penal code, with the different laws, so that when you're
discussing that, we can actually research and see what are
the current laws. Like Buster said, we got enough -- I
-2R 0~
99
r
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
l7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
mean, my guys got enough laws to enforce without creating
more. But see which ones will cover a lot of those areas
you've already talking about, and even that citizen down
there in that meeting you and I went to talked about. But,
the one that isn't covered in any of it is camping all night
long, staying in there, you know, a lot longer. I know the
M ate's even got that in the roadside parks, there's no
overnight camping, no 24-hour stay in those. And that will
help.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Believe it or not, I
agree with a lot of things that are in here. But -- but I'm
pretty passionate about some of them not being --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, whenever you put
it back on the agenda after you've visited with each of us,
as you say, I think it takes a public hearing, so I think
whenever you style it again, you ought to be able to set the
public hearing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just so we have that
flexibility.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, let's move along. Next
item is Item Number 8, consider and discuss approval of
revisions to the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and
-~s-oz
100
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
Regulations.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Should we go get a
hotel room?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. You didn't
say my name, but I presume you're going to pass it off to
me.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Letz.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Everyone on the Court, I
think, has received the most recent revised pages. And the
cover sheet of the first page lists all the pages, and I
really don't wee the point of going through them
page-by-page again, as we've done a number of times.
However, there is one thing I'm getting ready to hand out,
and these are some late changes that had come in from Stuart
Barron, and also from -- 1 think Jannett worked on the fee
schedule from Truby -- was working on the fees. What I'm
handing out are some revised language -- or new revised
language for the Appendix B certification of plats. And
certification -- tYie first one where there's a change is
Certification by Administrator of On-Site Sewage Facilities.
And the main change -- well, I'll let you -- the main change
is that Stuart recommends that we go to a subdivision that's
lest than 3 acres as a required subdivision. That's 3 acres
as opposed to 2 acres. And the reason, as I understand it
from briefly talking wiCh Stuart -- is Stuart still here?
s-as-~~
101
1
2
7
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
There he is. Is Chat the sanitary control easement, by
size, is -- why don't you explain it, Stuart, before I get
into trouble here?
MR. BARRON: Is it the appropriate time?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
MR. BARRON: Do y'all have the color-coded
copies of them? It may be easier for me to --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, they don't, but if
yon just go -- cite that number, the certification by
On-Site Administrator.
MR. BARRON: The number two certification
there, a sanitary well easement is 70,650 square feet. A
2-acre tract of land is 84,120 feet. There's not a lot of
extra room on a small tract of land like that to install a
septic system, so I'm recommending an additional acre. That
should be more than sufficient to put in a septic system.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, basically, what
Stuart's recommending is that if a subdivision is less than
3 acres, it needs to go througYi --
MR. BARRON: My review process.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- Stuart's review
process to make sure that everything -- that it will work;
basically, that you can get both a well -- or possibly a
well, but a septic and house and all that on that lot. If
it's greater than 3 acres, it never goes through the
s-z~a-o~
102

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
O.S.S.F. review process. It's just deemed to qualify. And
it's -- I mean, it's -- basically, Stuart put some science
behind t}ie arbitrary number that I pulled out of the aSr,
and came up with a different number.
MR. BARRON: I would personally like to see
the 10 acres, but that's --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sit down, man.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. The next change is
on the second page, on Yage 4, under the Certification by
Floodplain Administrator. Under the standard plat -- well,
actually, under the first part, the second line, there's a
change, and it's a basic change. We had to keep deleting
I the words "Community Panel" out of that map name. And then,
under the standard plat notes lower down under Scenario 1,
you're just changing, I guess, the verbiage a little bit to
make it accurate.
MR. BARRON: I have a color one if y'all's
aren't color-coded. It may be a little easier to see what
he's talking about.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We have lines drawn
through ours.
MR. BARRON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, there's --
on this one, there's no substantive changes; we're just
making it actually conform to the language put on the maps,
5 29-0.
103
1
2
3
4
J
6
7
8
0
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
21
I believe.
MR. BARRON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then on the next
page, there's some change to the permitting regulatory fees,
which we set.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We don't set the fees.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, we don't set them,
but we --
JUDGE HENNEKE: We -- is the language in the
rules flexible enough to let people know that those
Headwaters fees can be changed by them at any time? We set
the floodplain and the on-site sewage, but we don't set the
permitting and regulatory fees.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: For Headwaters.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We can just put a note
on there that says, "Set by Headwaters," can't we?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I'm wondering --
we kind of changed this a little bit. Maybe we should
delete most of those.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't see any reason why we
have the -- any of the fees in our Subdivision Rules and
Regs.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The ones we --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Certainly not the ones that
we don't have any control over.
-ze-oz
109
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Except for
information only. And since it's something for people who
are looking to do subdivisions or acquire properties, it's
information that's valuable to them.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Sut it could be misleading,
unless we changed our -- our schedule every time Headwaters
changes its schedule.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I see.
DODGE HENNEKE; That's my point.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The only two that I would
think is the -- you know, and -- but we still don't control
it, is the subdivision review fee. And it kind of goes with
the Subdivision Rules.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN; How about just taking
all those out of there and moving this up, and at the
bottom, saying that developers or landowners need to contact
Headwaters in regard to fees related to Headwaters'
jurisdiction? That way we don't have to change this every
Time they change their fees, but it's just giving them a
heads-up -- giving people a heads-up that you got to go talk
to Headwaters on areas of their jurisdiction.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- well, that's
fine, doing it that way, buL a legal question has come up.
David, Headwaters -- you may not know the answer, but
Headwaters has a subdivision review tee in here. I think
5_,~_~~
105
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
l~
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2`
it_'s as they review some subdivisions. Did they have the --
where would they get their authority to have that fee?
MK. MOTLEY: It seems to me that it would
have to be from the legislation that allowed them to have an
underground water authority; would either specifically set
out the fee, or else allow them the ability to set their own
fees. And I -- again, I can certainly check that out, but I
don't -- I don't know that. I know that the -- exactly what
you were saying, though, on the septic; that some recent
research did show the Commissioners Court, when they set the
fees up on septic tanks, but 1 don't know. But I can find
out if you'd like me to.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd almost say, at this
point, maybe we ought to pull the fee page off, because I
hadn't really thought of that one thing. Because the only
-- the subdivision review that Headwaters is doing is under
water availability, and I don't know where they would get
the authority to set that. 'Cause if they -- the water
availability is something that we're -- we're basically
contracting with them, so the fee structure would have to be
set by us, not by Headwaters, I would think. We have to
agree to a fee structure, possibly, but --
JODCE HENNEKE: Now, it's been a while since
I've done their legal work, but I think they have the
authority under Chapter 36 of Lhe Water Code to set fees for
S-2B-OL
106
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
1G
1]
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2~
23
24
25
services. But I think it's a good idea to pull it; I agree
with that.
COMMi55IONER LETZ: Or we could pull the
Headwaters this time and the floodplain -- are those fees,
Stuart, that we -- the Court has approved these?
MR. BARRON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: These are current,
approved ones.
MR. BARRUN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we just pull
the Headwaters, then, fees at this point until we visit with
them, make sure that they're -- that there's authority for
those fees?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'll go along with
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Other than that, I -- I
believe all the changes LYiat we've discussed for the last
three or four months are present.
MR. SARRON: I'd like to add a little
something, if I could.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure, Stuart.
MR. SARRON: I had left on my part -- I don't
know if it got on y'all's document or not -- the land
surveyor would certify if ~t was in a flood -- a 100-year
floodplain or not. And the reason for that is -- is that
5-2E-0~
107
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
L[~
23
24
25
they're physically out there on the ground and determining
exactly where the subdivision is located by metes and
bounds. I don't have those numbers given to me, and I'm not
a licensed land surveyor. They can determine exactly where
they are. I have to look at a little window that they give
me, and the floodplain maps are hard to read. If not all --
if not all the streets are located on there, it is very hard
to distinguish where they're at. When they're already out
there, they've done the work, they know exactly where
they're at, and they know where the floodplain is, I think
they ought to be able to determine it without any problem.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think that's a good
idea, because the surveyors do have the best data, by far,
and that would keep arguments from developing between Stuart
and -- our Designated Representative and the surveyors and
landowners, which has happened on more than one occasion.
And they do -- they definitely have the best data, and they
have a license that they want to protect. So, if they
certify it, that should be good.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What do they say about
it?
MR. BARRON: The surveyors? I -- I haven't
talked to any of them that said they don't want to do it.
Apparently, somebody has.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They currently do do it.
-ze-o~
108
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. BARRON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let me look at that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yeah.
MR. JOHNSTON: They currently do it.
Generally, they don't like to do it either, because the data
is very vague. It's hard to tell exactly where it is
without extensive study.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. I mean, that's --
the comments I've heard, they don't -- like Franklin said,
they don't like doing it, because it is hard to tell where
the floodplain -- they know where they are, but they don't
know where they are in the floodplain.
MR. JOHNSTON: On the other hand, they are
the ones, really, that have the instrumentation and the
knowledge to put it on the map, where they probably should
be the one to put it on.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think -- I think
Stuart's point about not being an engineer, you know, that
can certify it is valid also.
JUDGE HENNEKE: One of the problems, though,
is that Stuart's determination as our floodplain
administrator is going to be binding upon us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Say that again, Fred?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Stuart's determination as our
s ,H-o~
109
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
floodplain administrator is going to be binding upon us.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's correct.
JUDGE HENNEKE: You know, and so, do we want
him signing off on a surveyor's determination, or him making
his own determination?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think, in essence,
you almost have to do that anyway, don't you? I mean, you'd
look at the data and sign off on it, and the surveyor has
the best data.
MR. BARRON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No doubt about that.
So he's got to go along with them. It's just a question of
who's certifying it, I think, more than anything.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think both
certify it.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the engineer --
that's the way Stuart has it.
MR. BARRON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He wants the surveyor
to --
MR. BARRON: Both would sign off on it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- certify it.
MR. BARRON: -- in that scenario.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He certifies it from our
s-fr-o
110
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
standpoint and agrees that, yes, it is, or yes, it's not --
or no.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If he saw something
way out of whack, in his opinion, he wouldn't sign off on
it. Stuart wouldn't.
MR. BARRON: And I think that's the beauty of
us keeping a checks-and-balance instead of just one person
saying yes or no. It will definitely help.
MR. JOHNSTON: Are you talking about the
BFE's, or just the line on the --
MR. BARRON: Just the actual location of the
100-year floodplain. A zones, also.
MR. JOHNSTON: Do you set the BFE's or do
they?
MR. BARRON: Its depends on what flood --
floodplain they're in. If it's in an AE zone, it's already
determined by FEMA. If it's in an A zone, depending on how
large the subdivision is, then we make -- then they have to
certify. If not, then we can do it, it it's not very large.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I don't have any
problem with -- I mean, with adding that language and making
the -- you know, putting it back the way it is. I didn't
hear a great response from, you know, the surveyors I talked
to. They really didn't have a big problem; it wasn't a
breaking point to them. They don't like doing it because of
~a o~
111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
zs
24
25
that fact. Stuart doesn't like doing it because of that
fact. Make them both do it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: They can both be in trouble.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: I pointed out to Jonathan
that I have a question about the certification by
Administrator of Headwaters Groundwater Conservation
District, which is on the second page of what Stuart handed
us. The way it currently reads now, we have the Headwaters
District certifying that the subdivision meets the rules and
regulations of Headwaters Groundwater Conservation District.
Well, why should they be certifying on our plat that it
meets the rules and regulations oY Headwaters'? What we want
them to certify is that it meets our Kerr County water
availability requirements.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think Truby missed that
on the -- or I missed it when I went through it, because I
believe we changed that in the text, but didn't change it on
the appendix.
JUDGE HENNEKE: It's actually not in the
text.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. We need to
correct that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Any other questions or
comments on the revisions?
s-ae-o~~
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
112
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My only -- my comment now
is, I'd rather wait two weeks.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because if this change
didn't get in here, I want to proofread it again to make
sure. We have so many drafts going back and forth, I want
to make sure the draft that we do is right. And that should
have -- we had that in one of the versions, so we --
somewhere, we lost it. We went backwards somewhere. So --
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. Anyone have any
objection to tabling this and bringing it back in a couple
weeks?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; I think it's very
wise.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Thank you, Stuart.
MR. BARRON: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You won't have to come
back, Stuart, unless you want to.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item Number 9,
which is consider and discuss approval of the relocation of
the Collections Department to the space currently occupied
by the Treasurer's office. Even though it doesn't say it on
the agenda item, that's upon relocation of the Treasurer's
office.
COMMISSIONER GRlr'FIN; Hope so.
g_~g_Q~
113
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: I think this is something
that we need to do by court action so that departments don't
get involved in any turf wars.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, do you want to
make a motion?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't make motions,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, but you can.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't. No, I preside. You
don't make motions when you preside.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: L move that we approve
the relocation of the Collections Department to the space
currently occupied by the Treasurer's office.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court
approve relocation of the Collections Department to the
space currently occupied by the Treasurer's office upon
vacation of such space by the Treasurer's office. 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. Item Number
5-28-02
114
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2~
2~
2a
L~
10, consider and discuss approval of the job description for
the Collection Officer in the Collections Department. Y'all
have been provided a copy of the job description prepared by
Mr. Duncan and Mr. Alford. This was a point that
Commissioner Letz made last week, when we had to actually
approve a job description. Does anyone have any questions
or comments regarding the proposed job descripti~ii?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Typos.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What? You said --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Typographical.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS; Y'all know what they
are?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can'L wait. Tell
us.
DODGE HENNEKE: Tell us what they are.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Line 2 on the
position summary, "Notifies or located." It should be
"locates," I believe.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Locates, yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On the very same
Line, very last word says "Provides." Probably should be
singular, not plural. Other than that --
JUDGE HENNEKE: We missed one. The last line
of that paragraph should be "Commissioners Court."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. And
q_Zg_~~
115
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
capitalized, besides.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. One for your
team.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Two.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Capital and an
apostrophe, so two. Two-to-two.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're right. Want
to add something?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I'm not playing.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: 1'11 move we approve
the job description of the Collection Officer, as amended.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 1 second that motion.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
approve the job description for the Collection Officer in
the Collections Department, as amended. Any questions or
comments?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the -- the duties --
or this job description meets a Grade 17? You think -- you
equate it to a Grade 17 in other departments?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I believe it does. And my
understanding, Brad, was that you reviewed this with
Ms. Nemec and she concurred in the classification; is that
correct?
-°a ua
116
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
lZ
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ALFORD: I believe Mr. Duncan did. I did
not, 'cause at that time I really didn't have any say-so. I
didn't want to overstep my boundaries. But I know
Mr. Duncan did work with Ms. Nemec quite closely on revising
this.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Do you want to approve it
subject to her ratification?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just want -- I mean,
that's fine. I guess I'd just like to -- it doesn't look
like a 17, to me, but I think -- it's a job classification,
so I'd defer to --
JUDGE HENNEKE: I think it's -- it's not a
highly supervised position.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: It`s a position that requires
a lot of independent action, initiative. Not that all the
positions don't, but --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN; Some more than others.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- there's not a
superstructure that supports it. But, you know, if we want
to -- we need to move forward on this so we cai~ get this
thing posted and get people -- applications coming in.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, she's the guru of
job descriptions. If Ms. Nemec agrees with this --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Why don'L we approve the job

117

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
description and let Ms. Nemec set the appropriate grade?
Since she's the one who has that --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'll amend my motion
to do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I'm going to
second the amendment.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I like that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. Let's restate the
motion, then. It's a motion by Commissioner Griffin, second
by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve the job
description in the -- of the Collection Officer in the
Collections Department, with the appropriate grade to be set
by the Kerr County Treasurer/Personnel Officer, Barbara
Nemec. Brad, are you comfortable enough with that?
MR. ALFORD: Yes, sir, I am.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or
comments?
MS. PIEPER: Shouldn't that be "step and
grade"?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, the step will be 1
unless -- you know, everybody comes in at a 1 unless the
Court authorized differently. So --
MS. PIEPER: Okay.
MR. ALFORD: If I can ask one more question,
after her approval, is that when we would have -- go ahead
s ~a-o'
118
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and post it?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes.
MR. ALFORD: I think -- mean if I can get
with her tomorrow, we can -- we can post tomorrow afternoon
type deal, is what I'm asking.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How can you post it
without knowing what the grade is?
MR. ALFORD: After I get with Ms. Nemec.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And -- well, that's a
good stopper.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. 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. Okay. Item
Number 11, consider and discuss becoming a member of the
Association of Rural Communities in Texas, I put this back
on the agenda. We talked about it abuut a year or so ago,
and it's come back around again. The organization is up and
going. They've hired a full-time representative in Austin,
an executive director. There's a lot of concern, at least
in the Rural Judges' Association, that with redistricting,
rural communities have lost so much clout in the Legislature
that they need to have more effective representation as
s-za-oz
119
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
rural communities. We all know the Texas Association of
Counties does not represent rural Texas, nor does the
Municipal League. And if you look at the list of -- of --
on the board, you'll find it about evenly divided between
county representatives and city types. There are three
county judges on the board, including Richard Evans from
Bandera County. The cost to the County would be $300 to
join. It's something Z think we ought to seriously
consider.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: $300?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there any money -- is
this for next year's budget? I mean, is it -- or is it due
now?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, we could -- I don't sce
any reason why we couldn't go ahead and make the decision to
join, effective -- you know, and -- but with the money
coming out of next year's budget, because the real work of
the organization is going to be once the Legislature gears
up, you know, and really start getting organized and
effective in about October/November. Su I don't have any
problem joining, with the understanding that the dues would
come out of next year's budget, which would allow us to
budget for it effectively.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My preference would be to
-za-u~
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
kind of commit to join, and then handle it through the
budget process as kind of one of our items.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I think that would work.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then what our goal
is, I guess, is this organization, by -- by the time the
Legislature goes into session, that we will have lobbying
efforts put together, et cetera. I mean, I can't imagine
being a member of anything if it's not going to benefit us.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would want somebody
over there pounding on the table for rural counties.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, Richard's -- 1 mean,
the requirements are it has to be a county of less than
100,000 and a city -- well, a county of less than 200,000, a
city of less than 50,000, so you really are striking at
rural Texas. It's not something that's going to be
dominated by Comal County, Hays County, Williamson County.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 1 think that's an
important factor.
COMMISSIONER LE'1'Z: I mean, I think it -- you
know, I don't know that we need a motion on it at this
point. I think we really need to handle it during the
budget process. And I would -- you know, because it's -- we
can say we're going to join, but until we budget the money,
s-'e oz
121
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
z3
29
25
they don't care if we say we're going to join or not.
DODGE HENNEKE: Well, I think they do. I --
you know, I think a commitment from us to become a member,
subject to the budget process, gives them another county to
put into their -- their roll. And, you know, when they go
to the Legislature, if they have 170 counties out of 274,
that looks pretty good, as opposed to if they only have 80.
So, I would -- I would like to see us commit to joining,
subject to the budget process.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER GRIr'FIN: Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You make it, I'll
second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, that's a motion.
I'll make the motion.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Make Fred do it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Cuumiissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court authorize
membership in the Association of Rural Communities in Texas,
subject to the budget process for next year identifying the
X300 dues.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Kind of like rainwater
catchment.
s-~H-oz
122

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2~
ZL
2`
JUDGE HENNEKE: We can do that all night.
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. Next agenda
item also comes out of the County Judges' -- the Rural
County Judges' Association. It's a difficult topic, but
it's one that just needs addressing in the worst way, and
it's the allocation of state moneys to counties for road
maintenance. I think the most telling statistic is the fact
that counties currently divide $7,300,000 among all 254 of
us for maintenance of roads. That's the same amount of
money that's been allocated since 1971, the exact dollar
percentage. We haven't got a nickel more in the last 30
years. And what is being proposed, led by Richard Evans --
there was an article in County Progress magazine -- is to
request that the Legislature increase the fuel tax by 5
cents, but at the same time, also change the allocation of
funds to the different entities that are in charge of roads
so that the counties end up with 10 percent of the total,
which in essence would triple the amount of money that would
be available to Kerr County for roads in the first year.
Asking for an increase in the tax -- the user tax, like
-za-o~
123
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
gasoline tax, propane tax, or diesel tax, is not easy, but
the experience of almost everybody has been that it's easier
to get blood out of a turnip than it is to get road money
away from TexDOT. So, this is something that comes before
us to see if we want to join in the effort to equalize the
distribution of funds, without appearing to take money away
from TexDOT, School Fund, and the Comptroller's Office.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: May I make a comment
on your -- on somebody's -- this is probably a topic that
somebody -- in the resolution --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- the second whereas,
"The Kerr County Commissioners Court is responsible for the
upgrade and maintenance of 457 miles of county roads, and
most of these roads are substandard in comparison to
state-maintained roads," that kind of could be a true
statement, compared to state-maintained roads. Ours
probably are somewhat substandard, but as far as county
roads are concerned, our roads are far from substandard.
They're in excellent --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Far superior to
Bandera County.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I agree with you,
Commissioner. This is right -- this is taken from what
Bandera and Concho County did. If we wanted to delete that,
5 _ -o~
124
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
z3
24
25
I have no problem with that whatsoever.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Just say we're
responsible for the roads and make a period after that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the total amount?
DODGE HENNEKE: Of what?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That Kerr County gets
currently.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We got about $31,000 last
year; 31, 37, something like that, from the State. I mean,
it's -- it's not much.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just -- I don't know
that I'm in favor of them giving a tax increase anywhere for
not a real significant increase in -- to help the county out
a lot. I mean, I think they should give us more money, but
they need to give us --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, it would take us up to
about $113,000, which is what ours -- maybe that's not
significant enough to be on record favoring a tax, but
you're not going to get TexDOT to let loose of anything they
have now. You're not going to get the Legislature to change
the current formula. TexDOT controls all that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, you know, I think
TexDOT, though -- a lot of the major projects, they do
eventually pay a large part. I think we're fortunate in
5-?8-~~
125
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2 1
22
23
24
25
Kerr County that a lot of the major roads -- and probably iii
most counties -- are state highways, so they're major
thoroughfares. And, you know, I don't know if the bridge
fund comes out of bridge money or comes out of that same
thing; they pay for a good part of the bridge fund. I wish
they'd pay more, but they put a fair amount back into the
county.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My first thought on
the thing is, Kerr County roads are -- will soon be all
paved and brought up to county standards, and we will
automatically go into a maintenance mode from that point.
And, just with that thought in mind, it seems to me that we
cut way down on our major construction and just get into a
maintenance mode, and it just doesn't -- you know, when I
think tax increase, maintenance on roads, it just --
something, in my mind, just -- that doesn't fit or go
together. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm seeing it wrong.
It's our money anyway, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just ask to get some
of it back.
COMMISSIONER LETL: What we're asking is for
them to take more so we can get some back.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeaki. We want to
spend more at the pump so we can get some back.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This would be to ask
~a-o~
126
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
the Legislature to look at this new -- raise the level of
taxation, right? Which is already 33 cents a gallon.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're asking the
Legislature to tax more, but give us a little bit -- but
give us a little bit more of it back. But I'm just not sure
the trade-off is -- I'm not sure I'm in favor of asking the
Legislature to tax more.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What I'm afraid of is
they'll raise it and not give you anything back.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Another option.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah, if we even give
them -- that's the fear I would have, really, is that they
would play with that -- with that distribution percentage
I
formula, where we -- you know, we get -- we get another
$5,000, and we would have been in favor of raising taxes a
nickel a gallon or something. That would be --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why can't we just ask
our good representative to do the lobbying on behalf ~f --
of rural counties?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Go back to the last
item.
DODGE HENNEKE: I'll leave it in your capable
hands.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll leave it up to
^a-c~
127
1
L
3
4
5
F
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2c
2.
29
2`_
Commissioner Baldwin. He knows those ropes well.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I think this coming -- this
next coming budget year and succeeding budget years, it's
going to be exceedingly difficult to fund the Road and
Bridge Department at the level that they're at now. And
maybe, like Commissioner Baldwin says, once they -- once we
get all the roads paved, they won't need as mucki. But, you
know, there are three areas that you can impact the budget
to any degree: Sheriff's Department, Road and Bridge, and
personnel. And Sheriff's Department takes up about
25 percent. Personnel, taking out the Sheriff's Department,
probably takes about 24, 26 percent. Road and Bridge takes
about 14 percent.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If the State ups the tax
on gas, the Sheriff's Office is going to take up mere.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, you don't pay tax
anyway.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Hope not. You can bet
they'll find a way. But our families and the employees, you
know, we all do.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Looking down the road, if --
you know, those are only three areas in your County budget
where you can find significant sums to divert into other
projects. And if you're going to -- we're going to look at
implementing the Sheriff's plan, which means starting this
5 2?-02
128


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
2`
year, where are we going to find the money? Because the
7.5 percent increase in the ad valorem valuation, by the
time you take out a 2 and a half percent COLA and leave
yourself a 5 percent increase, it's not going to get you
there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Well, I --
DODGE HENNEKE: I'm not going to propose
even -- you know, I never have proposed a deficit budget.
I've -- we've agreed upon deficit budgets, but I have yet to
propose one. I'm not likely to do that again. Okay. Well,
Z think I get the sense of that one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd like to see where it
goes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Kind of like park
rules.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, the only way it's going
to work is if we get a strong statement across rural Texas
in favor of it. They worked it last year at the
Legislature; they actually had a good proposal from Clyde
Alexander, who was chairman of the House Transportation
Committee. Unfortunately, he retired, so he's not there any
more. But we'll see where we go with it. Let's skip over
and take up Item 15, the -- since Item Number 13 may
involve --
MR. COSBY: I filled out a request to speak
5-za-o
129
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2`_
on this issue.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Which issue?
MR. COSBY: The 2.12.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, I'm sorry. Mr. Cosby,
go ahead.
MR. COSBY: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which item?
JUDGE HENNEKE: This one we just did, the
fuel tax.
MR. COSBY: I was a little concerned about
it, too. I -- Judge Henneke, I think you said a 5-cent --
is it a 5-cent increase?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes.
MR. COSBY: Per gallon? The resolution says
a 40 percent increase in fuel tax. I talked to McGrade Oil
Company. Right now, we pay 20 cents per gallon state tax on
everything we buy at the pump. Federal tax is 8 -- is 18.4
cents per gallon. If we request and get through the
Legislature a 40 percent increase, it comes out to 8 cents a
gallon.
JUDGE HENNEKE: But we don't control the
federal tax.
MR. CGSBY: I know, but I'm saying state tax
is 20 cents a gallon right now, and we're asking here in the
resolution to increase the motor fuel tax, right, by
s-~a-oz
130
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2~
29
L~
40 percent. Forty percent of 20 cents is 8 cents. So we
would have a 28-cents-per-gallon tax on motor fuel. And the
reason -- of course, you've already marked it off. I think
the reason was because of substandard roads. We have a quy
here tonight that was an expert in -- and his testimony is
on Page 12 of the workshop you guys had on the 22nd. He
said that the roads actually are pretty good. Y'all are
fortunate to have an excellent county road system compared
to your neighbors. The roads are -- I was amazed actually
at your road system. Even -- even out in the boonies with
three houses on the end of a road, most of the roads were in
extremely good shape. Doesn't sound like substandard to me.
DODGE HENNEKE: That was an error. Error on
my part.
MR. COSBY: Was it?
DODGE HENNEKE: Yes.
MR. COSBY: What is --
JUDGE HENNEKE: In not deleting the reference
to substandard roads. i apologise for the error.
MR. COSBY: No, no, no, and I accept that,
but it doesn't change the fact ghat it's an 8-cent increase.
And that's just another way of taxing the taxpayers, folks.
Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Let's take up Item
Number 15, consider and discuss authorization to procure
-28 ~~ 2
131
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
legal services from the firm McGinnis Lockridge and Kilgore
for wastewater treatment service agreement between City of
Kerrville and U.G.R.A. for the Kerrville South Wastewater
Project, not to exceed $6,200. Commissioner Williams, isn't
this a follow-on to the agenda item we had last -- last week
when we allocated that amount of money out of the grant for
the legal services?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It was a follow-up to
the last item we did -- dealt with at the previous
Commissioners Court authorizing budget transfers not to
exceed $6,200 out of the capital operating fund for
Kerrville South projects, This is the law firm of choice
that has the experience doing these things. They will be
the ones that will negotiate with the City of Kerrville. We
are, however, the ones that have Lo make the contract for
the services, so that's the reason it's on, and I would
offer the agenda item for approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The reason that we
approve it is because we're the keeper of the cash?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I like it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Keeper of the cash?
New song I'm coming out with here.
Discussion uff the record.)
5-'_8-0~
r
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
71
~2
2H
24
25
132
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move it.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
DODGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court
auttioLize legal services from the firm McGinnis Lockridge
and Kilgore, LLC, for the purposes of negotiating a water
service treatment agreement -- wastewater treatment service
agreement between the City of Kerrville and U.G.R.A. for the
Kerrville South Wastewater Project, with a fee not to exceed
56,200.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And get the County
Judge to sign same.
DODGE HENNEKE: Right. 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. All right.
We'll turn to Item Number 13, consider and approve an offer
to purchase a right-of-way for Sheppard Rees improvement,
authorize County Attorney to finalize the purchase, and
authorize payment of costs associated by County Treasurer's
hand check, if necessary. Mr. Motley, should we go into
executive session on this one?
MR. MOTLEY: That may not be a bad idea, Your
5-~8-u2
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
133
Honor.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. At this time, the
Commissioners Court will go into Executive Session, pursuant
to Section 551.072 of the Texas Government Code. The time
is 9:37 p.m.
(Discussion off the record.)
(The open session was closed at 9:38 p.m.,
and an Executive Session was held, the
transcript of which is contained in a
separate document.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Havinq completed the
Executive Session, the Commissioners Court will now return
to open session, discussion on the purchase of right-of-way
for Sheppard Rees road improvement. Do I have a motion
regarding that topic?
CuMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. I move that
we transfer $2,970 from Road and Bridge funds. The line
item would be determined at a later time by Road and Bridge
and the County Auditor, I assume. That is to be paid for
costs and fees related to Sheppard Rees road improvement,
authorize the County Attorney to finalize the purchase, and
ask the County Treasurer to do a hand check.
MR. MOTLEY: Buster, on that one, the $400
probably needs t~ stay over there. They're going to take
care of the cost of the fence through whatever -- Road and
Bridge is going to do that. So, $400 --
-'a-n?
134
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We don't have to
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
18
lE
1-
1E
1~
2(
2
2.
2
2
2
transfer.
MR. MOTLEY: That wouldn't be transferred?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $2,570 actually is the
number.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're probably not really
transferring; we're just approving payment.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Authorizing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or authorizing payment.
MR. MOTLEY: I think so.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's true.
MR. MOTLEY: I thought it was going to be --
County funds were going to be transferred, $400 to them. I
didn't know where the money was coming from.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Authorizing payment.
Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court
authorize the sum of $2,570 for purposes of purchasing the
~ remaining right-of-way parcels for Sheppard Rees road
improvement, closing costs associated therewith, authorize
' the County Attorney to finalize the purchase, and authorize
3 a hand check to be issued by the County Treasurer's office
} as required.
MR. MOTLEY: I'll try to get those other
s ze-ac
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
135
costs together.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or
comments? If not, aLl in favor, raise your right hand.
iThe motion carried by unanimous votP.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
tNo response.}
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Unless
somebody has a death wish, we're adjourned.
iCommissioners Court adjourned at 9:59 p.m.)
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY GF 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 3rd day of June, 2002.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
SY : ____ G---- ---
Kathy Ba ik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
s-.a-,,,
ORI'iER NO. X7559
AF'F'ROVAI_ SCI-iEDL11__IN8 A F'URL.:[C I-iEARINC
FOR TFiE CL'lL1N"FY'"S 0k~0 COL_ONIA COMF'REHENfiIVE F'L_f1N
On i;h:i s the 2E3th clay a F hiay ELZ~Oc, ~_rpon mot iorr made by
Cummissioner•s Williams, sec_vnded by Gonimissi.vner• Lets, the
Co~srt ~_tnanimv~_isly approver) 6y a vote vi-' 4-~-~, to hold a
public heaY'ing on ti-~e draft 'EOctti~ Colonic Flan far- hlonday, J~_ine
Crd, Year ~=~Q~2, at r :3~ p. m. , in ti-re I-;err Co~.rnty Cu~_trtho~_ise,
tF~e exact courtroom to be determined and to 6e identified by
signs which wi.Il be placed thi°o~_ighout the co~_irtho~_ise.
QRDER N0.~7560
CLAIMS AND RCCOUNTS
C1n i:h:i.a the 'c8th day of May :_00c, came to 6e considered 6y the
Coi_n~t var'•io~_is Cammiss:ioners precincts, which s~aiU Claims and
Acco~_ints are:
i0-General for 391,738.49; 14-Fire Protection for 38,035.84;
15-Road R Bridge far 34c, 7~5.~+c; ~_3--J~_ivenile State Aid F~_ind
far• 311, 899. ~~; '87--J~_rv Intensive F='r•oy-State Aid Fund ~For-
31, 697. ~,°,; :i0-Indigent Health Car°e For 316, 966.40;
70--Permanent Improvement for 3c,G98.36; 76-Juvenile Detention
Facility 'Par 31.;8. 1a; 83-St:;rte F=tuuied--ci6th Dist Attorney for
31,6:_3.71; 86-State F~_rnded--c:16th Dist F'r•ob fer 3577.84;
87-State Funded-Community Cai°r-ections for 34,46.10;
l"0'TRL Cf1SH REG!UIRED FOR ALL FUNDS IS: 31$c, 5'_6. 5~'_
Upon motion made by Ce:nnmissioner Baldwin, seconded 6y
Commissioner Griffin, the Co~_~r•t tananimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, 'to pay said acco~_ints.
ORDER NO. ~7°iE~l
PL.IDOE'F AIrIENDMENT
JUSTICE OF THE F'EF3CE F'CT. #3
On this the c8th day of May c00'~, ~_ipon mot :ion made L-~y
Cc~mniissiuner• Let-, seconder.:) by Commissioner Williams, the
Co~_o~•i. ~.~nanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to tr~•ansfer
~6~~.[~ from Line Item No.ik3-457-480 Confererrces to Line Item
No.1~-457-1~8 F'ar•t-ti.me Salary.

oRDE:R NO.~~S~~:
L-~UDOET RI*tENDMENT
JUVE=NILE F'ROPRTTON
On this the c8th day of May c:00r=, upon motion made 6y
Commissioner GriFfin, seconded by Commissioner, Let z, the
Co~_ti^t ~-tnan~.imo~_isly approved 6y a vote of 4--0-~~, to transfer
~S.'E6 from Line Item No.10-570-400 Diagnosis & Ti°eatnient to
Line Item No. 10-570--499 Miscellaneo~_is.

'_~~ui:T. :v C.ufi' r~T ._rii.
i_.
~,~~Ilrl.._....,a„a, _,.,....r<;~++~, _rC..11r:;..J ~, CUacl.~,_..,,~.. ~;rii~f~~l, ,,.1._
t. J l_l l I' _ ~ G' lj I. ..1 i l.v '. ._ .. , i ,. ~ ~ 9 . ~1 . • is ~ l _, i 1L
i•.y U..-1. 'F,: ~ i)111 ~1.~c i\;aIII nlJ. ~. %i7 r~_~I .. c' i,u~_.~ iii (.i ~:~JiIIV~~
'111 ~. ._~-uE, v ~._ill l_ ., ".. .av. i. „_ l'. L. %.Ol.ll~ 1'ii.11-t_il.lt~ i~: ~. ~I t"ill j.
ORDER NO. :'_7564
FUDGET AIr1EMDMEMT
196TH/:.16TH DISTRICT COURT
On this the 'EBth day of May ~_~0c, upon motion made by
Commissioner I_et-~, se.cor-~ded by Commissioner Griffin, the
Co~_rrt ~ananima~-rsly approved Lay a vote ~F 4-4T-0, to transfer
~c, L:::"v. 1i from Line Item No. 1k7--~~r 6~-~4Q~~_ Coy-v,t Appo in~t ed
Attorney with X9].9.06 to Line Item Mo.1~-G3G-4~1 Coi_rr•t
Appointed Ser•rices; ~G151.05 to Line Item Mo. 10-4a5-497 Ca~.rrt
Transcriptsq X1,155.00 to Line Item No.10-•535-40c Cap-rrt
Appointed Attorney.

ORDER IYtJ. i:7JE"iJ
LRTE PILL
TEXRS COURT RE:F'C)R'TERS RS'SOCIRTION
Ch7 this the cOth day of t4ay :=0~~_, ~..tpon motion made try.
Ctymmissiunei• Elaldwin9 seconded by Commissioner Williams, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4_..43--Q~9 to pay ttie
following late 6i11 to Texas Co~_tr•t Reporters Rssoci~ttion in
ttre amo~_mt of 82nd. ~~ From tine Item No. lk-'{.35--405 Early
Registration fee for Cindy E. Snider. The Co~_mty Ruditor and
the L'o~_nity Treasur'•er are hereby a~_tthorized to write a hand
chectt in the amo~_tnt of 82:~~Z~.~~ made p~ryable to Texas Co~_tr•t
Reporters Rssoci~~tian.

ORDER IVO. X7566
LRTE PILL
KERRVII_LE F'OSTh1RSTER #435 to #436
On tt~:is the c8th day cr'k' htay ~00~, upon motion made by
Commissioner Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Let:, the
Co~_rrt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, 'Lo pery the
following lair: bill to Kerrville Postmaster #435 R 436 in
the amo~_int X600.00 with X300.00 from Line Item No.10--436-309
F'ostaye; 3300.00 'From Line Item No.10--435-309 F'cstage. The
Co~_~nty R~_iditor and the Co~_~nty Treas~_rrer are k7ereby a~_ithorized
to write a hand r_kieck: in tk~e amo~_rnt of b600.00 made payable to
Kerrville p'astmaster #k~r35 R =kk436.

oRnER Nn. ;_-rs~7
LRTE RIt_t_
t:ERRVILLE F'oSTh1RSTER #4'37
On this the ~Bth day of play c:kOL, upon motion made by
Commissior~er t_etz, seconded by Commissioner' Griffin, the Cai_ir-t
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to pay the following
late bill P;o N.errville Postmaster #497 :in ~'.I-~e amo~_int of
b370.00 from Line Item No.10-497-309 p'os'tage Stamps. The
County Ruditor and tl-fie Coi_mty Treas~-firer are hereby authorized
to write a hand check in the amount n'F X370.00 made payable 'to
N,er'r'vi.lle P'ostmaster• #497.


r~..i' „~Vi_ ~-i;i:_ i"'~:_:;:Cf"i '-iIL :';r_~:T1L, ..._=i=i=~'"~
., .:.._, .. .I ,.. .. ~ ., ..
~_:. JI iIIl CF J.: •_e lltl Wait~L~w ~, rv4_JI1'_.C'_~ ~)j L. it ~hu.a Jl i....ill L4[llueYl .9 ~. I~iG
;_..'_~i i I_inanimol_isly approved by ~ vote of 4-~-~, .~ ~,~.~.,-~ L;r
L t l' w ' .,
l.O~s{};J'j nt E11 `dl ]'~ R~_pol"t ~~ r~lta .., i'_4';'.'. ~_

,i^
ORDER NO. cfriG~
DON McCL_UTE
RESIGNF~TIGN
On this the ~=8th day of I'~ay ~?002, ~_rporr motion made 6y
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commi=ssioner Lett, the Co~a~°t
i_rnanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to accept the
resignation of Cunsta~le, Precinct 1, Don McCl~_rr,e, effective
June 30th, Year 2002.

ORUE:R N0. 27570
RF'F'ROVRL U1= CGNTF2RCT BETWf.EN THE T'EXRS DEF'AFd"fNIENT
OF F'RCITECTTVE RfJD REGULR70RY SERVICES RND
THE COh1hiISSI0NER5' COURT OF I:ERR COUNTY
On this the 2lith day of May 2002, ~_tpon motion made by
Commissioner- Baldwin, secnr~rled by Commissioner Williams, the
Court ~ananimwasly approved by a vote of 4-~--~, the Child
Welfare Board contract, nonfinancial, with T. D. F'. R. S.
effective Se ptember• 1, 2001= and authori:_e Coi_mty J~_idge to sign
same.

ORDER NO.c7577.
RF'F'ROVAL Of= VRRIRNCE TO EXTEND F'RELIMTNRRY
F'L_ii=1T ~F'F'I',OV~L CYPRESS SPRINGS ESTF-1TE, F'I-IRSE II
On this tt-ie c8tl-r day of P4ay c:~08, upon motion made by
Commissioner- Gi•ifFin, seconded by Cumm:issioner• I_et::, the Co~_n•t
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-Qr--~, to extend 'the
approval of the preliminar°y pl<~'t of Cypress Springs Estate,
Phase II, for six months.
ORDER NO.c757
RF'F'ROVr=rt_ Or R COLJRT ORDF_R RPRNDONINC, RND VRCRTINC;
R PORTION OF F'IER S DRIVE
On this ttre :~8tt-~ day of May EG~OE~ ~_rpon motion made 6y
Commissioners; Gr iffin9 seconded by Commissioner- taaldwin~ the
Co~_n~~t ~_uian:imo~_rs1Y' «R4ar oved by a vote of 4-t?r--iZt, to abandon as a
p~_rblic road tl`rat port :ion of Fier 5 Drive wl-rich is located
north of tl-rat point which is 66.6 feet su~_itl-reast from the
souattreast corner of lot ic, F'ier v S~_rbdivision.
ORDER ND.~7~73
Af='F'RDVAI_ OF RESOLUTION DECLARIhJG SUNE "r'ND, c:k'~4?~'_
AS ERNESI"INE WILSON ZIMMERMAN DAY
Drr this day t?Eitl-i clay of May .=0k'ri=, ~.AEion motion made by
Cummissio~ner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Let:, the Co~_rr~t
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-~, to ado~:~t ~a r-esol~_~tiorr
declaring .Dane ;_, Year ~'00~, to tie Ernestine Wilson Zimmer nian
Day in h:err Coy"mty, Texas.

ORDF_R IVO. X7574
AP'P'ROVAL OF= RELOCATION OF= COLI_CCTIONS DERARTMENT
On tF~ris tl-rc :'0th day of May 20~;=, i_rpcn~r motion made by
Commissioner Paldwin, seconded by Commissioner, Gr~ifFin, tyre
Cn~_rr-t rmanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-4~, the 'r elocat:ion
of the Collections Department to the space c~_rrrently occupied
by the T'reasurer's o'Ffice.
ORDER N0. c7:i7~i
RF'F'ROVt=iL OF SOP DESL"RIF'TION FOR CCILLECTION OFFICER
RS APPENDED
Ors this the ~=3th day of M~iy 'E002, ~.apon motic;rr made by
Cummi:>sioner• Gr•iFfin, seconded by Commis<_;ioner Paldwin, the
Co~_irt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-Qi--O, the .job
description for the Collections DeparCnier~t, as amended, witl-i
the appropriate grade to be set by the I'.er°r Co~.inty
Treas~_u•erJF'ersonnel. OFFice, Parbara Nemec.

ORDER NO.'757r'~
AF'F'RDVRI_ AU-fE-IORI~ IND MEMRI'-RSIi:[F' DF THE
ASSOCIATION DF= RURAL CDMMUNITIE:S ItJ TE.XRS
On this the c8'th day of h'iay :?OO::, upon motion made 6y
Connniss:ioner Let z, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, the Cmar-t
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-4~, to authorize
memi:~ershi[_~ in the t=ii'ssoc_ia'ti.on of I~ura1 Communities in Texas,
subject to the budget process for next year identifying the
`~3rDO. iry~ dues.
.~'~
ORDER NO. E75Tr
~F'F'ROVi=IL l"0 PURSUE PROCUREMENT OF I..EGRL SERVICES
FROM THE FIRM McGINNIS LOCF<RIDGE RND KILGORE LLC
On this the Ef3th day o'F Ir1<~y 'r'~0c, ~_~pon motion made by
Commissiur~~er Williams, seconded by Coniniissioner Gri~Ffin, the
Co~_u•t i_manimously approved by a vote of 4-~-Q~, to a~_rthnr-ize
legal services fr•um the firm McGinnis Lockri.dge aniJ Kilgore,
LLC, Far the p~_irposes (if negotiating .a wastewater- tr•eatinent
service agreement between the City of F;errville ar~d U. G. R. c~.
for- the K.er-rville So~_~th Wastewater F'ro.jeca, with a fee not to
exceed bG,~=k~~~.00 and Co~_rnty 7~_rdge signing same.
ORDER N0.~7S78
RPF'ROVRL RUTNORIZIN6 TI-iE F'URCI-IRSE DF RI6t-I'T-DF-WAY
FOR SHEF'F'RRD REFS RDRD IP+IF'ROVEMENTS
On this 'the .'8th day of May cD0'c, ~_~pon moti.an made try
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Comin:issiuner Let z, t:he Coui°t
~_uaanimously approved by 1 VUte of 4-0-0, a~.itPioririny the s~_un
of #~=, 570.02 fur p~_~r-poses of purchasing the remaining
righit-of-way for Sheppard Rees i°oad linpl"C1Ve'meia't, cl.nsir~y costs
associated therewith, autl-~orie the Co~_uity Rttor•ney to
f:inali<e the p~.n^chase, grid a~..ithori~e a bland cI-ieck to be ias~_ied
by the County Treas~_irer's of-`Fice as req~_~ired. Line Item
No. /1-'-Etl2~'~JJJ (RUW f='ttrcl-iase) to he cl-iar•yed for ~+2,572~.00.