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
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Regular Session
Tuesday, October 15, 2002
y:UU a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
c~
~J
~ J
V
PRESENT: FREDERICK L. HENNEKE, Kerr County Judge
H.A."BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner P~~t. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
ABSENT: LARR't GRIFFIN, Coimnissioner Pct. 4
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.-~
14
15
16
l~
18
19
20
L1
22
2j
... 2 4
25
2
	I N D E X	
	October 15, 2002	
	P	AGE
2.1	Quitclaim Deed from Kerr County to Center Point	
	I.S.D. for 0.234 acres of land known as Ave. B d97b7	9
2.17	Selection of consulting architect for HCYEC	
	renovation/expansion project X77`/1	13
2.2	Advertising for bid on lease of new motor grader	44d779~
2.5	PUBLIC HEARING - revision of plat of the	
	Y.O. Ranchlands, Lots 17, 18, & 19	47
2.6	Approve final revision of plat, Y.O. Ranchlands,	
	Lots 17, 18, & 19 ~}77~3	48
2.3	Clarification of Letter of Credit form letter;{9gy~	51
2.4	Cancel and vacate Kerrville's Pleasure Cliff	
	Subdivision, set public hearing date i{77%a	54
2.7	Update on July flood damage, repair schedule,	
	and FEMA assistance Ne Gtidr~	57
2.12	Adopt order amending Annual Determined Contribution	
	Rate Plan for January 2003 through December 2003	66~77~/~
2.8	Interlocal participation agreement with Texas	
	Local Government Purchasing Cooperative d,%%J~	67
2.9	Approve polling locations per Texas Election Code	69a799fi"
2.10	Approve various contracts and authorize County	
	Judge's signature /i77r7z1	71
2.24	Approve contract with Hill Country Alternative	
	Dispute Resolution Center =~~7h°'C	72
2.11	Approve tax collection contract with U.G.R.A..~7fic/	73
2.13	Reclassification of Jail Administrator position d 7~5~;2
	from 21/1 to 21/8	74
2.14	Change Order #1 for Kerrville South Wastewater	
	Collection Project -;7be3	81
2.15	Proclamation declaring November 18-22 as Flood	
	Awareness Wee}: 575~~}	82
2.15	Resolution recognizing impact of Zion Lutheran	
	Church during last 100 years :~7~i5	83
2.18	Resolution calling for more equitable distribution	
	of motor tuels tax collected by State of Texas~Z~"~	84
2.19	Ratify application for West Nile Virus funding?~;~~	85
2.20	Authorize County Judge to brief Kerrville City~~~~S	
	Council on expansion/renovation plans for HCYEC	88
2.21	Ratify proclamation declaring October 12, 2002,	
	as Rod Kennedy Day ~75~°`i	90
2.25	Apply for extension of time for compliance with J 7	5,D
	Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act	91
2.26	Authorize Judge to make statement in support of J 787
	Holdsworth Drive project at TexDOT public hearing	93
2.27	Select County representation, Caldwell v. Rylander	94d7~>i%i
2.22	Appointment of Kerr County 911 Board member	97,37b
r~'
2.23	Hiring part-time Kerr County Address Coordinator	4
98,,"J~l~
---	Adjourned	99
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
3
On Tuesday, October 15, 2002, at 9:00 a.m., a regular
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in
the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse,
Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in
open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE HENNEKE: Good morning, everyone. It's
9 o'clock in the morning on Tuesday, October 15th, Year
2602. I will call to order this regular meeting of the Kerr
County Commissioners Court. For the record, let's note that
Commissioner Griffin is absent today. His wife is having
surgery or another procedure on her knee in Houston today,
and he has gone down there to take care of her. So, in his
absence, I will lead us in our opening this morning. If
y'all will stand and join me in a word of prayer, followed
by the pledge of allegiance.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, any citizen
wishing to address l.tte CuurL oti an iLeut ctoL lisl.ed ort Lkte
regular agenda may come forward and do so. Is there any
ciLi~ert who would like Lo address the CouiL on att item not
listed on the regular agenda? Seeing none, we'll go to the
CouuuissioueLS' cuumtents. I'm anxious to kieaL about Tivy
football. Let's start with Commissioner 1.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How would you know
l ~~ - 1 5 - ~~
4
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
-,
23
24
25
that I would talk about football? We won.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's good.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Friday night in San
Antonio. That's two previous or prior top-10 teams in the
state that we've knocked off now. So -- and we still
haven't -- haven't -- the writers, the A.P. people, still
haven't put us in the top 10 yet, but that's okay. The --
the Harris polls that we watched, we've been number 9 for a
couple weeks now. So, anyway, besides all that, this coming
Friday -- you know, Texas high school football, there's
nothing better. There is nothing better than 'Texas high
school football. And this Friday is -- is a classic. It's
1'ivy and Fredericksburg -- Kerrville and Fredericksburg, one
of the old rivalries in the state. Two undefeated teams,
district title on the line. You know, the whole -- the
whole nine yards. And if I -- if I were going to tell
people what to do, which I won't, but if I was, I would say
something like, "Be there early." Because the place is
going to be packed. It will be packed. So, that's all I
have to say. We're having a good time. Our kids are having
fun. We have quality, quality young men, and -- and it's --
character is the difference between Kerrville football and
other big city football. It's character. We have some
good, good people. That's a11.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Commissioner
1
3
9
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~4
25
5
Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I can't top that, so
I'll just pass to you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just to kind of follow up
on the last thing Commissioner Baldwin said about character,
and that character starts a lot with the coaching staff.
And they -- those people that do watch football a lot and
understand football, if you watch the Kerrville coaches,
they probably work tcgether better than any staff I've ever
seen. While we're on the topic of football, let's go to the
number one ranked Comfort Bobcats.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe they won 78 to
8. Not -- I wuu't make a comment on the score that Comfort
had, how they got there, but anyway, they continue to roll,
and look forward to them making iL well into the state
playoffs. And the other -- my last comment was also to
follow up something ttie Judge said about rain. I'm not sure
about the entire county, but I know at our property, where
we do keep accurate records of rainfall, this is now the
wettest year ever that we've had, about 65 inches, which is
more than double our average. And while we have had some
bad floods, we've also had a lot of very general rain, so
it's been a remarkable year.
1 n 1 7 '~,
E
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2~
23
24
~5
JDDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. It's a good time
in the Hill Country for football, that's for sure. Ingram
Tom Moore is doing well and Center Point's doing well; enjoy
watching. The only announcement I will make is a reminder
that our first meeting in November also falls on a holiday,
November 11th, so our first meeting in November will
actually be on November the 12th, which is a Tuesday. The
-- our second meeting in November, while I'm on that topic,
is our last evening meeting for this year, so it will be on
the ZSth of November beginning at 6:30 in the evening. So,
without any further ado, let's get on with the business at
hand. We have a substantial amount of it this morning, and
let's pay some bills. Does anyone have any questions or
comments regarding t_he bills as presented and recommended by
the Auditor?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move we pay
the bills.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JODGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court
approvz payment of the bills as recommended and presented by
the Auditor. And I want to take a moment here to thank
T~nuny and staff for getting the bills down to us. This is a
busy time for them. They're closing out last year's books,
and aL ehe same time, trying to keep up with this year's
1 1.. _
1
2
3
4
5
5
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2~
23
29
25
7
accounts, and they worked very long and hard in order to get
us these bills in time for to us consider them today.
Thanks for your good work, Tommy.
MR. TOMLINSON: Thank you.
JUDGE: HENNEKE: All in favor, raise your
right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Budget
amendments. Surely we don't have any budget amendments.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Surely.
DODGE HENNEKE: No budget amendments. What
about late bills?
MR. TOMLINSOI~: 1 have one request for a hand
check to Kerrville Postmaster for $370 for postage for the
Treasurer's office.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve the
late bill and hand check in the amount of $370 payable to
the U.S. Postmaster fox postage for 'Treasurer's office. Any
questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your
right hand.
1
2
3
9
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
I7
18
19
20
21
2~
?3
24
25
8
iTrie motion carried by unanimous vote.)
DODGE HENNEKE: A11 opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. The ne:~t
item foi consideration is minutes. At this time, I'd
entertain a motion to waive reading and approve the minutes
of the Monday, September 9th, and Monday, September 23rd
meetings of the Kerr County Commissioners Court.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE',: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
waive reading and approve the minutes of the Monday,
September 9th, and Monday, September 23rd meetings of the
Kerr County Commissiuners Court. Any questions or comments?
If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The muticn carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No resp~iise. )
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. I would also
entertain a motion at this time to approve and accept the
monthly reports as presented.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Second.
JOGGE IIENLSEKE: Motion by Commissioner

1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1'L
1S
14
IS
15
l~
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
-,
~~
9
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court approve
and accept the monthly reports as presented. 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. Having
disposed with the preliminaries, let's move into the
consideration agenda. The first item for discussion is Item
2.1, consider and discuss and take appropriate action on the
issuance of a quitclaim deed from Kerr County to the Center
Point Independent School District for 0.234 acres of land
formerly known as Avenue B. Commissioner Williams.
COMMTSSIONER. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge.
I'm going to ask attorney Craig Leslie to come forward and
give us a little background other than what's in his letter
to me with respect to this particular request for a
quitclaim deed for the school district. Craig?
MR. LESLIE: This -- in 1999, the City of
Center Point was functioning and in existence, and they made
a deal with tt-~e Center Point Independent School District to
close out a small stretch of Avenue B there in exchange for
ancther tract, and the -- the deed was signed from the City
of Center Point to -- from the City of Center Point to the
school Yor this little tract of land. But, due to the
i,-1°-,
1
i
3
4
5
6
8
10
11
12
13
14
I5
16
l~
18
19
20
21
2_'
23
24
;5
10
inadequacy of the representation of the school district at
that time -- that is the person standing before you here
t~~day -- the -- as a matter of fact, I was working with Tom
Pollard to get this. The title company was saying they
needed a quitclaim deed from the County in order to insure
this, although the Center Point School -- City of Center
Point was really the operator of the streets at that time,
but they had asked fer a quitclaim deed from the City --
from the County, and somewhere it just fell off the track.
You know, it's all in -- it was all in the title company,
and it just came to our attention that it was never done.
And so I'm here today to ask if we could just ask the County
for a quitclaim to that. tract, which has already been deeded
by the City.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This particular
closure of Avenue B, they integrated that piece of roadway
into their total property; is that correct?
MR. LESLIE: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: For some redoings of
the school property campus?
MR. LESLIE: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. I would move,
Judge, the approval of a quitclaim deed from Kerr County to
Center Point Independent School District for point cero --
0.234 acres of land, which formerly was known as Avenue B in
11
1~
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~2
23
24
25
Center Point, to the Center Point Independent School
District.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And ask the County
Judge to sign same.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
authorize the issuance of a quitclaim deed from Kerr County
to the Center Point Independent School District for 0.234
acre of land formerly known as Avenue B, and authorize
County Judge to sign same.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a question.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Questions?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- at the time when
the original documents were prepared, the City of Center
Foint controlled all that -- controlled that street?
MR. LESLIE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This really wasn't a
county road, even though the County -- I can't remember
if --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We had already turned
it over to the City.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We had turned it over to
the City?
1 ~ - L ~.-U_
12
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
to
17
19
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My concern was, is it
proper for us just to -- we really don't own anything, more
than likely; we're just tying to clean it up, but we --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When we took it
back -- we didn't get it back when we took the streets back;
it wasn't part of the package that came back.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't have to go
through any er,ercise if we're going to assign, I guess, a
county road to another entity?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't think so, because the
deed was executed by the City of Center Point in a period of
time that they owned the road, and there was already a
representation from the County that we didn't have an
interest in it. This is basically, from what I understand
from Mr. Leslie, an insurance requirement in order for the
school to go and get the title insurance which their
auditors say they ought to have to all the property.
MR. LESLIE: And I have no idea why they're
even requiring that, to be honest with you, but title
underwriters are notoriously conservative.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or
comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: A11 opposed, same sign.
i ~ -it-~
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
15
17
i8
19
20
~1
22
23
24
~5
(No response.)
JrJDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this
time, gentleman, if we ran, I want to skip to Item 17, since
Mr. Gondeck is here. Consider and discuss the selection of
consulting architect for the Hill Country Youth Exhibition
Center renovation/expansion project per Section 271.119B of
the Local Government Code. It's my pleasure to introduce
Mr. Wayne Gondeck, who is an architect with DRG Architects
out of San Antonio. Mr. Gondeck is currently working with
the Kerr County Juvenile Board for the expansion of the
Juvenile Detention Center, and it's very easy and productive
to work with Mr. Gondeck, and I asked him to consider
providing services to the Commissioners Court as the
consulting architect, which is required by the Local
Government Code any time we do a design-build construction
project. So, Mr. Gondeck is here before us today to speak
on the issue or answer questions or whatever you want to do
as to whether or not to engage his firm to act as consulting
architects on this project. Morning, Wayne.
MR. GONDECK: Judge, Commissioners, good
morning. I would just like to go over a few things with the
Court this morning. One -- and I know that most of y'all
have read over the legislation. I am not an attorney, so
I'm not here to give ar.y legal advice, but I do want to go
over the aspects of that legislation which was -- came into
1 i= 1 5
14
1
G
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2J
effect last year about this time, or a little bit earlier.
It is fairly new. And what it has done is actually
formalized a lot of the different alternative types of
construction delivery methods that have been utilized, or
attempted to be utilized by county government over the
years. And there has been, you know, a lot of disparity as
to what counties could do or not do. Actually, this began
more with school districts a couple years prior, and then
was allowed to go into county government and allowing
counties to have actually five different methods for
construction delivery.
We are all very familiar with the sealed bid
approach, where you have competitive sealed bids that are
presented, read aloud, a lump sum amount. And then, you
know, it's up -- and they're selected }.used utr those actual
proposals. There is also a sealed proposal, which allows
some latitude of a neyutiaLiun with qualified contractors,
and then there is two methods of construction management,
one being curistru~..tiuii iuauayer as an advisor, one being
construction manager at risk. The last type of construction
delivery is a design-build process. If that is the method
that the County is choosing to go on, then by the stature,
iL dues Leyuire you to Hire an independent consulting
architect or engineer to act as agent for the County during
the duration of that project, to oversee the project and
1 ~ - _ rJ ~ _
15
1
J
4
5
h
7
8
' 9
10
~ 11
12
13
19
~ 15
16
17
18
19
2U
~l
22
23
,-. 2 4
~5
make sure that the design-build firm that is selected does
The services that the independent consulting
architect would provide begin at the -- the very initiation
of the project. The consulting architect assists the owner
in developing a Request for qualifications from design-build
firms to include a design criteria package. Now, that
design criteria package outlines the total scope of the
project, it outlines each of the structures or improvements
that are required within the project, it establishes the
quality of materials. Just as an example, it would outline
the size of the buildings that you're looking for, the type
of construction that you're looking for, each of the
elements that would go in there, you know, like if yuu'ze
going to have any restrooms, if you're going to have certain
flooring, whether part of it's going to be concieLe, part of
it would be dirt. It would also establish on your site
improvements how much parking you would have, what type of
site lighting you would have, how much of it would be
lighted, all those specific elements. And when you have
multiple aspects of a project, or multiple buildings, that
can get fairly detailed as to wtrat that design criteria
package would be. The reason being is that you want to have
a document that allows all your design-builders to present

16
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
~ 11
i
12
I
13
` 14
' 15
15
17
18
19
20
21
2 L
23
,-. 2 4
zs
their proposals and qualifications based on a -- a common
criteria.
The second step that the independent
actually going through the selection of a review and
evaluation of the qualifications statements, and make
recommendations based on weighted criteria back to the Court
to develop a short list or a -- you might say a shorter list
of qualified design-build firms that would come in and
present in person to be interviewed by the Commissioners
Court, in a -- with the assistance of the independent
architect. And then, from that point, we would make
weighted recommendations again as to selection of a
design-build firm.
Once you have selected a design-build firm,
the independent consulting architect continues to word:
through the design process, overseeing the actual design
from the architect and engineer of the design-build team.
We make sure that all the design elements within the design
criteria package are complied with. We'll make sure that
they do file the documents with all the required agencies
that have authority over the project, like filing with the
City, and make sure it has been reviewed by the
accessibility review	-- state accessibility	agencies.	And
then we work with the	owner and the design-	build team	to
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
I ~
1
9
10
~ 11
i?
13
14
~ i5
i
16
1!
18
ly
20
21
22
23
24
25
make sure that the guaranteed maximum cost of the project is
in line with, one, the County's budget, and two, that the
elements are all provided for within that budget.
Once that is solidified, once that design is
you begin construction. Then the architect -- the
independent architect would provide periodic observation of
the work. They would also provide for monthly review of the
draws, as far as the contractor draws, and we would certify
those draws prior to those being paid by the County.
Actually, during the construction, it's very much like, you
might say, customarily services that an architect would
provide, that we would review any changes in the work and
make recommendations. We would come to monthly progress
meetings, we'd present monthly reports to the Court, and
then, at the end of the job, we would assist in the
close-out of the actual -- you know, performing the
inspections on the project and making sure that all the
final documents, such as the record drawings and other items
of that nature, all the warranties, are turned over to the
owner at the end of the project. 't'hat is the basic process.
As far as Kerr County goes right now, and
specific to this project, it's my understanding that this
would be based on a bond election to be called. In that
case, you probably would not go beyond the selection process
1~.-1°
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
lb
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
prior to the bond election. And that selection process
would be contingent, you know, upon the actual passage of
the bond. So there would not be any, you might say,
continuing obligation if the bond election did not pass.
I'd ask if there is any questions as to what our role is
and -- or would be.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Go ahead, Jonathan.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- I guess what
I'm -- what's going through my mind right now is to figure
out really how much the Court wants to do before the bond
election, or how much we need to do. And we had talked
about selecting the firm, but the more I hear of these -- of
your discussion, the more -- the more doubt I have that we
can get all this done before the bond election. So I'm
wondering, is there a -- a step -- and the reason we were
anr.ious to get the -- at least as I recall, the team on
board is to get something drawn up so we can show the public
what we're looking at building. Is there a way for us to
hire a -- a consulting architect like -- that works with the
-- you know, the state law requirements as you understand
them, and develop a basic footprint-type plan, and not go
through the full design selection criteria until after the
bond election?
MR.. GONDECK: That is possible. I would say
that that shifts some of the responsibility for the
i~ is-n~
19
1
3
4
5
6
7
h'
9
10
11
1G
,~ 13
h 14
~ 15
16
17
18
19
GO
?1
22
~3
"„ 24
25
design -- in lieu of having the actual design criteria
package, it does shift some of that design responsibility
back on the consulting or independent consulting architect.
I really don't know if that's detrimental to the County, but
I would say that -- that, actually, during the selection
process, there is a two-phase process. In the initial one,
ttre design-build firms are not required to submit anything
within the qualification statements relating to specific
designs; however, during the interview process, it's
customary that they present their concepts to -- at least in
some basic form, to the Commissioners Court, and that is
part of the basis of their selection. So, that is one of
the reasons for going to that point of actually selecting
the design-build firm, because once you have gone through
that selection process, then you're just basing it upon
their concepts, and you're selecting actually from a set of,
you know, three or Lour different design-build firms as to
which concept you want to go forward with.
JUDGE HENNEKE: It's a tight schedule, but I
think we ran get there. And reflecting back on the
experience that K.I.S.D. had in bond electicn, I'm very
reluctant to take this Court through a bond election unless
we have the team in place, because that's going to be an
element of what people are going to be reflecting en.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- I don't know
n-~
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2C
21
L~
23
Z4
7_5
~o
that I agree with that. I mean, I think that they need to
know the process. I mean, I don't think the fact that they
-- the school district hired Drymala had any input at all
into their -- I think the way they were going to do it had
an impart; I mean, using the construction manager at risk.
But the --
JUD(;E HENNEKE: Well, I'm actually looking
back at the one that failed, when they didn't have a site,
didn't have a plan. They didn't --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE xENNEKE: All they wanted was money.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I agree, we
definitely -- I mean, we have to have some sort of a
drawing, schematic at a minimum, as to what we're trying to
accomplish. And we have one that, you know, primarily I've
been working on, but I'm certainly no architect, and I
wouldn't want to Lake mine any turther than where mine is
now, wha*_ I've done already. We need to get a professional
on hoard to get something that we can show the public if we
have any chance of success. But the other side of it is, I
don't want to spend uwney -- any more money than we
absolutely have to before we have the bond election, 'cause
I don't want to, you know, waste money. And the other --
and that's one issue.
The other issue that -- you know, that I

21

1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1Z
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Zl
2L
23
~4
~5
have, and this affects the timing a little bit. I'm
uncomfortable -- and I told Mr. Gondeck that probably I
would not vote for this today, because I think we need to
put it out for the public to have other people submit -- you
know, that may be interested in doing this type of a job for
us. I };now we don't have to do that; o-/e can certainly hire
him if we want, but I just feel more comfortable that we
should do this more -- as open as possible. And if other
people would li};e to, you know, solicit basically our -- our
business, I would rather do -- make this decision as to who
-- what architect the Court hires at our next meeting. That
way it's clearly -- today we're putting it out to the public
that we're going to hire this other architect; the law
requires us to do ir. Anyone who's interested should
contact us. I don't know that we need to go through a long
process of, you know, sending out, you know, ads to San
Ar.tcnio saying we're going to do it, but 1 do think that
we're -- at least I think we have an obligation to the
public to let others that may be interested submit whatever
they want to, as Mr. Gondeck has done. So, those are my two
thoughts, where I am today.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What you're looking
for, though, are some architectural renderings of elevations
and what the buildings might look -- might look like? As
opposed to retaining a firm such as Mr. Gondeck or anybody
1 ~~, - I J
2z
1
Y
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
,q
15
15
17
18
19
2Q
21
22
23
24
25
else's that would take us -- architectural engineer that
would take us through the entire process?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we should hire
the firm that we're going to use. I think we would hire the
person, whoever that consulting architect is going to be.
I'm not -- I'm in favor of hiring that person at our next
meeting, but I just think that, rather than go through the
process necessarily of hiring the design-to-build team, that
we could ask the consulting architect to develop a basic --
you know, do some work for us to get us to the bond issue.
I don't -- I'm not really opposed to hiring the team before;
I'm indifferent on it. I'm just more concerned on rime, to
make sure that we don't rush through it and put together a
team with some specifications that aren't right. And, you
know, I know we have time, but I also know that it takes
time for this Court and any court to act. And I see -- you
know, to me, it's going to take at least a month to get a
design that everyone is happy with. Based on the other
agenda item, we're going to go to the City hopefully and ask
for their formal participation, and I think they should have
input into the process as well if they choose to
participate.
So, I just think -- I just see everything
just kind of pushing off in the future, getting into a real
bind, and I don't want us to rush, you know, through to hire
23
1
1
E
r
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
I3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
L I
~2
23
24
25
a team just because we want to hire a team before the bond
election. I don't know that that's a critical point. I
think it's critical that we have the process we're going to
use, which we've decided it's going to be a design-to-build
process. I think it's important that we have a consulting
architect on board, and preliminary drawings, and someone
who's a professional to look at our cost estimates and make
sure that we're basically on board. And I understand that's
going to take some expenditure of funds we really don't have
budgeted right now. We'll have to find those funds, but
there's a minimum amount that we have to spend to get the --
you know, to get the information to the public so they can
make an informed decision.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you suggesting
that we advertise up front now for some others to -- to come
make that presentation like DRG has done? Or just word of
mouth to the press, or what?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think word of mouth to
the press. 1 mean, because I don't want to delay it
further. I mean, I think anyone who -- this project has
received a lot of press and interest statewide. Based on
some of the other -- quorum Group is one of the groups, just
different people we've been in contact with. So, I uietiu, I
think there's some responsibility for them to be watching
what we're doing. I mean, it's pretty much an item on our
._-.,-~
24
1
1
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
li
18
19
2D
~' 1
22
~3
24
25
agenda every meeting right ncw. So -- and I don't think --
I think it would delay -- if we were to go out formally and
request, we're talking about another month then.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And that's why I
asked.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that word of
mouth, and hopefully the press locally will put some items
in the paper, and that should be sufficient to get anyone
who's interested -- you know, certainly, they have the
ability to find that out and come to us at our next meeting.
I would put the onus on them. I don't think we should go
out really and try to solicit. I just think we ought to
make it known publicly that we are going to hire a
consulting architect as required by law.
JUDGE HENNEKE: So, your concept of going
forward to the bond issue, which is really the issue, is
that we won't have a design-build team actually have been
selected by then; that that will happen after the bond
election actually passes, or actually after it's held?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We11, I think that we
need ro hire the consulting architect and meet with them and
see how long it's going to take us to get the criteria. I
mean, I don't have any problem at all with going and hiring
that team. I just have a question in my own mind whether we
can do it in a timely manner and a proper manner. So, I
zs
1
.~ ?
3
9
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
is
15
17
18
19
zn
21
22
23
.-. 2 9
~s
mean, my timeline would be, hire -- at our nest meeting,
hire the consulting architect; we meet with that architect
in a workshop or one-on-one, however we want to do it,
developed ourselves and, you know, through Quorum
Architects -- you know, put that on the table and say, How
long is it going to take for you to come up with a -- you
know, a package that we can then put out? And it's going to
have to be put out, I assume, for 30 days, something like
that. And if that can be done before the bond issue, I have
no problem with continuing on the process. But it it
doesn't, I think we would know than at that next meeting,
after our -- or at our meeting subsequent to our decision to
hire that consulting architect. Then we could go over
the -- he could jus~ give us basic drawings.
~~OMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Say that last
sentence again? Give us a basic drawing? Who's going to
give us --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The consulting architect.
If -- see, to me, if we want -- and I don't think we can get
this whole thing done before the bond -- before February --
before, really, January 18th. And we have to have the
drawings, really, for early voting, so that's our push date.
If we cannot have a design-build team on board in enough
*_ime prior to the beginning of early voting to be able to
i '-- '- -
26

i
..,.
1
L
4
5
5
7
8
g
10
11
12
l3
14
15
16
17
18
1~
20
21
2i'
23
~4
25
get some drawings, then I would rather hire -- ask the
consulting architect that we hire, ask them to do some basic
drawings that iae can show the public, square footage-wise,
restrooms, and knowing that these drawings may not be the
exact -- it's going tc be a footprint, the amount of square
footage, but the building may have gray block instead of red
block. I mean --
CGMMISSIuNER WILLIP.MS: Well, let's take what
you're saying and ask Mr. Gondeck if that -- if that
timetable is possible. If we defer making a decision on
the -- on the architect or engineer to be our representative
ir. this entire process, if we delay that for two weeks --
essentially two weeks, can we then still put together the
package criteria necessary to go out for RFP's and get back
in time renderings of what the project might look like?
MR. GUNBECK: Commissioners, if you're
looking to go with the -- and I'm going to stay with the
design-build firm providing the conceptual drawings. If we
go that route, then the least that it would take to put
together the design criteria package is, you know, two to
tYiree weeks, and that's really pushing everything, getting
everybody together and making sure that that is reviewed.
So, we're probably looking at somewhere around the middle --
I guess the middle of November befcre that cculd be
released. Minimally, you need tc have it out on the street
1 i~- i 5- L
z~
1
i
~ ,-..
1
3
Y
5
5
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1~
19
,C
21
22
23
~4
LS
for two to three weeks. That puts us in -- or past the
first week of December to actually receive the Request for
Qualifications. Once you have received those
qualifications, it's going to take probably two weeks at
'east to narrow that down and review those and notify people
to -- that you're going to want them to come back in for
interviews. You need to allow them at least a couple weeks
for that, and you're already into the Christmas holidays and
New Year's. So, your actual proposals that you would be
receiving would come in sometime arounr~, you know, the first
week of January -- first cr second week of January at the -
the earliest date. Now, if you're -- you're pushing that
back, so the timetable is very, very tight to actually have
the design-build team, you know, being selected and
providing those conceptual drawings.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, based on that, the
way I look. at that is, that gives us -- we'll have a -- you
know, a design-build team on board, best case, the first
week of January. We've got to have something by the first
week of January to show the public. We really -- I mean,
you can't go out to hopefully, I mean, expect the public to
II make a decision based on drawings that we give them when
early voting starts; I don't. think that's reasonable. I
think our goal should be to have conceptual drawings by
Christmas.
1
28
t
I
i
3
4
5
ti
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
_^0
2i
Lc
23
24
Z5
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't disagree. I
think that's why that two-week period is critical up front.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We11, you }:now, I -- I
think we're being optimistic, even as such. I mean, the
two- to three-week period, I assume that everyone can agree
on the criteria right away, too. I don't want to rush it.
I don't want to make a mistake. I think o-ae have one shot
with the public, Whereas, to me, the other approach would
be to go ahead, hire the consulting architect, and then ask
them -- give them basically two -- you know, come up with
some kind of a way to look at our work, make sure we're --
dollar-wise, we're close, and come up with a footprint
professional drawing. Doesn't have to be any more, you
know, I mean, than what we've looked aT before, but have
it drawn by a professional so it's to scale and, you know,
the public can see what's actually there.
JUDGE HENNEKE: The problem you have, though,
if you have your consulting architect prepare a drawing,
you've influenced the design-build process. The whole
purpose of design-build is that the design-build team comes
in as part of their asking for our business with a concept.
Drawings, pictures.
COMMISSIONEF. W]LLIAMS: Cali you not wear two
hats, one temporarily?
MP.. GONDECK: I've worn a lot of hats,
i _ - , -
29
1
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
l
13
i4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
^2
G J
,q
~5
Commissioner, but it -- it does sort of -- goes against the
grain of the intent of the legislation. I mean, just from
reading the whole legislation and actually having an
independent consulting architect that is independent of the
design team. And ? don't -- there's no basis, I'm sure, as
far as this even being ever tested; it's too new of
legislation to say is it a good idea or is it a bad idea.
Definitely, if you want us to do a conceptual drawing for
the County, whether it's as the independent consulting
architect or just being hired as a -- a preplanning services
and master planning, we can do it either way you want to.
I'm very open to that. But, again, I'm -- I am wearing two
hats here today, 'cause I'm talking out of both sides cf my
mouth. 1'e s, we can de it either way, but I don't know
I
exactly what it is that the Court wants to achieve.
If you're wanting to achieve -- or stay with
the design-build process, then if we do t}ie conceptual
drawings, then we -- you know, beginning that role as
architect, and then at that point I'd have to ask you
whether you want us to be your architect and whether to go
design-build instead of one of the other types of
construction methods. So, you're sort of -- you're breaking
our of the one delivery method and really going into
something else, sc I'd have to ask the Court. If it is your
intent to stay with design-build, then I think that's the
s-n
30
1
2
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
i3
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
~1
22
23
24
~J
direction you need to go. If not, then you need to change
and go back to a more conventional way, and you need to go
to a construction manager at risk or tc go, you know, sealed
proposals or some other method.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner Baldwin,
what do you think?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question as
-- that's a little bit different. And the question, I
think, is of our County Auditor here, and it's -- you kiww,
we've talked about putting together teams and we've talked
about concept drawings, and all these things cost money.
And this -- and we're talking about work prior to the bond
election. Have we -- did we budget moneys Is there
Professional Services money budgeted to pay for these
things? I mean, we're talking about a lot of thinys her?
this morning.
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't recall what's in
that -- how much money is there, but I -- I remember that
conversation. We do have a sizable amount of contingency in
the budget.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: With this issue? We
built the budget with this issue in mind?
MR. TOMLINSON: xes, I think we did.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, there's plenty of
money to pay everybody even before the bond election?
1
3
4
5
6
7
ft
9
l~
11
12
13
14
1S
lh
i7
lg
ly
~0
~l
22
23
~9
25
31
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Flenty of money in the
budget, but there's very tight purse strings on my side
until it gets approved, in my mind. I personally want to
spend, I mean, as little as possible until the bond
election.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd like to deal with
that with Mr. Gondeck. Tell us about how the fee structure
is broken down in terms of the levels of service and so
forth. One more time.
MR. GONDECK: Commissioner, just so we're on
the record that we would want to be selected based on
qualifications, and that actual fees cannot be discussed
according to the Professional Service Procurement Act. But
we can talk about how does that work in relation to your
budget, and the process. Typically, the consulting
architect, just like with any other type of architectural or
engineering services, is that it's all based on certain
phases of the work, and you only get paid for the phases of
the work that you go through. As far as the preselection
services that was outlined in the letter that I sent to
Judge rienneke -- I believe y'all do have a copy of that --
that the preselection services are approximately 20 percent
of the total, you know, tees that would be charged by the
consulting architect. Or I guess, if you look at it, it's
somewhere a little bi*_ more than what, under the standard
;~-1~
1
3
4
h
7
fl
y
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
1 kS
19
20
21
~~
~3
24
?~
32
architectural contract, would be a schematic design, because
it goes a little bit farther that than. I mean, it's a
little bit more percentage than actually a schematic design,
but it gets us to the same point.
Typically, the contracts are structured to
where, if it's or. a contingent basis -- in other words,
contingent upon the funding of the project -- then it is
negotiated with the Court to establish some fixed amount or
maximum amount to be paid prior to the bond election, and if
the bond electior, passes, you go on from there. If it
Tails, we all say we had a lot of fun; we go our different
ways, or we go back and try again. And, unfortunately, I
just can't go --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand.
MR. GONDECK: -- right in the middle of it,
because then we'd be in violation of our statute, and I
don't want to do that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You answered my
question. The question is, what do we do'? llo we wait two
weeks or move forward? That's really what it's all about.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We've got to
understand, though -- everybody's got to understand that
we're talkinq about spending a considerable amount of money,
and the -- with the possibility of the bond election going
down. I mean, I know we don't want to hear that, but there
_n-i -
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
lg
20
21
,~
23
24
25
33
is that possibility.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Recognizing that,
Commissioner Baldwin, is there -- I mean, do you see a way
to, you }:now, provide information without spending some
money?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm a no vote, anyway,
so this is really, really easy for me. This is very simple.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, my question
wasn't your vote. I mean, is there another alternative of
how we get drawings that you know of?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't see it. I
don't see that there is another way, unless you want to just
get someone out of the community to open up their checkbook
and do it for you. Which is what should be happening
anyway.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Golly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Golly. And if we make
the decision today, I mean, there's -- so, basically, we can
move the whole timetable up, but even then, best rase
scenario is, if we're lucky, we have the design team picked
at our second meeting in December. Which is when -- or we
could rail a special meeting to do it.
JrJDGE HENNEKE: I think we could have the
design -- yeah, by mid-December we'd have the design-build

1
L
3
4
5
b
7
8
Q
10
11
l~
13
14
15
16
17
18
ly
20
21
~~
23
24
25
34
team picked. I mean, if we select the consulting architect
today, I think we can be in a position to send out the
Requests for Qualifications by the 1st of November, give
them the whole month of November to respond, and then have
the first two weeks or so of December in order for us to
make our initial choices, interview firms, and select a
firm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're more optimistic
than. I am.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's an ambitious
schedule. But, again, two weeks -- two weeks could make the
difference, if I'm hearing things correctly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, two weeks
definitely makes a difference. But I look at it as -- I
mean, my preference is what I said, is to go ahead and delay
two weeks in making the de~~ision. But, you know, I'm
probably wiilinq to take a different route if -- because of
the timing.
JUDGE HENNEKE: If we want to put the
decision off, we can put the decision off. But we cannot,
in my opinion, engage the consulting architect to do any
sort of drawings to be used in connection with the bond
election, so we'd end up using somebody else to do those
drawings. But we can get that on a donated basis or
whatever e_se. That's speculation.
-1G- -
35
1
3
4
S
E
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
14
1J
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
?~
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I mean, I
don't -- it would be nice if someone donated them, but I'm
not anticipating someone donating them. So, I think I'm
willinq to spend Professional Services to get that done; I
think we're obligated to the public to do that. I don't
see -- you can't ask the public to vote on something without
having some drawings and some background work. And we're
not qualified to do it and shouldn't be doing it ourselves.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The question in my mind
is, if we -- you know, do we have the time, really, to hire
the design-to-build team before the bond election? And I'm
coming down on no, I just don't see that happening. I mean,
I don't -- not in time to be of use. I mean, I think we can
have them before the -- you know, she bond -- the early
voting will be the third week of January, it starts.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Starts the 17th, I think it
is, of January.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And 1 think that, to do
that, you -- you know, pretty much, you need to have
drawings, certainly by the 1st of January, or -- of what
this is going to look like, what we're going to be asking
them to be voting on.
JUDGE HENNEKE: But, again, remember that
part of their -- their submission of their qualifications
_, u


1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
1?.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~4
25
36
are their concept, and we -- we vote on their concept. We
vote on them and we vote on their concept.
MR. GONDECK: Those that are qualified in the
first round would be asked to come in and make formal
presentations and interviews with the Court with conceptual
drawings, and that's part of the basis for selection of the
design-build team.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That helps.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That helps.
DODGE HENNEKE: So that's, you know, by
mid-December. If we choose a firm by mid-December, we've
chosen the concept that they're presenting.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Concept drawings at
that point. I don't think, if we're going to make the
timetable, we have the luxury of losing two weeks up front.
And I think we need to have some guidance to get us through
this process, or we may be taken to task for not doing it
correctly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, y'all beat me down.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, let's see if we
can move the process along here this morning. I would -- I
would move that the Court retain this architectural firm,
DRG, Mr. Gondeck's Tirm, for the purpose of guiding us
through -- as a consulting architect, guiding us through the
first phase of design-build, which is getting ready the
iu is _

I
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~l
~,
23
24
25
37
qualifications for Request for Proposals, which would
include conceptual drawings.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can we change the motion
to authorize the Court to begin negotiations with DRG to see
if we can come to an agreement?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, that doesn't do --
JUDGE HENNEKE: That puts us off another two
weeks, then.
COMMISSIONER LETZ
and hire them it we can.
(Laughter.)
We11, but if we can --
JUDGE HENNEKE: That will be a well-worded
motion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll withdraw mine
and you state it. Let's see if we can work it out that way.
Let's try it again.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm thinking how you word
it. I don't know how you can hire someone it you have no
idea what they're -- what they're going to ask. I think --
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's the next topic for
consideration. And I think we can do that if -- but
Mr. Gondeck says he can't talk to us about money until he's
hired.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
i~. is ~ _
38
1
1
2
3
9
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
29
~5
JUDGE HENNEKE: Once he's hired, then he can
stand here -- and we can always cancel it if we don't come
to an agreement.
MR. GONDECK: And that's how the actual
statute reads. If we --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. GONDECK: If I can't satisfy you on fees
at that point, after I've been selected, then you terminate
the negotiations and find somebody else.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Make your motion
again, t3ill.
(Laughter.)
COMM1SSlUNER WILLIAMS: I move that the Court
approve the retention of the DRG firm for the purpose of
developing the specifications and the criteria for Request
for Proposals for the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center,
first phase, Fhase I.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which would include
conceptual drawings in the RFP.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. You got that,
Kathy?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Con¢uissionex LeLz, that the Court engage

39
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1S
15
1/
18
I9
20
2i
22
23
24
25
the firm of DRG, Mr. Wayne Gondeck, *_o act as the consulting
architect to the Commissioners Court for the initial phase
of the design-build expansion/renovation of the Hill Country
Youth Exhibit Center.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You said that better
than I did, Judge.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm just paraphrasing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: One thing is clear. I
mean, it should be clear to the public that we didn't talk
about this ahead of time.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's for sure.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Really.
JUDGE HENNEb:E: Any questions or comments?
If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(Commissioners Williams and Letz voted in
favor of the motion.)
DODGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(Commissioner Baldwin voted aq_ainst the
motion.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to explain my
no vote, if I could, please. Once again, when this process
was started, 1 agreed to vote -- I agreed with the
Commissioners that we would allow the people to have a voice
in the process and the election; the people would be able to
i~ i
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
y
10
11
1Z
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2'_
22
~3
29
~J
40
go vote, and I agreed to that and voted with that. But, in
my opinion, my vote today or this day forward would be -- be
contrary to -- to that. So, I just feel like that we're
moving too far into the program now. It's just my opinion.
And so my vote is -- that's all.
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right, thank you. Now,
Mr. Gondeck --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How much?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Understanding that we prefer
that the majority of your fees be rolled into the bond
issue, can you give us some notion of what it would cost for
you to assist the Court in preparing a Request for
Qualifications and evaluating the responses?
MR. GONDECK: Judge, I'd say yes, I do that.
Yes, I do have the dollar amount that I have in mind. 1 do
always feel a little strange talking about my fees in open
court, but -- especially when there's a stenographer, so
I'll try not to misstate this. We would -- for the Phase 1,
which would be the Request for Qualifications and Request
for Proposals phase, and what we have actually defined as
that preselection phase, or up-to-selection point, we would
be looking at a fee of around $20,000. Now, what we would
offer to the County is to defer 50 percent of that,
contingent upon whether or not the bond election passes. If
the bond election passes, LYieii we would ask for that to be
41
1
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
lF
17
18
19
20
~l
22
23
,~,
25
paid in full. If it doesn't, then we have just deferred
that and let it go, so we'd be looking at $10,000 between
now and February 1, or whenever the bond election is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: To me, that seems
reasonable. But, I mean, how do we -- I mean, we're no --
we can't negotiate this thing right now. Nice idea to know
that, but, I mean, I think -- I mean, I guess the Court
needs tc decide how we're going to --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How we're going to do
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How we're going to
negotiate the contract, or who's goinq to negotiate the
contract and what needs to be in there and things of that
nature.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Again, if we're going to try
to get the design-build team in place, he needs to start
work on Request for Qualifications this afternoon.
MR. GONDECK: Can I just ask a question? Is
there a way that the Court could authorize us, on a
contingent basis, while we negotiate the contract -- of
course, that's --
DODGE HENNEKE: Sure.
MR. GONDECK: My neck's out on the line
pretty good, but. with the understanding, you know, that
we've expressed at least some general terms, and from there,

1
4
5
6
7
ft
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
i
24
25
4~
we can go through the contract with the County's attorney or
whoever you want us to work that with, to work initially
with the Judge in presenting an agreement,
JUDGE HENNEKE: In other words, what you're
proposing is two phases here where you all will go ahead and
start work on the Request for Qualifications at the same
time that we negotiate the pre -- the Phase I contract?
MR. GONDECK: Yes, sir.
DODGE HENNEKE: Can we get a motion to that
effect?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court authorize
negotiation with DRG for the amount of their services prior
to bond election at the same time that DRG works on the
Request Tor Qualifications Tor design-build team. Any other
questions cr ccmments? If not, all in favor, raise your
right hand.
(Commissioners Williams and Letz voted in
favor of the motion.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(Commissioner Baldwin voted against the
motion.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
3
4
S
6
7
P.
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
29
25
93
(Discussion off the record.)
DODGE HENNEKE: Do you want to be the one to
work with him on the contract? Or --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure, be glad to.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm not --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm serious. I --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Ycu need to get with the
engineer and --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You and the County
Attorney?
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: I won't be there alone, I
can assure you. Yes.
DODGE HENNEKE: Okay. All right. Anything
else we need to talk with Mr. Gondeck about?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good start.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How long are you going to
be here today?
MR. GONDEGK: As long as you need me to be
here today, Commissioner. I can qo to San Antonio and come
back later, but --
JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll take a break probably
in about 30 minutes; you two meet then and decide what your
schedule will be. ukay. Thank you, Wayne.
MR. GONDECK: Judge, Commissioners, I
appreciate it. Thank you.
'- -I r'- -
1
2
1
4
5
7
8
9
10
it
l~
13
14
15
15
17
18
ly
~0
Zl
Z3
24
25
94
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. We can take care of
one or two before our public hearing at 10 o'clock. Let's
do Item Number ~', consider and approve advertising for bid
on the lease of new motor grader with scarifier. Leonard,
are you going to talk about that one briefly?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The operative word
was "briefly."
MR. ODOM: Sir?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS
was "briefly."
The operative word
MR. ODOM: Very gracious. I believe that you
have the packet there. For the past six or seven years,
we've had a very successful lease program for our motor
graders, as well as loaders. The lease on one of our motor
graders will expire the end of December. At this time, we
ask that you allow us to go out for bid for the lease of a
new I2-H motor grader. When the process is complete, we'll
bring the bids back to the Court for acceptance and ask for
authorization for the Judge to sign the same.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUUGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner

1
2
3
4
6
7
8
y
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
~~
23
24
2J
45
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court approve
advertising for bid on the lease of the new motor grader
with scarifier, with the bids to be received at the Kerr
County Clerk's Office not later than 5 o'clock p.m. on
Friday, November 8, Year 2002, and the bids to be opened on
Tuesday, November 12, Year 202 at 10 o'clock a.m. Any
questions cr 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. ODOM: Judge, may I take just a second to
address the Court? Something came up Thursday with a
maintainer -- and this is not something that you have to
make a decision on, but for information for me and for the
Court. Thursday, one of the crews -- I have two crews in
the west end; one of them in the 1340/39 area, the
maintainer went out. I say -- not maintainer; 1 mean
loader. The old Dresser is 15 years old; will not go in
reverse. It will go forward, but it won't go in reverse.
And so we've -- we're trying -- between Thursday and today,
we've get a quote of $12,500. We're bringing it in this
afternoon -- or this morning to take a look at the shop.
That's a loL of money just for a transmission. And we
-1'- -
46
haven't broke it down. The old Dressers, you have to take
the entire engine ouY_, you have to take the transmission
out, and it has to go to Washaw-Pierce. At this point, I
don't have a decision. I want to look at it, investigate a
little bit. But would the Court be receptive at this point,
instead of spending that kind of money and not guaranteeing
tYie engine wouldn't go out, to look at the possibility of a
lease program like we did for the last 9~4, I think,
recently? We just had one to go back out for that. Instead
of spending r_hat money. That's a year's rental for one
maintainer, and I could get five years. I mean, it's just
something I could work into next year's budget. But I don't
};now if it's worth $1D,SUU, and nc guarantee a 1`,-year-old
loader's going to stay together.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I think it's something we can
look at. Obviously, we can't make a commitment today on
this; it's not ou the agenda, but you need to bring us the
numbers and the pros and cons on both sides.
MR. ODOM: Kight.
JUDGE HENNEKE: As you always do. So, take
1
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
l~
I3
19
IG
le
1
i~
1!
~~
2
2
2
look at it.
	MR. ODOM: The	Court would	be receptive;
3	that's what I waned to know.	'Thank, you.	
~	JUDGE HENNEKE:	Thank you.	It is 10 o'clock
5	in the morning on Tuesday, Oc	tober 15th.	At this time, we
~ ~--~_
47
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
?~
~3
~4
25
will recess this regular session of the Kerr County
Commissioners Court and hold a public hearing for the
revision of plat of Y.O. Ranchlands, Lots 17, 18, and 19.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was
closed at 10:00 a.m., and a public hearing
was held in open court, as follows:)
P U B L I C H E A R I N G
JUDGE HENNEKE: Is t=here any member of the
public who would like to address the Court on the issue of
the revision of plat of the Y.O. Ranchlands, Lots 17, 18,
and 19? Once amain, this is a public hearing on the issue
of revision of plat for Lots 17, 15, and 19 of Y.O.
Ranchlands. Is there any member of the public that would
like to address the Court during this public hearing on that
topic?
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: One more time, the Court is
now iii a public hearing nn the issue of revision of plat of
Lots 17, 18, and 19 of Y.O. Ranchlands Subdivision in Kerr
County, Texas. 1s there any member of the public would who
would like to address the Court on the issue of this
revision oL plat? Seeing none, hearing none, we will
adjourn the public hearing and return to the regular session
of the Kerr County Commissioners Court.
(The public. hearing was concluded at 10:01
a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court
meeting was reopened.)

48
1
3
9
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
1G
17
18
19
~0
21
22
~?
~q
~S
JrJDGE HENNEFrE: Let's take up Item Number 6,
which is to consider approving the final revision of plat of
Y.O. R.anchlands, Lots 17, 18, 19. Franklin Johnston. Good
morning, Franklin.
MN. JOHNSTON: Good morning. The -- you have
the preliminary plat, I believe. The one item that they
were building is Goodnight Trail, an access road to these
lots. That road has been completed. I went up last week,
made an inspection. 't'hey had it tested. It meets all the
requirements, so that road is complete. There's one item,
just kind of a loose end 1 triought I'd bring it up while
we're here on this. Ori the preliminary plat, there wasn't
any floodplain shown. Then on the final plat, there is a
floodplain. Stuart approved the preliminary, and I guess
h«_~s approved the final also. He signed it. I guess you
had enough information to --
MP.. SARRON: The final is correct. The first
preliminary was incorrect; it did not show the 100-year
floodplain. I returned it to Mr. Domingues, and he then
delineated the 100-year floodplain on the second preliminary
that was sent to me.
MR.. JOHNSTUN: Okay. But that wasn't the one
we had ir, court. That was apparently -- that wasn't the
same one we had -- it was? It wasn't the one we had filed.
MR. DOMINGUES: Yes, sir.
ll 1~'-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
i' 1
2~
23
~q
,~
99
MR.. JOHNSTON: There's another one floating
around, okay. It wasn't the one we had on file. OY,ay.
Based on that, I'd recommend approval of the plat.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd move for approval
of l.he preliminary revision of pla: for Tracts 17, 18, 19 --
MR. JOHNSTON: This is actually the final.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is final?
MR. JOHNSTON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Plat approval -- move
plat approval for Lots 17, 18, 19 of the Y.O. Ranchiands, as
proposed and recommended by the County Engineer.
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: I'd like to second. I
have a question before 1 do.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We need the second before the
question.
COMMISSIONEP. BALDWIN: I'm not going to do
it, the r.. I want to ask my question.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Do we have a second?
COMMISSTONER BALDWIN: Has anyone heard from
Mr. Griffin? Did. he relate to anyone his feelings or his
thoughts?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't -- Larry -- I talked
to him, and he did not tell me he had any reservations about
this.
CONSMISSiONER BALDWIN: Second.
1 ~'-1 ~-
1
2
3
9
5
6
8
9
10
11
l~
I3
19
15
16
17
1 li
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
50
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
approve Lhe final revision of plat of Y.O. Ranchlands, Lots
17, 18, and 19, as presented.
CGMMtSS1UNER LETZ: I hate a question.
DODGE HENNEKE: Question: Go ahead.
COMM[SSIONEH LETZ: Franklin, this is not the
one that we had all the confusion about right-of-way? This
is a different -- I mean, we --
MR. JOHNSTON: That is correct. That -- what
we had hefcre was Lhe one that's north of this one.
CGMMISSIONER LETZ: The question on that
cne -- that one's nvt in the subdivision, as I recall.
MR. JOHNSTON: That's not in the subdivision.
S think that was called Dominion Nanch, or -- that's a
separate item.
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. We'll go
hack to --
MR. JOHNSTON: Apparently the mylar is not in
r-nurt. I think they delivered it to our office. I didn't
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
L 1
22
23
24
2~
51
pick it up, so I'll bring it back later today.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's go back to Item Number
3, gentlemen, consider clarification to Letter of Credit
form letter, Appendix D of Kerr County Subdivision Rules.
Number 3.
MR. JOHNSTON: In our form letter in the
appendix of the Subdivision Rules, it refers to -- after
Letter of Credit number, maintenance of roads, streets, and
alleyways. And frequently the -- you know, there's two
kinds of letters of credit. One's for road maintenance for
County-maintained road. One's for construction that's not
complete at the time of the final plat. That's the majority
of the ones we've been getting. When we get the letter of
credit, invariably they go by our form that it has
maintenance on there; we have to send it back and get it
corrected every time. So, I think there probably should be
some kind of a selection up there that they can select one
or the other and do it right the first time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You can't ask one till
you get a second, though.
(Laughter.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's unly if a motion has
1u-15-
52
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~5
been made.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see, okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I see a -- I see a
couple potential typographical errors. One I'm certain is a
typographical, one I'm not so certain about. Third
paragraph, "This is not a n-o-t-i-a-t-i-o-n..." Is that
supposed to just be notation, or is that some special credit
term that I don't know about?
MR. JOHNSTON: What page are you looking at?
Just the Letter of Credit form?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Appendix D, Letter of
Credit.
MR. JOHNSTON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Third paragraph and
fourth paragraph. I know that's a typographical error.
JODGE HENNEKE: That should be "notation."
MR. JOHNSTON: That's probably spelling.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: "Notation" is the
word.
MR. JOHNSTON: "Notation."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Then "modified" is
also -- in the next paragraph. Okay. That's all I want to
know.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Jonathan, could we amend that
form without having to --
~0 i5-0_
53
1
1
2
3
4
5
H
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think so. This is
really not changing anything, just clarifying the language.
I don't think we need a public hearing or anything; I think
we can just do it. And it needs to be, you know --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Needs to be done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It needs to be done. So,
I make a motion
MR. JOHNSTON: There may be a better format
than that. I just put both of them in there. They can
select one or have a blank there and type it in or whatever.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there a situation
where you have a construction and maintenance letter of
credit?
MR. JOHNSTON: I don't think so. I think if
the road's not complete at the time of the final plat, they
would have to have a letter for construction. Then I think,
at that time, whenever the road was complete, accepted, i
think the letter -- the maintenance will actually start at
time of road completion, so it probably needs to come back
and get a separate one for that for a year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I move we approve
the revised Appendix D as presented.
COMMISSIONER k3ALUWIN: Second.
DODGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve the
in-1t
54
1
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
revised Appendix L, as presented, to the Kerr County
Subdivision Rules and Regulations. 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.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Franklin, would you make
sure that Truby gets copies of that to everyone on the Court
and everyone else that needs to be distributed, County Clerk
and others who have copies of it?
MR. JOHNSTON: I think we have a list of all
the people. We'11 see that they get that.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's go to Item Number 4,
consider canceling and vacating Kerrville's Pleasure Cliff
Subdivision, recorded in Volume 1, Page 11, consider public
notice, and set public hearing date for the same. Again,
Franklin.
MR. JOHNSTON: We have a sample, I think, of
the notice that we had published in the paper. This
subdivision, I think, is owned by three people, all the
lots, and they've all signed a notarized statement that they
wanted to vacate. Copies are in your packet.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would you like to
55
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
satisfy my ignoranr_e as to where this is located, this
subdivision?
MR. JOHNSTON: We11, let me see.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you know?
MR. JOHNSTON: You're putting me on the spot
here, Commissioner.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Precinct 9.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's Pleasure Hill.
MR. JOHNSTON: This really doesn't have --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sleepy Hollow Avenue,
that's the road that goes into the subdivision.
MR. JOHNSTON: Doesn't have a location map.
I'd have to look it up. The roads don't sound familiar.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Anybody here
representing the owners that can tell us where it's located?
(No response.)
MR. JOHNS'I'UN: I guess not.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you sure it's in
Kerr County?
MR. JOHNSTON: That I'm pretty sure of, yes,
sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. JOHNSTUN: Would you like me to briny iL
back with more information?
CUMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I tried.
L i - 1
56
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
1~
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We need a public hearing,
though. I move we set the public hearing -- correct? I
move we set the public hearing for the -- to consider
canceling and vacating Kerrville's Pleasure Cliff
Subdivision for --
JUDGE HENNEKE: 25th.
MR. JOHNSTON: 25th of November?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- November 25, 2002.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court set a public
heaxinq on canceling and vacating Kerrville's Pleasure Cliff
Subdivision, as recorded in Volume 1, Page 11, and set the
public ]searing date for November 25th, Year 2002, at
10 o'clock a.m. in the Kerr County Commissioners Court.
MS. SUV1L: It has to be -- that's our night
meeting.
JUDt,E HENNEKE: That's right. So it would be
at --
COMM1SS1ONER WILLIAMS: 6:30?
JUDGE HENNEKE: No, set it at 7:30. Any
questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your
right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
~_ .s-=_
57
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1 L
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Thank you,
Franklin. Item -- want to take a break?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can we get the next one
done? That way Road and Bridge can get done.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We can do Item Number 7,
update on the damage from the July floods, repair schedule,
and FEMA assistance. Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just put this on the
agenda just to receive an update as to where we were on
receiving any financial assistance from FEMA related to the
July floods, and also an idea as tc where Road and Bridge
was on repairs related frcm that flood. That's it.
Leonard?
MR. ODOM: As you see before you, there's 37
sites. PaLt of those are Category A and B. So, we
originally had put in about 70 sites that was damaged. Part
of that was delineated down to less than $1,000, they did
not pay us for. So, these are the 30 -- 35 or 37 sites all
together that were approved by FEMA. The total amount of
Road and Bridge was $315,092.28. Federal share was
$236,349.21, and then the 25 percent is $78,773.07. So,
what we have is about a quarter of a million dollars worth
of damage that we've received funds for. The Judge signed
_~i ._ --
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
9
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~;
23
24
25
58
oft on thar_ paperwork, and we've submitted that in. At this
time, I believe, off the top of my head, I would say of
these 35, we have about 70 -- 73 percent of those items
r_omplete. But in that, of course, those are the -- we have
some bigger items that are not. You'll see they're
color-coded. Those that are yellow are completed since we
talked to FEMA. The blue are -- still needs to be
completed, anc~ there's a percentage thereof.
And then, of course, what we did not have on
there was -- this is FEMA. NRCS had seven sites. I didn't
yive you that, because it's somewhat ambiguous because of --
they put down the sites and they did not put all the dollar
fiyuxes down. Hermann Sons, I had no data on the bridge.
Part of the sites along River Road were not completed. Some
of them had to do with drainage, gaging baskets, things like
that. They did not give me any numbers, so I'm sort of in
limb, but that total that they had a figure was 547,825. I
sort of fiqure that that might increase 50 to -- 50 percent
more, maybe $75,000 total with the gagings, and all that's
going to be expensive, so I'm not quite sure. Hermann Sons,
there will be some money on Hermann Sons Bridge, but that
project's not to replace the -- the bridge, Commissioner.
Neither did FEMA. I think FEMA gave me about $2,200 for the
approaches. Tim Bushka is working on that, out of Temple.
At the time that I went with the
~~-_7- _
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
a
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~3
24
~5
59
representatives Yrom NR.CS, Tim wasn't there and they
couldn't give any data on it, but they were talking about
demolition of the oLd structure and trying to pull those
structures out, the rail cars. And we had -- we thought we
could pull them out. We can't. I had two winch trucks down
there; we couldn't budge them. I called Joe Franklin back.
I just told him that we could not participate in that; that
the hammer that we thought we could break up that concrete,
the -- Hull says do not put it in water. It will blow the
seals and possibly -- could make the head explode. So, we
just said we do not have the equipment to do that. So, I
don't know where that would be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, do you have any idea
when -- what Tim is going to do, when he's going to -- how
much -
MR. ODOM: I'm not quite sure. I asked Joe
to get bac}; with me, and Joe was on vacation last week. We
did put in a call back to Tim, but, you know, he's so --
he's never in Temple.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. ODOM: And I'm not quite sure -- at the
time, the question I had was what about it, and they said
Tim is handling it. Ste, that's all I know at this point
till I get a reply. It does not look like we will
participate -- I mean gel. much participation like we did

60
1
2
3
4
J
5
7
8
rj
10
11
12
I3
14
I5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
last year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, do you think
they'll probably at least get the cars out of the river?
Railroad cars?
MR. ODOM: Well, the railroad cars, I think
that's possible. But, see, there's no -- I need to get with
Tim; I nave to rebuild that pad out there to even put a
crane out there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I mean, I'm
thinking more first step before anything gets done. I mean,
no matter what happens with the bridge, the railroad cars
need to come out of the river, in my opinion, if possible.
MR. ODUM: Oh, I don't disagree. I thought
we could winch them out, but we discovered too much debris,
and one's layii,y on top of another one, and I just couldn't
move it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was on the phone
last week with the mayor of Karnes City, Texas, and his
first question was about those railroad cars in your
precinct. I wasn't about to try to answer.
COMMISSIONEK LETZ: They're famous.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well-known, here and
far.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, good.
JUDGE HENNEKE: 'Pommy, have we actually

51
1
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1~
~0
21
22
23
24
25
received any money from FEMA?
MR. TOMLINSON: I'm not sure. I don't think
we have.
MR. ODOM: I don't believe we have. They
told me by the time you -- when you receive that paperwork,
it was about two to three weeks, they said, and then after
we sent that in and that paperwork was processed, it would
be another two or three weeks, we should get our money.
Because it's not a large -- we're not over $52,000 on each
incident, so we feel that that 236 would be coming pretty
scon, within another week or sc, I would -- maybe toward the
end of the week or next week, we may receive something.
COMM1SSlONER WILLIAMS: Leonard, have we
satisfied or will we have satisfied our 25 percent share
with ii,-kind services, or do we have money to pay out?
MR. ODOM: At this point, I think I've -- out
of the X36, to answer your question, I don't have a firm
answer for you. I believe that the 25 percent would cover
my expenses. Again, remember, NRCS is there, and I don't
have a firm number on that yet. It's a lot of concrete, and
that 25 percen*_ gets hit pretty -- when I can't do a lot of
this. So, I feel that I'm going to be close to a quarter of
a million. I remember originally I asked for 125 up to a
quarter of a million, so we might be close to that
"15 percent. But, we're going to try to do it for that. I
u - ~ -
62
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
?0
~l
Gc
23
24
?5
still have same major projects to complete.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you think -- are you,
I guess, content with FEMA's amount they approved for each
item? I mean, basically, they're going --
MR. ODOM: They were basically fair. You
know, it's a judgment call. The individual I had is -- was
somewhat harder than -- than the gentleman 10 years ago; his
pencil didn't move as much. And, so, you know,
across-the-board, I think it was -- he was fair to us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My fina] question, do we
recoup anything, like on Hermann Sons Road, where -- back by
Mr. Daughtry's property?
MR. ODOM: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where the road washed out
three times during the flood?
MR. ODOM: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we get any -- do we
recoup any of that money of our work during that period? Is
that included in here?
MR. ODOM: That was all part of it. You'll
see Hermann Sens twice. It says Hermann Sons Road, and then
it_ says Hermann Sons Bridge. So, Hermann Sons Bridge is a
separate incident. The Hermann Sons is part of that roadway
going up to the old structure, and then the back end of
that. So, we did get money there for that structure, and
-~s- ~z
53
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
~2
23
24
25
that will probably be the last one that we try to pull --
pull down. It's still functional. I just went over it
Friday, and that's going to take two 75-inchers and concrete
rip raps, so that's an expensive incident. We'll look at
that at the last -- we'll try and knock out the dirt work
and finish everything else up six months from the time the
Judge signed that paper, which was what, September the 23rd?
DODGE HENIQEKE: 25th, I think it was.
MR. ODOM: Something like that. It's the
latter part of September; we have six months.
COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: Leonard, L do have
one question on Elm Pass Road. I noticed on your list here
that you're at the 90 percentile in terms of work, and it
notes sealcoating, but some of the folks who live on that
road have indicated to me that there's still some major
drainage problems just past Starlite -- entrance to
Starlite, in between that and Pecar. Valley, where there was
at one time a -- a culvert that -- that we removed, but in
removing it, we've ~=reated some other problems in this most
recent rains, 3, 4 inches of rain. They indicated there's
Brill some problems in that area. Are you familiar with
that?
MR. UUUM: No, sir, I'm not.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Maybe you and I
should take a run out there.

h~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
5
9
10
11
12
13
19
1 J
16
17
18
1`J
20
21
~2
23
24
~ ~,
MR. ODOM: I'm not quite sure -- I thought
most of that was taken care of.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, so did I, but
this was brought to my attention about a week ago.
MR. ODUM: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Waiting for this
opportunity to talk to you about it. So, we'll get together
and take a run out there?
MH. ODOM: We'll get together and -- see, I
still have dirt work to do there, and I have some drainage
there. Douglas and I ore re talking about it, but we're on
Turner right now. So, that will be through this week and a
little bit of next week, and then we want ro run -- either
go -- make a decision. Elm Pass will take about a week for
differeiiL little things we need to do, then go into Elm
Pass II.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Maybe tomorrow we r_an
take a run out there, take a look.
MR. ODOM: That will be fine.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just see what they're
talking about.
MR. ODOM: I'm sorry, I'm not quite sure what
you're talking about.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else for Leonard?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, Leonard.
~ n i s r~
65
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
]9
20
21
22
23
24
25
MF,. ODOM: Does that answer your questions?
DODGE HENNEKE: I want to again thank Leonard
and his crew Yor not only the work they did during the
flood, but for the work they've done with FEMA. The people
I met with at FEMA on September 25~h were very complimentary
of the documentation and the evaluations and the assistance
they'd gotten from Truby, as well as Leonard and everyone
else, and we're well-served. Thank you very much.
MR. ODOM: Thank you. I did not address
Glenn Holekamp's, so Glenn might give you an update on that
a little bit.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Glenn, do you have anything
to add real quickly?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Just briefly, on the three
items that were FEMA-covered on ours, the walk bridge at
Flat Rock Park, we've been -- we will receive approximately
$?,000 for that to rebuild it. The County Extension Office
-- and on that one, I need to probably contact a contractor
to loo Y. at the procedure -- to proceed on repair bid or the
replacement.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the bridge?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir, the walk bridge.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You might look at
changing the design slightly, too, when you're dcing that.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir. And I will get with

66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Q
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
L 1
~~
?3
24
L S
you on that. The other one, which we started this morning,
was the damages that FEMA is covering at the County
Extension Office on the replacement of the floor the in
that particular building. They started on that this
morning, so with any kind of luck, we'll finish up the
repairs on it possibly *_he end of this week.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions for Glenn?
Okay. Thanks, Glenn. We're going to take a break now.
Let's return promptly at 20 minutes to 11:00; we'll take up
the County Treasurer's items since she has a conflict later
this morning.
(Recess from 10:25 a.m, to 10:40 a.m.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. Let's reconvene
this regular session of the Kerr County Commissioners Court.
The next item we will take up is Item Number 12, consider
and discuss adopting order amending the annual determined
contribution rate plan for January 2003 through
December 2003. County Treasurer, Barbara Nemec.
MS. NEMEC: Thank you, Judge, for moving me
up on the agenda. This was discussed during our budget
workshop, and the rate was funded during that time, the new
rate, which is 7.92. So, this is just the formal paperwork
that needs to be signed to go with that. Actually, the --
it was 7.92, but the Court did decide during the budget
-ie-~_
67
1
2
9
S
6
7
R
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
L J
workshop to go ahead and adopt the buy-back program, which
brings it up to 7.95. And that is in the budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court adopt an
order amending the annual determined contribution rate plan
for the term January 2003 through December 2003. 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.
MS. NEMEC: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Barbara. Let's go
back to Item Number 8, consider and discuss interlocal
participation agreement with Texas Local Government
Purchasing Cooperative. Tommy?
MR. TOMLINSON: This purchasing arrangement
is similar to the Houston/Galveston Area Council of
Go*.~ernments. In the past, Road and Bridge and the Sheriff's
OLfice have purchased vehicles and heavy equipment through
H.G.A.C. through state purchasing. This -- this is the same
arranyement. However, when we purchase heavy equipment
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
7z
23
24
25
68
through H.G.A.C., there's a -- a fee associated with the
purchase. It will range from $1,000 to $2,000 or $3,000,
depending on the amount of the purchase. We can pay an
annual fee of $200 per year to join this -- this purchasing
cooperative, and -- and which enables us to purchase some,
you know, lighter vehicles and equipment through this agency
without payinq the fee. We currently, in the budget, have
a -- Road and Bridge has a tractor that's -- that we have
budgeted that we can purchase through this cooperative, and
only pay the $200 annual fee. So, just in one purchase, we
can save a minimum of $800.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You can purchase --
we can purchase through this cooperative anything that we
could have gotten through Houston/Galveston?
MR. TOMLINSON: They don't offer all the
equipment that you can purchase through H.G.A.C. There --
there's some limitations as to what they have to offer for
sale, but it -- this allows us to -- to pick and choose
between agencies that -- that offer different pieces of
equipment.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I see.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we approve the
interlocal agreement between Kerr County and the Texas Local
Government Purchasing Cooperative.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
1 ^, - 1 5 1, _
69
2
3
4
5
7
8
y
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
;~
23
24
2J
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court
approve the Interlocal Farticipation Agreement with Texas
Local Government Purchasing Cooperative, and authorize
County Judqe to sign same. 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. Thanks,
Tommy. Item Number 9, consider and discuss approval of the
polling locations for the February 1 bond election in
accordance with Chapter 93 of the Texas Election Code.
Jannett?
M5. YlEYER: Gentlemen, this is for the bond
election in February. If you'll remember, I had e-mailed
each one of you and asked to you pick a location in your
precinct, since the census was to consolidate into four
different locations, and attached is the list that each one
has selected. And --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: ~iuestion. I know
what it's for, but the agenda request doesn't stipulate
which election and when. Should it?
MS. PIEPER: I know it just says in
accordance with Chapter 43, but this will be for the bond
i,-r~-,_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1S
16
1/
18
19
20
~l
22
23
24
25
~o
election, 'cause that's the only election we have coming up
that we have not taken care of polling lo~~ations yet.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge?
JrJDGE HENNEKE: Hmm?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are we okay with
that?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I think we're okay with that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court
approve the polling locations for the February 1st bond
election as presented by the County Clerk. Any questions or
comments?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only comment I have is,
does -- I guess for the Commissioner -- or for Precinct 3,
we need to be on that side, because this building, I
believe, is Precinct 1. The annex is Precinct 3.
MS. PIE PER: Okay. If we hold it in the
lower level, that will meet the specification.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But it's -- I
mean, 1'd hate to have it two feet off the -- out of the
precinct. The annex is -- if you're in the new structure
across the way or down below that open area, it should work.
i __ _
~1
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
MS. PIEPER: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. 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. Item Number
10, consider and discuss approval of a list of various
contracts and ratify the authorization of the County Judge's
signature. Again, Jannett.
MR. MOTLEY: Judge, may I comment just
briefly on that?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Jannett?
MR. MOTLEY: I was wondering if we could move
2.24 up to that; it's the same thing, since different people
are here for that. It's the same type of contract, just add
it toward the end.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, we can take that up
separately. This is ratification of a signature.
MR.. MOTLEY: Okay.
MS. PIEPER: Gentlemen, I've attached a list
of the contracts that have came in that we need to approve
and ratify the signatures on. The forms have already been
approved, from what I understand.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
i~~-i--o
~~
1
2
3
4
G
5
7
8
9
10
11
l~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
21'
~'3
24
~S
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve and
ratify the -- the approval of the various listed contracts,
and ratify the signature of the County Judge on same. 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.
MS. PIEPER: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's go ahead and take up
Item 24, as long as we're doing contracts, which is the --
consider and discuss approval of contract between Kerr
County and Hi11 Country Alternative Dispute Resolution
Center, and authorize County Judge to sign same.
Ms. Bailey, do you have anything to say on this?
MS. BAILEY: No, Your Honor. I've spoken to
-- I've spoken to Mr. Motley about it. He presented this as
a formal contract, and I believe tnat we changed all the
details that relate specifically to the mediation renter.
I'm available for any questions, as I'm sure Mr. Motley is,
if have you any questions about the contract.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Uoes anyone have any

73
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1/
18
lu
20
~l
22
23
2q
25
questions of Ms. Bailey or Mr. Motley about this contract?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do not.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval of the
contract.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And authorize County
Judge to sign same.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court
approve the contract between Kerr County and the Kerr
County -- Hill Country Alternative Dispute Resolution
Center, and authorize County Judge to sign same. All in
favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
JUUGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
MS. BAILEY: Thank you.
JUllGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Ilse. Item Number
11, consider and approve the tax collection contract between
Upper Guadalupe River Authority and Kerr County. Paula?
MS. RECTOR: Okay. This all came about from
a phone call from U.G.R.A.; they could not locate their copy
of the contract. These contracts are automatically renewed
unless one party or the other chooses not to. There was
1n-15-nom
74
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~2
23
29
25
just two changes made in the contract, to include the
section of the code that referred to the County Tax
Assessor/Collector being able to collect their taxes, and
also changing the amount of daily deposits. Those were the
only two changes. So, I did rewrite the contract for them.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions of Ms. Rector?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval of the
contract, authorize County Judge to sign same.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
approve the tax collection contract between Kerr County and
the Upper Guadalupe River Authority, and authorize the
County Judge to sign the same. 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
13, consider and discuss reclassification of the Jail
Administrator position from 21/1 to a 21/d. Sheriff?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, before he
starts, I noticed on here, estimated length of presentation
is two minutes.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Start the clock.
i'-1s- -
75
1
2
3
4
5
0
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can we regulate this?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Do you want my watch?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got one that
works here.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I had mentioned last
time about since I had a loss -- unfortunate loss of the
Jail Administrator, in trying to replar_e that person with a
qualified person for Jail Administrator, I didn't really
have anybody that has been with the department to where I
felt was really qualified to step into those shoes. There's
just a lot of responsibility and liability in there. So, in
checking around, I have hired one that will start tomorrow,
the 16th. But in -- and this is what I had brought up; it
was hard to hire somebody without knowing what kind of
salary that I could offer. This person came from Gillespie
County; he was their Jail Administrator. His salary at the
current time under their new deal would have been about
$31,000 -- between 31 and 32, and that was Gillespie County
Jail who only houses about seven inmates.
In checking with Kendall County, their Jail
Administrator -- and they house abour 48 inmates or
something like that; we're now housing some of their inmates
even for them -- is making close to $35,000. In the Nash
study, it just stated that the Jail Administrator should be
in the ~1 range, and 1 think 1 attached a copy of that Nash
- . 5 - _
76
1
2
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
z3
24
25
study to that current stuff. And with the duties that that
Jail Administrator is doing, especially with more and more
liability issues, more and more inspection issues, the fact
that our jail nurse makes more than the Jail Administrator,
I am asking to where an exception to that and move this
person to a 21/8 as a starting salary for him due to his
experience as a jail administrator and everything else,
puttinq him at $34,115.
DODGE HENNEKE: So, really, what you're not
asking for is reclassification; what you're asking for is an
exception to the policy in order to be able to hire this
person as a 21/8 instead of a 21/1?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct.
DODGE HENNEKE: Questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the experience of
this individual?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This individual was with
Kerr County for a number of years under one of our former
Jail Administrators as the assistant administrator, so he
understands Kerr County, understands our new jail and our
computer system. When he left and went to Gillespie County
as their Jail Administrator, they also have the same
county-wide computer system in Gillespie County as we have
here, so he understands that. He has been through a number
of state jail inspections, and -- and also, in this area, he
_ -_s- _
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
Ll
22
23
29
25
~~
knows the inmates that we deal with most of the time. He
already knows a lot of them on a first-name basis and that,
which does help deal with these people in a serious light,
than somebody coming in that doesn't.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're saying that
the bottom line -- it has no effect on the bottom line of
your budget?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I really don't think
there is, because of the number of openings throughout the
year that we always have in jails. You know, it's always
hard to keep totally staffed for the entire year. Such as
right now, the new budget took effect October 1. I've got
one of the new positions -- new five positions starting
tomorrow also, so that still has left us four open ones
since October lst. And just throughout the year, you're
always going to have enough openings to make up that -- that
difference in salary.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Until next year.
SHERIFF HIERHULZER.: I think you'll still
have it then, too, because of the openings you have every
year in trying to run a jail. 'Those people move up -- you
know, I've promoted several jailers out of the jail onto the
streets as officers, and I've had several go to larger
counties. You'll always have some openings in the jail.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions or comments?
1~-~~-~_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1 L
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
~l
zz
~3
7G
1S
78
COMMISSIONER BALDWIrS: I just wanted to say,
I just think it's bad -- it's a bad way to run government,
to say that I'm going -- there are going to be some people
that leave my employment, therefore I have money to pay
somebody. I just --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, I would agree with
you, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's not the way we
do things. However, I think that this Commissioners Court
has to show some kind of faith and trust in -- in you, that
you know what you're doing. I -- I do like the fact that
the -- I'm going to say that you're right on comparing them
with these other counties and what they have done. However,
I don't -- I don't like the idea of comparing a jail
administrator with a nurse. I think that's a goofy way to
think. Just my opinion. But I think that we agreed to
doing this in the budget process at some point. I don't
remember where the money was going to come from, but I do
remember having a conversation and agreeing to -- that we'd
come back at a later time when you found somebody or
something like that, and so I feel like that we did kind of
make a commitment to this thing.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, I do agree with
you in your comment that it's not good business to have to
consider not having a full staff to -- to be able to do
_=-_~-u~
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
ly
20
21
L 2
23
24
25
79
this, where the money is. But, unfortunately, in jail
operation, and ever since I've been with the County over 20
years, I don't believe there's ever -- ever been a year that
you've had an entire jail staff for the entire year without
any openings. You know, if I had somebody that gives notice
that they're leaving or anything, then you still have to
advertise, you still have to interview, so you're always
going to have some time periods in there. It's just a fact
that you're going to have some time periods with openings.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think what Commissioner
Baldwin is probably saying, and I agree with his comment, is
that -- I mean, there is a budget impact next year. You
can't budget for the assumption you're going to have
openings because of turnover. I mean, we just can't do
that. That would be a horrible way for us to start trying
to do our budget. So, I mean, I -- I can see -- agree that
there is probably no budget impact with your request for
this year, but in future years there certainly would be a
budget impact, because you have to budget for every position
being filled all year.
SHERlr'r' HlERHOLZER: I think there very well
could be -- could be a budget impact as far as what's on
paper, is what you're saying, but *_hen you have the fact of
the real dollar --
CUMMISSiONEN. LETZ: 'That's all that matters.
1 i, 1 S n
ao
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
L L
~3
24
2 `~
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it's a $6,000
impact next year automatically, if you keep at the same
staffing levels.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's also -- remember that
right now we're without an administrator at the jail, and we
need to hire a qualified individual.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand that.
I'm not opposed to it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's the single biggest
source of liability in this county.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think, based on
what your approach is -- I mean, you're using the Nash
study. You made a management decision that his experience
level puts him to a Level 8 or Grade 8, so, you know -- and
this gets the pay where you need it. I understand that.
That's -- you know, you picked tha- Grade 8 for a reason,
because that was the salary you needed to get to. But, at
the same time, I think that you are justified that he has
more experience than a novice would have, and we have
done -- maybe not to the extent, but we have done this for
many other departments when they bring in a new employee, to
set their grade higher than Grade 1.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Do we have a motion to
approve the request?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move it.

81
1
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2G
23
2q
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Letz, that the --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The Judge has the
authority to second motions.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Not this Judge. That the
Court approve the hiring of a Jail Administrator at a 21/8
as opposed to a 21/l. 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.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Item Number 14, consider and
discuss, take affirmative action on Change Order Number 1 in
the amount of $65,975 for the Kerrville South Wastewater
Collection Project, as recommended by the project engineer.
Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As the backup says,
there were some changes which the Engineering Department,
City of Kerrville believed were necessary, on the basis of
adding some -- a couple additional manholes and so forth in
the project. Changes the bottom line of this specific
contract from Sul to 367. It's not going to change the
i -_
82
1
L
3
4
5
F
7
8
y
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
?q
25
entire contract, because we've got "X" number of dollars,
and the project's going to go as far as the dollars will
take us. So, I would recommend that -- I move approval of
the change order as recommended by the engineers.
Construction will start as soon as this gets underway, in
effect.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that
motion.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
approve Change Order Number 1 in the amount of $65,975 for
the Kerrville South Wastewater Collection Project.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And authorize County
Judge to sign same.
JUDGE HENNEKE: And authorize County Judge to
sign same. Any questions or comments? If not, all in
savor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number
15, consider and discuss approving a proclamation
proclaiming November 18th through 22nd, Year 2002, as Flood
Awareness Week.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
1 1~- _
83
1
3
4
5
0
7
8
S
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
10
20
21
22
23
L Y
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. Attaboy, Jon.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve a
proclamation proclaiming November 18 through 22, Year 2002,
as Flood Awareness Week. 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
15 is consider and discuss approving a resolution
recognizing impart of Zion Lutheran Church congregation
during the last hundred years on the social/religious
heritage of Kerr County.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The congregation to
which I belong has celebrated its 100th anniversary. Did so
in 2001, and has been awarded a subject plaque by the Texas
Historical Commission, which will be dedicated ir, the
ceremony coming up in about two Sundays from now. And, as a
parr of this ceremony, they have requested us to resolve in
their favor recognizing the contribution of the church to
Kerr County as a whole, and so we have prepared this
i~suluLion for your consideration. And I would move the
reSOlUtlOn.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
` -1'-
84
1
3
4
5
ti
7
8
9
10
11
l~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
~l
22
23
24
25
JUDGE HEPSPSEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
approve a resolution recognizing the impact of the Zion
Lutheran Church congregation during the last 100 years to
the social and religious heritage of Kerr county. 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.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Item Number 18, consider and
discuss a resolution calling for a more equitable
distribution. of motor fuels faxes collected by State of
Texas.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Haven't we had this
one other time?
JUDGE HENNEKE: We had a different version of
this. We had a version before that called for an increase
in the motor fuels tax, which the Court did not approve.
This resolution simply calls for a more equitable
distribution of the motor fuels tax. I think the most
striking thing that r_omes from the information which is
presented is the fact that, in 197, a total of $7,300,000

85
1
2
3
4
5
h
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
15
19
20
~1
22
23
24
25
was allocated to the 254 counties in the state of Texas for
local, county-maintained road maintenance. In the year
2002, the total sum of $7,300,000 was allocated to 254
counties in the state of Texas for the same purpose. Not
only has that percentage not gone up, the amount of money
has stayed the same for almost 30 years now. And there is a
major push underway to recognize county roads are the basis
of the statewide and even national road system, and that
there needs to be more equitable funding of the road --
roads in the state of Texas.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve a
resolution calling for more equitable distribution of motor
fuels taxes collected by the State of Texas. Any questions
or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: AlL opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HEPJ CJEKE: Motion carries. Okay. Item
19, consider and discuss ratification of application for
West Nile virus Surveillance and Public Education funding,
and adoption of a joinT_ program with the City of Kerrville.
This is one oL those deals that came in after our last
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1~
13
14
15
15
17
18
15
2U
21
~,
Lc
23
24
25
86
meeting and had to be submitted by September 25th. It's a
-- it's funding through the Texas Department of Health for
West Nile surveillance and education. When I received this,
I knew that the County, per se, did not have personnel and
equipment to be involved in this, but I knew the City did
and was involved in that. I discussed it with Ron
Patterson, and we made the executive decision we would go
ahead and approve for the funding subject to, I would say,
approval by the Court. Subsequent to that, Mr. Patterson
has prepared a -- a proposal for use of those funds, which I
distributed to everyone late last week. Basically, the
program calls for the City to be the clearinghouse where any
citizen in the county could call in and report a mosquito
problem; city personnel would be dispensed to examine the
area in question and locate it on a map with GIS, and also
provide information, training, and assistance in treating
the problem area. The funding which would be received would
be used to train staff and volunteers, purchase the GPS
unit, and proceed with the program. The program cannot,
itself, be used for mitigation. It's only a surveillance
and education funding program. I understand that 1 jumped
out a little bit ahead of the Court in taking this action,
but it was either move or lose out on it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm glad you did.
JUDGE HENNEKE: So, what I'd like to have you
1. [~- 15-[~~'.
87

1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1a
19
2U
~' l
~~
L3
24
25
to do today is to ratify the application, and if the outline
of the program is acceptable, then move forward to actually
prepare an agreement with the City for this joint program.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the City's willing to
take this on county-wide?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good. I think it's a
good program.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are we not -- we're
not going to participate staff-wise in any way? Or --
JUDGE HENNEKE: The -- since the City already
has people on staff who do this, this is a mechanism whereby
their services will be provided county-wide. We really
don't have anybody in any of our various programs that is
knowledgeable or trained in this area, so unless we want to
step up and create a position and a program, I think this is
a better use of the funds.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. Well, I
certainly am in favor of it, and I appreciate you taking the
step. I see what -- I know exactly what you're saying, and
I appreciate you doing that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Do I have a motion to ratify
trie application --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Of course not.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- and the program proposal,
lr-l5-

i
2
3
4
J
b
7
8
9
10
11
12
l~
14
15
16
17
18
19
2C
21
22
23
~4
25
88
and to move forward to agreement with the City?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Lets,
second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court ratify the
application for West Nile Virus Surveillance and Fublic
Education funding, approve the joint program proposal, and
authorize the County Judge to move forward with preparing an
agreement for Commissioners Court approval with the City on
the surveillance program. Any questions or comments? If
not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
,7UDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
,7UDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item is
Item Number 20, consider and discuss authorizing County
Judge to brief the Kerrville City Council on plans to
renovate/expand the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center and
request participation by the City of Kerrville.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIUNER W1LLlAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court
authorize the County Judge to brief the Kerrville City
Council on plans to renovate and expand the Hill Country

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
89
Youth Exhibit Center and to request participation by the
City of Kerrville. Questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. Do we want to
leave that open-ended, to participation anywhere? Or narrow
it down to what we've -- I guess, you know, I've talked
about -- I've talked about this with some of them one-on-one
about participation in the exhibit hall portion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My sense, it would be
limited to exhibit hall.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, to me, that's
cleaner that way. But --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Sounds good to me.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, if they want --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If they want to give us
money for anything, that's fine. But, I mean, specifically,
you know, that's where --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Targeting.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- we're targeting their
participation. That's just a direction -- a directional
comment.
JUDGE HENNEKE: So *_aken. Any other
questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your
L1ght fldIld.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.

3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
,~
i~
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
90
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you know when that's
going to be, Judge?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'17. have to write to them
and ask them to get on the agenda.
CUMM1551UNER LE'1'Z: if you'll just let us
know when, copy everyone so we can --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Probably, I would guess it
would be the first meeting in November. But that's my
guess.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Item 21, consider and discuss
ratification of a proclamation declaring October 12th, Year
2002, as Rod Kennedy Day. This was dune aL Lhe request of a
number of individuals. And, again, it was one of those
things where there was not time to bring it to the CouiL in
advance, so I ask your indulgence in ratifying my signature.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court
ratify a proclamation declaring October 12, Year 2002, as
Rod Kennedy Lay. Any other questions or comments? If not,
all in favor, raise your right hand.
_ !G U_
91
1
3
4
5
F
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~l
??
23
~4
25
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
DODGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
DODGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. We're going
to do all of the remaining items that don't require
Executive Session; we'll come back to 22 and 23. The next
item is Item 25, which is on the first addendum. Consider
and discuss applying for an extension of time for compliance
with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability
Act. Commissioner Letz prompted me to place this on the
agenda. I requested the County Attorney to advise us as to
whether we were covered by this or not. I have -- haven't
got any response.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: As I recall, this came --
JUDGE HENNEKE: From TAC.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- from TAC. And it just
seems that it may have some consequences, so that the best
thing to do is to request an extension, which gives us
another two years, it seems like, to make a decision it we
can find out if we have to do anything or not with this.
So, I'll make a motion that we apply for an extension of
time for compliance with the Health Care Portability and
Accountability Act.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that
motion, but 1 have a question.
S _
9~
1
L
3
4
5
F
7
8
9
10
11
l~
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
2Z
23
24
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court apply for an
extension to time for compliance with the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act. Question by
Commissioner Baldwin.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You were saying
something, and I couldn't -- I didn't hear all of it,
something about you haven't received an answer back from
your question. From who?
JUDGE HENNEKE: The County Attorney.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did you ask the County
Attorney about it?
JUDGE HENNEKE: The memo is in the -- in the
backup. I sent this to him, asked him to advise the
Commissioners Court as to any action the Court should
consider, and have not received any response from him.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Kind of serious
business here, it appears to me. Seems like we would get
better participation in this. But I'm ready to vote.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. All in favor, raise
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. We'll go on
1o-15-nom
93
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~L
23
24
25
to the second addendum, Item Number 26. Consider and
discuss authorizing County Judge to make a statement in
support of the Holdsworth Drive construction project at the
TexDOT public hearing to be held Wednesday, October 16, Year
2002, at 6:30 p.m. This is pursuant to a request from Bill
Tucker, the TexDOT engineer, who has requested that someone
appear on behalf of the County to make a statement in
support of the Holdsworth Drive construction projer_t.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONEF. BALDWIN: Before you do, please,
Bill, I'm going to be there also. I'm going to be there at
this, too.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you want to move
it? I forgot it was in your precinct, I'm sorry.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Would you like to make the
statement in support?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Along with you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. All right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That was his request.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's in my precinct, too.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, sort of.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But you two can -- can
represent my interest, I'm sure.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Do I have a motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
I n- 1 S- U
99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
ly
~0
21
~2
23
^4
'S
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to move for
approval.
DODGE HENNEKE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court
authorize the County Judge to make a statement in support of
the Holdsworth Drive construction project at the TexDOT
public hearing to be held Wednesday, October 16, Year 2002,
at 6:30 p.m. Any questions or comments? If not, all in
favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUUGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
DODGE HENNEKE: Mot-on carries. ILeiu Nurnber
27, consider and discuss the selection of representation for
Kerr County in the lawsuit of Caldwell vs. Rylander. I
think that I distributed to each of you a copy of the
petition in this matter. This is a suit brought by -- I
won't say that, 'cause it's going to be on the record -- an
attorney in Austin as a class action suit, claiming that the
additional fee collected by 86 counties in the state of
Texas to provide a supplement to the County Court at Law
Judges is unr_onstitutional. A number of the counties are
entering into a joint defense agreement with the firm of --
Jim Allison's law firm, including partial funding by Texas
Association of Counties. The question is, does Kerr County
r=-n
95
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
~4
z5
want to be part of that joint defense effort? Which would
obligate us to pay any expenses incurred above the $25,000
contributed by TAC on a proportionate basis, determined by
population. I don't know what anybody thinks.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably the most
economical representation we could get.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We11, no. Actually, the most
economical representation would be to have the County
Attorney's office do it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, that's true.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That is actually what I would
suggest. But what's the pleasure of the Court?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm agreeing with you.
Third -- the third paragraph here --
JUDGE HENNEKE: We did submit this to our
insurance carrier. Coverage was denied. I think I passed
out to everyone this morning that fax I received today.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Any feel for what our
exposure might be? Costs?
JUDGE HENNEKE: It's basically open-ended. I
mean, that's -- you don't know. 1 mean, if the -- if the
plaintiff's attorney decides to depose the County Clerk in
each of the 86 counties, you're going to run up some
substantial bills on that. And since the plaintiff's
attorney is going to get paid a percentage of the
i~ i~ ~~_
96
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
recoveries, we won't necessarily know what the cost's going
to be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I like the idea -- I
mean, it is good to go with the County Attorney; I agree
with that. I make a motion that we -- what's the agenda
item? I make a motion that we request the County Attorney
to represent us in the lawsuit Caldwell vs. Rylander.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court request that
the County Attorney's office represent Kerr County in the
litigation entitled Caldwell vs. Rylander. 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. Okay. The
two items remaining have been requested for Executive
Session, so at this time, the Kerr County Commissioners
court will go into Executive Session pursuant to Section
551.0745 of the Texas Government Code and Section 551.074 of
the Texas Government Code.
(The open session was closed at 11:17 a.m.,
and an Executive Session was held, the
transcript of which is contained in a
separate document.)
i ~s-o.
97
i
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2U
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: Having completed the
Executive Session, the Commissioners Court will now return
to open session and take up first Item 2.22, consider and
discuss the appointment of a Kerr County 911 Board member.
Commissioner Baldwin, do you have a motion to make?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, I do, Judge.
Thank you. I move that we appoint Mr. Walter B. Harris,
Jr., to the Kerr County Emergency 911 Network Board to
represent Kerr County Commissioners Court. That's all.
JUDGE HENNEk:E: Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court appoint
Mr. Walter B. Harris, Jr„ to serve as the -- as one of the
County's representatives to the Kerr County Emergency 911
Board of Directors. Any questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I'd just like
to say that Commissioner Griffin and myself interviewed this
gentleman, and what -- we were surprised that there were so
many great qualified folks that are coming forward and
willing to serve the citizens of Kerr County. 'That's all.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Any other questions or
comments? If not, al] in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
-..,-__
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
~0
21
22
:3
29
25
98
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number
23, consider and discuss hiring a part-time Kerr County
Address Coordinator. Cormissioner Baldwin again.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Again, Judge, thank
you. Commissioner Griffin and I met and interviewed around
20 applicants for this position, and we have selected and
present to you here today Mr. Jim Bullock of Kerrville as
the Kerr County Address Coordinator.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court appoint
Mr. Jim Bullock as the part-time Kerr County Address
Coordinator. Any questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Again, we had s~ many
great -- I mean, this was difficult, because there were some
really, really fine candidates Tor this position. But it
boiled down to -- we felt like that Mr. Bullock was going to
be the guy that releases this logjam of information to yo
through the post office and telephone companies and
addressing and all those kind of things. He's the guy that
can get those things done. And it took -- it took -- I was
really thankful for Commissioner Griffin to gel off into the
computer programs and those kind of things. But, anyway, we
feel like that this is our guy.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Z1
2~
~3
24
25
99
DODGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or
comments? If not, all iri favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Unless
there's somethinq else to come before this Court, we stand
adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 11:32 a.m.)
STATE OF TEXAS ~
COUNTY OF KERR
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as
County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County,
Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this ?1st day of October,
002.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
BY: __ __ ~~G _____-
Kathy Ba ik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter

ORDER N0. ~'77t35
CLRIMS ANU ACCOUNTS
On this the 1:;th d<_zy of Oata6er, c~4'~c, came to 6e r_onsider'ed
by ttie Cap-rrt vario~-is Commissioner=_' precincts, whiet-~ said
Cle.ims and Accn~_rnts ar'e:
1~--8eneral for- ?*C:4xt,EiE34.°iiq 14--Fire F4•otection for- $1c,6Ej3.34g
1~--Road R" Fridge fur ~15G,=.39E,.4F,g 1t3-Cour-,i,y L_aw Library fnr-
?c',:iE;9.91g 19-public Libr-"ary for 33:],k'~98.;?,4; SN--Indigent
Health Care for' F~1,oSr.. lGp (N"-F''i=T'maniarlt Improvement for
2c737,~Sf;.91; 76-Jr-rvenile Detention Facility for 3124.46;
D1--District Administration for 35':;G.~E3; Ham--State 1=untied-'16th
I!ist Attorney for 32, 'E].1.~E'~ Ei6--State t=~-rnded--clEth P.ist p'rob
for' 34,964.76, E37--5t<ate Funded-L'omm~anity Correct inns for
38, 97'l. 3c:.
TOTAL. CASH I~EnOIRED FOR ALL FUNDS: 375`;,1F3V~.[n"
Upon motion made by Commissioner Naldwin, seconded by
Commissioner Williams, the Co~_rrt unanimously approved by a
vote of 3-2-0, to pay said acco~-rnt=_".
C]RDER N0. ~_778E;
RF'('ROVFaL Of= Lf-al'E EaIL.L_
TO KER13V1LI_E p'Of~"fNNSI"ER #k49'7
On this the 1 ;~th clay of October-, ~00~=, ~.rpon motion made 6y
Commissioner Let:, seconded 6y Cornmisaioner L'~aldwin, the
Co~_rrt ~_manimously approved by a vote of 3-~-0, to pay late
bill in the amo~_uit of ~3.'T0.00 front Line Ttem No. 10-497-309.
The C:o~anty N~_rditnr and County l"r•eas~.irer are hereby a~_rthor•i~ed
to write a hand check in the amo~.xnt of X370.00 made payable to
Ker•r•vi11e p'ostmaster• #497,
ORDER NCI. '~?7f3'7
AF~F'ROVAL 'f0 RC'CE=1='T MINUTE~~ RND WAIVE RE:RDING
On this the :ISL-h day of October, c~0c, ~.rpon motion made by
.~-.
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the
Co~_n•t unanimously appr-oved by a vote of 3-0-@, w<zived reading
and approve the following minutes: Kerr County Commissioners'
Co~_rrt, Reg~.ilar Session, Monday, Se ptember~ '~, cl4ry:_ at 3:~~ a. m.
and Kerr Co~.inty Commissioners Co~_rrt Sper_ial Session, Monday,
September 'cu, c~~'~ at 9: N0 a. m.
ORL•Ela N0. c"i7f38
flF'PROVE flPJI] flCCEP"C MON"CHL1' f?EF'ORTS
,,~ On this the 15th day of October, 'c'0NF_, '_ipon motion made by
Commissioner- Aaldwin, seconded 6y Cemmissiuner Lets, the Coy"u•t
~_rnanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, 'Lo ac=cept 'the
following reports and direct that they be filed with the
Coy-tnty Clerk for f~"its"ire a~"idit:
Linde Uecker "" District Clerk
fie pt ember, c:0~c
Vance Elliott -- J.G. #1
September, 2N0
William E. Ragsdale - J.F"'. 4t~r
Sept ember,~ONc
Robert t_.'1'ench -- J. F'. ##
September, '~N02
W. F?. Hier•holier - Sheriff
Se ptember•, '~04?~'S
Dawn Wright - .7.L='. #~'
^ September, c4'~02
,7annett Pieper" - County Clerl~
September, EWE

OI~DF Et NO, c T?t39
RE'P'ROVE G!UI"f CLRIM DEED FROM KE::RR COUNTY
TO CEhdTER POINT IhJDEP'ENDEI`JT SCHfIOI_ DISTRICT
.-.
On this the 15th day of October-, 200, upon motion made by
Commissioner- Williams, secaiided by Commissioner L3aldwin, the
Co~art ~_manimously approved by a vote of 3-~-Q~, the iss~-ranee of
a G!uit Claim lleed from E:err Co~_mty to the Center Paint
Independent School District for N.c34 acres of land (tract
one) formerly known as Avenue N, and authorise County Jude to
sign laame.
DRDF_R NU. ~'779D
APF'RDVE: SELE:C"PION DF CGNSUL"FIf~IG ARCHITECT
F-013 HCYEC RENOVATION
~ Dn this the 15th day of Dcaober, c~02, ~_~pon motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded 6y Commissioner t_et~, the
Co~_~r•t approved by a vote of 2-i-Q~, with
Commissioner Baldwin opposing, to engage the firm of DRG, Mr.
Wayne Gondeck, to act as the cons~_tlting architect to the
Commissioners Court for thie initial phase of the design--b~_~i.ld
expansior~/renovation of the Hill L'o~_mtry Youth Exhibition
Center.
of~D~R rUn. 27791
flF'F'RC]VF hIEG(7TIFa1°IOIVS WITH DRCa ARCI-III-ECTS
On this tr,e 15th day of Clctober, c0t?~2, ~.ipgrr motion made by
Commissioner Let:, seconded by Commi=;sinner Williamsy the
Court approved by a vote of c-1-0, wi+,h Commissioner Baldwin
oppnsiny9 to ai_ithori've negotiations with DRf3 Architects of San
F~ntonio, for the amo~.ant of their services prior to bond
election at the same time that DRP~ works on the Req~.rest for
G?~_ralifications for design-b~_rild team,
AP4`'ROVE: pi:1VER'fISING FC7R PID
ON I_ERSE [1F NEW rR~DEFt
Cln this the 1°,th day of October, _'ONc, upon motion made by
Commissioner, l;aldwin, sec=onded by Commis<sioner ~et~~, the Co~_irt
unanimo~.isly approved by a vote of 3_m-0, advertising for- bid
on the lease of a new motor grader° with scarifier, with the
bids to be received at tine Kerr County Clerk's Office not
later than `.; o' clock p. m. on Friday, No~dember C3, Year c:OIZI'r',
and the bids to be UpE'iled on Tuesday, November lam, Year ~~~!'
at 1~! o'clock a. m.
OI~DER N0. c779
4l[='F'F20VE: f-":[hdRL F!LpT OF LOTS 17, 1E3 RND 19
OF 1"HE Y.O. RRNCNL.RNDS
On this tt'ie 1`"ith cagy of October', ~'OVic, upon motion made by
Cominissioner• t•Jilliams, seconded by Commi<.>S1oneT' PaldWln, +,he
L'o~ar-t unanimously approved 6y a vote of •:,-Q~-O, the final
revision of Flat of Y. 0. Ranch lands, Lots 17, 1£i and i9, as
presented.
u13t)ER rao. ~~»4
CLFIRIFICATION fJF- LE=l"TER OF CREDI"f FOF2M LE"fTER
Ors this the lath day of 0~_•tober, cV7+Z+2, upon motion made by
.~
Commissioner Let-, see:onded by Commissioner L3aldwin, the Court
unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, the r•evi.sed Rppendix
ll as presented +,o the I;err• C;o~.mty Subdivision Rules and
Regulations.
ORDER NO. X7795
SET' PUE~LIC kEARIN6 ON
I':ERR'JI~LE' S F'l_F=HStJRf: CLIFF SUPAIVISION
On this the 15th day of October, 20~?l~, ~.ipon motion made by
Commissioner I_et~, seconded by Commissioner- Williams, the
Court ttnanimo~_isly approved by a vote of 3-~-2~, to set. public
hearing on canceling and vacating Kerrville's Pleas~_ire Cliff
S llbd l'J1514n, as recorded in Vol. 19 Page 11, and set p+.~bl is
hearing on same for November C.S, c@Q~~ at ~?:3~ p. m.
ORDER NU. X7796
RF'I='RUVRL 'CO RDUP f URDE:R RNENDING
RNNURC_ DE"f E:F2MINF_D CUNT"RIRUTIUN RRTE F'LRI`J
.-~-
Un this the 15th day of Uc:~tober~ c00'c, ~_ipon motion made by
Commissioner Let::, seconded by Commissioner Paldwin~ the Co~..irt
~_inanimously approved by a vote of ~-Q-a~ adopting the order
amending t!'ie ann~_ia1 de'terniined contrih~ation rate plan for
the term January C'_0~3 thrr,~agh December c~~3.
Of2DER N0. 7"7S7
RE'P'ROVE IN"fERI_CICRI__ F'RR"fICIF'RT]:ON RGREF_ME=NT'
WITi-I TEXRS LOCRL GOVERNMENT F'URCI-IRSINO COOF'ERRTIVF.
On this the loth day of OCtbf]Et'y 0~0Es ~_rpon motion made by
Commissioner Naldtiins seconded by Commissioner W.illiamss the
Co~_rr•t unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-~s the Tnterlocal
F'ar-ticipation Agreement with Texas Loc:~al Government F'~_rrchasing
Cooperatives and a~_rthorized Co~_rnty .J~_rdge to sign the same.
(7RUEli N0. c'779E3
F~P(='1,'iJVE F'OLLlI~JG I_OGF~'T IUfJ;a
.-,. Cn this the 15th d~;y of October, ct?~VJ~, l:pon motion made t,y
Commissioner Paldwin, aer_onded by Commissioner William=_, the
Co!mt unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, the pooling
locations for +,he February 1st bond election as presented by
+,he Co!mty Clerk.
Precinct Location-Address
1 Trinity Rapti=_.t Ch!irch, t3~47 .Tacitson Rd., Kerrville
~_ Schreiner Cailloux Center-, '~1NS Memorial Nlvd., Kerrville
;, I.err County L'o!rrtho!rse, 7k30 Main Street, Kerrville
4 1ii11 Country Arts Foundation, Hwy ~;9 W., Ingram
Early rloti.ng: Kerr Co!Snty Extension Offir_e Meeting Room, SN01
San Rntonio h-Iwy, t:er-r-ville.
.~-•
ORDER NO. ::779`.-3
RF'F'ROVRL" OF VRRIOUS CCIIV"fRRCTS
RND RRTIFY COUNT"l' JUDGE'S SIGNRTURE
On this the 15th day of October, 'r'00~, upon motion made by
Commissioner- L.etz, seconded by Commissioner [~aldwin, 'ti're Co~_v`t
t"tnanimo~asly approved 6y a vote of .'~-O-Qt, ttre approval of the
listed vario~"t=, contracts and ratified the C:o~"tnty S~adye's
signature on samec
I)ieter•t L'laim
N.ids Rdvocacy Place
Hill Country Crisis L'o~ancil
Moi"tntain Home Vole"rnteer Fire Department
Elm Pass VOlltnteer` FiT`e Department
Kerr Coi"tnty Economic Development f=o~.tnda:~tion
Center F'oint Vol~.m+.eer• Fire De partmenl:

URDER NU. 270Ni1~
RF'F'RUVRL UF= CONTRACT l3E'fWEEN
KERR C:UUNI"Y FaND
HILL CUUNTF2Y RL'fEf2NATIVE DISF'U"fE RESULLJTIUN CEhITER
~~
Un 'this the 15th day of Uctober~, '~~VJ~, upon motion made by
Commissioner- Williams, seconded by Commissioner L.etz, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-~-Q~, the cantr-act
between N.er-r Co~_mty and the Hi 11 Co~_mt:ry Al.terna{;ive Dispute
Resolution Center and authorised the County Judge to sign the
same.
ORDER NO. c7C307.
AF'F'ROVRL OF CON"fRAC"f BE=TWEEN
UF'p'EF2 GUADAt_U4='E: RIUEF2 AU'1'HORII"Y AND I{ERR COUNTY
On this the 15th dary of October, c:~N2, ~.ipon motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner I3aldwi.n, the
Co~.ir-t unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, the tax
collection contract taetween Upper- G~aadal~_ipe Ftiver• A~-ithor•ity
;and I.er•r• L'o~.mty, and authorized Co~_mty .Judge to sign the
same.
ORDI_R NO. E7f3S~='
RE'P'ROVE RECLR~ialF-ICR"flOnl OF' JRIL. ADh1TNISTRR-IOR
On 'this the 15th day o'F Octnber~ c0~E9 upon motion made by
Commi==sinner Wi:.liams~ :seconded t:>y Commi.ssianer~ L_.etz~ tF~~e
Co~.~rt unanimously approved by a vote 3-Q-0, the hiring of a
Jail Rdministrator- at a .=1/k3 as opposed to a c'1/l.

U1
RF'F'RUVE CHRNGE URDER #kl
FUR ra=RRV:[LLEi SCIUI-H b1Ri-FE:WRI'ER CUI_I_ECTIUPJ F'IRDJECT
On this the 1E5th clay of October-9 c:UN29 ~_rpon motion made by
Commissioner ldil.li.ams, seconded by Commissioner F+aldwin, the
Cotrr•t ~-rnanimoi.isly approved 6y a vote of ,~-0-~~ the Change
Drder 4#1 in the amo~-tnt: caf bE,~i,97.~.01~ for Kerrville Soy-ath
Wastewater Collection Project and :a~.athor•i~e Co~anty ,J~-adge to
sign the same.
oRnER nlo. ~~a~4
RPF='ROVE F'ROCLRMRTION F=OR
F=LOOn RWRRL=:NES WEf.:.I:
.-.
On this the 10th day of Octoher, 'EN~~9 ~_ipon motion made by
Commissioner L_etz9 seconded by Commissioner 1_'~aldwin9 the Court
unanimo~_isly approved by a vote of 3-N-0, the F'r-oc:lam.:jtion
proclai.min~ No~dember 18th through ~;c:nd, {_04Z~c as "F=food
Rw<areness Week."
oRnER No. ~_~a~s
RE'P'ROVE F2ESOLLI7ION RECOGNIZING
ZION LLITHERRN C;HUI~CH CON(:~REGR'1'ION
.-. Ors this the 1.'ith day of Oc~toher, '~0~c, ~.ipon motion made try
Commissioner Wi.lliain:;, seconded by Commissioner P.aldwin, the
Court ~ananimo~.isly approved by a vote of G-0-4~, the Re=>ol~.ition
recognizing the impact of i:he Zion Lutheran Ch~.irch
Congregation during the l:asL- 10V~ ye:ar:~ to the Social and
Religio~.is Heritage of Kerr Co~.mty.
ORDER NU. c7806
RPF'RUVRt.. OF RESOLUTION
FUR EU~UIl-RBt_E DISTRIHU'TIUN OF
MUTUR FUELS "fRXES
Or-. this the 1,°,th day of C.lctnber-~ EN~2,r ~.ipon mrtion made by
Cammissi.oner Lete, seconded 6y Commissioner- Paldwi.n, the C;our-t
unanimaasly appr^oved by a vote of 3-0-~~ the Resol.~.ri;ion
calling for more eq~aitahle distril:n.ttion of motor fuels taxes
collected by the State of Texas.
ORDI=R NO. E78~7
RR"fTt=ICATICIN OF RF'F~LICR'fION
~„~ FOR WEST hdILE VII~UF.i SUI~VF_II_Lf-ONCE
RNll PUBt_IC EllUCr1TIOhl FUNDING
On this the 15th day o'P October, 'E00c, upon motion made by
Commi.ssior-~er Lets, secondeci by Commis=.aioner Baldwin, t:he Court;
~_manimously approved by a vote of 3-N-B, the ratific_;tion of
application for We<.at N:ile Virus Surveillancr= and Public
Edi_icration f=~_nrdi.ng and adoption of joint program with City of
N.err~vi l le.
URDE R NU. c: "tH~B
f~UTHCIRIZRTIUPI F=UR CULJNTO' JUllGE
TC] BRIEI= I',ERR'JILLE CITY CUUIVI::IL..
Un tY~is I;he 15th day of Ucaober, ~~0~:_, ~_ipon motion made by
Commissioner Haldwin, ser_onded by Commissioner Williams, the
Court ~.inanimo~_isly approved by a vote of 3-~-4~, a~.ithori~iny
Co~.mty J~_idye to brief Kerrville City Council on plans to
renovate/expand HCYEC and request participation by City of
Kerrville.
oRD~R NO. ~_~r~~n':~
P.R~FIF'Y F'RDCt_RMf-1TION llE.CLRRING
"ROD I:ENNCDY I)RY"
,... On this the 1:Sth day of October, ~'0ii1~, li.pon motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, secanded by Commissiener^ Williams, the
Court unanimously appr-oved by a vote of 3-0-2, ratification of
F'raclamation declaring October 1'~, 2>C0 as "Had Kennedy llay."
C]Fti]ER NO. ~7t310
AF='P'ROVE: RF'F'L.YIhdG F=0F2 EXTENSION OF TIME
FOR COMPLIANCE bJITH Hllc'AA
Cln tF-~i.s the 1°,th d~_~y of October, 'r'ir0fc, ,.upon motion made 6y
Commissioner L.et<_, Seconded by Commissioner Paldtain, the Coi_n-t
t~nanimoi.isly approved by a vote of 3-0-0, applying for
extension of time far compliance with the F-IealtFr Ins~.trance
Portability and Acr_ountability Act.
nr~DEr~ NCJ. c7$11
AUTHURIIE COUNTY JUDOS "f0 NRI:E OTR"fEMENT
RT THE TXDOT F'C1LaL'IC HEARING
,,,\ TO SE FIELD OCTOF3ER 16, 202
On this the 15th deny of October-, c4~kL, ~_!pon motion made by
Commissioner Naldwin, seconded by Commissioner Let z, ±:he C;aart
unanimo!_tsly approved by a vote of 3-0-~, authori::ing Co~_inty
Judge to m<~ke a statement in s~_ippor•t of the Holdswor•th I)r•ive
constri_iction project at the T'xl)OT' F'~ablic Hearing to be held
bJednesday, October 16, i_k'~~~' at 6:3N p. m.

RPPRdVE SELECTION ~F" REF'RESENTR"fIfJhl H'OR KERft COUNTY
i-. On this the l.,th day of October, ~4~4~c, ~_ipan motion made by
Commissioner- Let z, seconded 6y Commissioner Williams, the
Cni"irt ~.inanimo~.~sly approved by a vote of 3-0-Q~, selecting
David Motley, County Rtturney, to represent I.err Co~_inty to
Caldwell vs. Rvlander-.
ORDf-~R IUO. c7Ej13
RGF'OINTMENT OF WAC_TER R. 41RRRI.S, JR.
TO THE 911 F~ORftD Of-' llIREC'1"ORS
On this the 15th day of Cictobc~r, c0~c, ~-upon motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, sernnded by Commissioner Letz, the Co~ar•t
~-inanimo~.rsly approved by a vote of ~-rD-~, appointing Mr. Walter
A. Harris, Jr., to serve as one of the Co~.aity's
representatives to the-~ Kerr Coy-ir~ty Emergency 911 Poard of
Directors.

ORDER N0. ~7©i~r
RF'pOIPJMEN"f OF .JIM L30LL"UC;K 1lS F'f1RT-TIME.
KERB COUNTY RDDI~ESS COORP.INATOF?
'~ On this ttie 15th clay of Uetnber, '00c, upon motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, <secnnded by Commissioner L_et~, the L'o~"irt
"rnanimo~"isly approved by a vote of :,-Q~-O, appointing Mr. Jim
P~allock gas the part--time Kerr Cn~_mt;y address Coordinator.