. +~
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
n
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
l~
i8
lq
20
2i
L 2
20
24
25
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Special Session
Monday, October 28, 2002
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
~~
~~1
~~
.J
:~~
~~

PRESENT: FREDERICK L. HENNEKE, Kerr County Judge
H.A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
LARRY GRIFFIN, Commissioner Pct. 4
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
13
~-.
14
15
16
17
18
19
2~j
21
~~
2~
24
,-~.
25

I N D E X
October 28, 2002
		PAGE
2.1	Approval/execution of TWC Child Care Local	
	Initiative Agreement -~'7~'•~~~	14
2.2	Resolution supporting M.H.M.R.'s funding request	
	for 2004/2005, support increase for additional	
	services 75~f	15
2.3	Proclamation proclaiming month of November 2002 ~7	~1~
	National Alzheimer's Disease Month for Kerr County	16
2.9	Designate Encino Drive in Ranchero Estates as a	
	dead-end street<,'"'~=i	17
2.5	Drainage issue on Block 2, Lots 1-4, Harrison	
	Tract, Center Point	29
2.5	Preliminary revision of plat, Fort Richie Subdi-	
	vision, name change to Chuck's Gully	38
2.7	Final plat, Live Springs Ranch	46
2.8	Discuss National Pollutant Discharge Elimination.	
	System Phase II MS4 Stormwater Permit	98
2.9	Discuss County's authority/responsibility in the	
	regulation of condominium developments	55
2.10	Advertising for bid on Sheppard Rees road	
	improvements '7h~,9	61
2.11	Allow Road & Bridge to go oat for bids on lease	
	of a loader ..' Jar:`	62
2.12	Amend Order appointing Election Judges and t'7:~_'~-	
	Alternate Judges for November General Election	66
2.13	Amend Capital Gutlay budget in Sheriff's Depart-	
	ment Tor new leased vehicles = 'r`;.	69
2.14	Resubmission of 2003 Colonias Fund application,'ih'/~`	75
2.15	Review and approve agreement with Texas Arts and	
	Crafts Foundation	7g
Z.16	Authorize asbestos survey of HCYEC-~ %~^`J	100
2.17	Approve agreement with DRG Architects, PLLC,% 7x:~~	
	for independent consulting architect services	109
2.19	Approve Grder Calling Bond Election for	
	February 1, 2urI3 ,"~~,~=~.i1	116
2.1'8	Approve reappointment of members of Kerr County	
	Rural Fire Prevention District No. 1 ~ 7%~~,/-	117
2.20	Approve various contracts, authorize County Judge	
	to sign ~,•'~`'''	119
2.22	Approve Resolution approving submission of grant	
	application for Juvenile Behavioral Transition	
	Program ?yg,~d	119
2.2j	Ratify hiring of P.1lison, Bass & Associates, LLP,	
	to represent Kerr county in lawsuit,~"7b~`'	120
2.21	Selection of new county appointee to Airport	
	Advisory Board ~%,i8'Ct-	125
---	Adjourned	130

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 Monday, October 28, 2002, at 9:00 a.m., a special meet-
ing of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the
Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville,
Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE HENNEKE: Good morning, everyone. It's
9 o'clock in the morning on Monday, October 28th, Year 2002.
I will call to order this regular special meeting of the
Kerr County Commissioners Court. Commissioner Griffin, I
believe you're due the honors this morning.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Join me, please, in a
moment of silent prayer, to be followed by the pledge of
allegiance.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. At this time, any
citizen wishing to address the Court on an item net listed
on the regular agenda may do so. Is there any citizen who
wishes to address the Court on an item not listed on the
regular agendas
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: One more time, is there any
citizen who'd like to address the Court on an item not
listed on the regular agenda? Seeing none, we'll go to the
Commissioners' comments. Let's start with Commissioner
GiiLfin.

1
3
4
5
E
7
ft
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
18
19
20
~1
77
23
24
~J
9
	COMMISSIONER	GRIFFIN:	I would defer to our
Tivy Antler	-- but I will say "Go Warriors" also.
	COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN:	Yeah.
	COMMISSIONER	GRIFFIN:	By golly. But I know
that we may	eat up a little	time here	in the next few
minutes, so	--		
CUMMISSIUNEK BALUWIN: Actually, I'm going to
be nice about it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Baldwin, tell us
about it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We11, the only comment
I have about last Friday night's football game, it's very
pretty in Uvalde this time of the year, and we enjoyed our
stay there. But if you haven't seen our Tivy Antlers, this
Friday night may be your last chance in Kerrville. This is
our last regular season home game, is this coming Friday
night, against Medina Valley. And, so, you know, there may
be -- may be something in the playoffs at some point -- we
haven't planned that -- in oui stadium. I just don't know
any of that. But -- so, we're looking for a big crowd at
our stadium next Friday night, and then the following week,
we are down in Boerne for the last game, and it will be two
undefeated teams for the district champiuiiship, and old
rivalries. And, I mean, it just doesn't get any better than
that. It's not going to get any better than that. ThaL's
r '~,-3i-~~, ..
1
1
2
3
4
5
F,
7
8
9
10
11
l~
13
14
15
16
17
18
ly
20
~~
~3
~4
25
5
all I've got. That's all I know.
DODGE HENNEKE: That's true. Excellent.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can't top that,
Judge.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Williams? You
pass?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nothing.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Jonathan?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just one more football
note. At least the Comfort Bobcats are back on their
winning ways again, beating Johnson city this past week.
I'm sure they will hopefully continue on their winning ways
for the rest of reason and on into the playoffs.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We11, good luck to all of the
people. f want to make a comment about the athletic
director and the football coach at Tivy High School. We've
all probably read in the papers, there was a celebration
after the Fredericksburg game in which some of the players
on thz Tivy High School football team were caught breaking
the training rules, and received two-game suspensions for
those actions. And it didn't seem to slow them down too
much. But I want to commend the athletic director and the
football coach for -- for remembering that these are };ids,
and forming their character is more important than winning
foo~bail yamzs, even though it didn't have an adverse effect

b
1
3
9
6
A
9
In
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
on them. That hasn't always been the situation. I'm very
pleased to see them take that action, enforce upon the young
kids in our community that their actions do have
consequences. So, I certainly want to applaud them for
their actions, even at the same time I'm thrilled that they
continued on their winning ways, despite the loss of six of
tae members of the team for a two-game suspension.
On scheduling notes, I want to remind
everyone Lhat our next regular scheduled meeting will be
Tuesday, November 12th, at 9 o'clock in the morning.
Monday, November 11th, is a holiday, which will be our
regular scheduled meeting, so the next meeting wLll be
Tuesday, November 12th. We'll also have to have a special
meeting to canvass votes; is that correct, Jannett?
P~7S. PIEPER: That's correct.
DODGE HENNEKE: I'm going to propose we do
that Thursday morning, the 7th, at 11 o'clock. Is that
going to be acceptable to your group, Jannett? Can you be
ready by then, 11 o'clock on Thursday morning?
MS. PIEPER: I'll need to check the Election
rode book as far as the dates.
DODGE HENNEKE: It has to be within three
days, doesn't it?
MS. PIEPER: Okay, I think that's correct.
JO DGE IIENNEKE: Well, just be aware of the
i~ -_a-r~

3
4
5
E
3
5
10
11
12
13
19
15
15
17
18
L
20
?1
~2
23
~9
~5
fact that sometime --
MS. PIEPER: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- a very short time after
the election on Tuesday, November 5th, we are going to have
to have a special rneeting in order to canvass the votes from
that general election.
MS. PIEYER: Right.
DODGE HENNEKE: And we'll say it wi1L be
11 o'c1o~~k in the morning on 'Thursday, November 7th, subject
to Jannetr checking the calendar to make sure that is within
the statutory time frame.
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: Judge, can I say
something right quirk?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 'Triat particular day I
have a TAC Board meeting in Austin, so the other guys need
to be here.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: Don't count on me
being here.
DODGE HENNEKE: Anyone else who knows of a
conflict that day?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: NO problem.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Also --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAM5: Judge, I do have a
~i_~r_rI

1
3
4
5
6
i
8
q
1 ~?
11
12
13
14
15
16
I7
lE
19
20
21
2~
Z3
J4
LS
conflict.
JIIDGE HENNEKE: Where will you bet
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm supposed to be at
the design and build --
JUDGE HENIQEKE: Tha.'s right. When are you
going to that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon?
DODGE HENNEKE: Are you going up that day, or
are you yuiry to be gone for two or three days, or what?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I think I go up
on the aftenioc~n of the 5th. It's on the 7th, I'll
doublecheck that, though.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's three; it's
not a big deal.
DODGE HENNEKE: We'll have three, unless I
lose one more. If somebody has a conflict, let me know. We
can -- we have to have it within a certain time frame, and I
think it's -- I think it's vaithin five days, I think, of the
election. Anyway, we'll -- we'll just be alert to that.
MS. PIEPER: Did you say 9 a.m. or 11:00?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I said 11:00.
MS. PIEPER: 11 a.m.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't know whether we need
to have a special meeting to consider the RFQ or not. What
do ycu thine, Commissioner Letz?
.~i_ ,,'-.J.
a
i
2
3
4
5
E
7
9
9
10
11
1?
13
19
15
lb
17
16
19
20
21
-~
23
24
zs
CCMMISSIONER LETZ: Hopefully --
DODGE HENNEKE: And we will probably have
that this week?
COMMISSIONER LETZ; I think that it will be
pushing it. I mean, I think it's probably easier to get it
on with that one. I haven't looked at the long time
schedule on the Rh'Q. We have a draft that's not on the
agenda today, but I received a draft. But I've talked with
Wayne Gondeck, about it, and I thin}: we need to have a --
meet with Commissioner Williams and Wayne Gondeck,
hopefl~'_ly. I'm not sure of his schedule today, but to go
over that some.
COMMISSICNER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Well, just also be
alert to the Lact that we may have to have a special meeting
within the next week or so to consider the RFQ on the
renovation and expansion of the Hill Country Youth Exhibit
Cenrer. So, keep those scheduling things in mind, and let's
get on with the business at hand. Do we have any bills to
pay? Anyone have any questions or comments regarding the
bills as presented by the Auditor'?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we pay the
bills.
COMMISSICNER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner

10
1
2
3
9
5
5
7
8
y
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~i
22
'3
24
;5
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court
authorize payment of the invoices as presented and
rer_ommended by the Auditor. Any questions or comments? If
not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
1'1'he motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Budget
amendments. Budget Amendment Number 1 is for J.P. 1.
MR. TOMLINSON: This request_ is to transfer
$1~7.G0 from Gffice Supplies to t3onds to pay for the J.P.'s
new bond.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS; Yrice of bend go up?
Mk. TOMLINSON: He didn't budget for -- only
budgeted y50, and that was for the clerk's bond. He failed
to -- he didn't remember he needed a bond for nett year.
rOMMISSIONER BALDWIPI: Well, I want to know
where the money comes from before I do, though.
JUDGE HENNEKE: office Supplies.
MR. TOMLINSON: Office Supplies.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can see that. I
move that we pay -- or do this transfer, amend the budget.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
y
10
lI
12
1'.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
GL
23
24
approve Budget Amendment Request Number 1 for J.F. 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. Number ? is
for the 19cHth and 216th District Court.
MP.. TOMLINSON: Okay. r have two bills,
$1,500 each, for liability coverage for the District Judges.
We had budgeted $1,300 each, which that -- that premium had
been that for the last four or five years. It went up $200,
so I'm asking for a transfer from Special District Judge
line item in each court for that amoun*_.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIGNER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Lets,
second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve
Budget Request Number 2 .or the 198th and 216th District
Court. Any questions or comments? If nor, all in favor
raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
.iODGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number

1~
t
2
I
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
l~
14
15
16
17
lg
19
z i1 i
L1
L 2
23
~4
2J
3 relates to Indigen*_ Health Care.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. I have one last
billing for -- for last fiscal year for salaries for -- for
the person that does Indigent Health Care at r_he hospital.
Total amount is $752.88. We have a balance of $550.08, so
I'm asking that we increase last year's 2001/2002 Indigent
Health Care budget by $202.80.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
CUMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
DODGE HENNER:E: Motion by Commissioner Let"
second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court declare an
emergency and increase the administrative budget for
Indigent Health Care, Expense Code SO-641-]00, by the amount
of $ 02.08 for the FY 'O1-'02 budget. Any questions or
c~nuuents? Ail in favor, raise your right hand.
(The mction carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Uppcsed, same sign.
(No respcnse.i
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number
4 is for J.P. Number Z.
MR. TOMLINSON: This amendment is actually to
transfer money from Nondepartmental Contingency into J.P.
I's Operating Equipiuent line item for the replacement of a
monitor on their -- one of their computers.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
J - - ~ - I _
13
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lU
11
12
13
14
IJ
16
17
18
15
2U
~l
22
?S
29
25
MR. TOMLINSON: And I do -- and I do need a
hand check for that payable to OfficeMaY.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court
approve Budget Amendment Request Number 4 for J.P. Number 2
and authorize issuance of a hand check in the amount of
$169.99 payable to the order of OfficeMar,. Any questions or
comments? Tf not, all i:~ favor, raise your right hand.
;The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion ~,arriPS. Nnmhar S i~
for the Law Library.
MR. TOMLINSON: I pulled that amendment. I
discovered that -- that 90 percent of that was -- was a
prepayment. It was actually invoiced in September, but it's
a prepayment of -- of the contract with Nexis-Lexis for the
next fiscal year, so we're goinc; to pay it out of -- out of
our '02-'U3.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. A11 right. Any
others? Tommy, any other late bills?
MR. TGMLINSVN: No, that's it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. We have no
minutes. We have no mon~hly reports. So, let's start at
1i_ _N- _
14
1
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
~I]
21
2~
23
24
~5
the top and work our way through. Item Number 1, approve
and -- consider and discuss the approval of the Texas
Workforce Commission Child Care Local Initiative Agreement,
and authorize County Judge to sign same. Brenda Chapman.
Morning, Bren~-ia.
MS. CHAPMAN: Good morning. How are y'all?
JDDGE HENNEKE: Good.
MS. CHAPMAN: Well, it's that time again, to
renew our contract for the next year with Alamo Workforce
Development Board. We're hoping to renew our -- our
contract this year. Last year, our contract was for $99,000
local match, and we were able Yo raise it -- they just
raised it to $50,000 this year, so just $1,000. We have
currently ~0 children in care, and we hope to use those
funds to sustain .hose children in care and to add new
children ;n as soon as money -- more money is available.
DODGE HENNEKE: Goes anyone have any
questions or comments regarding this Child Care Initiative
AgLeef[le nt?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move the approval
an:9 execution of Te:;as Workforce Commission Child Care Local
Initiative Agreement as presented, and authorize County
Judge to sigh same.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
DODGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner

15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
13
19
2u
21
22
L i
2G
25
Williams, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court
approve the Texas Workforce Commission Child Care Local
Initiative Agreement and authorize County Judge to sign the
same. Any questions cr comments? If not, all in favor,
raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
DODGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No resoonse.l
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Thank you,
Brenda.
MS. CHAYMAN: 'Thank you very much.
DODGE HENNEKE: Item Number 2, consider and
discuss approval of Kesolution supporting the Texas
Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation's funding
request for '09-'O5, and support increase in funding for
additional services. This request was made to us by our
local Hi11 Country Community M.H.M.R., as we can see in the
packet. Any questions or comments regarding the resolution?
CUMMI55IUNER GRIFFIN: I move we approve the
resolution. and authorize County Judge to sign same -- or is
this for everybody to sign2 I don't have a signature block
on this one.
DODGE HENNEKE: Well, just --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: As appropriate. To be
signed as appropriate.
1
3
4
5
h
8
9
10
11
l
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
~ i~
21
-~
23
24
25
15
JUDGE HENNEKE: To be executed, okay,
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that
motion.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
approve a resolution supporting the Texas Department of
Mental Health and Mental Retardation's funding request for
2C1~~4 and X005, and supporting an increase in funding for
additional services, and authorize appropriate signatures on
*_he resolution. Any questions or comments? Zf not, all in
favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by ur.an.imous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
!No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Number 3,
consider and discuss approving a Proclamation proclaiming
NovembeL ~OG~ as National Alzheimer's Disease Month for Kerr
County, and authorize County Judge to sign same. This
request came Lu us from the local Alzheimer's Outreach
Program, and we have the proclamation, ir. our packet. Any
questions or ~~omments:
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
1
3
4
1,
6
7
H
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
lb
17
19
19
ZO
21
~L
~3
2~
25
l~
Baldwin, sPCOnd by Commissioner Letz, that the Court approve
a resolution for -- proclaiming November 2002 as National
Alzheimer's Disease Month for F;err County. Any questions or
comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JpDGE HENNEKE: upposed, same sign.
~No response.)
JDuGE HESdNEFE: Moticn carries. Number 9 is
a request to have Encino Drive in Ranchero Estates
desiGnated a dead-end street or gated. Who has this one?
Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSInNER BALDWIN: I'll take it, We have
a -- a guest, Mr. Mcc,raw, that lives on Er,Cino Lrive, has
requested this to be on the agenda this morning, and the
County Ei~yineer is in the room as well. So, Mr. McGraw,
make your preser.tatior,. Then we'll have a -- provably have
some discussiun about it.
MR. P7cGRAW: Ver, good. I'm Warner McGraw,
at the present dime representing president of the
homeowners' association for F.errville South, Ranchero
Estates. Now, we -- when we first moved in there, or when
this was first platted in 1969, it was put down as a
dead-end street. I dcn't know the difference between a
dead-end and a gated as far as the law is concerned, but it
stated at that time i~ was all a dead-end street. And then
18
3
4
h
7
8
1C
11
12
13
i4
I5
lF
I~
lg
1~
~G
Zl
?~
,3
~4
~`
this year, it's been changed for some reason to a no outlet.
And, ar the present time, the road goes through -- and we
paved this back in 198, '84. And, you know, at the present
time, the only interference I see is up at the top of the
hill, H.idgeway, they ha~.~e possible completion of the road
fcs Encino Drive. And at the end of the road going from
Ranchero Estates up to the top of the hill at Ridgeway, it's
a very steep hill, but it is feasible and possible.
Enraineers could design a way to complete it. But, at the
present time, we've had several conflicts of people coming
up and to and around cur driveways, throwing out trash, just
more or less backing into fences, breaking them down. And
we kind of like the atmosphere we have at t_he present time,
and reques_ that -- it would not interfere with any ether
land, ur Uie ones on top of the hill. They do have access
to their land, and we feel that Ranchero Road would be a
pretty busy s~reet if they were to open it up, so we request
that, it possible, make it a dead-end street permanently, if
~ possible.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where would the gate
be placed^:
MR. Mrr,RAW: Pardon?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: b4here would a gate be
placed?
MR. McGRAW: If we put a gate in there, it
19
2
3
4
'o
7
8
9
10
li
l~
13
14
i5
16
1?
18
19
~0
~l
~~
23
24
25
will be coming off of Ranchero Road -- I mean -- yeah, off
of Ranchero Road to Encino Drive. But that -- that is not
necessarily a -- what we would like to have. We'd just as
soon have it a dead-end permanent, and continue as it is
iiow.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Franklin? In our
packets, he has some signatures by the homeowners.
MR. M~~.GRAW: les, it's 100 percent of the
homeowners. Everybody in -- in the Ranchero Estates has
signed off and requestzd that it would be a dead-end street.
COMMLSSiGNER BALDWIN: My question to
Franklin, 1 guess, is, is it required 100 percent signatures
of the pruperty owners to approve something like that? Or
~=,o
MR. JGHNSTON: Actually, the -- there's thz
subdivision he's talking about, and the road extends on up
to one lot that's he alluded to. That's what he mentioned;
there's one lot outsidz the subdivision. Lot 10, I think it
is, or D. Maybe it's Lot D. it's a triangular-shaped lot.
The road dead-ends into that lot. That's what that -- this
larger scale plat shows. The road corms right up to the
property line. So, I would think that hz would need to also
agree to it. I think he was the one planning on building
the road, extending the road on up to that -- that piece of
property. So --
i"--,'-',~-
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
i5
16
17
18
lg
20
2l
~2
23
?4
25
MR. McGRAW: See, it's not landlocked,
though. You have Ridgeway here all the way across, which is
what we had when we started, a dirt road.
MR. JOHNSTON: Ridgeway is shown, but that's
not built -- not built, either. It's a right-of-way only.
MR. McGRAW: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you See the -- the
property line -- I mean the subdivision line, Letz, now?
You all there? And there is a -- there is a piece of
property in the -- in this other subdivision, like -- 34D
there, that the yuy wants to develop. Now, my question
is -- is when we talk about getting 100 percent of the
signatures in the subdivision, this guy is in another
subdivision. Do we -- do we need to respond to him as well?
JUDGE HENNEKE: We11, I think legally,
though -- I mean, you have to look at -- at Encino Drive.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Uh-huh.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Because I would suggest that
the intent of Encino Drive is to serve only that
subdivision, and not the adjacent subdivision. If that's
the reality, then the owner of Lot U has no legal right to
the use of Encino Drive. So, you have to look at the
dedication of that road to see, was it designed for only
that subdivision? Was it designed for the next subdivision?
You haee to go back to the dedication of that road, and
I~i-.e II
21
1
L
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
lcl
19
~' 0
21
23
24
25
if -- if it says -- I would suspect it is, which is that
Encino Drive is only designed to serve that subdivision,
then the man who owns Lot D has no right to use Encino
Drive, and it wouldn't be an issue.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: 1s it not true that --
in fact., at the end of Encino Drive, that property line in
that subdivision could be -- could have a concrete fence if
they wanted.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's my Chinking. I
kind of wan*_ed some legal advice, and I got a little more
there than I was expecting, but --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a question. So,
Encino Drive does not connect to Ridgeway Drive right now?
MR. McGR.AW: No. The -- Encino Drive is
completely to the middle of Lot 6.
MR. JOHNSTON: Neither of which are built.
The orange ones aren't built, so all those up there are just
kind of off -- off trails.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, first of all, I
mean, 7 don't think you want it gated, because if you --
MR. McGRAW: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- if you put a gate on
it, then the County doesn't maintain it any more. I think
ycu want the County to maintain it, probably,
MR. McGRAW: True. We would appreciate the
1 _a- _
22
1
2
3
4
5
H
7
8
9
1G
11
l~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2~
23
^4
~~
County takicig care of that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if there's no -- that
last little pink stretch of -- going up along Lot 6 is not a
road right now?
MR. McGRAW: No, it's a steep hill like this.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Then I don't know -- I
mean, is there a difference between a "dead end" and a "no
outlet" from a Road and Bridge standpoint?
MR. ODOM: Well, from our standpoint, "dead
end" means, like, you would end into no turn-around space.
But there's turn-around space there, so the significance
of -- it's really semantics of "no outlet" versus "dead
end." So, "no outlet" means that they're -- it doesn't go
through. That's what we're telling people before they go --
get up there. Dead end's more indicative -- like, in the
west end where you just end into a cattle guard right there
and there's a real narrow space; you can't turn around. You
don't want a truck getting up in there that can't turn
around.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN:
that, but I would ask the question -
turn-around there from just going up
as platted, there is no turn-around.
MR. ODOM: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN:
People may have made
- people may have made a
there and doing it, but
It's a 50 --
They could technically
1V-._Y-
23
1
2
3
4
6
8
9
10
11
1<
13
14
15
16
17
i8
10
20
21
2 '~
23
29
25
have a dead-end --
MR. ODOM: Technically.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- designation,
couldn't it?
MR. ODGM: It could.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So, it sounds like
that if we do a dead end designation on the sign, and that's
what --
MR. McGRAW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- you're asking for,
and there's no plan to improve the last piece of Encino
Drive --
MR.. JOHNSTON: Not from us. I thin Y. the --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Where would it dead-end? I
mean, you have to provide access.
MR. McGP.AW: If you wanted to -- the way I
was proposing, if you wanted to -- we own Lot 5, E, 7, 8,
and 9, and you can make a turn-around here where 5 and 9 are
across there. I would desig -- I would give the land there
to make a turn-around there so you would have --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Lot 7?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Lots 7 and 8.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, you own --
MR. McGRAW: We own it, and the family owns
5, 5, 7, 8, and 9.
- -~`-'-
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
i
8
9
10
i~
12
13
14
15
16
i~
18
i9
20
~1
22
~3
24
25
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That would require
replatting to make that into one --
COMMISSIC>NER LETZ: Lo r_.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- lot.
MR. JOHNSTON: One lot, yeah.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's --
MR. JOHNSTON: If it ever came up in the
future for sale, they -- it wouldn't have any access to it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That would be the way to do
it, is plat 5, 5, 7, 8, and 9, and abandon, vacate the road
from wherever --
MR. McGRAW: Wherever 5 and 9
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You actually just have
to combine 7 and 8, because if you put the turn-around --
JUllGE HENNEKE: Six, too. Depends on where
you put a turn-around.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, if you put a
cloverleaf -- not cloverleaf, r_ul-de-sac. If we put a
cul-de-sac at the conjunction there of 5, 5, 8 and 9, and
made 7 and 8 one lot, then you would have access to all the
lots at the turn-around and have --
MR. McGRAW: Okay, that'd be fine.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's Lrue.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If all -- if the request
is just to put a "dead-end" sign instead of a "no outlet"
25


1
2
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
1 ?.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~?
24
25
sign, we can just do that, and you won't have to go through
the platting expense.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Fight.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, down the road --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If it continues to be
a problem, come back.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You'll need to come back
and replat it.
J~JDGE HENNEKE: I'm not sure I understand the
significance of the difference between the "dead-end" and
the "no outlet."
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't, personally.
COMMISSIONER GR1P'F1N: I think the
homeowners -- ~~orrect me if I'm wrong, but I think what
they're saying is when it was -- when it had the "dead-end"
designator on it, you didn't have as much problem as you're
having now?
MR. McGRAW: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: With people dumping
trash and that kind of thing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, just change the road
sign, come back and look at it again?
JUDGE HENNEKE: We can do that.
MR.. JOHNSTON: So, you're saying that the
owner on the other side doesn't have any -- any ar_cess to

zE
1
L
3
9
6
7
S
9
10
11
lz
13
19
15
16
i7
18
19
~0
~1
?z
23
?q
15
that road? Any legal access?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm saying -- I don't know,
but I'm saying my guess, just on the face of it, is that the
owner of Lot D does not have any legal right to Encino
Drive. Nvw, we'd have to go back and look at the document
that established Encino Drive and see for whom it was
intended.
MR.. JOHNSTON: See what his deed says, if it
has access or -- it's up to him to do that, though. Not --
not anything we need to worry about.
CGMMISSIONEk LETZ: We can still put a
"dead-end" sign there.
MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah.
MR. McGRAW: Right.
COMMISSIGNER LETZ: But my only concerr.
about -- you know, I mean, if -- if it's going to be
abandoned down the read, but especially -- if Encino Drive
will be abandoned, that's one thing, but one of the things
that -- in our Subdivision Rules that we encourage is to
have a way to tie roads together. I mean, I understand
their concern and their problem, especially when he owns --
well, the road dead-ends basically at your property, Sut,
long-term, this is a major problem area from roads not
cnnnectin.g, and we really -- I mean, I would be very hard --
iT_ would be very hard to convince me, 1 think, to start
i ~_
z~
1
3
4
h
8
9
10
11
1L
13
14
IS
16
l~
1Q
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
making fewer access. The road doesn't exist now, so I think
we can certainly do as requested, but down the road, if that
read was there, I would not want to abandon it.
MR. JOHNSTON: If that was developed, it
looks like it would be a natural way to tie Encino into
Ridgeway there and have an alternate access.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, what I'd
Like to do, being as I am the Commissioner out there, is I
would like to get a legal opinion of -- are we required to
provide some kind of ingress/egress to that other
subdivision? Just what -- what Motley's ruling would be,
before we authorize anything in here today. And, as well
as -- Mr. McGraw, you have a water well or something?
MR. McGRAW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well's in the county
right-of-way. We need to get that --
MR. McGRAW: Well, that I'm not sure of.
I --
COMMISSIUNER. BALDWIN: I'm not either, but we
want to make sure, okay? Can we address that and get that
cleared up?
MR. McGRAW: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN
Thank you. See you in
two weeks.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Commissioner, did you
i -''-e-~
28
1
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1?
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~l
24
~ G,
include not putting up the "dead-end" sign? Because I don't
think that really affects this issue. 'Cause it's a
dead-end right now for sure.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine. I'm
just -- it's not a big deal. I don't -- I don't care.
Franklin, do you have a -- I mean -- it's --
MR. ODOM: I just need a direction. I mean,
it's just putting a sign back there. Is it "dead-end" or
"no outlet"? Which one did you decide?
COMMISSIONER. GRIFFIN: It's a dead-end.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a no outlet now,
correct?
MR. McGRAW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They'd like to have
dead-end.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll make a motion
that we authoLi~e the Road and Bridge Department to put a
"dead-end" sign on Encino Drive.
CvMM1SSI~_~NER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Let z, that the Court
authorize the installation of a "dead-end" sign in lieu of
*_he "no outlet" siun on Encino Drive.
MR. McGRAW: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions or comments?
1n-~x-n.
29
1
3
4
5
5
8
a
10
11
12
l3
14
15
lE
17
18
19
2U
21
22
~3
24
25
If not, all in savor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.;
DUD(, h: Y.ENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
MR. McGRAW: Thank you.
DODGE HENNEKE: Thank you, sir. Item Number
5, consider and discuss a drainage issue in Block One, Lots
1, 2, 3, and 4, Harrison Tract, Center Foint. Commissioner
Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is pct on by Mr.
Te11, I believe, representing his clients, and has to do
with a matter on C.P. River Road. It came into full focus
during the recent fluuding. Mr. To11?
MR.. TOLL: Yeah, it did really get accented
during the Jury floods. These discussions have been going
on, apparently, since the beginning of the year, and I got
im~olved in this in April, when Road and Bridge sent my
client, Julia Dewey, a letter saying that recent changes
they had made in their property were blocking drainage from
the road. That property has since been sold to Mr. Jim
Lehne, who wanted to be Here Loday, but he's laid up in bed.
I have discussed this back and forth with David Motley;
we've peer. trying to get some kind of resolution to the --
to the drainage problem. It was washing away my client's
property. And the difficulty from the county's side is,
1 -_,- _
1
^~ L
4
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.~-~
14
15
15
17
18
19
~0
2i
22
23
24
~5
30
when -- when my clients stopped drainage across their
property, the water backs up on the road. So, during the
July floods, water backed up apparently all the way to
Highway 27,
The County sent somebody down that punched a
hole through the property, and it resulted in the damage
that you see in those photos. Those aren't real good; if
you'd like to see the :=o1or versions of them, I have them
here. Sut if y~u'l1 look in that bottom photo on the first
page, there's a person standing in the bottom of that hole.
That all happened during July, which was probably -- I don't
know what -- three or four years worth of rain. And on the
other end of the photo at the top cf the other page, it's
just a -- that's just a little spot where somebody with a
front leader or bullduzer or whatever punched a little spot
through the property. And when you're looking at the other
side of it where the man's standing in the hole, that's what
happened on the down side of it.
Something that's not real clear in that
picture on the top of the second page is that it has washed
out the soil on the property under the driveway that's next
to that cabin. And since July, there's been severa] rains;
at_ this point, and my client is unable to rent that out
io-~e-~~
1
~,
.-.
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
,.-,.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~-.
25
31
because of the precarious position that it's sitting in.
David Motley tells me that some group called the Natural
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct.
MR. TOLL: Apparently, everything is moving
at all-ahead bureaucratic speed, however, and my clients are
worried that the property damage is going to become
irreparable; the cabin's going to cave in, something really
serious will happen, and what they would like to do is have
you gentlemen -- ask you gentlemen to do, is to approve Road
and Bridge to design some type of drainage in this -- in
this area, which I think everybody agrees needs to be there.
Mr. Lehne says he's willing to give the County an easement
to put in the drainage, and he would just like to get it
moviny and get it done as soon as possible.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm glad you
nienLioued Lhe latter part, Mr. Toll, because that really is
the basis of the issue that was unresolved before the
flooding began, and started back with a letter from the
County Engineer dated April 30, which it was pointed out
to -- I'm not sure the individual was your client at that
time, but it was at that time on record as the owner of that
property.
1 "i _~ 0,
32
1
3
9
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
I5
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
MR. TOLL: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It was pointed out
that you cannot block a county drainage easement and create
another problem, which that did, by landscaping their yard
or their property and building up a berm that prohibited
floodwater -- stormwater from running its natural course to
the river. And, as you and I both know, the net result of
the flooding in late June and July caused because of that
berm created a situation where water backed up all up Bowlin
Drive and flooded other people's yards, about 6 to 8 inches
of water standing in their yards, and creating all sorts of
problems. And so we did what we thought was necessary and
opened up the drainage for that water to go. You are
correct in that, that we're awaiting some word from the
federal agency with regard to funding an appropriate
solution to the stormwater runoff. Hasn't been designed, to
my knowledge. Has it, Franklin? Or Leonard? Has the
solution been designed? Are we still waiting?
MR. ODOM: We're still waiting on NRCS to --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Natural Resources
folks, whomever. And as soon as we know the funding is in
place, or reasonably in place, I guess we'll proceed with
that. I think some of these pictures, while they do show
some erosion, it is my sense of it, having seen that
property now for some four years, that a good bit of that
.u-_~ __
1
3
4
5
1
F,
~1 8
1 v
10
11
12
f 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~5
33
erosion was already there before we opened up that drainage
situation there, so I'm not certain that the County's action
with regard to protecting its own road system and other
pieces of property particularly created all of this erosion.
I don't really think that is the case. But, be that as it
may, that's something we really don't need to quibble over.
We need to figure out how to get it fixed. And I have
referred your letters to the County Attorney, and the County
Attorney has been working with Road and Bridge, and we're
waiting to see where the funding on it --
MR. TOLL: And that was one of the reasons
why they asked me to go ahead and get this on the agenda,
because Mr. Motley's response last week was somewhat similar
to what we've had since January, and it just sounded like
things were not moving. And I think my clients rightfully
feel that the County does not have an easement across there.
If you'll read that note on the plat, it speaks of easements
as shown on the plat, drainage as shown on the plat. And
there is no drainage shown across those lots on the plat.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd like the County
case, 'cause he's the one that wrote the letter on
April 30th -- I mean County Engineer. Franklin, are you
still out there someplace? Can you address that issue, this
coLLespondence to a prior owner? What was the basis of your
iu ze-e~
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1J
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
34
judgment on that?
MR. JOHNSTON: Well, the basis was that it
talked about the drainage easements, and obviously was a --
wasn't shown on the plat specifically, but that was a
drainage area, so I assume it referred to wherever the
drainage areas were.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 1 mean, I think the --
MR. JOHNSTON: They don't think it was, so
now we're --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If there's no work done
by your clients, where would the water go? Where would --
where's the natural place for that water to go when it
cLOSSes the road? How's it get to the river?
MR. TOLL: Well, there's a couple of plar_es.
If yuu yu down about two lots, there's about a 3G-,
40-foot-deep drainage ditch that runs down from the highway.
MR. JOHNSTON: That's uphill from there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If the water -- if there
was no road there acid yuu didn't do anything, how would that
water get to the river? Would the water come along the --
MR. TOLL: It would probably come across the
property.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If that's where that
water goes, then you don't need an easement in that
situation. The water has the right -- the law says the
~n-'a _
1
3
4
E
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~5
35
water goes where it's going to go, and you can't change that
course.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Its natural --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's going to follow the
natural, you know, topography. And you can't -- I mean,
you -- and, I mean, no property -- private property owner
can change that without creating a specific easement
somewhere.
MR. 'POLL: Right. And they don't want --
Mr. Lehne does not want to quibble that point. He's -- he's
interested in his property riot washing away.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. TOLL: All that damage did happen
since -- since the flood. The picture that shows the cabin
sitting there is -- is the exact cabin that's in the picture
where the man's standing in the rut.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not going to quibble
that.
MR. TOLL: He would liY.e to have some kind of
drainage put in there that could take the water from the
road to tkie river without having to wash this property away.
Where, you know, everybody on one side of the road is -- is
benefiting from the pxuperLy owners on the other side
suffering by their property washing away.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My view is -- I mean,
-..~-~'-
36
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
ly
20
2i
~~
23
24
25
certainly, I agree it needs to go to Motley, I mean, for a
legal opinion on it, but it's not the County's
responsibility to fix an ease -- a drainage issue on private
property. You know, our responsibility is -- as I
understand the law, is that we -- you know, we cannot affect
the drainage -- natural drainage any more than any private
property owner can. If there is a -- if there's an erosion
problem on your client's property, they need to come up with
a solution. Now, if NRCS, working with the County, is
helping to fund that, that's great, but I don't think it's
the County's responsibility, as I understand the law. I
mean, granted, I'm -- you know, this is -- and I've dealt
with these issues on other roads, but that's as I understand
it to be. So, you know, if we figure out a way to solve the
problem, I think the County's willing to work, but I can't
see that it's the County's responsibility to solve the
drainage issue.
MR. TOLL: Well, and it may depend on how
things were before the road was put in there, because if
you'll check the survey we have, it shows that the County's
road is not in the right place, for one thing; it's 7 feet
over on my client's property.
CUMM1551UNER LR'1'Z: 'That's another -- that's
not what your agenda item is about.
MR. TOLL: True, but the road being in the
-_--o_
37
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
13
19
~G
21
~2
23
24
2S
wrong place and being built up may have affected the
drainage, too, and it may not totally be the property
owner's problem. It may be -- I suspect, at the time, that
may have been the City of Center Point, rather than --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, that road has
been in that location for eons.
MR. TOLL: But, I mean, at one time it might
have been in the City of Center Point, right?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At one time it was,
but it was in the County's jurisdiction before that. It was
only in the City of Center Point jurisdiction for a very
short period of time.
MR. ODOM: Ten years. lt's been there for as
long as it is right r.ow.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 1 mean, I think the -- if
MRCS is, in fact, looking at this, that's the best solution.
It's a way for them to try -- because they now have funding
to help, you know. But I'm just saying that I don't think
it's the County's responsibility to go fix the problem on
the private property, unless it was caused by the County. I
haven't heard anything to say it was caused by them.
MR. TOLL: Okay. Well, I -- you know, I'm
not sure where the water naturally drained prior to -- to
the July floods, where it was with the county.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, where iL
io-.a n.
38
i
2
3
4
c
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1S
1G
17
18
19
20
21
L2
Z3
24
25
naturally drained through your client's property before the
berm was placed there redirected it, and the berm redirected
it down closer to one of those cabins, is my understanding.
And so, you know, the berm had to go, not only for the
protection of the County's road, but for the protection of
other people's property. The berm was placed there by your
client, for whatever purpose, whether it's aesthetic or
what, but in the process, it redirected water to another
area and it's going to go down to the river someplace,
somehow. It's goinq to go down there. And that's what's
happened. So, you know, 1 think -- 1 think we will work
with you. We're waiting to see what kind of funds are
coming back to the County for this purpose, and we'll
certainly work with you, but I think, between you and the
County Attorney, we need to have some clear-cut, documented
resolve of the easement issue so we don't get into this
problem one more rime. That's kind of the way I see it.
MR. TOLL: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else? Thank you,
Ed. Item Number 6, consider approval of preliminary
revision of plat of Fort Richie Subdivision recorded in
Volume 5, Page 207, and change the name to Chuck's Gu11y.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Chuck's Gu11y.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I like Fort Richie a lot
better.
1~.;-_~-~i.~.
39

1
2
3
4
5
b
7
8
9
10
11
1^_
i3
14
15
1h
17
18
19
20
zl
2
~3
3q
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Chuck's Gully.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. JOHNSTON: This is actually just a -- a
plat -- I may have been a little unclear on the title. A
portion of Fort Richie, Lot 1, plus some additional acreage
that wasn't in the original subdivision. It's all Lot 1,
plus, like, two -- 2-point-something acres of adjacent
acreage. And then they backed out the portion that was in
the road right-of-way. That was before it was an easement,
dedicating that and dividing it into two lots, one 8.73 and
one 3.31, which averaged 5-plus. There's no new roads; it
all faces Prine Lane.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And Prine Lane is a
50-foot right-of-way like the others in that area?
(Mr. Johnston nodded.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't see anything
-- I don't see a problem anywhere.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the -- I guess my
big question is, this is -- I see this as a lot of work for
whoever wants to do this. They're going to have to go in
and get -- first have to go in there and amend the previous
plat. You're telling me this is part of a big subdivision.
They'd have to go in there --
MR. ,7OHNSTON: Do you want to make a comment?
1 U-~' y -i
40
1
2
4
5
E
3
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
i5
17
1LI
19
20
21
2~
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Then they have to delete
these tracts from that subdivision or get permission to add
additional acres into the subdivision. First step. And --
MR. JOHNSTON: This is outside the boundary
of the original Fort Richie?
MR. BRANDENBERG: Correct. A portion of this
actually goes onto the Tract 2 north of Fort Richie, so it
includes above and beyond Tract 1 of the original Fort
Richie Subdivision.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you're going tc
take -- it's going to take, I believe, Franklin, a public
hearing to do either of those things.
MR. BRANUENBERG: Ukay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Whir_h is certainly
possible. And then the minimum -- if it's a new
subdivision, then you're going to have a minimum acreage
requirement that you don't meet the 5 acres.
MR. JOHNSTON: Well, it averages five, two
lots.
JUDGE HENNEKE
water systems; doesn't apply
MR. JOHNSTON:
You're on wells throughout?
MR. BRANDENBE
MP.. JOHNSTON:
That average only applies for
fox wells.
You're drilling wells, right?
RG: Correct, yes.
IL iL's under -- if it's four

41
r
1
3
4
5
E
8
9
10
li
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2 ~?
~5
lots or less, some of these rules don't kick in, right?
Sc --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But if it's going to have
a well, minimum let size is 5 acres. Unless it's under the
old sub -- unless you can -- you know, if you revise -- if
you revise the old subdivision, and then you're
grandfathered under that subdivision. But --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It could have to --
that's the only way you could do it that way and have a well
on it. Zt would have to be part of an old subdivision,
which requires a public hearing to _hange it and take in
this additional lane.
MR. BRANDENBERG: So, in other words, you're
saying we need to incorporate this 2-acre portion north of
Tract 1 into the existing --
MR. JOHNSTON: Original Fort Richie.
MR. BRANDENBERG: Original Fort Richie?
MR. JOHNSTON: Revise that one, come back in
and do this one.
COMMISSIONER. GRIFFIN: Wel], this could be
done at the same time, could it not?
MR. JOHNSTON: At the same time.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It could be done at
the same time.
MR. BRANDENBERG: Simullaueously.

42
I
I
1
I
I
1
2
3
4
5
5
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2`
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Could it not?
COMMISSIONEP. LETZ: We have to have a public
hearing. Then you could do it after.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right.
rnMMISSIONER LETZ: You're combining? How
big is -- you're going to have three tracts?
MR.. BRANDENBERG: No, sir, it's going to be
two tracts.
MR.. JOHNSTON: These little deals are kind of
confusing.
MR.. BRANDENBERG: Yeah. It's -- Tract lA
incorporates a portion of the tract to the north of Fort
Richie. I understand it's very contusing.
MR. JOHNSTON: So, by doing that -- that
original replat, then that will take care of all these
tracts; it will just be Tract 1 of Fort Richie and dividing
it.
MR. BRANDENBERG: Correct, yes.
MR. JOHNSTON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And after you're done,
they'll be -- Tract lA will be 8.73 acres and 1B will be
3.31?
MR. BRANDENBERG: Yes, sir.
MR. JOHNSTON: So, it doesn't have a private
water system. In order to do that, they'll have Lo increase
i~,-za n.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1~
18
19
20
~1
~~
23
24
25
43
the lot to 5 acres?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. What's -- that
land up to the northwest, I guess, on the other side of
Dingly View Drive, what lot does that go in?
MF.. BRANDENBERG: They are primarily out of
Tract 3010 of Turtle Creek Ranches.
MR. JOHNSTON: So it may involve a replat of
that subdivision, too. Maybe three of them. Two of them
involved in the original, and then --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where's the subdivision
line?
MR. JOHNSTON: The original? Is it that
line?
MR. BRANDENBERG: Subdivision line is, I'm
going to say, or,e-fourth of the way down on the -- on the
south.
MR. JOHNSTON: That line there'?
MR. BRANDENBERG: Yes, uh-huh,
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: This one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. Oh, okay.
MR.. JGHNSTON: That dotted line going across.
MR. BRANDENBERG: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This jagged line.
MR. BRANDENBERG: Just to give you a little
history --

44

1
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~4
~S
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Where's the northern
boundary of the subdivision, the old subdivision?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Right here.
MR. JOHNSTON: I think he's saying the old
subdivision. The northern boundary is this little line
right here. So this -- this is the south side of it. That
little triangle right there is that side of it.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And this portion
that's up to the north is going -- is part oY another
subdivision right now?
MR. BRANDENBERG: It's part of a tract out of
Turtle Creek Ranches. To give you kind of a history on --
MR. JOHNSTON: Is that a platted --
COMMISSIUNER GRIFFIN: Platted?
MR. BRANDENBERG: It's an unplatted
subdivision.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. So we could
take that in, the old subdivision, which makes this possible
to do, I think.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you're going to have
to -- the way to proceed would be to revise the plat -- the
Fort Richie, as I see it.
CUMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: With a --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're going to have to
make -- and the lot sizes are going to be -- if you're going
- ='°_ `
45
i
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1S
19
~0
Zi
22
~3
?4
2 °,
to have a well, they have to be a minimum of 5 acres.
MR. BRANDENBERG: Okay. So, revise Fort
Richie, but incorporate that portion of Tract 3020 into
that, and submit that as a preliminary plat? And along with
this existing plat?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. BRANDENBERG: And then, if the approval
is granted ~n the revision of Fort Richie, then this will
kind of, by default --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We can go ahead and
show the subdivision --
COMMISSIONEP. LETZ: We need to get the -- and
the name change, it needs to have -- change the entire Fort
Richie Subdivision. You can't just change a parr of the
subdivision to Chuck's Gu11y. So that's -- I mean, it
depends how important that is.
MR. BRANDENBERG: Probably not very
important.
MR. JUHNSTON: If it's one lot, you can
redivide one lot and change the name, right? We've done
that before.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You can do what? Say it
again.
MR. JOHNSTON: If you just replat one lot and
divide it up, you can change the -- Lake lhat out and change
1~=-'ti

1
G
3
4
5
E
7
R
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
1?
l~S
19
LO
21
2'
23
~4
~5
46
the name on that, just that one lot?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. You'd have to --
well, yeah. You'd have to take it out. You could change
Fort Richie, exclude all this acreage out of Fort Richie and
then create a new subdivision.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that's going to be --
I mean, from a cost standpoint, that's going to cost you
more, 'cause you're going to have to do all the fees on
two -- on two plats, so -- as opposed to one plat.
MR. JOHNSTON: Could keep it Fort Richie,
call it a replat of Lot 16, Fort Richie, and not do that,
right?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And expand the boundary
of ~t.
MR. JOHNSTON: Right.
MR. BRANDENBERG: Gkay. I will convey that
to my client and see how motivated tie is to carry cn.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ukay.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay.
MR. BRANDENBERG: Thank you, gentlemen.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you.
MR. JCHNSTON: 'f hank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Item Number 7, consider
approval of the final plat for Live Sprinys Ranch, Precinct
i~~ za --
47

1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
i3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
L J
24
~5
4, off of Henderson Branch Road. Commissioner Griffin.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Franklin?
MR. JOHNSTON: Surveyor would like to pull
that off the agenda. They're apparently making some other
changes, and they'll bring it back at another time.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay. I have a
question on this.
MR. JOHNSTON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Commissioner Letz and
I were discussing it a little earlier. He actually brought
it up, but it would seem to me, with the size of these --
according -- on this plat, that are going to be proposed,
with the lot sizes we're talking about, the smallest of
which is about 15 -- over 15 acres, it seems like that
they've -- why do they have to go to U.G.R.A. or Headwaters?
That was our -- that was the gist of our discussion.
Because we noticed in the paperwork they did.
MR. JOHNSTON: I don't think they did, but I
think at the time the preliminary was -- was Liled, I think
that rule wasn't approved yet.
COMMISSIUNER GRIFFIN: Gkay.
MR. JOHNSTON: The preliminary has been
laying around quite a while.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay.
MR. BARRGN: Larry, if you don't mind, they
48

1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
lh
17
18
19
20
~l
22
23
24
25
have to -- to come through for floodplain. There's --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Anything other than --
but, see, it had all the sign-offs on it and they paid all
the fees on it. And, obviously, they have to do floodplain,
but --
MR. BARRON: That would be the reason why
they'd come over there.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's a good
question.
MR. JOHNSTON: Maybe they can get a refund.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Item Number 8, consider and
discuss National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
Phase II MS4 Stormwater Permit. That's a mouthful.
MR. JOHNSTON: This is in the form of a
question. I've been reading about this in various trade
journals. I -- my understanding, it's going to go into
effect next March.
MR.. GDOM: March lst.
MR. JOHNSTUN: And when we build roads Lhat
tear up or disturb more than 1 acre, we have to send in a --
what they call a Notice of Intent. I think there's a copy
of that attached. But it's under the County's NPDES permit.
I haven't heard anything, but I asked U.G.R.A.; they don't
kncw anything about it. Who gets the permit? Apparently,
it's more than just filling out a form. Apparently, it's
it-_.-,_
49
1
2
3
4
5
5
8
9
10
11
1L
13
14
15
16
17
lE~.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
very complicated to fill out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is -- Buster, isn't
this one of those things that surfaced about six years ago,
and it's finally coming to bite us?
COMMISSIONEP. BALDWIN: Yeah. Well, actually,
I think this is Phase II of the -- of all that.
MR. JOHNSTON: Larger counties over 50,000
population have already been phased into this, and it's just
now coming our turn to do it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I remember we had a
briefing the very first meeting these three guys were on the
Court.
COMMISSIONER GRIE'P'1N: I remember that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But, to answer your
question, who in Kerr County is applying, I have noL a clue.
I haven't heard a peep. I just see it in the -- in the
magazines, as well.
MR. JOHNSTON: Little article I sent along
with it said political leaders of the community axe
responsible for it.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Hard to dodge that
one, isn't it?
JUDGE HENNEKE: And when is the deadline for
this?
50
1
G
3
4
5
F
7
3
9
10
it
12
13
14
15
16
17
lb
ly
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: March next year.
JUDGE HENNEKE: March '03?
MR. JOHNSTON: Actually, part of it phases in
in November of this year, and -- and the rest of it's March.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I tell you, this is --
I mean, this is really going to be expensive. But all of
our -- you know, our association is -- we -- we spend a lot
of time in Washington fighting this issue. A11 county
government is -- is fighting it. It's dust crazy.
MR. JOHNSTON: A little background; I think
the -- the County Engineers and Road Administrators
Association, along with some other people, filed suit
against whether or not this applied to county road
maintenance, and they lost.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It does -- yeah, it
applies to county road maintenance.
MR. ODOM: Originally -- may I address it?
Originally, when this came up, we argued about it, and we
were told by the Federal Highway Administration that
counties would be exempt, particularly those under 50,000,
was originally the way it went. And then, also, my question
was, what about disrepair? Or what about rehabbing roads?
The answer to that question in Dallas, Texas, was that. we --
we were exempt; that it could go for infinitum. But then
they came back and they said any ditch work.
- a-r~~
Jl
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
y
10
1'.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2~
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Even ditch work.
MR. ODOM: Even ditch work was there. And
then we asked what the discharge was. The discharge is from
the farms and from the ranches, is where the pollutants are
going to be coming -- or the fertilizers, and we're
responsible for that. And that's been a big argument. And,
of course, then we went ro court about it. Apparently, we
lost, and we've just been notified that we were -- that we
lost this, and this is coming into effect in March. And
it's really -- it puts -- I don't know what the
ramification's going to be, but you can't even hardly pull
maintenance --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I'll tell you
what the ramifications are. If you look on Page --
whatever, 2, 3, under Item Number 3, and it says that the
states have until November to provide guidance and an
interpretation of federal regs by people such as us, and
that they can add other things onto it. We need to know
about that. But the second -- next paragraph is what
catches your eye. Nevertheless, Phase II communities that
wait until November '02 to begin their permit application
process might find themselves struggling to complete their
dpplictitioiis -- complete tkieiL applicatiuti by Mdr~ki ' 03.
Political leaders whose communities don't meet the deadline
will have to face the consequences, steep fines or even

52
1
3
4
h
7
E:
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
]9
2u
L I
22
23
24
2S
imprisonment. He11o.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Chocolate cake. I
don't -- I don't like chocolate rake.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Food out at the jail's pretty
good, boys.
MR. ODOM: Can we get out on the weekends?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'll come visit you.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We got a work program;
don't worry about it.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'm just grasping at
this straw, but is there -- is there a way you could submit
one application for, quote, road maintenance?
MR. ODOM: Well, that's the question. I was
wondering if we would have a standing permit on a yearly
basis for road maintenance, whether it's ditch repair or --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah.
MR. ODOM: -- clean-out.
MR. JOHNSTON: We met with TexDOT. They said
they fill uut that form every time they do a project. But
it's under the umbrella of the County -- in their case, it's
of the state, bul. this would be out of the County permit.
That's what this little thing -- even that little thing
takes a lot of woLk.

53
1
7
3
4
_`,
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
~z
<'3
L4
25
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Does this cost us
anything to submit? I mean, do we have to pay a fee?
MR. JOHNSTON: I don't think so. We have to
get someone out there, figure out the latitude and longitude
of the projects.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What I was saying, why
don't we design the outline of the county, and -- say, for
road maintenance, you know, for ditch maintenance and
whatever, submit it, and see what they say.
MR. UDOM: That's --
COMMISSIONER, GF.IFFIN: If they say okay, then
fine, we'll put it in the file, forget about it.
Mk. JUHNSI'ON: Just a blanket form.
MR. ODOM: On a yearly basis, I would assume.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which I think we need
to have somebody -- from what it says under ~ here, many
stales are trying to decide whether to issue a general
permit applying to all Phase II communities, or whether, in
the alternative, to require individual permits. If the
State's going to file a general permit for all Phase II
communities, l,ha*_ should suffice, should it not? I guess we
need to know, is that going to happen?
MR. JOHNSTON: T.N.F..C.C. hasn't been in
contact with y'all? I haven't heard anything.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Have you talked to -- I
i - Y, U
54
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
y
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1~
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
~5
mean, I would think that TAC is --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- involved in monitoring
this.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you would like, I
can ask TAC to come down, make a presentation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That might be good,
before we all yo to jail.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Before we go to
jail -- before you go ro jail.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would -- that would be
a good idea, Buster.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's something
we're going to have to wrestle with vne way or the other,
figure out how to do it. And 1 think it's unchartered
territory for all counties.
MR. JOHNSTON: I think the permit involves a
lot of -- mostly with the water stuff, but water testing,
water for pollution and that type of thing.
JODGE HENNEKE: Was that the solution?
Commissioner Baldwin's going to use his influence to have
someone make a presentation, at least give us a summary as
to what tYie status is of this by the next meeting? Which is
_o-'e-n~
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
d
9
10
11
12
I J
19
15
16
17
1 ti
19
20
21
?2
_'3
24
~5
the 1Lth. of November.
COMMISSIGNER BALDWIN: I'll be happy to do
that. Just wondering if that's what you guys want. I think
it would be wise.
CUMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm, I agree.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They're in tune.
They're in tune with this issue.
JUDGE HENC7EKE: We're a member of that
Stcrmwater Coalition that's been fighting this thing for a
number of years.
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: Long time.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Apparently, we're
losing the fight.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, we've gained a lot of
ground, but there's still a mountain yet to climb. Okay.
We'll do that, then.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thanks for calling it
to our attention, Franklin.
DODGE HENNEKE: Item Number 9, consider and
discuss County's authority and/or responsibility in
regulation of condominium ~.level~pments.
MR. JOHNSTON: That's another question --
fcrm of a question here. Does the County Engineer --
Commissioners Court have authority, under 5.01G of the Kerr
County Subdivision Rules, to regulate condominium projects?
lU-SK-
1
2
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2~
Z3
29
~S
56
Apparently, one of the projects that was going through as a
standard subdivision plat has flipped over and become a
condominium project.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Want me to take a stab at
Lhis one, Judge'?
DODGE HENNEKE: Lead off, brother.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The answer is yes, if it
triggers any -- you know, if there is any transfer -- if it
meets the definition of requiring a plat, yes, a condominium
comes in under other types of deve_opments. So, if there's
anything -- basically, as I interpret it, if there's any
change of title or access roads, you know, if it's a --
deeding a road Lo an association or anything like that, that
will trigger platting, and they're subject to our general
rules. If they're just out there not doing any of that, if
it's just a piece of land, they're going to do a -- you
know, a project with no conveyance of right-of-way, I think
that it would possibly come under Chapter H2, which I'm
really not familiar with. But it wouldn't come under our
subdivision -- I mean, if it meets the -- our basic
definition by the State of "subdivision," if it triggers any
of those things --
MR. JOHNSTON: Well, this one has new roads,
and -- and they're private, but they're new roads, and --
CGMMIS;,IGNER LETZ: But, I mean, if --
i~,-.a-n.~~
57
1
3
4
5
F
8
J
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
~0
21
22
2~
24
25
currently, that land is owned by an individual, and if it's
going -- if he's deeding the access of those roads to an
association, that will trigger platting, correct? As I
understand it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Or even -- seems to me, even
if he's cutting the roads and then deeding title to the
individual units.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. If he's doing --
if lie's building roads, and that title to that road is doing
anything other than to him personally --
MK. JOHNSTON: Mm-hmm.
CCMMISSIONER LETZ: -- that's going r_o
trigger a plat.
MR. JOHNSTON: If he takes ownership of all
the roads, it doesn't, but --
C_OMMSSSIONER LETZ: We11, if he retains
ownership to all the roads and then sells off the tracts --
JUDGE HENNEKE: That use the roads, that's
still a plat.
MR. JOHNSTON: Still a plat, yeah. Onder
Chapter 8~, rhaL A paragraph, .006, Applicability of Local
Ordinances, Regulations, and Building Codes, the way I read
it, it says, yeah, they have to follow --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. That's -- that's
correct. And that's, you know --
t -_e-
58
1
3
9
6
7
8
5
1G
11
12
13
14
IS
16
l~
18
19
?~
21
2Z
22
24
25
MR. JOHNSTON: -- Subdivision Rules. They
were under the impression it didn't, so that's why I brought
it up to the Court.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If it triggers the
definition of a plat, it doesn't make -- they can call it
whatever they want; it's still Subdivision Rules.
MK. JOHNSTUN: Do you have a court order I
can give them? And --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 1 mean, I don't
know what the court order -- I don't know what he's doing.
If - you need to bring to us what he's, you know, doing.
Then we can get a determination. I mean, but generally --
MR. JOHNSTUN: I showed you this earlier.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, it's --
PAIR. JOHNSTON: Look at the highlighted part.
COMMTSSIONER GRIFFIN: I would suggest that
we're -- that we direct Franklin to respond to this; that it
is not -- it says -- the quote says, We therefore want to
withdraw the preliminary plat, blab, blab, blah. Let me
know if my understanding as set forth above is not correct.
And I think what we d~ is we say, your understanding of the
above is not correct.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I think you need to respond
to Mr. Jackson, something to say that if the land
de*aelopment activity meets the definition of a plat, then,

59
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
?~
23
~4
25
you know, the -- it would have to follow through the normal
subdivision platting regulations. And I think that's what
Jonatkiaii is saying.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Righr_.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That if they're building
roads for access, even if they're buildinq roads and access
is going to be owned in common, that's still a plat.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The fact that's it's a
condominium, you're still selling off -- I mean, you have a
common area -- you have bigger common areas, but you still
have cwnership in a -- inside the walls.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER LE`1'Z: And that is going to --
it's no different than selling off lots. You're still -- I
mean --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You come under
different rules for different things, but it does not do
away with the requirement for a plat.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's the deal. I
think bottom line is that, yeah, there's some other looser
rules that you play by in the condominium -- under the
condnminium act, but_ it does not negate -- in our judgment,
does not negate the requirement for a plat to be approved by
the Court.
-"_~-
1
L
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
ZO
21
2~
23
~4
25
60
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the issue comes,
they're going to have to come and -- with -- you know,
obviously, lc,~ size is adjusted in a condominium
development; you're not going to have -- you ~~ould have, I
guess, 5-acre u~iidominium unit sizes, but --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And there are also
some O.S.S.F. issues, depending on the density. It can
trigger the requirement for a -- more than 5,000 gallons
total, they have to have a T.N.R.C.C. or T.C.E.Q. permit;
mere than 5,000 requires processing plant, all those kinds
of things.
MR. JGHNSTUN: Still have floodplain, flood
issues, drainage issues.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And some people
issues. If they say they're yoing to criange it, we need to
know what that is for O.S.S. F. purposes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How do they see
themselves benefiting by going the route they're requesting?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: They don't plat.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sounds like not platting.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that all there is
to it?
J~JDGE HENNEKE: Well, I think you'll find
it's probably a density issue, too. I think if they can get
out from under the pla*_ting, then they can put more people
t -_: ,_
61
1
2
i
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
I7
18
19
L V
21
22
23
24
25
than our current rules provide for.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's probably --
Fred's probably closer.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And which may trigger
a T.C.E.Q. issue though On-Site Sewage.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
CUMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Because of the high
requirement if you put a lot of people.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Y'all are being honest
here. Be careful.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I think we've got that one
done. Anything else?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, pretty simple.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Item Number 10 is consider
advertising Lor bid on Sheppard Rees Road improvements.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see the -- on his
schedule here, sealed bids would be received by -- in the
Clerk's office 5 p.m. Friday, December 6th. Bids are to be
addressed -- let's see. Bids to be opened 10 a.m. Monday,
December 9, in the Commissioners Court. Pre-bid conference
November 21 at 2 p.m. Anything else before I make a motion'?
MR. JOHNSTON: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we approve
the advertising for bid on Sheppard Rees Road improvement
project.
i =-_.-~i
62
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
li
18
ly
20
21
?~
;' 3
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court
authorize the advertisement for bid on Sheppard Rees Road
improvements as submitted. 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
11, consider and discuss allowing Road and Bridge Department
to go out for bids on the least of a loader.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. At the previous
meeting, I -- for information, I addressed this, and you
said to come back to court. And what we did at the time,
even in this memo here -- I will address this in this last
paragraph. I'd like -- at the time, I didn't have all the
data I wanted for an estimate or for appraisal. We have a
19HE3 Dresser 51UB, Serial Number 72Uy, that has extensive
damage to the transmission, will not go into reverse at all.
We've had it in the shop, taken a look at it to see if there
was any valves or anything else that we could -- that may
have been wrong. Basically, it is in the transmission
itself. The repair costs are estimated to be, at the least,
$12,500.
11 9 ;,,
1
~-. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1G
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-.
25
63
We have been calling other people to get
appraisals, and just from the fact that it's -- describing
what's happening, and so we know that that minimum is 12, 5,
probably going up. If they're quoting 12, 5, it would be
even greater than that; we figure $14,000, $15,000. We
currently lease one loader at a cost of $1,126 a month.
That's the most current lease we have on a 924, recently.
At this time, we are asking the Court to consider the
following: Allow us to go out for bids for a 5-year lease
on a new loader like we have in the past. Consider
declaring the old loader surplus and allow us to offer the
Dresser as trade-in on lease of the new loader. If the
Court allows this, we will fund the lease of appror,imately 9
months within our current budget and adjust the following
years to accommodate the cost of the loader lease.
At the time I wrote that last paragraph, I
told Truby to put it in. We had asked people to come in and
give us an appraisal on the unit itself to see cost
justification, to see what it was worth. And we did qet
that, but after we submitted that for documentaticn for you,
we were told that if the -- if the loader was like it was, a
1988, it was worth about $15,000. If you took the 12 -- and
this came from Holt. We asked them to come out and give an
appraisal, their	appraiser to	come	look	at this	thing.	The
cost, if you take	the lam' from	that,	we	figured	there was	a
_d n_
64
1
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~1
22
23
~4
25
residual of $3,000 just as it -- as it stood now. To spend
that kind of money would probably go closer to the actual
cost of the loader, the value of it. That's just for the
transmission. If we have another diesel, if we had an
engine problem, we're probably looking at $15,000 to $17,000
for a diesel engine, so we've way exceeded -- I mean, what's
to say that's not there? It was logical to assume that the
lease would be the best way to go. We looked and calculated
the residual value, plus what 1 had in Capital Outlays. I
have $3,75 .60 left out of my Capital Outlays. Taking that
at $1,12b from 12 months, there was a difference of
$5,759.40.
We feel like if you calculate what the lease
rate is on the last loader, which is less than a year ago,
that that would be six months rental. By the time we get
through putting cut to bid and -- and receiving a loader, it
would probably be in January, so all I would need is about
three months rental to make this work, and which would put
me in July, August, and September. And the worst I would do
is to use the Equipment Repair money, which it's going to
come out oI LkiaL anyway, and in those months when we start
to have major damage to something that is costly, our -- our
pxugxam is to finish sealcoat. We normally take things and
put it back if it's costly. So, we feel like we -- we were
better off uy leasing it than we are to -- to expend that

65
1
G
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
i5
16
17
18
1 `~
20
~l
22
23
~q
25
type of money this early into the budget year. Plus, we're
under warranty, and if we have any problems with the loader,
it's covered under warranty, just like we are, up to five
years. And I think this last time we had $250 -- it was a
tremendous bid. So, if things are the same, we just feel
like it's more logical to go ahead and go out for a lease.
We ask the Court to consider that, declare that surplus, and
then I will make it up and I will adjust the budget come May
when we submit the new budget to the Court.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No hit foreseen to the
'03 budget as it stands now?
MR. ODOM: As it stands now, I don't foresee
that. I thin]: I can make it work.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why is it necessary
to declare the old loader surplus if you're asking for
permission to trade it in?
MR.. ODOM: Well, that's the -- I have to ask
the Court for -- to trade it in legally, 1 have to declare
it surplus.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: He has to declare it
surplus so we can use it for a trade-in.
MR. ODOM: For a trade. I don't have the
authority by law to -- only the Court does.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand.
. ~-'y-u_
h6
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
ld
19
20
?1
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I'll make a motion we
approve this request, and as submitted.
COMMISSIONEF, BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, tYiat the Court
authorize the Road and Bridge Department to go out for bids
for a 5-year lease on new loader, that the Court declare the
existing 52UB loader as surplus, and that the Court allow
the Road and Bridge Department to offer the current Dresser
520B loader as a trade-in on the lease of the new loader,
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.
MP,. ODOM: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Leonard. Item
Number 12, consider and approve amer.diug Order 27663,
Appointment of Election Judges and Alternate Judges for
Norember General Election, as per Texas Election Code
Chapter 3~. Jannett Pieper.
MS. PIEPER: 'T'hank you, Judge. Since our
appointment of the election judges and alternates, things
have came up, and we've had several that have asked to be
-~H-.,~
67
1
L
3
9
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
1 i'
13
14
15
lh
17
18
19
c0
21
'' 2
~3
24
25
replaced for various reasons. The letter that I'm passing
out now is another amendment to the list that you have
received with the agenda item. The -- on the backup for the
agenda, we have a precinct judge in 303, 405, 314, and 32G,
that need to be replaced, and S have the names listed of
people replacing those. And then the alternate judges in
404 and 118, I have their names listed, with the exception
of this letter that I jest handed you.
COMMISSIONEP. LETZ: Jannett, question I have
is on 314. The address given of the new judge is Mountain
Home. Is there a typo on one of them, or do they have two
residences?
MS. PIEFER: To my knowledge, that is their
mailing address, but I --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You need to check,
because, I mean, clearly Mcuntain Home is not in Precinct
314.
MS. PIEPER: That I don't know.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I just --
MS. PIEPER: If they cannot find judges in
that particular precinct, the law does d]low them to go
outside the precinct to find a judge.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. PiEPER.: But they have to look within
that precinct first.
_'8 __
68

1
3
4
5
6
7
8
5
10
11
l~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
I)
~1
21'
L ,S
24
-,
~~
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. PIEPER: She does live on the Y.O. Ranch
Road Nox-thwest.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But she's willing to come
in to --
MS. PIEPER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just checking.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or
comments?
COMMISSIONEP, BALDWIN: So, we're replacing
Mrs. Ford now with Mrs. Nomer?
MS. P7EPER: Excuse me? I didn't hear you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In 118, we're
replacing C4rs. Ford with Mrs. Nomer?
MS. PIEPER: Yes, we are.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, let's see. I'll
sure make a motion so we man have lunch on tiuue.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Conuuissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court amend
Order 27563, Appointment of Election Judges and Alternate
Judges for the November General Election as per T.E.C.
Chapter 32, as recommended and presented by the County
Clerk. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor,
raise your right hand.
-~e-
69
1

I
1
1
t
1
2
3
4
h
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
13
ly
20
21
22
23
24
25
(The motion carried by unanimcus vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Oppcsed, same sign.
(No response.]
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
MS. PIEPER: Thank you.
DODGE HENNEKE: Thank you. item Number 13,
consider and discuss amending the Capital Outlay budget line
item in the Sheriff's Department budget for new leased
vehicles, to increase the amount from $61,042 to $64,039.85.
Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Don't know -- I haven't
talked to Judge Henneke about this. l don't know where the
$3,000 short came. I don't know if it was in the
last-minute adding of -- taY,ing care of the one car that got
washed eff by the flood when we were replaciny it, or if it
was in some percentage. I've looked and the Judge looked,
and he's just -- when we got this first bill, this is where
it's -- where the amount is.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'll accept responsibility
for it. I don't know how it happened, but we obviously came
up about $3,000 short in the lease program. So, what we
need to do is move that money from Contingency to that line
item and increase the Sheriff's capital budget by that
amount.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZEH: The only other place I
-~~-
70
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
1i
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
LO
21
~~
_L
23
~4
25
can think of, when we got paid off on the car that we lost
in the flood, there was about $3,On0-something that went
back into that line item, right at the erid of last budget
year. And I don't know if that's what was figuring this and
it didn't carry cn over into this budget year or what, but I
can shod that in the budget, where it went back in in
August. I lust don't know.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER BALGWIN: Well, I do -- I have a
I
comment. I think -- I think a Ford Expedition, to me, is an II
extravagant luxury, and I can't see, in my mind, how that it
helps protect the citizens of k.err County against criminals. ~'
To me, we`re going in and, within one month of breaking
the -- not breaking the budget, but adding to a budget for
something that, to me, is -- is a luxury, And 1 didn't
like -- I didn't like the idea of purchasing that type of
automobile in the beginning, and I really don't today. I'm
going to vote no on this issue.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or
comments? The Court did approve the Expedition as part of
the Capital Outlay lease-purchase program. The intent of it
was tc have an off -- off-road vehicle, which the current
patrol cars are not equipped for.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The intent of the
Expedition was to give the Sheriff's Departm?nt one
i _' fi
71
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
ft
9
10
11
1'
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
~~
21
22
23
L Y
25
four-wheel drive vehicle for use during floods, and even
during normal times when we have to get some of these places
that -- that we need to get to. It wasn't a luxury. It's
under the state contract through H.G.A.C,; that's Houston
COG. That's the four-wheel drive. Unless you get just a
regular four-wheel drive pickup that just doesn't have the
weight in the back end to consider that to even be used on
patrol.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 1 understand that,
Rusty. And 1 also understand that at one time, this Court
purchased a pickup for the Sheriff's Office for the Estray
program. I mean, that's your vehicle. That's a Sheriff's
vehicle. Doesn't have anything to do with picking up dogs
and cats or stray horses and that kind of thing. So --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZEH: Didn't --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where the Estray
program is.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER.: Also didn't have
anything to do with this Sheriff. And the deal we worked,
and that happens with all our estrays now, is where it
should be, is in Animal Control.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. So, we're
stuck with a pickup. It's just -- yuu know, I just -- I see
it as an extravagance. That's just the way I see it. I'm
not -- you know, I'm not angry at yuu or -- not yet. But --
1 -~b-_
1
2
3
4
E
7
ft
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~1
22
23
24
25
72
(Laughter.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Make him late for lunch, he
will be.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, we're going to
have a good fight here in about an hour and a half.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I recall the
discussion and the Sheriff making a point for a four-wheel
vehicle, and it came, obviously, on the heels of all the
flooding. And it would appear that the shortfall is -- is
due to the fact that, for whatever reasons, we didn't add
S4,2U0 to cover the added cost cf that particular vehicle.
Is that correct?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, that's not for that
particular vehicle.
DODGE HENNEKE: It was a pencil went wrong
somewhere, and I'm not sure where it was. I've looked and
the Sheriff's looked, and neither one oT us can figure out
how we came up short.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it's pretty
simple. The other vehicles are 2F, 5 apiece, and this one
is $30,000. So --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But you're talking over
a three-year period.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The three-year lease.
-'"- -
1
2
3
4
5
F
8
G
10
11
1^
13
14
15
16
l~
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
73
And what we had left cut of that -- or after we got the
payment -- 'cause this is a little over $3,000, and after we
got the payment back on the one that washed off, they paid
off that car, the one we lost. It was $3,460. That went in
-- went bac}: into the old budget before this took effect.
And I think --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's -- I suspect
that was --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It I'm not mistaken, I
think the intention was that that would also be added in
somehow. It didn't.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand ali
that, Sheriff, and it just gets down to unit cost. And unit
cost for the Crown Victoria is a lesser unit cost than the
unit cost for the Expedition, and therein lies the
shortfall, as I see it.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: But it also -- iL you
look at the cost for the four-wheel drive vehicle, that's
not a bad price, that much -- the $30,759,50 for LYie cost of
the -- of the -- of any four-weel drive vehicle is not way
above -- in fact, I don't think it's above the market at
all. So, if you bought off on having a four-wheel drive
vehicle, this is probably as good a price as you man get.
And I'll make the motion that we approve the request as
submitted.
~_-_"- -


1
2
3
4
5
5
7
2
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
74
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And where does the
money r_ome from?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN; Oh, that's only out --
has to come out of Contingency.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; I think that's what
Fred said. I didn't know if that's what everybody agreed to
or not.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Dcn't you have any money
in your budget anywhere?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only place -- and I
seriously thought about this, but 1've got a problem with
it, and I mentioned this to Judge Henneke -- would be out of
our -- to give up our Capital Outlay out of the jail. And
that was -- if you'll remember, was to replace cameras and
monitors in the jail. And it's not even enough Lu euver the
full amount, but the problem is, in the last week, I've got
about four cameras going out in the jail, 'cause all those
cameras are about six years old now. So, I just don't have
it at this time, that I can see.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You have jailer's
slots above and beyond --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, I do not.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- the state
regula*_ions.
SHERIFF HIERHGLZER: We are fully staffed,
i -_"- '-
~s
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
5'
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
In
1
z~
~q
L_
sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You have jailer slots
above and beyond what the State requires.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I have a motion. Do I have a
second?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Ccmmissioner Williams, that the Court
approve amending the Capital Outlay budget line item in the
Sheriff's Department to increase the amount from $61,642 to
$64,039.85, with the additional funds to be taken from the
Contingency line item in the Commissioners Court budget.
Any other questions or comments? If not, all iu favor,
raise your right hand.
(Commissioners Williams, Letz, and Griffin
voted in favor of the motion.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed?
(Commissioner Baldwin voted against the
motion.;
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Let's do one
more and rake a break. Item number 14, consider and discuss
and rake appropriate action on resubmission of 2003 Colonias
E'und Application for coriLiiiuatiun of Kerrville South
rf?astewater Collection. Project. Commissioner Williams.
CGMMISSIOI4ER WILLIAMS: The Court will
-_9 ~_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
L 2
23
24
25
76
remember that earlier this morning, we were notified that
the funding for the 2002 Colonia competition, we missed
funding by about four spots; they funded 13 positions and we
came in at 17. It's the considered opinion of the folks who
hacidle this matter fox us that with an additional -- with an
additional matching fund, which we would anticipate the
o.G.R.A. would come up with, we should resubmit this,
ber_ause with that additional matching funds, we would have
additional opportunities to have matching funds again. This
would be for the Loyal Valley -- part of the Loyal Valley
and the George Muck part of project, which is really
necessary for this to be a successful project and end
result. And, tkiexefore, I'm asking the Court to approve
resubmission of this application.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sriould we be concerned
about those numbers? You know, what is a Larger matching
fund at this time? Or are we just --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe it was
$20,000.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then he says at
that time, some initial payments for engineering and
administrative services would be necessary. I mean, how
much?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That comes out of the
funds.
lr~-ze-c7
77
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
15
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So all we're doing
today is just approving -- is a step to go out --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Go back again.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Doesn't it -- wouldn't it
make sense to go to U.G.R.A. first to see if they're willing
to up their ante?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, they've had
that discussion, Commissioner. They had -- Grantworks folks
had a discussion with U.G.R.A., and I think it's a question
of timing, as it wasn't appropriate for them to make that
final decision. They didn't want to do it in this
particu]ar budget time frame; they want to do it in next
budget time frame.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second it, Bill,
if you can get a motion on the table.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll make that
motion, that we resubmit the Colonias Fund Application for
continuation of Kerrville South Wastewater Project for use
in the Loyal Valley portion of the project.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
authorize resubmission of the 2003 Colonias Fund Application
for continuation of Kerrville South Wastewater Collection
Project for use in the Loyal Valley portion of the project.
t v ~ ~~±
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
5
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
?5
78
Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your
right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: A11 opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Okay. Let's
take a 10-minute break. We'll come back and deal with the
Arts and Crafts Foundation and the Hi11 Country Exhibit
Center.
(Recess from 10:30 a.m. to 10:90 a.m.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: A11 right. Let's reconvene
this regular special session of the Kerr County
Commissioners Court. Next item for discussion is Item
Number 15, consider and discuss review and approval of the
agreement with Texas Arts and Crafts Foundation.
Commissioner Lets.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I puff. this on the agenda
because we need -- I Lhink we're all familiar with what
we're talking about out here, but we need to get moving on
it. And I also handed out -- should be in front of
everybody -- a memorandum from David Motley, and it's kind
of -- I guess we should probably address this issue first,
and then we can go to the agreement and make sure everyone's
on the same page. Under Lhe -- the type of agreement that
1~~.-_A-
I
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
1~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
?~
21
22
23
24
25
~9
we use, we've talked about using a lease, and then -- or a
license, or just joint agreement, all kinds of terminology
we used. And I think my recommendation at this point is
that we go with a formal lease that will require a 20-day
notice period for us to put it out for auction, so to speak,
or public -- you know, other people could bid on this. I
think we can structure that notice and that requirement such
that it's going to be very difficult for anyone else to come
up wil.h a --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Use.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A use and a lease on the
terms, other than the Arts and Crafts Foundation, which is
our intent to yet trie -- you know, to use the property. But
it's possible somebody else could. I mean, you know, you
don't know. BuL, based on Mr. Motley's memo, to go the
lease route, we have to go the public auction route. The
other option would be to appoint a -- probably a park board,
and then ore can designate that area a park and go that
route. That really seems an awful cumbersome approach, just
to make one agreement with one foundation. So, my
recommendation would be *_o -- to go the lease route and
publish a notice, and in 20 days we can make a decision.
Anyway, any other comments or questions on that item?
And --
MR. MOTLEY: You could do the -- you know,
n - ~ d - ~ '1
1
G
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
73
24
25
80
the sealed bid type of lease, too.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR.. MOTLEY: I don't know if that would be
any faster or not than the auction type. Are you talking
about sealed bid type?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, sealed bid type.
Bur, I mean, by your memo, David, it looked like it was a
20-day period. You have to have three notices.
JOUGE HENNEKE: The memo says it must be at a
public auction.
MR. MO'T'LEY: Public auction unless another
exception applies, and there's some exceptions for the
lease -- where you can lease it. But the only problem with
that is that -- and I think Jonathan hit the nail on the
head, is that the minimum bid on the lease acceptable has to
be the fair market value of the estate and land conveyed.
And if the buildings such as are to be erected are
considered as compensation, I think that will take care of
that. The Parks Board thing could have wider applicability
than just this one situation. It would be something -- and
as I said earlier, I don't know if I handed this out to you,
but the Parks Board does not actually have to create a
board. The Commissioners Court can serve without ever
having to create a board. It doesn't have to appoint itself
as Park Commissioners. The Commissioners Y_hemselves can run
L -2A-;;
81
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
this function of the county, and have -- and it takes a very
little time to create that board. But they could lease and
do what they saw fit in order to operate a park. And all
the county land can basically be considered as park land in
that situation. But -- you know, but if you need any
statutory references and stuff, I can go get what you need.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: David, I think, to me,
the one issue is, under Local Government Code 263.007, which
is the lease for sale through sealed bid procedure, we need
to know the notice period. To me, that's the preferred way
to do it, through a sealed bid, as opposed to an auction.
MR. MOTLEY: Okay, hold it a second. I may
have it with me
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How do we arrive at
the appraised value, fair market value?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: For a lease. It's not
the fair market value of the property. It's sale -- it's
the fair market value of the lease, right?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know, maybe
public auction is better. I mean, to me, it's whichever is
quickest.
MR. MILLER: Yeah, we're under the gun on a
couple things. Our S.B.A. loan has a 60-day window, and
we're three weeks into it already. I'm going to have to go
back to the S.B.A. and do something to forestall that.
_ ~y
82
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
1"
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
L Y
25
We've pulled it once; I'm not -- and we're through their
legal department, so I'm not sure where we are on that
status. My question to you is that one of those paragraphs
in the memo from Mr. Motley referred to one of the
exceptions being a cultural --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was just going to
touch on that, 'cause I noticed that in his letter --
memorandum, that the governing body of a county,
municipality, so forth and so on, if it touches on
cultural -- recreational or cultural facility. I was going
to wonder aloud whether or not the Texas State Arts and
Crafts Fair, which has amongst its vendors only those who
match certain criteria for crafts and so forth, doesn't fit
into that.
MR. MILLER: It's a juried tine arts and
crafts fair, but we also have planned to do an art gallery
as part of our office complex there that would be open
during the year.
MR. MOTLEY: That sounds right. The only
reason I didn't go any further into that one, I believe it
actually requires participation by the municipality. Not
that Kerrville would not participate, but I thought we --
you know, the idea was to kind of move it along as quickly
as possible. So, we would have to involve them, as I see
1 t .
1 ~ - .. -
83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lU
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
ly
20
Gl
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. You're saying
that takes joint participation in order to qualify? Is that
what you're saying?
MR. MOTLEY: Yeah, I believe so, if I'm not
mistaken. There are six different things; I might have a
couple of them confused, but I have some notes here that I
can -- Jonathan, this deal requires that the County publish
before sale or lease a notice of intent.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: David, on the lease type,
if we did an auction or sealed bid, either one, can we put
the criteria that the -- the purpose of the lease is to
have -- to construct a recreational, you know, facility?
MR. MOTLEY: I don't see any reason why not.
That's the consideration that we're seeking in the lease; it
would be that, instead of paying money for it. I think that
has a value. It would be -- probably be a value that could
be established -- iT you went the sealed bid route, value
could probably be established by an appraiser, I feel fairly
sure, on the lease.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But to go the sealed bid
route, you nave to get an appraiser before we can proceed?
MR. MOTLEY: Yes. And appraisal has to be --
fair market value appraisal has to be the minimum bid
acceptable under that scenario.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can we go -- I want to
i~~~~-ze-o,
84
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
i7
18
19
20
21
~~
Gc
23
24
25
know -- we have no money to pay for appraisal, but could you
go ahead and start advertising -- do you have to put the
minimum bid in the advertising?
MR. MOTLEY: I don't -- it says right here
the procedure must -- must include a requirement that the
County publish, before the sale or lease is made, a notice
of the intent to sell or lease, as appropriate, the real
property. Notice must be published in a newspaper of
general circulation in the county. If real property is
located -- no, nevermind. Must be published on two dates,
with the date of the second publication occurring before the
14th day before the award of sale or lease. So, two
notices, with the last being before 14 days before,
including description of the real property, including
location, including description, procedure by which the bids
will be taken in and opened. And then -- but before selling
property, the Commissioners shall obtain an appraisal --
determine the minimum bid amount based on the appraisal.
They may reject any and all bids. So, you know, you do your
appraisal, it seems to me, only before it's actually
included. So, if that's the way you choose to go, we can do
that, too.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The other option is a
park board.
MR. MOTLEY: Right. Well, yeah, the parks
i„ _H ua
85
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~2
23
~4
25
board. But, again, like I said, a parks board does not have
to be a separate entity, necessarily. The Commissioners
Court could run it, and it may give them more authority over
all their park land. Don't have to actually create a
separate entity called a parks board.
MR. MILLER: Does the cultural exception
still fall under all those bid --
MR. MOTLEY: We11, I shied away from the
cultural exception -- excuse me -- because of the
requirement of the involvement of the munir_ipality. Not --
again, not that Kerrville wouldn't just jump right in and
help, but looks to me like it's a joint thing, if I -- if I
recall this right. I didn't bring a lot -- and some of
these references are on -- on a hard drive on the computer.
I don't have them all printed out, but I can r_heck that for
you right quick.
MR. MILLER: We've already received support
from the Kerrville Convention and Visitor's Bureau on this
project, and we will go to the City's E.I.C. for funds also.
We're going to -- we're trying to go to L.C.R.A., Texas
Parks and Wildlife, local foundations, and city entities to
help us fund this project. We also do -- under the cultural
r_oncept, we do demonstrations and rare Texas arts and
whatnot at the art fair, and the program that's coming here
is to really videotape those and record those to create a

86
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IJ
16
17
18
1`3
ZO
2'1
22
23
c4
ZS
library. 50, I think that's an area we may fall under, if
it works. Now, what I need is -- is speed and a lease. One
of my problems with some of the other things we talked
about, like licensing, is that every other entity --
L.C.R.A., Parks and Wildlife, everybody else, I think, is
going to quiver and shake at anything that doesn't say
"lease" on it. You know, it's going to slow the process
down a bun~~h.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would -- I mean, to me,
the cleanest way is to do the lease and have a -- a sealed
bid. And 1 think, you know, the value that we're looking
at -- someone needs to create an event park, and then the
person that gives us the -- the biggest improvement value
wins. And I think -- and I'm saying that because I know
you're -- the investment -- the monetary and -- or the
investment of the improvements that g'all's association or
foundation is looking at is substantial, and L can't imagine
anyone coming up with doing more than that. I mean, it's
possible.
MR. MILLER: My major concern today -- kind
of running a short fuse. I didn't see those exceptions
until this morning. This is my S.B.A. loan application. I
hate to lose Lhe money that has been approved 'cause we have
to put those on the back burner.
COMMISSIONEk LETZ: Right.
. = z e ri
87
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
a
10
I1
l~
13
14
IS
16
17
18
l~
20
~l
2c
23
24
25
MR. MILLER: That's something that's real
needed seed money at this point.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'm going to flip-flop on
myself. I'm going to be the first to admit it, because I
think that the only way to accomplish what we want to
acco::tplish and make sure we do it is to establish a county
park board.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAP~iS: I agree.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm with you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: 'Cause I think we control
Lhat. I think it's something we could do at our next
meeting.
rOMMISSSONER BALDWIN: Or tomorrow.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We obviously can't -- well,
we -- it's not posted, so we can`t do it tomorrow. But --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be the first time we
broke the law.
JUDGE HENNEKE: It would be the first time we
broke the law, and I'm not -- at this stage, I'm not
interested in it.
{Laughter.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: We could do it before that,
if we needed to. We could do it on -- on the 12th. But I
think, if -- if we set up a county park board, meet the
requirements and -- and present this lease to the county
-~e-n-
88
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l~
13
14
15
16
17
18
l~
20
21
22
23
24
~~
park board for their consideration, declare that to be a
park, I think we can get there a lot easier, and I think we
can have a -- we have a better opportunity to control the
pror_ess than we do through any sort of a bid process. I'm
just concerned, with as many entrepreneurs as we have in
Kerr County, if we opened up 7 acres next to the --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Goat barn.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- Ag Barn for -- for bid, I
mean, you know, the -- what's the name of that bar out
there? They may come in there and want -- want some
ad~9iLional space or some'_hing.
MR. MILLER: Volleyball court.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Actually, that may be
faster.
JUDGE HENNEKE: It's also faster.
MR. MOTLEY: There's no notice requirement or
anything.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Might be a faster
process.
MR. MOTLEY: And specifically which powers
that the County Commissioners would retain, and if they
chose to create a separate entity called a board, which
powers would be conveyed. And if you just did --
Commissioners keep it, there's no r_onveyance of any powers
necessary. It just tells in there very specifically what
__~_ _
89
2
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~4
25
they can do, and it's just everything you can think of doing
with a piece of land or a building.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: David, is there a notice
requirement, or can you just create it at the next meeting?
MR. MOTLEY: I have no notice requirement in
the chapter. I have the whole chapter here. It just said
Lhat you just adopt it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that makes
sense, because I think we have other things that we want to
do with respect to parks, not the least of which is the
updating of the parks master plan, and a parks board. So,
Commissiwiars Court, sitting as a parks board, could take
care of those matters --
COMMISSIONEk LE'1"L: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- expeditiously.
JUDGE HENNEKE: 1 think that's the quickest
way to accomplish this. Now, I don't know what the pitfalls
are, if any, if we declare this 7 acres to be a park. If,
for some reason, we should need it for any other use, we'd
have to
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Ondeclare.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- double back on ourselves
or what. But I -- for this purpose, I think that's the best
avenue to accomplish what we want to do.
1C-3f]-~_~
90
1
2
3
9
5
E
7
S
y
10
11
1L
13
19
15
16
1~
18
19
~0
Zl
22
23
29
~J
MR. MILLER: Well, even under the original
proposed lease agreement we have, it is even -- one of the
requirements is the County has to maintain that for public
use in perpetuity. You know, at the end of the lease term,
if we gave it back to you. So, I don't think that changes
the character of it at all.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone have any
questions about the lease that's in our book?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, let's talk about those.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: And then we'll move on.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Simple question. On
Page 5, Number 2 at the rop of the page, the maintenance.
It says it's -- it is contemplated by the parties hereto
that the landlord may mow the premise grounds as well as
provide other maintenance to the premises. In this event,
the landlord will bill the tenant for those services at a
rate that is mutually acceptable. I just wondered, do we --
wouldn't we need to define what "other maintenance" is? I
mean, are we going to send County staff in there to paint
buildings? Is that what we call "other maintenance"? Or --
I can see us mowing. 1 don't have any -- I mean, I can kind
of see that in my mind, but this term, "other maintenance,"
t~~ me, is kind Of broad.

91
1
2
3
4
5
F,
8
9
10
11
l~
13
14
15
16
1 "1
1 YJ
19
20
21
22
2.
24
2`
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, you know, we
could do -- Commissioner, I agree with you on your concern
there. Tnat, on an annual basis, the Commissioners Court,
you know, decide what that's going to be, because I don't
know that we know what_'s going to be there yet, and it's
hard to write an agreement, 7 think, for 20 years. But I
think we could add under that provision that this will be
mutually agreed to on an annual basis, and that way -- and,
ro me, it really goes back to even a little bit of a broader
provision under the rent provisions as to how you determine
ner_ profit. I rnean, I presume that this figure here kind of
-- you get paid -- we get paid that off the top, so to
speak.
MR. MILLER: And that's spoken to in the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. MILLER.: -- revenue portion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it's just -- you
know, I think it needs to be cleaned up a little bit, and I
agree with yuu on that.
MR. MILLER: On Page 2, we're -- or tcp of
Pagc Number 3, when you determine that net profit, it's plus
the cost of the county maintenance on the premises as
hereunder provided.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. And the other
question I have is, I know the, you know, potential. And
_ir _ -
92
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1T
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
we're not really trying to do this to make money as a
county, but my -- I guess my concern is that I can see, by
the definition of "net profit," the county -- that y'all
will never have a net profit.
Mk. MILLER: I hope so. I'm not much
interested in operating at a loss.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- and the reason I
say that is because if you take in all of your capital
improvements into that formula, you're talking about, you
know, half a million dollars of improvements, and I can see
that that could never get paid off ro the point that -- I
don't know how it's going to be amortized, how it's going to
be calculated into the formula, but I can see if you include
all your of your capital investment, that there would never
it be a profit, really, that the County would share anything.
Yet, at the same time, we're providing maintenance and we
would never get any -- we would be spending money and never
get anything even to break even.
MR. MILLER: Never get reimbursed for your
maintenance? We could make it provLsional; I think that --
T think that would make sense. Maybe we pay for the
maintenance as we go along. I don't haee a problem with
that, either.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the only concern I
had in the entire agreement, is just how that relationship
1; aH-,,,
93
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
t3
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1H
19
2U
21
~L
23
24
25
works, so that, you know, I don't -- as long as we break
even every year, L'd be happy. I don't think we're tryinq
to make money, but I don't want us to be losing money
basically, yeu know, subsidizing the foundation.
MR. MILLER: Our current plans are to
actively market that property the weekends that we're not
there with Arts and Crafts functions, and probably use
Convention anal Visitor's Bureau, Sudie Burditt, to help
market it along with the Ag center. I think there will be
some activities that will actually use both locations at the
same tir,ie. I think they'll complement each other very well.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And from my standpoint,
another option would be to understand the definition of "net
profit," qet rid of all capital improvements, have it more
of an operating --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Operating.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- an operating profit.
And, in which case --
JUDGE HENNERE: That doesn't --
MR. MILLER: EYCUSe me, I don't understand
that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: You do the amortized capital
improvements. TYiat's the way you typically define net
profit.
COMMISSIONEK LETZ: Okay.
iu-i5 n-
94
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
g
10
11
1G
l~
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: I think, as minimum rent, you
need to add in the amount of maintenance provided by the
County under Paragraph 2 that Commissioner Baldwin pointed
out.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Yeah.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Section E, Subparagraph 2,
that needs t_o be as part of the minimum rent, so there's no
question that the County's going to get reimbursed for that,
regardless oI whether or not --
MR. MILLEP,: `leap, that makes sense.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- there's any profits. Any
other questions or comments?
COMMIS510NER WILLIAMS: While it may not --
it's not specific to the proposed agreement for the
formation of a parks board, it was brought to my attention
that a prior Court -- and you, Commissioner Baldwin, and
Commissioner Letz would probably remember -- by court order,
instructed Rnad and Bridge to place the material that they
currently store there, and it was suggested that this Court
would have to reverse that court order in order for them to
remove those materials. Do you recall that? I'm really
asking, basically, whether or net you recall it. And if we
do need to reverse that court order and instruct them to
remove that stuff, then we can do it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We instructed the Road
-ze-o.
95
I
L
3
4
S
E
7
8
9
1G
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and Bridge nc;t to move it?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think the way it
was told to me was that -- yeah, was that the -- that we
were in the process of removing, by previous court order --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We first asked them to
remove iT, and then we find out from the -- Antiquities?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Archeological.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Archeological?
COMMISSIONER LE'PZ: State Board of
Antiquities.
MR. MILLER: Texas Historical Commission.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Texas Historical
Commission that we are not to move anything anywhere because
of the Indian rnounds.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's kind of where
we are today.
COMMISSZONER WILLIAMS: Did you instruct them
to stop what they were doing?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do we need to reverse
that or not?
MR. MILLER: Let me tell you where the status
of that is. We've done the archeological survey within the
last three weeks. The site that was the numbered
archeological site on that location, to my understanding --
_ -<n-n_
96
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
l~
18
lg
20
21
22
23
24
5
they have not submitted us a written report, you know -- has
been discounted, and there wasn't anything dumped there,
which it's really kind of on the bank of the ditch.
Although they have -- they're telling me they're probably
going to name an area that's along Riverside Drive from the
drainage ditch back towards that back gate probably 100
yards, but none of your materials are stored on that site,
either. We -- I talked to them directly, because we started
clearing out there already, whether we could clear, and they
said as long as we were using wheeled vehicles, that -- and
hand r_learing, that was fine. They just didn't want any
bulldozers, you know, moving dirt and whatnot until they do
their work and give us a final report. So, the ability to
go in and pick up the steel and whatnot that's out there, I
think, is -- is not in -- in conflict at all with their
directions at this point.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did they say that to
you in writing? Or --
MR. MILLER: What?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That we can go in with
a truck and haul off --
MR.. MILLER: No, that was verbal, because I
told them I had a crew going -- they scare me; they've got
big penalties, so before we were going to do any clearing or
anything else, I wanted to make sure that that was okay.
in-~d-~~
97
1
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
~l
?z
23
24
25
But_ it_ was verbal only.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And they scare me a
little bit, too, but I'm not scared any longer. I don't
think -- you know, I'm in agreement with what they've told
you; that it's -- the trash is not anywhere near the Indian
mounds. Never has been. And there's a gate and a road and
the whole thing. We can drive in there, load it up and haul
it off, and it's out of there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I visited with Road and
Bridge on that, and the only thing that -- there are -- at
least from what I could tell through the weeds over there,
there's a bunch of old guardrails and some railroad ties and
some concrete culverts -- or old concrete culverts, as I
understand. The Arts and Crafts Foundation may have a use
fox those concrete culverts, but they have little to no use
for the old railroad ties and the guardrails.
MR. MILLER: And there's a little steel stuff
scattered in the woods out there. But a lot -- most of it
is the old --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Guardrails
MP.. MILLEE:: Yeah, the guardrails.
rOMMISSIONER LETZ: Road and Bridge said they
would -- I thought we were still under the court order that
told them to clean it up, which I guess we are, and then
they're told to stop.

98
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
~~
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the whole
point.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But they've been -- I
told Truby we need to get it -- clean that stuff out of
there. And it's not on the Indian mound, so I don't think
we're violating any, you know, antiquities study.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do we need to tell
them again to get it out of there by official court order?
'Cause that's really the question.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think you can pick
up the phone and say, "Please go get that stuff."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. MILLER: Can I ask one other thing? I
take it Road and Bridge have already started dumping again
after they burned trie pile there. There was -- if y'all
would ask them to please not dump any more. Or if they do,
do you want to get it burned? I don't -- I don't really
care if they dump it and burn it, but --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Anything else on
i_he Arts and Crafts'?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, my only
suggestion. is, because of triis time frame that he's working
under, couldn't we come back on Friday morning and approve
this board issue? Three of us come in here Friday?
n__,-~~_
99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
lb
17
1S
19
20
21
L ?
23
24
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: If we need to do that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we need to at the
same time, if we all could just save -- adjust this anything
-- any way we need to, which shouldn't take y'all too long.
MR. MILLER: And I provided Mr. Motley -- and
I received this morning the actual legal description of the
acreage, so that we actually know how much it is. You know,
7-point, I think, 2 --
MR. MOTLEY: 7.1, I think.
MR. MILLER: 7.18 acres.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The contract will
have to be restructured.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Parks will have to approve
it, but we can come back on Friday, if Y_hat's what the
pleasure of t7-ie Court is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just -- because of
this time frame, leL's get it done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. There's no
reason for you to geL any extensions anywhere. I mean, if
we can do normal court business and get everything done on
your schedule at our next meeting, that would be my
preference, but if there's any reason for us to call a
special meeting, we certainly can. And we probably are
going to have another special meeting next week anyway, or
late this week, after I visit with Mr. Gondeck. We'll find
~~ t -
100
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
i9
20
21
22
~3
24
25
that out shortly. Z think we can do both of them at our
next special meeting, which will be soon.
MR. MILLER: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. Thank you, Bob.
Do you want to take the asbestos thing?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Asbestos.
DODGE HENNEKE: Next item --
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Next item is Item Number 16,
consider and discuss authorization of an asbestos survey of
the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center. Commissioner Letz.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: In meeting with Wayne
Gondeck, I guess it was last week, out at the Ag Barn, a
question was asked as to if we had ever done that asbestos
survey out there, what Lhe status was of asbestos in any of
the buildings out there, and the answer was, "I don't know;
ask Maintenance." Tliey didn't know, and Mr. Gondeck advised
that, basically, for us to proceed, we need to know the
answer to that question. And 1 asked him if he could come
up with someone to do that work and a proposal and bring it
to us today. Mr. Gonder_k? yot;.'ve probably got it out o£
sequence.
MR. GONDECK: I'm sorry, I had my papers in a
different order there. In going through the facility out
there, in looking at the age of the construction and talking

1
2
.-_
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
lol
about some of the methods that the facility was constructed
on a barn that's intended or proposed to be demolished at
this point, my question was brought up, that any time a
public entity does go into renovations or demolition of an
that or abate that prior to going in and doing the general
demolition. There were no apparent areas that I could say,
oh, yes, this is definitely an area that would have asbestos
in it. However, we have, within similar-type structures,
found it in all sort of mastic and other type of materials
that may be present in the existing building. Secondly,
there is either a vermiculite or perlite-type poured decking
on top of the majority of the barn, and with the type of
construction, it very well may have had fibers in there.
Now, the reason why this does affect us right
now, even though we're going with a design-build proposal,
it is easy to presume that any proposal that we get from a
design-build contractor without specific knowledge of
whether or not there is asbestos or not would exclude that
from any of their proposals, and then the Court would have
to decide, well, hew are we going to deal with that? And we
don't know if we're going to have a major demolition issue
outside of the contract or whether it's going to be taken
in-~e- ~~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
15
LO
~l
22
23
24
25
102
care of inside the design-build scope of work. So, it's my
recommendation to go forward at this time with the asbestos
survey, because we would be required at any time that you go
in and do those additions or renovations or demolition to
have that survey completed before the start of construction.
One thing -- and, again, I'll go back to some
of the comments that were made on other issues earlier about
substantial penalties. It's my understanding -- and I
actually got this in writing once from the Department of
Health -- Texas Department of Health, that if you do proceed
with work without having your asbestos survey completed and
following the recommendations of the environmental engineer,
that they can fine you up to $10,000 a day. Fortunately, I
don't think there's any jail time with that.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We may go for this
one.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Will they be
concurrent sentences'?
MR. GONDECK: And I do know that the
Department of Health does monitor that quite effectively.
Sometimes I'm not sure how they know what-all's going on all
over the state, but in some of the most rural areas of the
state, they seem to find out just as quickly as any other
areas that demolition is going on. We have used a company
;n_ „ u.
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
l~
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
2J
103
out of San Antonio; actually, they have several offices all
over the state, ATC Associates.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's the name
again?
MR. GONDECK: ATC Associates. They have been
very responsive. They have been very quick in responding to
the needs of the different counties that -- that we've
worked in, or they've worked in with us. They have stated
that they could move on this very quickly, and within 7 to
10 days, actually have the report back to us, which I think
is somethinq very beneficial to have that information up
front before we get into our final solicitation for
design-build firms. In reviewing the scope of work with
them of the existing structures, the hog barn and the arena
that we're looking at right now that may have some
modifications or renovations out there, they have presented
a cost-based proposal. Again, this is an engineering firm,
and I'm -- I know that we need to go forward on this on a
selection of qualifications, but they have presented a cost
proposal to me based on selecting them or based on choosing
l.hem as being a qualified firm. Their cost proposal was
$1,390 for the work to be completed. If I may, I would ask
the Court to sort of bring this back to the ner,t agenda item
as part of my recommendation on how to structure this or to
handle this. Prior Lo knowing that it was actually going to

109
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
be an agenda item specifically, I had solicited this
proposal to be included within our structure as a consulting
architect. Not to, you know, tack on any fees or anything
on that, but to do it that way.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, why don't you call
the next item at the same time? We can discuss them both.
DODGE HENNEKE: Okay. Court will also
consider Item Number 17, which is consider and discuss
approval of the Agreement for Independent Consulting
Architect Services for the renovations and additions to Hill
Country Youth Exhibit Center with DRG Architects, PLLC.
MR. GONDECR: Within -- and I'm going to skip
to the back and stay specific to Agenda Item Number 16
first, but within -- does everybody have a copy of our
latest --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, it should be what
was handed out.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two things were handed
out. One -- there is the agreement.
MR. GONDECK: We proposed an additional
clause within our agreement, and I'll just read it. It
basically states, the consulting architect shall arrange and
pay for the professional services of a qualified
environmental engineering firm to conduct an asbestos survey
io-~a n
105
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
y
10
11
12
i3
]4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
23
2q
25
of the buildings to be removed or demolished -- excuse me,
to be renovated or demolished as part of this project.
Owner shall reimburse consulting architects for the
environmental fees out of current fees upon
completion/acceptance of the engineer's report by the owner.
In the event that asbestos removal is required, the
consulting architects will similarly arrange for the
em~ironmental engineer to develop a scope of work and
specifications to be used in the asbestos removal. And then
I also qualified that by saying, consulting architect shall
not perform any services or cause environmental engineer to
perform any services under this paragraph until the owner
has approved the amount of fees to be paid for the services
r_o be performed. So, if this clause is acceptable under
Item Number 16 -- do you not have one, Commissioner
Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I can't seem to
locate it, if I do.
COMMISSIUNER GRIFFIN: It's the one that
looks like this.
COMNIISSIUNER LETZ: I've got another one.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Here's ar_tually the other
one; you probably don't have this one.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
~,, _.- ~_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
l~
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
106
MR. GONDECK: If this clause would be
acceptable, then it would be my understanding that Agenda
Item Number 16, the approval there would be based on the
amount to be expended.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And where --
MR. GONDECK: And it would be included as
part of the scope of our services.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. Let's ask for
any -- any questions or comments on the Agreement for
Independent Consulting Architect's Services, which is Item
17.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The copy that everybody
has, there was a -- an original one that was submitted, and
then some changes that were made that I think are -- on the
black and white version, are noted off to the side or
underlined. Makes it easier on my copy, 'cause mine's in
red. But, very few changes were made. Mr. Motley has
looked at the agreement as well -- I don't know if he's
still in the courtroom or not -- and he had no problems with
it. He sent me an e-mail to that effect. I will note that
we were able to reduce the total amount from $120,000 to
$105,006. The initial phase that would take place prior to
the bond election is $20,000, and of that, the County is
obligated to pay $10,000 of that whether the bond issue
_n-~~a~-~~_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
107
fails or passes. If it does pass, then we pay the remaining
$10,000 balance on that one portion. A11 of the other items
are -- amounts would come out of the proceeds from the bond
election, if it is successful. And, obviously, if it's not
successful, none of those will come into play.
The other area that we've made some changes
and may be of interest, there were -- in the original
agreement, there was some language as to the number of
visits that would take place under each phase, and above
that amount, we'd be charged a -- we would be required to
pay expenses related to those visits. Those were all
deleted. It's basically -- now it reads that visits will be
made -- or the trips will be made the number necessary to
complete the work and, you know, to meet the needs. There's
no specific number, minimum or maximum, set in the
agreement.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So that it becomes as
necessary.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It becomes as necessary.
And Mr. Gondeck was very agreeable, primarily because we're
very close to San Antonio. I mean, if we were in --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Lubbock.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Lubbock.
MP.. GUNDECK: There are some areas of Texas
that -- where the contract has become very critical under

1

1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
108
that issue. To where, you know, it takes five hours to get
to a point where we'd be doing the work, that, obviously,
each trip becomes -- stop talking with my hands -- that each
trip does become a very costly issue. Here, you know,
we're --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One-hour drive.
MR. GONDECK: -- an hour drive away from the
office, so we can be here whenever you need us to be.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or
comments rzgarding the agreement?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only just one other that
1 have under 6.0, Wayne. You do need to change the $120,000
to $105,000 there.
MR. GONDECK: That -- yes, sir.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Gkay. We11, let's take these
in order. Let's back up to Item Number 16, and I would
entertain a motion at this time to approve the amount of the
asbestos abatement survey at $1,390.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved, with the funds
to come from °rofessional Services line item.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court approve the
amount of the asbestos survey to be $1,390, with the funds
i,~-_N-~
109
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1~
13
14
ZJ
16
17
18
19
ZO
21
22
23
24
~5
to come from Professional Services. Any questions or
comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's see. Back up
one more time. Say that one more time.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Approve the amount of the --
of the cost_ of the asbestos survey to be $1,350, with the
funds to come from the Professional Services line item in
the Commissioners Court budget.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that is separate
from the agreement with Mr. Gondeck?
JrJllGE HENNEKE: Yes. We're setting the
amount.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In order to do the
study?
	JUDGE	HENNEKE: Yes.
	COMMI	SSIONER	BALDWIN: Okay.
	COMMI	SSIONER	LE'1'Z: Well --
	JUDGE	HENNEK	E: We11, Mr. Gondeck's going to
supervise the	study	and he'	s going to select the contractor
as part of --	if we	approve	this agreement. But what he
needs fr~u~ --	Lor us	to do	is tell him how much he can
spend.			
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're just saying -- this
isn't a budget amendment. We're just saying this is, you
r~ ~g_~~
110
1
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
1~
13
14
1 J
16
]~
18
19
20
21
~2
~3
24
25
know, where the money would come from.
(Disr_ussion off the record.)
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: Item Number 17, I would
entertain a motion to approve the Agreement for Independent
Consulting Architect's Services as presented and amended.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court approve
the Agreement for Independent Consulting Architect's
Services for renovations and additions to Hill Country Youth
Exhibit Center as presented and amended.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And hopefully Larry will
agree, in addition to that, the funds to pay the $10,000
will come from Professional Services, 'cause there is a
minimum -- I mean, we're definitely having to come up with
$10,000.
COMMISSIONER GKlr'FIN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which is not a budgeted
line item -- budgeted item. That will come out of
Io-'e
1
3
4
5
H
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
G 'f
25
111
Professional Services.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's part of my
uwtion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And authorize County
Judge to sign same.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He said that too, I
think.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I remember hearing
him say that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or
comments? I£ not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(Commissioners Williams, Letz, and Griffin
voted in favor of the motion.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: A11 opposed?
(commissioner Baldwin voted against the
motion.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. All right.
Let's continue oaith the `Louth Exhibit Center work and go to
Item Number 19, wiii~h is consider and discuss the --
anything else you needed to say, Wayne?
MR. GONDECK: I didn't know if you wanted to
discuss the schedule at this point. Just as a --
DODGE HENNEKE: We probably should. Good
CdtCh.
MF.. GGNUECK: One of my -- Judge, there's a
_ ZB 02
1
,,.. 2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
112
couple of questions. And, again, I may need some of your
direction as far as the technicalities or legalities.
within Section 271.119, which is what we're looking at as
far as the design-build method, it is silent on Lhe actual
advertisement requirements. And, as we know, there are some
requirements within advertisement as far as a 14-day period,
ur within the bidding. It's my understanding now that the
second notice -- or second advertisement has to be 10 days
prior or the tenth day prior. Looking at that, and noticing
that we want to move this along as quickly as possible, if
we would want to accept bids or be able to open bids on the
25th of November, which is part of the timeline that I've
been looking at, to have them available Monday morning at
the Commissioners Court meeting, we'd probably want to
receive Lhose the r'riday prior to that, which would be the
22nd of November.
In looking at that 10 to 14 days prior, which
S do not know which requirement we're under, we'd be looking
at somewhere -- either the 31st and 7th -- you know, 31st of
October or the 7th, which means this week. Maybe even
forward up to the 3rd and 10th, if we did it on a Sunday
publication. So, I think if we looked at the 10-day
requirement, we could push it all the way back to the 5th
and the 12th. There are a few issues still within the
Requests for Proposals that need to be fine-tuned or
_~~-za-~z
113
1
2
3
4
F
7
R
A
10
11
12
13
14
1~
16
17
1?
19
?~
21
2~
23
29
25
resolved. It is my understanding that, within the statute,
it does allow the Court to designate a representative to
finalize or formalize that Request for Proposals -- in fact,
I quess that's under 271.114 -- to establish the criteria
and the methods that you're going to select the design-build
team on. We have provided a draft or an outline to Judge
Henneke and Commissioner Letz at this point as to what we
think needs to go into that actual Request for
Qualifications. However, there are probably still some
issues that do need to be resolved. And, just in general,
as fax as my ~~oncerns at this point on technicalities, you
might say, one would be the date as to when to receive it.
If we're going to shoot for the 25th, then we can work back
from that with the County Auditor and make sure that that
gets publicized and advertised in the local paper.
The second issue that I would have a concern
in is making sure we state the actual budget for
construction appropriately. It's my understanding that
there's a cerCain amount that is going to be in the bond
election, but the actual construction amount would be
substantially less than that. So, I probably need some
direction on what that final amount would be for
construction, but iC does need to be stated in our RFQ. And
the other issues are just general informational items that I
can ask Judge Heuneke and Commissioner Letz, I think, to
114
1
2
3
9
5
h
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
14
1ti
1n
17
18
19
20
L
2~
23
2 Y
25
finalize Lhis.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think on the -- I mean,
if we'ie getting a target, I think we need to receive bids
on November 22nd. I mean, so we can open them up on tP~e
25th. And I think we need to allow as -- as much time as
possible for the people submitting bids to have time, and I
think 10 days is not enough. So, I would say that we
probably will need a special meeting Friday or Monday to
finalize the RFQ criteria. And in the interim, if the Court
designates, you know, me or somebody else, or maybe
Commissioner Williams and myself to work -- to come up with
a final RFQ to come to the Court, you know, in that interim.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, yeah. I think we need
to have a special meeting. We need more time to talk about
this. I mean, we certainly have today. Friday or Monday,
you know, either one. Right now --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's a little late.
JUDGE HENNEKE: It'11 have to be Friday
afternoon at this point, by the time we got it posted.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Friday at 1 o'clock?
JUDGE HENNEKE: We can do it Friday at
1 o'clock.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And at that time, we
could also probably do the park board.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We can do the park board,
.o-~_-~_
115
1
2
3
4
5
6
E~
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
2~
23
24
25
that's right. Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think from -- clearly,
as backup, 'cause, I mean, we have a draft. Where you put
the draft, it's a backup, and if we can get a -- you know,
a - well, we'll need that much time -- as backup material.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's the date?
JUDGE HENNEKE: It's the lst. So we'll have
a meeting eitha_r 1:00 or 1:30 on Friday afternoon to talk
about the RFQ, a5 well as the park board.
COMMISSIONEP. LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Ukay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Who is -- do we need to
designate somebody to caork on that RFQ? I don't know what I
was told to do last time.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't think we need to
designate someone. We can make the comments on the draft;
we all have a copy of the draft. You can be the central
clearinghouse for commenYS, anyone who wants to make
comments, and you can work with Wayne to -- to tighten up
the draft to the extent necessary, and then Friday we can
work it out.
MR. GONDECK: If you're going to have a
meeting on Friday for approval of the RFQ, then i don't
think it has to be a formal designation at this point.
Jr1DCE HENNEKE: Get that posted, anyway.
Ie-.-a.
1
G
3
9
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
116
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Thank you, Wayne.
MR. GONDECK: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Now we'll go to Item 19,
consider and discuss approval of an order calling a bond
election for February 1, Year 2003.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 18.
JUDGE HENNEKE: 18?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You skipped 18.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I know. We're going to try
to get rid of the bond stuff first.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll come back to 18. I
handed out, I believe, a draft of the bond, the proposed
order. Does anyone have any questions? Mr. Spurgeon is
here to answer any questions. Actually, we have taken these
actions before, but we need to put it in a form that's
recognizable by the Attorney General and the other agencies
that would be involved in the bond process, which is why
this comes back before us today. Does anyone have any
questions or comments regardinq the order calling the bond
election? This has been reviewed by Jannett, and she's made
some comments. She's going to incorporate it into the
revised order, 1 believe.
i~ __a-o-
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
S
9
10
11
12
l i
14
15
16
1/
18
ly
20
21
22
23
24
~5
117
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move we approve the
order -- court order calling for a bond election for
February 1, 2003, for the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center
improvements and renovations.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court
approve the order calling a bond election regarding the
February lst, Year 2003, bond election relating to the Hill
Country Youth Exhibit Center, as presented by our bond
counsel. Any questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got a comment.
In order to allow the taxpayers of Kerr County to have a
voice in the -- in this bond election, I would vote in the
affirmative.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Commissioner. 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 r_arries. All right.
Now we can go back to Item 18, consider and discuss
approving the reappoir.tmeat of Truman R. Lyles and Elaine
Casteel as members of the Fire District Board of
-; a-o.
118
1
3
4
5
6
8
y
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Ia
20
21
22
23
24
25
Commissioners for Kerr County Rural Fire Prevention District
Number 1. Commissioner Griffin.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. You'll notice in
the backup there is a letter from the Fire Prevention
District for Ingram that recommends the reappointment of
Truman R. Lyles and Elaine Y. Casteel to that -- to that
Board of Commissioners for the district, and I'll make a
motion that we approve those reappointments. The District,
by the way, continues to be run very efficiently, very well.
Well-managed, run very openly, for all the citizens of the
district to be able to see into the operation, and they've
done an excellent job. I'd recommend reappointment and make
a motion to do so.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Third.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court
reappoint Truman R. Lyles and Elaine Y. Casteel as members
of the Fire District Board of Commissioners for Kerr County
Rural Fire Prevention District Number 1. Questions or
comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hard.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
DODGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
DODGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number
1 ~.-_. d - ii.
119
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2~
L 1
22
23
24
25
2U is consider and discuss approval of the following
contracts and authorize County Judge to sign same: Big
Brothers and Sisters, Turtle Creek Volunteer Fire
Department, Ingram Volunteer Fire Department, and Comfort
Volunteer Fire Department.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HEI4I~EKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz,
second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court approve the
listed contracts and authorize County Judge to sign same.
Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your
right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Ner,t we'll take up the two
items added by addenda before we do the Airport Board.
First item is Item Number 22, consider and discuss approval
of a resolution approving submission of grant applications
from Juvenile Behavioral Transition Program. This is an
annual grant submission that we do. The facility provides
the match.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Facility provides the
match?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIUI\iER BALDWIN: The three --
JUDGE HENNEKE: $3,585.
_ _~~ ~~~
120
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
15
~0
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: "Facility" being the
Juvenile Detention Center?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we approve.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUUGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court
approve a resolution. approving the submission of grant
application for the Juvenile Behavior Transition Program.
Any questions or commentsl If not, all in favor, raise your
right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item is
Item Number 23, consider and discuss ratification of the
hiring of Allison, Bass, and Associates, LLP, to represent
Kerr Cuuutl in the Caldwell vs. Rylander litigation. As you
all may recall, at our previous meeting, we referred this to
the Coun*_y AttoLney's office for representation in
accordance with the agreement for the County Attorney to
provide civil representation for Commissioners Court.
Mr. Motley has declined to provide that representation in
his memo dated October 23rd, so rather than have the County
t. -_8-,~
121
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1Q
20
21
22
23
24
_'S
be unrepresented and suffer the possibility of a default
judgment, we contacted Mr. Allison, and even at that late
hour, he was able to accommodate us by filing on our behalf.
I need someone to authorize the -- ratify the action that I
took on behalf of the Commissioners Court.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll move that -- that
we ratify the hiring of Allison, Bass, and Associates to
represent Kerr County in that lawsuit.
CGMMISSIOtdER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court ratify
the hiring of Allison, Bass, and Associates, LLP, to
represent Kerr County. I think I circulated to all of you a
list of those counties that had -- were represented by
Allison Bass. I believe 30 out of the 64 counties that were
sued engaged the Allison Bass firm. Texas Association of
Counties has agreed to pay half of the costs of the defense,
up to a maximum of $25,000, which -- who knows what will
happen to that one. Any questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge --
MR. MOTLEY: Comment.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- I just think that
this is a -- to me, is a cleaner, simpler way to do it. It
may or may not cost us down the road. No one knows at this
time. But, to me, joining in with other counties is just a
~~-.a-_~
122
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l .'.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2q
25
cleaner, smarter way to do it, in my opinion.
MR.. MOTLEY: I do have a comment. The -- the
memo was real clear that this -- I don't believe there's any
way that this sort of lawsuit -- or coverage of
representation for this kind of lawsuit falls under the
agreement to provide advice to the County officials. And it
was never my intention to allow the County to receive any
sort of a default in this case. I've also spoken to
Mr. Allison at length about this case, and had arrangements
made to have him answer-file in case the Court did not take
this action.
JUDGE HENNEKE: The agreement with you to
provide the third attorney was not so you'd provide advice
and counsel to Commissioners Court; that's already your
statutory duty. It was to provide civil representation to
the Commissioners Court.
MR. MOTLEY: Well, the agreement seems to
change a lot.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone disagree with
that?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No. 1 would just ask,
what is in the agreement, then, for simple -- civil
representation? 'Cause that's the words that we used.
MP.. MOTLEY: I don't know. You know, the
agreement changes; it mutates a lot, depending on what
-.'a-=~
123
1
2
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
1G
11
12
13
14
15
16
1~
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
people want in the agreement. And, you know, this is
clearly -- this is something that is not generally covered.
County has never generally represented -- the County
Attorney's office has never generally represented the County
in lawsuits when we were sued, except in certain specific
instances. It's always been referred out. And, so, to say
that this is common practice is not -- not correct.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't think anyone said it
was common practice.
MR. MOTLEY: Well, chat's -- I don't deem
this to be covered by any agreement that the Court has with
our office at this point. I really don't. I don't think
it's a correct interpretation of -- by any stretch of the
imagination of the agreement that we have.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: While we're on the
subject, could I just ask a question? What is covered, in
your mind, by the agreement?
MR. MOTLEY: Well, you know, it's really a
good issue. The agreement, as I understood originally, was
that we were going to try to have somebody here as often as
possible in the courtroom to be able to -- you know, to
respond quickly and thoroughly to the issues that are raised
by the Commissioners Court. And that's what we've tried to
do for several years. You know, we've tried to provide that
kind of service and give as quick a possible response as we
i -_ .- ._
124
1
2
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
l~
18
19
2G
21
~~
23
24
2S
can to the questions raised by the Commissioners, the
elected officials, and the department heads. And the
agreement, you know, was never written down that I know of.
That was the idea, is that we would be responsive to the
Court's needs at that time, but I don't think that
contemplated going outside and doing -- you know, handling
outside litigation. That's -- that was rot the agreement.
Ar.d, besides, and I -- I hear the Judge saying that,
certainly, as 30 of the F4 counties are in with the Allison
group, I would maintain that it would still probably be
less -- less expensive for Allison to do the work than for
our office to do it, for the simple reason they're about
three blocks away from courthouse, and our expenses for
going over, just for travel, would probably be exceeding
what Allison would charge us to do the whole thing. I just
think it's a better bargain for the County to have somebody
do that, and better to have it all coordinated, all the
counties into one -- or as many as possible into one
response. So, I -- the agreement I -- you know, I don't
~ know. It's not written down as far as I know. I just know
it mutates. It's like some kind of a horror movie thing; it
just kind of --
(Laughter.)
MR. MOTLEY: -- you know, changes. Whatever
people want it to be, that's the agreement.
1J-!R-U
125
i
L
3
4
S
6
7
8
5
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
l~
20
21
2G
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER SALDWIN: That's a true
statement.
MR. MOTLEY: We11, it is. It is.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We have a motion and second.
Any more questions or comments? All in favor, raise your
right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
DODGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign.
iNO response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Last item
four uur consideration this morning is Item Number 2l,
consider and discuss the selection of new county appointee
to the Airport Advisory Board, or any alternative methods of
selecting new county appointee to the Airport Advisory
Board. As yuu all may recall, this is occasioned by the
fact that one of our appointees, Dr. John Davis, was
selected as president of the Airport Advisory Board, which
is not an appointed position, but an elected position,
elected by the other members of the Board. Since he now
acts as the president, we have a vacancy in our
appointments, Du we want to consider appointing someone
based, perhaps, on the individuals who expressed interest
before who were not rhusen? Or do we want to talk about a
method of selecting a new county appointee? And this is
posted for executive session, if we so desire. What's the
,.. ,a-
126
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
lg
19
20
21
23
24
25
desire of the Court?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I don't know
whether it requires executive session. I wouldn't have any
opposition to that. We do have -- we had individuals who
expressed an interest in serving on that board ir. the past,
when we made the decision to reappoint Dr. Davis and
Mr. Miller. And that was a good decision, because those
folks have ~~ontinuity, Dr. Davis being the longest-serving
member of that board, ar.d it provided the County with very
good representation. We now have an opportunity to put
another individual from Kerr County who has expressed a
desire to serve on that board. In the past, I had three
individuals who exhibited interest in serving on the Airport
Board, and one has withdrawn that interest, and leaving two.
It's up to the Court. I've discussed -- we can do that and
make a recommendation or whatever.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- one general
question. At which point -- when Mr. Davis is no longer
president of that board, what happens to his spot? Is he
just off the board at that point?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Correct.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It's a weird board, in
that you appcint four members of the board. They elect --
JUDGE HENNEKE: The chairman.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- a chairman from
1_-. ~ ~_
127
1
2
3
4
5
5
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
LV
21
22
23
24
25
outside of their ranks.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right, it can be.
Doesn't have to be from outside the ranks, but it can be.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What I mean is that
you have four appointed members and you have a chairman that
they elect. It can be from anywhere.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, he's -- he resigns
his -- he basically gives up his spot?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: He's lost his seat on
the board, because now he is the chairman of the board.
It's a weird thing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I mean, I think
the -- probably the best way to handle it is to look at
those who applied earlier. I think if we don't do that, you
kind of risk the people not applying for boards. I mean --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- I think those would be
r_he first people, and if somebody on that list is interested
in doing it, qualified to do it, in our opinion, that's the
route we should go.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: But I think we could
also -- I don't think we should close out additional people
who have voiced interest since then, either, should we? I
mean, we should include them all.
COMM15S10NER LETZ: Right. Well, but --
e n
128
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1?
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
2U
21
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, but there is
some sense of emergency to fill the spot so that they can
conduct their business properly.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah. Their next
meeting probably will not be until December, so you've got
some time. It's -- I think we can do it either way. Or --
I mean, we can -- I don't see any reason to close out
whoever may be interested in expressing --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Definitely not. I
think that's the first pool of people that we would look at.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And, certainly, we
would consider all those who responded last time and did not
remove themselves, or have not removed themselves at this
point.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Uf the -- you said the
three individuals submitted letters before, and one of them
no longer wants it. Both of the others are interested?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Far as I know, yes.
COMMISSIONER LE'1'Z: A11 right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, a little
guidance. Do we talk about it in executive, or de we put a
name out here, or what do we do?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I think it would be prudent
for us to go into Executive Session, and so, at this time,
the Commissioners Court will go into Executive Session to
1:-~~-_
129
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~~
24
25
consider the appointment of an individual to the Kerr County
Airport Board.
(Discussion off the record.)
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was
closed at 11:45 a.m., and an executive
session was held, the transcript of which is
contained in a separate document.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioners Court will now
return to open session. The topic is consider and discuss
selection of new county appointee to Airport Advisory Board.
Would anyone like to make a motion regarding that topic?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judqe, I'd like to
make a motion. Based on the fact that the board -- County
has an opportunity to till a position on the board, and
based also on the fact that we had solicited openly in the
past names oT persons interested in serving on the Airport
Advisory Board, we do have a back -- kind of a database of
people who'~~e expressed that interest. That has winnowed
itself down to two people, and I would offer for the Court's
consideration Uranger MacDonald, a longtime Kerr County
resident, who is an aviator, owns an aircraft and
participates in aviation matters, as the County's new
appointment to that board.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court
-_e- _
130
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2G
21
22
23
24
25
appoint Granger MacDonald to serve as one of the Kerr County
appointees to the Airport Advisory Board. 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. Before we
adjourn, I had mentioned earlier the necessity for a special
meeting to canvass the votes. Jannett has handed me a
notice from the Director of Elections which indicates that
the Commissioners Court must canvass the general election on
Tuesday, November 12th, 2002, which is our regular meeting.
So, we will not have to have a special meeting with regard
to canvassing the votes. We will meet this Friday at 1:30
in order to talk about the RFQ, as well as the parks.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Before we bang the
gavel, back. to the previous item, to notify about
correspondence with the city.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else? If not, we
stand adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 11:52 a.m.)
i~ _~ ~~~
131
r~
1
2
4
5
0
8
9
10
11
12
13
i4
15
15
17
1E
L
2C
~,
-, .
G.
z_
G'
2
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 4th day of November,
2602.
JANNETT PIEPE,,R~~, JR~err County Clerk
Kathy B iY, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
_ ~ ~ - 1:
ORDER NO. 7815
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
On this the 8th day of October, c00~, came to be considered
by the Court various Commissioned precincts, which said Claims
and Accounts are:
10-General for• 883,879.54; 14-Fire F'r-otection for• 86,151.11;
15-Road 8 Bridge for• SI0,53'E.44; 18-County Law Library for
8686.4~Q~; C7-Juv Intensive F'r•og-State Aid F~_ind for 814,378.10;
4Q~-Rlternate Dispute Resolution for 842, 480.0Q~; 50-Indigent
Health Care for Sc6,N77.90; 76-Juvenile Detention Facility for
849.99; 8,:,-State Funded-c16th Dist Attorney for 8149.47;
86-State F~_~nded-E16th Dist F'r•ob for 83,5'76.94; 8"I-State Funded
Community Corrections for 82, 310. E9.
TOTAL CRSH REQUIRED, RLL FUNDS: 8~50,~73.78.
Upon motion made by Commissioner- Baldwin, seconded by
Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a
vote of 4-0-0, to pay said acco~.~nts.
ORDER N0. X7816
BUDGET RMENDMENT IN JUSTICE OF THE RERCE, PCT. 1
On this the 8th day of October, ~@@2, upon motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-@-@, to transfer
5177.5@ from Line Item No. 1@-455-31@ Office Supplies to Line
Item No. 1@-455-2@6 Ponds.
ORDER N0. 27817
BUDGET gMENDMENT IN
198TH DISTRICT COURT RND
.-. 216TH DISTRICT COURT
On this the 28th day of October, 2002, upon notion made by
Commissioner Let z, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to transfer (200.00
from Line Item No. 10-435-415 Special District Judge to Line
Item No. 10-435-206 Insur-ante Liability; f200.00 from Line
Item No. 10-436-415 Special District Judge to Line Item No.
10-436-c^06 Insurance Liability.
ORDER N0, '7818
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN
INDIGENT HERLTH CRRE
On this the 28th day of October, X002, upon notion made by
Commissioner Let z, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, the Court
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to declare an
emergency and increase the administrative budget for• Indigent
Health Care, Expense Code SQ-641-100, by the amount of 820c.84~
for• the Fiscal Year 'G1-'Q~2 budget.
ORDER N0. 27819
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN
JUSTICE OF THE pERCE #2
NON-DEPRRTMENTRL
On this the '28th day of October, [@@2, upon motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-@-@, to declare an
emergency and decrease Line Item No. 1@-4@9-571 Contingency in
the amount of 5169.99, to Line Item No. 1@-456-569 Operating
Equipment. The County R~.iditor• and County Treasurer ar•e hereby
authorized to write a hand check in the amount of 5169.99 made
payable to OfficeMax.
ORDER N0. 2782@
RGRROVRL RND EXECUTION OF
~' TEXRS WORKFORCE COMMISSION CHILD CARE
LOCRL INITIRTIVE AGREEMENT
On this the 28th day of October, 2@@2, upon motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-@-@, the Texas
Workfor^ce Commission Child Care Local Initiative Rgreement,
and authorize County Judge to sign the same.
ORDER N0. 27821
APRROVE RESOLUTION FOR
TEXRS DEPRRTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH
~' RND MENTRL RETRRDRTION
On this tfie 28th day of October, 2002, upon motion made by
Commissioner Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, the Resolution
supporting the Texas Department of Mental Health and Mental
Retardations' funding request for• ^c004 and 2Q~05 and supporting
an increase in funding for additional services, and authorize
appropriate signatures on the resolution.
ORDER N0. 27822
RPPROVE NRTIONRL RLZHEIMER'S DISERSE MONTH
FOR 1',ERR COUNTY
On this the 28th day of October, ^c00^c, upon motion made by
Conmissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner- Let x, the Court
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, the Resolution
proclaining November, 20Q2 as National Rlxheimer•'s Disease
Month for• Kerr County.
ORDER N0. 27823
RUTHORIZE "DERD END STREET" SIGN
ON ENCINO DRIVE
On this the 28th day of October, ^c@@2, upon motion made 6y
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-@-@, installation of a
"dead-end" sign in lieu of the "no outlet" sign on Encino
Drive in Ranchero Estates.
ORDER N0. 27824
RE'P'ROVE RDVERTISING FOR PID
FOR SHEE'E'ARD-REFS RORD
On this the 28th day of October^, 2@02, upon motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the
Co~_trt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-Q~-0, advertising for
bid on Sheppar^d-Rees Road improvements as submitted. Sealed
bids to be received in the County Llerk's Office by Friday,
December 6, 2002, at S:Z~O p. m. Bids to be opened 10:04 a. m.
Monday, December 9, 24i4~2 in the Commissioners Cour^t. F're-bid
conference November^ 21, 2002 at c2:4~0 p. m.
ORDER N0. 27825
RLLOW RORD & BRIDGE DEPRRTMENT
TO SEEK LERSE OF R CORDER
On this the 28th day of October, 2@@2, upon motion made 6y
Commissioner- Griffin, seconded by Commissioner- Baldwin, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-@-@, authorized the
Road and Bridge Department to go out for bids for- a 5-year
lease on a new loader-, that the Court declare the existing
52@B loader- as surplus, and that the Court allow the Road and
Bridge Department to offer the current Dresser 52@8 loader- as
a trade-in on the lease of the new loader.
ORDER NO. 27826 '
AMEND ORDER APROINTING ELECTION JUDGES
AND ALTERNATE JUDGES FOR NOVEMPER GENERRL ELECTION
On this the 28th day of October, 2aQ2, upon motion Bade by
Commissioner Paldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, amending Order• 2766?,
Appointment of Election Judges and Altet•nate Judges for the
November General Election as per- TEC Chapter ;,2, as
recommended and presented by the County Clerk.
ORDER N0. :.78:.7
AMEND CRp'ITRL OUTCRY PUDGET LINE ITEM
IN SHERIFF' S' DEP'AR'TMENT
On this the 8th day of October, c00:_, i.ipon motion made by
Commissioner- Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the
Co~ar~t approved by a vote of 3-1-0, with Commissioner Paldwin
opposing, to amend the capital o~_~tlay bi_idget line item in
Sheriff's llepartment to increase the amo~_int from 561,04.00 to
564, 035.8`i, with the additional f~_inds to be taken from Line
Item No. 10-405-571 Non-Departmental Contingency.
ORDER N0. 27828
RESUBMIT 2003 COLONIRS FUND RPPLICRTION
On this the 28th day of Octoberr 2002, upon motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Paldwin, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0r to resubmit
the 2003 Colonias Fund Replication for• continuation of
Kerrville South Wastewater Collection Project for• use in the
Loyal Valley portion of the project.
ORDER NO. 27829
RUTHORIZE RSBESTOS SURVEY
OF TIDE HILL COUNTY YOUTH EXHIBITION CENTER
Un this the 28th day of October, 2002, upon motion made by
Commissioner Let z, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the
Co~_ir•t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, the amount of
the asbestos s~_~r•vey to be X1,390.00, with the f~_inds to come
from Line Item No. 10-401-486 Professional Services in the
Commissioners Court budget.
ORDER N0. 27830
APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH
DRG RRCHITECTS, P. L. L. C., AS PRESENTED AND RMENDED
On this the 28th day of October^, 2002, upon notion made by
Commissioner Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Lets, the Court
approved by a vote of 3-i-0, with Commissioner Baldwin
opposing the Motion, the Agreement for• independent consulting
architect's services for• renovations and additions to Hill
Country Youth Exhibit Center as presented and amended.
ORDER N0. 27831
ORDER CALLING BOND ELECTION
On this the 28th day of October, 2002, upon motion lade by
Commissioner Williams, seconded 6y Commissioner Let z, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, the Or•der•
Calling Bond Election r•egar•ding the Febr•uar•y 1, 2003 bond
election relating to the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center, as
presented by our bond counsel
ORDER N0. 2783
RPPROVE RERPPOINTMENT OF TRUMRN R. LYLES
RND ELAINE Y. CASTEEL
On this the z8th day of October, 20Q12, upon motion made by
Commissioner Griffin, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, the
reappointment of Truman R. Lyles and Elaine Y. Casteel as
members of the Fire District 8oar•d of Commissioners for• Kerr
County Rural Fire Prevention District No. 1.
ORDER NO. 27833
RPPROVE VRRIOUS CONTRRCTS
RND RUTHORIZE COUNTY JUDGE TO SIGN THE SAME
On this the 28th day of October, 2Q~Q2, upon motion made 6y
Commissioner Let x, seconded 6y Commissioner Griffin, the Court
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, the listed various
contracts and authorized the County Judge to sign the same:
Big Brothers and Sisters
Turtle Creek Volunteer Fire Department
Ingram Volunteer Fire Department
Comfort Volunteer Fire Department
ORDER N0. 27834
RPPROVE RESOLUTION FOR
JUVENILE BEHRVIORRL TRRNSITION PROGRRM
On this the 28th day of October, 20N2r upon motion made by
Commissioner 8aldwinr seconded by Commissioner Williamsr the
court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, the Resolution
approving submission of grant application for the Juvenile
Behavioral Transition F'rogr•am.
ORDER N0. 27835
RRTIFY HIRING RLLI50N, BRSS & pSSOCIRTES, L.L.P.
On this the 28th day of October, 2@@2, upon motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Let z, the Court
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-@-@, ratification of
hiring Rllison, Bass & Rssociates, L. L.F'., to represent Kerr
County.
r
..~,
ORDER N0. ^c7B3E
RPPOINTMENT TO RIRPORT RDVISORV PORRD
On this the 28th day of October, 2002, upon motion ^ade by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Griffin, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to appoint
Granger MacDonald to serve as one of the Kerr County
appointees to the Rir•port Rdvisory Poard.