,,.~.r 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 .' 3 24 25 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT Regular Session Monday, December 9, 2002 9:00 a.m. Commissioners' Courtroom Kerr County Courthouse Kerrville, Texas .~M `~ hJ V PRESENT: FREDERICK L. HENNEKE, Kerr County Judge H.A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 LARRY GRIFFIN, Commissioner Pct. 4 2 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 _--. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 L 1 22 23 24 25 I N D E X December 9, 2002 PAGE --- Commissioners Comments 3 1.1 Pay Bills ~,r783z 11 1.2 Budget Amendments r`r~''~ 12 1.3 Late Bills a%BA`~ 21 1.9 Read and Approve Minutes ~ 75b'S 22 1.5 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports %j7b%5"N 22 2.1 Historical Commission's 2002 Annual Report-~ 7~'S'T 23 2.2 Discuss employee Health Insurance renewal rates-~~~S29 2.5 Final plat revision, Lots 9 & 10 of the Horizon, Section One, Precinct 1 ~7b~`j 91 2.9 Approval of refund to Ameripark Kerrville Corp. per agreed judgment~'7~T~, 42 2.10 Rescind January 13, 2003 date set for public hearing on HOME Disaster Relief Funds until after ~78`ll Disaster Relief application workshop is scheduled 45 2.11 Resolution requesting our U.S. Congressman, State Senator, & State Representative's support for ~ expediting construction of Hermann Sons Bridge'7~~~ 46 2.15 PUBLIC HEARING - applying for LLEBG Grant 50 2.3 Open sealed bids for reconstruction of Sheppard 7~'9~ Rees Road, consider awarding or rejecting same 51 2.12 Authorize condemnation process, if needed, to ~ yh'y~ acquire right-of-way for Hermann Sons Bridge 53 2.4 Open sealed bids for lease of wheel loader, ~ gf'y5" consider awarding or rejecting same 55 2.6 Consider authorizing Road & Bridge to acquire construction easements to work on private property, authorize County to proceed with TCDP grant,~7b'Y(e approve publication & set public hearing for TCDP grant application, authorize County Judge to sign TCDP fina] application, and approve publication for TCDP grant application posting/mailing 56 2.7 Authorize Road & Bridge to close Sheppard Rees 7 for up to two weeks during construction project'~~~~64 2.8 Presentation of Phase 2 MS4 Storm Water Permit by Sue Glover from TAC 67 2.13 Discuss accepting bonds for all newly elected public officials at December 23rd meeting 93 2.14 Discuss rescinding Court Order 27879, declaring December 29th a holiday, having employee luncheon on December 23rd at 11 a.m. ~73`JS 94 2.15 Discuss amending holiday schedule adopted as part of FY 02-03 budget to clarify it is applicable to only employees of County departments not headed by elected officials 96 _-- A~ourned 108 1 - 2 3 4 5 5 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 I 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 ~1 2~ ?3 .-. 2 4 25 3 On Manday, December 9, 2002, at 9:00 a.m., a regular meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court: P R O C E E D I N G S JUDGE HENNEKE: Good morning, everyone. It's 9 o'clock in the morning on Monday, December 9th, 2002. We'll call to order this regular session of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. Commissioner Letz, I believe you have the honors this morning. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would everyone please stand, join me in a moment of prayer? (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Commissioner. zIt this time, any citizen wishing to address the Court on an item not listed on the regular agenda may come forward and do so. Is there any citizen who'd like to address the Court on an item not listed on the regular agenda? Seeing none, we'll go to the Commissioners' comments. Let's start with Commissioner Letz. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Brief comment. Great football game. Sorry about the outcome. Commissioner Baldwin may have a few other comments, but it really was great to go down there, and a huge turnout. Fantastic. The -y-„_ 9 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 ' 9 10 11 12 ^„ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 other comment I have is, I keep on forgetting to bring this system, I guess, Region J is the -- or the regions; Region J for Kerr County are the ones responsible for appealing those population projections, working with the entities with the problems. We're in the process of finalizing the appeal for Kerr County. They -- we've regressed back to some projections probably in the early '70's or something. They show our population leveling off in the Year 2030 at about 60,000, then dropping off after that, which is very different from the last one they accepted two years ago when they showed us going up to about 80,000 by 2050, Anyway, that appeal is underway. We're working with the local entities, City of Kerrville, and are trying to do that. The -- one of the issues with the appeal is that, under the state rules, that -- you know, and I object to the state rule, but no region can change the total population projection for the region, you know. And I said -- you know, luckily for us, they -- in everyone's estimation, they overestimated Bandera County, so we're taking people from Bandera County, moving them to Kerr County, and working that out with the region. Sut, I mean, i_-~-r~ 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2J 5 absurd rule that they said that, you know, no region can change. But, anyway, it should work out okay. We're going to end up with a projection probably of around /U,000 by 2080 for Kerr County -- or 2050 for Kerr County, which is less than we showed previously, but it can be amended later. But we just -- our maLn purpose at this point is to show and justify continued growth. JUDGE HENNEKE: Very good. We get to vote on who comes up from Sandera County? (Laughter.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Any particular individual we want or don't want? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We want a list of names. JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Griffin"? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No comments this morning, Judge. JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to shock you here; I'm going to talk about something other than football first. Our old friend, Judge Sagebiel down at Sequin, is retiring after 20 years of service as a County Judge down there, and we just got the invite the end of last week, so I didn't have time to put it on the agenda. So, I have asked Commissioner Williams to assist me in doing a Resolution of 1 J - 9 - fi 6 I 1 2 3 4 5 E 7 8 9 10 11 1~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 just our thank you, our friendship with him, and -- and then I'll be going down there on December 20th to read that to the community. So, I just -- you know, we want to get your permission to do that, and then I guess it's necessary for us to ratify that at a later time, if it's okay. So, we'll do that. And then Tivy football was a fantastic year. We had 19 weeks of hard-nosed head knocking, and those kids are a really great bunch of kids, and we had -- but iL's over. We -- we actually got beat. Unbelievable. The -- those kids had a bad night Saturday night. But, you know -- but the character is what I really want to talk about, the character of our community and our parents. And Commissioner Letz alluded to the crowd that was down there, and I'm going to -- I estimated close to -- around 20,000 people, and probably about 10,000 people from Kerrville. Huge crowd. Unbelievable crowd. But the -- you know, Lhe kids cried Saturday night, but Sunday, I'm going to tell you, my phone has not stopped ringing. People called us from all over the state just to talk, and it was -- it was -- it's a fun thing. But the -- the character in the whole thing is our community. And you'll see it -- and the kids, you know, will go back and hang up their football uniforms and check out the track and field uniforms today, and the 12 9 n~ 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 baseball uniforms, and go to work. You know, it's over with, and they're back to work. And if you watch baseball and track, you will see the Tivy kids do as well, if not better, than they did in football. So, they're -- you know, everything up there -- and it`s not -- you know, everybody talks about we have a great coaching staff, and we do; we have a bunch of great coaches. But those great coaches come here because our kLds are good, our community has character. And -- and so the whole thing really works well together, and it's going to be fun, fun, fun from now on. And so, anyway, it was a lot of fun. I see some old Tivy Antler fans -- the General was there, and some family members of some players are in our audience today, and it was great. And Commissioner Williams came up with an idea this morning. I -- I didn't think we were going to lose this early, so I didn't pursue any kind of resolution or anything like that, but Commissioner Williams is going to put something together also for them, some kind of recognition notice of some sort. Also, he had mentioned maybe inviting some of them to our Christmas dinner, just to pat them on the back from the County fathers, you know. If y'all don't do this, I don't know what we'll do. But, of course, I like the idea. You know, any time we -- we can support our kids in our community, I like to do that. That's about it. And it was __ q-o. 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 a lot of fun. The seniors -- me and my little group, the daddies, we watched practice every day for six years, and it's just been -- it's just been the highlight of our lives. It's been great, JUDGE HENNEKE: That's great. Commissioner Williams? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we're all going to miss taping up Commissioner Baldwin's ankles every Monday as he gets ready for the game. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But we have track. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But I think he's correct in that the character of the team is reflective of the character of the community. And it's been -- as I say, it's been a great run for those kids and for the community, and we will put together some kind of a resolution of thanks, or proclamation that honors the kids, because they have done a fine job and overcome some adversity. I'm not sure how they've managed to stay healthy through this number of weeks, but apparently they've done that, and in good fashion. So, we'll do that and be back next week -- two weeks. COMMISSIONER LETZ: On that topic, I believe the Booster Club is going to try to organize some sort of a community event as well. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Cool. -~_~_n= 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 L 1 22 23 24 25 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We talked about it at our last meeting, but we didn't schedule anything until we got to this point. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner Baldwin had one hesitation about inviting them to our Christmas luncheon. He's afraid we wouldn't have enough food. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, they had -- they had a luncheon up at the field house last week. They ate 40 pizzas. Forty pizzas. Can you imagine feeding that bunch? JUDGE HENNEKE: Less than one pizza per person. That's not so many. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, when you look at it like that, Judge -- JUDGE HENNEKE: I mean, not Tor kids. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- what's a pizza? JCrDGE HENNEKE: Depends on whether it's large or small, medium. Anything else, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nothing. JUDGE HENNEKE: As long as we're on the topic of Tivy football, it's been a fantastic season. I've enjoyed getting to a couple of games, and I was privileged to go to the game last week against Bastrop when we beat Bastrop -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Calallen. L'-4-nz 10 1 -- 2 3 4 5 H 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ' 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 .-. 2 4 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Calallen. You're right, Calallen. And the thing that impressed me most about the game was what happened immediately after the game. When the game was over and we were victorious, all -- both teams streamed out on the field; they shook hands with each other, and then the teams themselves, not organized by coaches or parents, they knelt in the middle of the field, led by Miles Murray, big tackle for the Antlers, and offered up thanks for the opportunity to compete and for the opportunity to come out of the game uninjured and with their pride intact. And I thought it was a remarkable spectacle of small town Texas football, where, after a very hard-nosed, hard-fought game against two excellent teams, they met in the center of the field, exchanged thanks, and gave thanks to God for allowing thern to compete for their own schools and for their own parents and their friends, and it was a wonderful moment. And I think, as Commissioner Baldwin says, that expresses what these kids really are. They're not just good football team players; they're wonderful examples of -- of what kids can be and what they are in a situation like this, and it's been a lot of fun to watch them and participate, particularly through Commissioner Baldwin's comments. Regret that they didn't go all the way, but they surely have provided all of us a boost for the past 14 i~-,-,~ 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 weeks. You know, if -- if the Boosters Club thing is organized before our next meeting, I would certainly suggest that we do the resolution and ratify it. No reason not to have something from Commissioners Court in a celebration such as that. The other thing I want to cover, as long as we're on good news, is that Jannett Pieper, the County Clerk, is in Austin today, where the Kerr County -- County Clerk's office will be honored with a 5-Star Exemplary Award from the Texas Bureau of Vital Statistics. Of the over 540 local registrars in Texas, 65 attained the 5-star award, which the Commissioners -- which Jannett`s office has received for the past five years, I believe it is, and only eight out of 540 earned, I think, the designation. We talk a lot about how -- what a fine group of County employees we have and how hard they work and how well they do their job, and it's always a great thing for someone other than us to recognize the good job that's done by the people who work for the citizens of Kerr County. And my congratulations to Jannett and Nadene and everyone who works in the County Clerk's office for their recognition of the excellent service they provide. Without any further ado, let's turn Yo the business at hand and pay some bills. Tommy, d~ we have some bills to pay? MR. TOMLINSON: As always. ~_ 9 ~' 12 1 2 3 4 b 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, do we, JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone have any questions or comments regarding the bills as presented by the Auditor? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move that we pay the bills. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Commissioners Court approve payment of the bills as presented and recommended by the Auditor. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Budget amendments. We have one budget amendment for Nondepartmental, I guess it would be. MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct. The -- the request is to declare an emergency, to increase the budget by approximately $400,000 for -- for payment of a claim relative to our health insurance to Methodist Hospital. I provided the Court with the details of -- of this situation. Ray Rothwell's in the audience as we speak for any questions as far as the details that, you know, the Court might have _~-y-oz 13 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 other than what I've explained in my memo. Essentially, we -- we had a sizable claim that has been partially satisfied by our stop-loss carrier, our reinsurer, in Lhe amount of $250,000. That -- that satisfies the claim, except for the amount unpaid, which is -- which I explained is -- is the $900,000. We -- we anticipate -- our plan administrators anticipate that -- that this will ultimately cost us $40,000. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How much? MR. TOMLINSON: Forty. But we have -- since our plan ends December the 31st, we -- we have to pay this claim before that date in order for it to have any chance whatsoever that our reinsurer will reimburse us for -- for their part. And the reason -- one of the reasons that we have an obligation to pay this is that -- that, in our estimation, a majority of the costs associated with this -- with the $400,000 is outside of the -- the medical procedure that was performed. The medical procedure that was performed, our stop-loss carrier had a $2SU,000 ceiling on, and that -- that ceiling was expressed in our plan. So -- but there are -- there were costs involved that weren't directly related to that procedure. So, if our -- our stop-loss carrier is obligated to reimburse us for any costs that -- that's not directly associated with the procedure. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My question would 14 I i 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 be -- the only question I have is the -- the legal end of it. I mean, are we liable for costs that are not directly related to the procedure? MR. TOMLINSON: I think we are. I visited prior to the meeting with -- I had that question also, and the opinion of our plan administrator is that, yes, we do have an obligation. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, he's not a lawyer, though. But, of course, if we asYed our Comity Attorney, it would be way into next year, and we'd blow the other coverage before we got an answer to it. So -- JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or comments? COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the -- I mean, the -- it's thought that we will be reimbursed x360,000 uut of the $400,000? MR. TOMLINSON: That's our estimate. COMMISSIONER LETZ: How certain is that estimate? MR. TOMLINSON: That's a question for Ray, I think, to explain. MR. ROTHWELL: Sure. To give you a little bit more of the -- of the sequence for y'all's information, the claim was about a million dollars, approximately, give or -- plus or minus a few dol]ars. We had that -- that .~-v-~,a 15 1 1 G 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 claim negotiated down to about $650,000. It was a transplant benefit, and the plan document has a $250,000 limitation on transplants. So, that 250 -- first off, the County has a $40,000 stop-loss self-funded plan, and the County has prefunded that $40,000 already. Triat's -- that 40 is paid. So, I've talked to the stop-loss carrier. They agreed to prefund the $250,000 transplant benefit to get some money to the hospital in a timely basis, to where we wouldn't get into a conversation about losing that $400,000 discount. So -- so, we've done that. We've paid 250. The sequence of events really play the important part here. The -- the person went into the hospital about the 1st of September here in Kerrville; was immediately transferred to San Antonio Methodist, and immediately transferred into their transplant -- into their transplant unit. The costs between the 3rd of September and the 11th of September, we believe, are not related to the transplant, and I think the early review by the stop-loss carrier agrees with that. We believe there's some costs after the transplant for a couple of days before the person died. So, we believe that we will get the majority of that $400,000 back, if not all of it. Our track record says we'll get it all back, and we believe we will. ~ The kind of contract we're on is a 12/12 contract, and that's been the most cost-effective stop loss ~_-~- 16 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 ~' 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 contract for us to be on, and it continues to be. If the County elected not to prefund that $400,000 per this request, we would need to buy a 15/12 contract, which would cost us about $270,000 more over the next 12 months. And what that 15/1z contract would do, it would pay claims incurred three months prior to the end of this contract, going into the 1~ months. Part of those claims fall within that three-month period; some of them don't. So, it's in the County's best interest to prefund the $400,000, let us attempt to get it back, and we will make every attempt to do Chat. Our track record says we're 99.9 percent effective at doing that. We -- we believe we'll get it all back, and we think it will take 95 to 60 days to do that on -- on this type of contract. lt`s a spec contract, and we have a contract in our stop-loss plan of a -- of a spec program of $40,000, an aggregate program at some dollar figure. And we're not going to have an aggregate claim; we're under that total umbrella. But we have this one claim that's -- we've actually -- actually had two, but we've had just one that's in question that we need to prefund sometime in the next week or 10 days. And I think the request is a budget transfer to do that, and then we will pay it and immediately file for reimbursement; expecting to get that back probably in February, would be my best guess. i,- ~ ~ 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone have questions for Mr. Rothwell? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question. Do we -- do we approve $400,000? Do we approve "about $400,000"? Or do we -- is the court order going to read, "up to $400,000"? I mean, I think something needs to be specific, doesn't it? We don't say -- in the court order, we don't say "about $400,000." JUDGE HENNEKE: Tommy what -- MR. TOMLINSON: I would say up to the amount, but I don't know the exact number. MR. ROTHWELL: And we don't know that exact number. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand you don't. MR. ROTHWELL: But I think "up to" would be safe, or "approximately" would be safe. JUDGE HENNEKE: Not to exceed $900,000? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not to exceed. JUDGE HENNEKE: Barbara, you had a question? MS. NEMEC: I just wanted to kind oY answer Commissioner Ba]dwin's question about the legality of us having to pay for it. If -- the reason that we're having to pay this amount over and above the 250, it's because it's not a trans -- the procedures that were done is not for the ---~-u- 18 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 l~ 13 14 15 lh 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 transplant. We've paid the maximum that the transplant benefit offered, so, you know, these other charges just go into the regular benefits that we allow. That's the reason that we're having to pay for it. If it was just all transplant, then we would have paid the mar,imum; we wouldn't be here today. But that's the reason, if that explains that a little bit better. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It does. Thank you. COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the -- the question I have for Tommy is, to declare an emergency for the full $400,000, and then we get a refund, it seems like we're going to be inflating the budget in future years to look like we have a lot larger budget. I mean, the money's going to go back into reserves, but still, it will increase the budget. Is there a way that we can find the money in the budget, you know, for, like, four or five months, and then do the budget amendment to take the actual amount that's, you know, not anticipated, and increase the budget by that amount in the future, rather than do it a lot more than we think we're going to end up needing? MR. TOMLINSON: I hadn't thought of it that way, but there's -- I think there's funds in -- well, there's 500 -- like, $530,000 budgeted in -- in our Indigent Health Care Fund. I don't know -- the only thing, I guess, if we had to have the funds in there between now and the ._ a- 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 la 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 time we're reimbursed, then we could transfer cash into that -- into that fund. I don't know of anything large enough in the General Fund budget to handle that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know how the rest of the Court feels. It just seems that it's -- it's -- when we look back at our budget, it's a better way to do it this way. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: In other words, take the hit when you know you got a hit that you got to take. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I kind of like that approach. We got 530 in the Indigent Health Care'? MR. TOMLINSON: That's close. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Roughly? MR. TOMLINSON: I don't know exactly. JUDGE HENNEKE: That's what we started out the year with. I don't know what we have now. MR. TOMLINSON: I don't know exactly what we have right now. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And then, when this comes bark, we'd reimburse the Indigent Health Care line item? MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. JUDGE HENNEKE: Good idea. And then reimbursement would go in the General Fund. Then it would have to be a budget amendment to take it -- iz-~ ~,~ 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. TOMLINSON: To transfer it. JUDGE HENNEKE: General Fund, not Indigent Health Care. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. MR. TOMLINSON: We could -- I mean, we could increase the revenue budget part of it so we have an equal amount of change in -- in the revenues as well as expenditures. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, but there's still that -- MR. TOMLINSON: I mean, still -- it still -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Increases the budget. MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, it does. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the -- you know, and we're really not increasing the budget, we don't think. I mean, we have may have to do -- you know -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We can still do that later. I mean, if you had to. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we -- in any event, we have to do the -- well, it depends. If we didn't, I would rather take it out of Indigent Health Care or some other fund right now, until we have -- MR. TOMLINSON: I think there's probably enough there. JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. I think that's a good i_ ~~-_~ r 1 1 3 9 5 6 7 R 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 ~~ zl idea. Do we have a motion to thaY_ effect? COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Commissioners Court transfer not to exceed $400,000 from the Indigent Health Care budget for purposes of paying the medical reimbursement claim that's been presented for the health care of the person -- whatever. Any other questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Do we have any late bills? MR. TOMLINSON: I have one. It's to Robert Brown for $600 for repair on an electric lock in the jail. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court authorize a late bill and hand check in the amount of $600 payable to Robert Brown for repair to the electrical lock at the jail. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your i~-y-~~ 22 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. (NO response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this time, I would entertain a motion to waive reading and approve the minutes of the November 1st, November 12th, November 25th, and November 25th meetings of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. DODGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court waive reading and approve the minutes of the November 1st, November 12th, November 25th, and November 25th meetings of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Upposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Also at this time, I'd entertain a motion to approve and accept the monthly reports as presented. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. i_ y i>? 1 1 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court approve and accept the monthly reports as presented. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) DODGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Turning to the consideration agenda, the first item, Item Number 1, is presentation of the Kerr County Historical Commission's 2002 annual report by General Walter Schellhase, the president of the Kerr County Historical Commission. General Schellhase? MR. SCHELLHASE: Thank you. It's required by our bylaws to make an annual report to the Commissioners Court of the activities, the membership, and leadership of the Kerr County Historical Commission. This past year, we've had one marker approved. That was the Zion Lutheran Church. After a two-year-long endeavor to get that approved, that was finally done. It's getting harder and harder each year to get these markers approved. We have two in the works; one for Hunt, Texas, and one for Shoemaker Crossing. Those both have been in the works for a little over six months. We still have two that have been in -- at the Texas Historical Commission for over two years; the A.C. Schreiner, Sr., home, and the Union Church building. Those ._-y-oz 24 1 2 3 9 5 E 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 are still being worked on a daily basis. Our biggest project, of course, is the Union Church project, of which we still have planned at this time for the dedication to be on the 29th of December. That will be, I believe, 118 years from the date the building was dedicated originally. We hope -- I believe that's going to be set for around 3 o'clock. It hasn't been established yet at this time. Bi11 Blackburn is going to emcee it. We have arranged for r_he four original pastors of the church -- four original churches, pastors from those churches will be there t~ participate in that function, so it should be a very, very good opportunity for us. We have permission from the City to do this one function, because the building will not be finished; it will be sometime later in the year. We're stil] lacking about $20,000 to do the final work on the inside, furnishing. curing that ceremony, we'll have a collection of plates that will be used as commemorative plates for that function; they'll have the Onion Church emblem in the middle of them and the four original churches that splintered off from that churcri surrounding it, so '~t will be a real nice collector's item. I believe they'll be selling for $35 each. This year also we had the -- the 2003 calendar. We have your complimentary copies. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. i?_q-~~ 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2s COMMISSIGNER WILLIAMS: Thank you. MR. SCHELLHASE: This will be our third series of calendars of the historical reminders of what took place in Kerr County over the last 150 years. Those collections are -- a lot of them are collected from individuals, and many of them at this time are from Glen and Margaret Dolan, who has a great collection, and we're already in the process of working on the 2004 calendar. Our oral history program is continued. We have not had any additional completed this year; we've been working to complete the ones we have in the works. We have about 50 finished now. The question is still what we're going to do with all these and how they're going to be used and where they're going to be stored, but the finishing of the history library, we hope that we will be able to display them in that facility. As you know, we're condensing everything on those histories -- oral history down to a CD-ROM, so that we'll have the pictures, the audio, the videotape all in one concise document that can be checked out and used very easily. We completed this year the update of the historical marker location, where we have all of the locations. we had 5,000 of these printed. We really need about 15,000; because of budget, we did five. We had eight additionals Lo add to it this year, so it made a pretty ~:_° 26 1 L 3 4 J 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 la 19 ~0 21 2~ Z3 24 ZS good-sized brochure this year. Our archives are still down in the basement here at the courthouse. More room is still needed. Obviously, they need to k>e displayed in a much, much better fashion than what they are now. The courthouse display cabinets, after many years, those were finished; we've had a full year now of displaying them. As you know, those are for both the court use as well as Historical Commission, so if there's anything the court would like to have displayed in those, please let us know. You have -- on the budget item, you have the display of the items that we used the budget for last year, and then we have the proposed use for this year. The membership of the Historical Commission this time is 15 active members. We continue to grow a little bit. We have a total of 21 really considered members. The leadership in the coming year, there are 15 new board members that we're asking for approval by the Court. The leadership will be Joe Herring, Jr., will be the chairman; Ray Haney, vice chairman; Ann Bethel, second vice; Lloyd Strange, the Treasurer; and Brenda Craig, the secretary. We ask the Court to approve those for us. Coming year projects, we'll continue with the historical restoration of the Union Church building. Our oral history, we're making a goal of 10 interviews next year. As you know, we're doing those over in the small 1~- ,-~~, 27 1 .-. 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1 Ls 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 apartment behind the historical library. That library facility is -- has no plans for it: this year to be demolished or anything, and that has been a rumor. They have removed our telephone from that building, so we may have to come to the Court and ask for a telephone to be extended into that building. We use the bottom for the interviews. We have a setup down there with a living room-type set up so that people that we bring in for the interviews feel comfortable and at. home. They usually bring in all of their library -- their photo collections. We duplicate those, scan them all, put them into the computer system so we have them for a historical record. As I mentioned, the historical calendar for 2004 is in the works. We're in the process of collecting those photographs at this time, and hopefully we'll have those out earlier than we did this year, although we did make the October deadline. Membership, we're continuing to ask the Court to continue to consider those people that may be interested in participating and refer them to us for approval. Additional projects, we're looking at the updating of the historical booY.s that we have on Kerr County. We have the gracious offer of Rosa Lavender to assist us in those, as well as a historical video and slide presentation, so those will be the main projects for the year 2003. Thank you. Any questions? i_-~-~_ 28 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 Z1 22 <'3 24 25 COMMISSIONER. LETZ: General, how long have you been chair? MR. SCHELLHASE: Three years. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Three years? You've done a good job. Appreciate what you've done. MR. SCHELLHASE: Thank you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you need a motion to approve the leadership for the following year? JUDGE HENNEKE: We need a motion to approve the -- accept the report and approve the leadership. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I would move that the CommissLoners accept the report as presented by General Schellhase, the current chairman, and -- and approve the recommendations of the Commission for its leadership in the ensuing year. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court accept the Z00~ annual report of the Kerr County Historical Commission and approve the new leadership as described in the report. Any questions or comments? I COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question. Judge, the photograph on the front of the calendar is dated 1908. Walter, that looks like you there on that horse. (Laughter.) l,_5_~, 29 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 S 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~2 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Could that be you? MR. SCHELLHASE: That was my great-grandfather. JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or comments'? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. {No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. MR. SCHELLHASE: Thank you. One quick announcement. I'm going to be leaving immediately. The V.A. has asked us to come -- the Council to come to San Antonio to meet with the director out of Dallas and bring us up to date on the current -- what they call Enhanced Care for the Kerrville Tacility, so we'll find out what that long-range plan is. Thank you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Thank you. JUDGE HENNEKE: Item Number 2 is to consider and discuss employee health insurance renewal rate. Barbara, are you going to introduce this one? MS. NEMEC: Well, our third-party administrator, our representative from there is Ray Rothwell with Employee Benefit Administrators, and he's here today to discuss our insurance renewal rates, and then our _-±-~- 30 1 2 Y 4 5 F 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 representative here from Kerrville is Bryan Finley and Curtis Finley, and Bryan was unable to be here, but Curtis is here, so I'll just turn it over to them. MR. ROTHWELL: What. we're recommending is to continue with -- and this kind of carries over from the conversation we had a little bit ago about the -- the prefunding of the -- the one large claim. Cost-wise, I think y'all have all been presented with -- with the cost figures. In my opinion, after we resolve this one outstanding claim, our best buy continues to be a 12/12 contract. As of last Thursday, we had about three days work on-hand, meaning claims in process in our shop were less than three days old -- or they were three days or less old. We have nothing large working. We've had no major pre-certs into the hospital, up to last Thursday, over the last 45 days. So, in our opinion, we've got no reason to pay the extra cost of the 12/12 contract. And you can see -- of the 15/12. You can see our current rates on the display of Plan A, B, and C. A is the best plan, and that's the plan, if you go back to the individual sheets behind that cover sheet, that has virtually all of the employees on it. It's a $300 deductible, 90 percent plan. This county has historically funded that plan, allowing the employees the opportunity of buying down, if you will, to B or C, using i~-y-~,~ 31 1 -- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 21 22 23 l 24 25 those e:;tra dollars to supplement or to help pay for their dependent coverage. If you look at those individual pages of B and C, you'll see that not too many employees took advantage of that. On Plan B, that's a $500 deductible plan. There's 25 employees with four dependent units, and on Plan C there's 13 employees, about three dependent units. So, the majority of the employees are still taking advantage of the best plan that the County offers and pays for. The County pays, as you know, 100 percent of the employee cost. The dependents pay 100 percent of -- the employees pay 100 percent of their dependent cost. With the resolution that we reached earlier, it's my opinion that we should continue with a 12/12 contract. Do y'all understand the difference in a 12/12 and 15/12? Should I go into that a little bit more? (Commissioner Letz nodded.) MR. ROTHWELL: Okay. On a 12/12 reinsurance contract, that contract covers claims incurred and paid during the 12-month contract period. It covers January 1 through December 31, anything incurred and paid during that period. So, that would tell you that the majority of the December claims aren't paid. We don't get those in, generally, in the month. Some of the November claims will be coming in a little later. Sur_, historically, the trend with the County has been very financially sound to stay with i~-q-~~~ 32 1 __ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 _ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~4 ~5 the 12/12 contract, This year, we had these two things that happened in September and October, these two transplants, and one outstanding one, that -- that created a little bit of extra looking at the back end of the contract to see financially wriat was the best route. In my opinion, it is the 12/12 route that we're asking you to approve. And you'll see the -- that the rate increase on the Plan A is -- is more than the Plan B and C, but. it's because all the people are in A and all the claim= experience is in A. Incidentally, let me back up one minute and tell you, that large claim that we talked about, only $40,000 of that claim goes against the history, experience, that sort of thing. We have a $90,000 stop-loss program, so we only get tabbed with $40,000 and only get measured with $46,000. In this particular -- in the two cases that we had that were large at the end of the year, one went off the plan efYective September 1, and one deceased shortly after the surgery. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ray, go over the 12/15. MR. ROTHWELL: Okay, the 15/12 -- but there is a 1"2/15 also. The 15/12 picks up claims incurred and unpaid during that 90-day corridor before January 1. Anything incurred and unpaid in that period would be -- would be covered under that 15/12 contract. I often recommend 15/12 as a -- as a contract item, as maybe the i~'-y-o~ 33 1 L 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 best way to go when we were looking at renewals. In the -- in Kerr County's situation, it's never been cost advantageous to do that. We believe that the 12/12 is the best way to go. COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the -- why is there a different cost for one versus the other? MR. ROTHwNLL: They're picking up three more months of liability within the contract period. You're picking up all claims. And the reason it's not a good buy for Kerr County is we know -- we know that we don't have any outstandinq claims. we know that we don't have anything large working, and we know that there was not any material hospital admissions during the last 95 days, from -- from our lookinq at and checking with the reinsurance company to see if triey had precertified anything, and they hadn't. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you switch from a 12/12 to a 15/12 during the year? Like, the -- MR. ROTHWELL: No. You have to make that -- to have make that option going in. Historically, we've ended up with -- with extra funds equaling, I believe, a little more than a month in our -- in our health insurance program, and I think we still have some surplus going out of this year that -- that's not going to be spent. Even though we're spending some large dollars now, we expect to get those back. i _ - 9 - U 2 34 1 _- 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ~UMMISSIONER LETZ: So, what would basically happen, to make sure I understand this, is that it's cheaper for us to go with the 12/12 than a 15/12, but I guess the risk is, if you had a real large claim come up in MR. ROTHWELL: There you have the option of buying a 15/12, going off of a 12/12 contract. We always have the option of buying a 15/12, or a paid, which is a 24/12. Those are always options available. If we had something large working next December, we would certainly wants to look at the 15112, you know. See, the difference is about $75 on an employee basis at this point in time, per month, per employee. And going across to the -- excuse me, the dependent units, it sr_ages up a little more than that. But, at the end of a 12/12 contract, we always have the ability to -- to buy that 90 days previous, or 24 months if we -- you know, if we needed it in our operation. We've never needed to go to a 24/12, because we just don't drag claims around. So, my recommendation is a 12/12. I think this is financially the best route for the County to qo. And, you know, next year we may -- incidentally, let me back up and tell you also, we shopped your reinsurance with nine carriers. We had three carriers d~=_cline. The rest -- and we're changing carriers. We have -- I've got better pricing from a new -- from a different carrier; it's an A-plus rated is ~~-o~ 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~~ 23 24 2~ carrier, but we are charging carriers, 'cause we shop that reinsurance market with all of our clients every year, so we effectively bi~,l tkraL for you. And we do that for all of our clients every year. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What did you say the deductible was on Plan A? Did you say $300. MR. ROTHWELL: It's $300. Three, five, and 750, I believe, are the three programs. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's $400. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought it was $400. That's the xeasun I asked. (Discussion off the record.) MR. ROTHWELL: Oh, it's $400, not $300. Okay, you're right. I'm sorry. I was thinking it was three, but it's four. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And it's $400 per member? MR. ROTHWELL: Per person. Three per -- three per family, for the family units. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So it's $1,200 for my family. MS. NEMEC: In network providers. MR. ROTHWELL: As long as you're -- MS. NEMEC: In network providers. If you go out oL Lhe network, then it's higher. -- "-"- 36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. ROTHWELL: Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. MR. ROTHWELL: Any other questions? JUDGE HENNEKE: For the record, are there any changes in the benefits? MR. ROTHWELL: No. We're quoting -- we're leaving the benefits exactly like they were in the three plans. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ray, I have a question. Here's my card. And I recently went to the doctor and used this, and they asked me, "Who is your insurance carrier?" And there's lots of words and numbers on this thing, but I, to this moment, have not figured out who any carrier is. MR. ROTHWELL: The carrier is not identified on there. You know, basically, b}' being a, quote, partially self-funded company, you are the front-end carrier for the first $40,000. After that, it's Onion Labor, currently. Union Labor Life. And we're proposing to go to Presidential Life Insurance Company. COMMISSIONER BALDW:CN: Well -- THE WITNESS: They're an A-plus rated company. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That doesn't help me at all. What -- I mean, can -- can you put that on our ~_-~-u;. 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 cards? MR. ROTHWELL: We don`t -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or just pretend we have insurance, or -- MR. ROTHWELL: We don't ever -- we've never put it on a card. I suppose we could put on it a card, reinsurance carrier. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What do you say to your doctor? What do you say to your doctor when yuu use your insurance? MR. ROTHWELL: I tell them I'm covered by Blue Cross. MS. NEMEC: We're covered by Kerr County. We're partially self-funded, so it's Kerr County. MR. ROTHWELL: Kerr County Health Insurance program. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I've had that same problem. Doctors don't like to hear you're insured by Kerr County. MR. ROTHWELL: We can put that on there, but that's confusing, because, you know, there -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: They may file a claim directly with that company, whicr -- MR. ROTHWELL: And then it goes out into never-never land then, you know. We have enough problems ~~-, a 38 t 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ^_1 22 23 24 2 S with the local doctors not sending theirs to Greater Hill Country Health Care Alliance, which is the P.P.O. -- the primary P.P.O. that we use, which is the local group. Outside of here is Texas True Choice, and we often have a lot of local doctors sending claims to Texas True Choice. We, in turn, have to argue with Texas True Choice. "No, we're not going to pay you, 'cause we got to send it back." So -- so, we constantly talk to the doctors directly and/or through the Greater Hill Country folks, about telling their doctors to make sure they file their claims directly with us. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So 7'm just going to tell you, "Look, I promise you that we Yiave insurance"? You work that out with somebody? MR. ROTHWELL: Buster, if you tell somebody, "Trust me," I know they'll trust you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Obviously, they do. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My question, Ray, is more directed to Tommy. MR. ROTHWELL: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This appears to be about a 30 percent increase in the County's obligation per employee. What did we budget? MR. TOMLINSON: There's -- considering which budgets -- 1_' d-~. 39 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon? MR. TOMLINSON: Considering which budgets are involved, they're -- for those departments that have large amounts of employees that we have turnover in, we'll probably have enough budgeted. Others, no, we don't. There's about -- for example, in my department, we have -- there's three people covered, and I hope there's no turnover. So, we're going to have a shortfall of about $400 per employee. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On an annual basis? MR. TOMLINSON: On an annual basis. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Annual, okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy, on that, are you going to come back with one budge: amendment to correct all those at one time? As each department runs out? MR. TOMLINSON: As needed. COMMISSIONER LETZ: As needed. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You need a motion to approve the n ew rates? JUDGE HENNEKE: We need a rnotion to approve the extension of the existing rates -- existing plan. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. COMMISSIONER WILL]AMS: Okay. JDDGE HENNEKE: I think that was a motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin that is-5-o~~ 40 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the Commissioners Court renew the er,isting Kerr County Employee Health Insurance plan at the rates as presented. Any questions or comments? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, because of the importance of this one, I'm not sure it's posted properly for that. Consider and discuss employee health insurance renewal rates. I don't see that it talks about the plan. 7 mean, I guess you could construe that by renewing the rates, you're renewing the plan, but -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, we can restructure the motion, that the Court approve the renewal rates as presented by the carrier, or the carrier's representative. MS. NEMEC: Then, when we have the contract to be signed, then it will be worded properly, but this is just for the rates. We don't have the contract yet. JUDGE HENNEKE: For the record, their, the motion is to approve the employee health insurance renewal rates as presented by Mr. Rothwell. Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your riyYit hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sigrr. (No response.? JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. We have two ~~-~-u~ 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 41 public hearings scheduled at 10 o'olock. I think we can get another item or two in before that. (Discussion off the record.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Let's take up Item Number 5, then, consider the final plat revision of Lot 9 and 10 of the Horizon, Section One, Precinct 1. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mr. Johnston. MR. JOHNSTON: Good morning. This -- this plat consists of a revision of two lots. It essentially is moving a lot line just a few feet, from one to the other. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Looks good to me. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court grant final plat approval for the plat revision of Lot 9 and 10 of the Horizon, Section One, in Precinct 1. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: We can take care of Number 10 real quick, too. JUDGE HENNEKE: Which one'? ra-s ua 42 1 1 r t 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Number 10. JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's do Number 9 first. Number 9 ~s consider and discuss approval of refund to Ameripark Kerrville Corporation per the agreed judgment. Ms. Rector. MS. RECTOR: I don't know if you all have had a chance to read over the information that I gave to you. If you need a little background on how all this came about, this once was a lawsuit that was filed by Ameripark against the Appraisal District for value. It had gone on since 1999. We pushed to get it resolved before the 2002 taxes were paid and had to be refunded also. And I put in there the original value that they rendered and the agreed value between the two parties, and then the agreed funds were calculated based on that plus tl-ie interest that they are allowed by the Property Tax Code. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval of the refund as presented. JUDGE HENNEKE: Where are we going to get the funds? Favorite question. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Favorite question. Tommy, do you have a good solution? MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I don't -- most of the time, the tax -- on refund, we don't expense that, because it's actually not an operating expense finance, the way I 12-9-u2 43 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 see it, so we have the Tax Office sake it out of their collections. MS. RECTOR: No, we're not. MR. TOMLINSON: Not -- MS. RECTOR: We can't, unless you want me to withhold it from the next couple of months of what I turn over to the County. But we need to pay it as soorr as possible, because the interest is accruing, and we had asked each of the entities involved that they expedite t}ie refunds as quickly as possible, 'cause I calculated the refunds through November. So, Tommy, you and I could talk about it -- MR. TOMLINSON: I think -- in my estimation, it's overstated the operating cost, but it's actually a return of -- of -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tommy, we can't hear you on this side. MR. TOMLINSGN: They're essentially a return of revenues. So, I -- COMMISSIONER LETZ; i mean, just do it on the revenue side only? Just a revenue refund? Or refund of revenue? MR. TOMLINSON: That's what I'm thinking. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It's a refund. Just comes on the top of the profit and loss statement. lt's a ~_ v ~~~ 44 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ^5 refund. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we don't need a -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It lowers revenues; that's all it does. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But do we need kind cf an amendment to lower revenues? MR. TOMLINSON: I think we just treed approval to make the payment. I mean, I don't think it's a budget item, so I -- I think it's simply a return. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That will be my motion. JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; Te11 me how much. I can't seem to find the total anywhere. JUDGE HENNEKE: Second page. COMMISSIONER LETZ: $55,200.08. MS. RECTOR: That's the -- $59,882.29 is the total Kerr County and Lateral F,oad portion of the zefund. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $59,882.29? MS. RECTOR: Right:. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That includes the roads -- or the Lateral Road? MS. RECTOR: That's Lateral Road and County. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Let?, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve a ,_.,., 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 45 refund for the Ameripark Kerrville Corporation per the agreed judgment in the amount of -- aggregate amount of $59,882.29. Any further questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Moticn carries. Thank you Paula. Item Number 10, consider and discuss and take appropriate action rescinding the January 13, 2003, date set for public hearing on H.O.M.E. Disaster Relief funds until after disaster relief application workshop has been scheduled. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's -- the rules of the game say that there's no need having a public hearing prior to the time the disaster relief application workshop takes place, and that has not yet been scheduled, so I nwve we cancel the January 13th date. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court rescind and cancel the January 13th date set for public hearing on H.O.M.E. Disaster Relief funds. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.} _n~ 96 1 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 2 J JUDGE HENNEKE: A11 opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number 11, consider and discuss a resolution requesting our U.S. I Congressman, State Senator, and State Representative support for expediting the construction o` the Hermann Sons Bridge. Commissioner Lets. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I handed out to members of the Court, and gave one to Nadene, a revised resolution. I put this on the agenda due to the schedule that came out of TexDOT dated October 18th. In that schedule, it showed the letting of the contract in 2009, with construction to begin in 200. That, in my mind, is not acceptable because of the need to get that bridge done on a far faster time route. So, z prepared this resolution so that we could ask Congressman Lamar Smith and State Representative Harvey Hilderbran, Sate Senators Troy Fraser and Jeff Wentworth to do what they can to prod TexDOT along on this project. I included Senator Jeff Wentworth because a lot of the residents and a lot of use of this bridge goes into Kendall County, and he is the State Senator for Kendall County. Let me briefly read the resolution. Resolution in Support of Expediting the Construction of the Hermann Sons Bridge. Whereas, on October 20, 2000, the low-water __-~-n~ 97 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2L ^3 29 25 bridge crossing the Guadalupe River on Hermann Sons Roads washed out during a flood. Whereas, TexDOT -- I mean the Texas Department of Transportation is responsible for the "Off System" road bridge program in the State of Texas. The Hermann Sons Bridge is part of this program. Replacement of this bridge was ar_celerated by and became a priority one project after the bridge was destroyed by the flood of October 20, 2000. Whereas, Hermann Sons Bridge is vital for the health, safety, welfare of the residents and the community of Kerr County. The Hermann Sons Bridge serves the Hermann Sons Retirement Community, which has over 65 residents, the Hermann Sons Youth Camp, over 4,000 youth during each summer, and the Pot of Gold Youth Camp, and numerous ~ residents in Kerr and Kendall Coun=ies. Whereas, the Hermann Sons low-water bridge was the site of a tragic school bus accident where the bus was swept away by a flood on July 17, 1987. Eleven children were killed and over 30 were injured. whereas, in 2001, Kerr County, with the assistance of Natural Resource and Conservation Agency, constructed a temporary bridge across the Guadalupe River to assist the many residents of the area; and whereas, in early July of 2002, a series of __-~ ~- 4fl 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 floods on Lhe Guadalupe Fiver washed out and destroyed the temporary bridge, and the Texas Cepartment of Transportation assured Kerr County and Lts residents that the permanent replacement of Hermann Sons Bridge was a priority one Whereas, by correspondence received from Texas Department of Transportation in early November 2002, a revised schedule dated November 18, 2002, was received by Kerr County, where the construction date for the Hermann Sons Bridge was 2005; and Whereas, Kerr County has budgeted and planned for its share of the expenses of this project and is ready, willing, and able to proceed with this vital project at the earliest conceivable opportunity. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Kerr County Commissioners Court that Kerr County reaffirms its unwaveri~iy staunch support for the Hermann Sons Bridge, and that the proposed construction date of 2005 is unacceptable to Kerz County Commissioners Court and the citizens of Kerr County, and such delay greatly affects the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Kerr County, and requests that the Texas Department of Transportation give this project the highest possible priority and complete the project at the earliest possible time. And may it further be resolved that the Kerr ~_ 9 a~ 49 1 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 County Commissioners Court request the assistance of U.S. Congressman Lamar Smith, State Senators Troy Fraser and Jeff Wentworth, and State Kepresentative Harvey Hilderbran in assisting the citizens of Kerr County, Kendall County, and the State of Texas to insure that construction of the Hermann Sons Bridge receives the highest possible priority. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question. Is it a possibility that a companion resoiution will be forthcoming from Kendall County? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. It's being sent over to them tomorrow to do such. I'll move the approval of the Resolution. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve the resolution in support of expediting the construction of the Hermann Sons Bridge. Any questions or comments? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I will make one comment. The local TexDOT office is aware of this, and they have no problem and support the resolution. They feel this bridge should be a higher priority, and they think it will emerge, but encourage anything that we can do to make that happen. They appreciate it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, piggyback a 1c-~-i~z JD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 a 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 thought here. As I stated last month, we want to do something similar to this soon regarding the High Water Bridge, but what I want to do is have our elected officials encourage TexDOT to come to this room and explain to the Kerr County public why there isn't a high water bridge after five, six years. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ten, 15. COMMISSIONER BALDWI:N: Ten or 15 years, whatever. JUDGE HENNEKE: I think that' s a great idea. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We'll be doing that soon. JUDGE'. HENNEKE: Okay. Any other questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this time, we will recess the Kerr County Commissioners Court meeting and conduct a public hearing on Kerr County applying for aii LLEBG grant. (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:04 a.m., and a public hearing was held in open court, as follows:) P U B L I C H E A R I N G JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, if there is any i--"-'~ Jl 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2~ 23 24 25 individual who would like to address the Court on the issue o£ Kerr County applying for an LLEBG grant, you may come forward and do su. Is there any citizen who'd like to address the Court on the issue of Kerr County applying for an LLEBG grant? (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: One more time, is there any citizen who would like to address the Court on the issue of Kerr County applying for an LLEBG grant, which is a grant for use by the Sheriff's Department? Seeing none, we will close the public hearing and reconvene the special -- regular session cf the Kerr County Commissioners Court. (The public hearing was concluded at 10:05 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was reopened.) JUDGE HENNEKE: The next item for business is to open sealed bids for reconstruction of Sheppard Rees Road and consider awarding or rejecting same. Opening the bids here. First proposal is -- proposal is from Edmund Jenschke, inc. Total base is $393,544.50. Alternate bid Item Number 2 is $54,584 and no cents. Time of completion, 180 days. The next proposal is from MPB, Inc. Base Item Numbcr 1 is $674,000. Alternative Bid Number 2 is $55,000. Number of days for construction, 150 calendar days. Third bid is from RosBan Construction Inc. Base bid, Item Number -'-u-o~ 52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 L 2 23 ~4 25 1, $429,410.46. Alternate bid, Item Number 2, $52,520. Time of completion, 145 days. Next bid is from Wagner Materials and Construction. Base bid, Item Number 1, $320,000. Alternate bid, Item Number 2, $67,000. Time of completion, 120 days. The last bid is from Allen Keller Company. $ 62,430 for base bid, Item Number 1. Alternate bid, Item NumbeL 2, $37,900. Time of completion, 80 days. Not bad. Do 1 have a motion to accept the bids and refer them to the Road grid Bridge Department for evaluation and recommendation? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move to do so. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court accept all of the bids for reconstruction of Sheppard Rees Road and refer them to the Road and Bridge Department for recommendation. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hope they all read the same bid package. JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions or comments? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When -- when will you be back to the Court with a recommendation? MR. ODOM: You're asking me, sir? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. MR. OUOM: Next meeting? How's that? -- 9-:,_ 53 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Newt meeting? MR.. ODOM: Yes, sir. We will not do anything till after the -- the first of the year, anyway, even if we did that. So -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, cool. JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or comments? II not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) DODGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Okay. Why don't we do Item Number 12, consider and discuss authorizing beginniny condemnation process, if needed, to acquire right-of-way for Hermann Sons Bridge. Commissioner Letz. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda for two reasons. One, I'm afraid we may have to go through condemnation, actually, due to one of the landowners, possibly two of the landowners there. And also, this is really spurred a lot by the TexDOT schedule. They have -- every time I talk with TexDOT, they want to know where we are on right-of-way. Z just want to make sure that we have our right-of-way locked up as soon as possible, so they can't say that is your reason for delay in the construction of a bridge. So, what I'm really asking for here is for the Court to formally approve or -- and authorize the County iz-y-uz 59 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Attorney to proceed with the condemnation. Of course, that will be preceded by an attempt to not go through condemnation by the County Attorney. We have made preliminary contacts with all the landowners, and I think we are going to need an appraisal of the property in either event, so this is just to authorize the County Attorney to proceed and get everything in order that he needs, and to approve the -- you know, starting with the appraisal, whatever. I'll make a motion to that effect. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second it. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, second by Commissioner Wi]liams, that the Court authorize the County Attorney to begin condemnation process, if necessary, to acquire the right-of-way for the Hermann Sons Bridge. Commissioner Baldwin, you have a comment? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. I do thank you. We've negotiated with those Landowners? I mean, I know you have; I understand that. But has the County Attorney -- I mean, is he -- is he ready and prepared? I mean, he thinks this condemnation is the next step? COMMISSIONER LETZ: He is aware of the situation. He has not yet talked to him, but this gives him the authority to -- to start that. I mean, I don't -- I hope we don'L have to go through the formal condemnation, 55 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 but I think that it's -- we are at the pcint in time when it needs to be taken out of my lap and Road and Bridge's lap and given to the legal department to start negotiating so that things are done properly if we do have to go to condemnation, w}lich is very likely, upon the landowners. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to strengthen my second, if I could. JUDGE HENNEKE: Your strong second is noted. COMM[SSIONER BALDWIN: Strong second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. iThe motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this time, we're going to go ahead with Item Number 4, which is to open sealed bids for lease of wheel loader, and consider awarding or rejecting same. The envelope, please. We have one proposal from Holt cA'I on the wheel loader. The proposal is for $62,680, which includes a guaranteed repair expense. Five-year lease is $62,280. Guaranteed repair expense of $400. Total bid of $62,680. COMMISSIUNER BALDWIN: That's it? That's going to be a tough one. JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, I'd entertain a 56 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 motion to accept the bid on the lease of wheel loader and refer to it Road and Bridge Department for evaluation and recommendation. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second, DODGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court accept the sealed bid for lease of wheel loader and refer same to the Road and Bridge Department for eva]uation and recommendation. 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.l J[7DGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Let's go ahead and do Item Number 6, consider and discuss the following: Authorize Kerr County Road and Bridge to acquire construction easements to work on private property; authorize Kerr County Road and Bridge to proceed with T.C.D.P. grant; approve publication, set public hearing for i T.C.D.P. grant application; authorize County Judge to sign completed T.C.D.P. final application; and approve publication for T.C.D.P. grant application posting and mailinq. Leonard, good morning. MR.. ODOM: Yes, sir. Good morning. If ~~ ~ ~ ~ 57 1 ~-. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 L 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you'll bear with me, I'll go through this that T presented to you. There's several items that need to be addressed before we complete the clean-up work from the Suly flood. The attached letter from Natural Resource Conservation River Road; that's at the guardrails by -- where it -- Martin Marietta, across from there. Center Point River Road at Bowlin, at the cabins. The Center Point Dam. The Hermann Sons Road at the bridge, and the Center Point River Road at the springs. That's where young people swing off there where iL ate out real bad. These are not FEMA-approved sites, but we have preliminary approval from NRCS for 75 percent funding to repair these sites. However, Kerr County is expected to provide equipment and labor. Should Kerr County Road and Bridge use County equipment and/or funds to work on the private property portion of these projects, which are predominantly reimbursed by NRCS? Sf so, will Commissioners Court authorize Road and Bridge to obtain construction easements across the private property portion of the projects listed above, as well -- as well as work on this construction easement to make the flood damage repairs? On 12 August, '02, you signed the attached 1^-9-~ 58 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1~ 14 15 16 l~ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 resolution to submit to the Office of Rural Community Affairs, O.R.C.A., for up to $356,000 grant funds to carry out projects. When we first contacted Gus Garcia, we were told that we would need final numbers from both FEMA and NRCS before filiny with them. On the Zlst of October, '02, FEMA final numbers arrived, and that was a total of $338,761.60. The first check from FEMA arrived on the 29th of October, `02, and we received all payments, for a total of -- that gross amount, our /5 percent, of $261,852.72. On the 29th of October, '02, NRCS preliminary numbers finally arrived. They approved five sites at $86,000; one site, an estimate between 20 -- $50,000 and $65,000. The NRCS representative should be in Kerr County December the 18th to let us know how we proceed. That's trying to get the it paperwork that we can get the Judge to sign. October the 28th, we tried to contact O.R.C.A. to start work on the grant we believed would be the 25 percent of all funds approved by FEMA and NRCS. Gus Garcia, their Lepresentative, informed us this was not the case. And we were -- we had talked to them several times. Right at this point, we never heard. any different that we would get funded for all these sites, but we needed the -- the paperwork. So you can see, in late October, we didn't get all the numbers to submit the grant. We are now putting together information to submit a grant to O.R.C.A. for o> 59 1 1.., 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ~1 22 23 24 25 $80,495.27, and tkiat's based upon the things that are not complete. And I gave you a list here of these unfinished What I'm here for is to ask you -- we need to proceed quickly for approval for the following. First is the authority for Road and Bridge to acquire construction easements and to work on private property. Second, authority for Road and Bridge to proceed, with cooperation of other County offices, to assimilate the documents needed to submit the grant; County personnel data, planned capital purchases for one year, and census information. Approval of the publication and setting of public hearing 72 hours after publication for the T.C.D,P. grant application. Fourth, authorization for the Judge to sign completed T.C.D.P. final application. And, fifth, approval of publication for the T.C.D.P. grant application posting and mailing. What I've given you in the back of this summary here are the copies of the notices, the first notice for 72 hours, a~ well as the second notice to be published before mailing the final application, the permission for right-of-way entry, the letter fron. NRCS, how they came up with their six sites, the copy of that resolution. So, basically, those five items is what I need from the Court. We have no problems doing it, but we just need authorization to do this. We feel it's appropriate, but we wanted to __ 9 60 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 26 21 22 23 24 25 touch base with the Court in rase there was any conflicts or anyone felt like there was conflict, us doing work on private property. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is the resolution -- the resolution that we adopted back in -- a couple months ago? MR. ODOM: August, wasn't it? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: August or September. We discussed doing this -- the Court discussed doing this, and we had some discussion as to whether or not we should do it or allow Grantworks to do it, and we determined that Road and Bridge would file this application, and they have done so. They've done a lot of work on it, on the paperwork that's necessary to do this. Can we handle this just with one motion, or do they all have to be separate motions? DODGE HENNEKE: I have no problem with approving the agenda item in one motion. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I would move that we authorize -- should I list it in for the record, or just a generic motion? JUDGE HENNEI;E: List them in. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon? DODGE HENNEKE: List them in. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: List them. I would move that we authorize R:err County Road and Bridge to u-_-~~? 51 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 J acquire construction easements to work on private property, and to authorize Kerr County Road and Bridge to proceed with the T.C.D.P. grant they started, and to approve publication and set pub]ir_ hearing for T.C. D. P. grant application as required, and authorize County Judge to sign the completed T.C.D.P. application -- final application, and to approve publication of the T.C.D.P. grant application including posting and mailing. JUDGE HENNEKE: Where's the public hearing going to be held? Let's have a second first, I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court approve the agenda item as recited by Commissioner Williams. Questions or comments? ~ COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Public hearing would be held Here, 9 a.m. on December 16th at 700 Main Street. I assume that means this courtroom. JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. I've got a probate hearing scheduled in here at 8:30. Do we have another -- Thea, can you step out and see if we can find another courtroom? MS. SOVIL: For what date? JUDGE HENNEKE: The 16th, MS. SOVIL: December? 1 i-~1-~1 62 I 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1S l~ 20 21 L 23 L Y 25 JUllGE HENNEKE: Yes. MS. SOVIL: What time? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 9 o'clock. JUDGE HENNEKE: 8:30 for my hearing. We'll move my hearing, as opposed to the public hearing. MS. SOVIL: 8:30? COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other -- I think the only comment I would make on that, it's probably clear in the backup, but on the construction easements, those are the construction easements related to the projects listed in the application. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My question is related to that, too. What do you have to go through to get a construction easement? MR.. ODOM: Just the signatures to fill this out. Just the signature. COMMISSIONER LETZ; By luck or something else, I've been working with Mr. Motley on a construction easement for Hermann Sons, so he has just approved a new form. MR. ODOM: We can fix our -- if they don't give us a construction easement, we can fix our portion of this, and then determine if the health, safety, and welfare is involved, and there's certain -- you know, where that i~-9-=_ 63 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 location is. But if they don't sign it, we don't have it. It's only going to suffice us. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is the sample that you sent? MR. UllOM: It's a sample, right. Right. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Permission for entry. MR. ODOM: There may be more damage just that -- you know, that surrounds that -- that initial -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This, for one thing, would clear up that little dispute we have pending -- MR. ODOM: On Bowlin? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- with the cabins over on River Road. MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. And I have discussed that with the landowners and all, and I think that we can resolve that problem. JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. MR. ODOM: Thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You have a question of what time? 1~-9-~_ 69 1 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 1~ 18 19 20 2] 22 23 24 G J MS. SrVIL: What time is the public hearing set? JUpGE HENNEKE: 9 o'clock. Let's do Item Number 7, then we'll take a break, get reinvigorated and come back and listen to Ms. Glover. Item Number ~ is consider authorizing Kerr County Road and Bridge to close Sheppard Rees for up to two weeks during construction project. Franklin Johnston. MR. JOHNSTON: The Horizon end of Sheppard Rees project will require some blasting work, and a]so tie-in to the existing road. This activity and the grades involved may require closing Sheppard Rees to through traffic for up to two weeks for the safety of the public. We'd like this decision made now so that contractor will know how to schedule the project. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I am certainly in favor of it, and I am glad that the press is in the room i today to pick up on that, to maybe send a message out to the public that this is going to happen, There's -- 'cause that's -- there's a high traffic count that comes down through there every morning and every evening, so I think everything that we can do to prepare the public for the closing of a road would be helpful. Newspapers, television stations. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hcw will the traffic be 1 ~ 9 ~1 , E5 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ]1 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 rerouted? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm guessing out Bear Creek. MR. JOHNSTON: Bear Creek would be the only way. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See, Precinct 1 and 4, we plan ahead. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER WILLIP.MS much for us, Commissioner. That's not saying COMMISSIONER LETZ: He didn't say we didn't plan. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I wasn't throwing rocks at anybody. I'm just telling you that we're ready. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's quite a -- I mean, that's quite a lonq detour, so I think it is going to -- you know. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you provide lunch for those who have to detour? JUDGE HENNEKE: I assume that it will be open to people who have property along that stretch. MR. JOHNSTON: We'll try to minimize the time. I think there might be some time in -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You said two -- two weeks? lz-q-~~_ 66 I 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 I3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR.. JOHNSTON: Right. MR. ODOM: And we may not -- we may not have to do it, but we wanted the option to do it and let everyone know that the problem arises at The Horizon. But I -- where we can, we will leave it open. If it's shut, it will be a minimal time. But it gives the contractor an option. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, of course, they have another entrance over by my house. MR. JOHNSTON: Right, Horizon does. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So that's not a big problem, either. Judge, I move that we authorize the Road and Bridge Department of Kerr County to close Sheppard Rees Road for up to two weeks during their construction project. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court authorize the Kerr County Road and Bridge Department to close Sheppard Rees Road for up to two weeks during the construction of Sheppard Rees. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And when the public starts calling and screaming, give them Larry Griffin's home phone number. JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) i_ ~-u 6~ 1 2 3 4 5 ti 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's take a 15-minute break, come back promptly at 20 minutes till 11:00. (Recess taken from 10:26 a.m. to 10:40 a.m.) DODGE HENNEKE: We will reconvene this regular session of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. 1t's 20 minutes to 11:00 on Monday, December the 9th. Next item for consideration is Item Number 8, which is a presentation regarding Phase 2 MS4 Storm Water permits by Sue Glover from the Texas Association of Counties. Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Thank you very much. You remember last month, gentlemen, we -- this item for the issue was brought up, and I told you that I would get someone from TAC to come over and brief us on it, and I've called over there, and sure enough, I got the top of the line. Our friend, Sue Glover, is an expert in this field, and she's -- thank you, Sue, for coming over to brief us on this issue. MS. GLOVER: Good morning, Judge, Commissioners. It's nice to come over and talk about storm water when I had to come through a lot of storm water to get over here this morning. So, as you will recall, we have i~-y-oz 68 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 been monitoring the storm water Phase 2 issue since EPA permitted this -- or proposed a rule back in 1998, so it's going on five years that I've been talking about storm water. But EPA did finalize its rule in 1999, and this past year we've been working with the T.N.H.C.C., now the T.C.E.Q., on how far they were going to administer the Phase 2 program in Texas. And, as you will recall -- y'all have heard me probably talk about this a lot -- there were two issues in Lhe Phase 2 rule, and one has to do with small municipal separate storm sewer systems, MS4's. And the other provision had to do with construction activity. Fortunately, at this point, it appears that you all axe not a designated MS4 county. The designation criteria for MS4 counties had to do not with water quality issues, buL had to do with population bracY.ets. And so, since y'all aren't a county of 50,000 -- or have an urbanised area of 50,000 within your county, you're not automatically designated under the Phase 2 rule. In Texas, we had 51 counties that were automatically designated, so for right now, that's a very good thing for you all, because those 51 counties will have an enormous amount of tasks to undertake to adhere to the MS4 permit. That's not to say that, in the future, that T.N.H.C.C., or T.C.E.Q., as they're now called, could not come in and designate a county or an area of a county based on water quality issues. So -- 1~-9-0? E9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 but at this point, I've r_hecked the rule. You all are not a listed county. Because you aren't adjacent -- next to Bexar County, you won't have that urbanized area come in. In San Patricio County -- which y'all know that that's right next to Nueces County, but a very small rural county -- there's a segment of San Patricio County, because they're right on the edge of Nueces County, that is designated, because it goes by census block tracts. So, as Kendall County grows, and y'all are adjacent to them, there could be some overlapping on your south side that could. Or T.N.R.C.C. or T.C.E.Q. could come in and designate you based on water quality criteria. So, today -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: As soon as the population in Kerr County gets to 50,000, does it automatically then, or is it -- MS. GLOVER: No, sir, it will be based on the census criteria. So -- and one of the things that we've asked for -- there are two permits that are out there right now. One is the M54 permit. The other is the construction. Under the MS9 permit, one of the things that we commented on was that it should be the latest census tract area. So, you all, under that definition, would probably not come under for another 10 years. But that's not to say that -- that the Commission couldn't come in at any time, based on the criteria that they've listed in the MS4 permit, to designate i:° ~-uz 70 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 y'a11, but at this point that does not seem to be. Which y'all are very glad, because for our 51 counties, they are going to see an enormous amount of expense, probably, in adhering to those provisions. So, right now, I'm just going to talk about construction. And the handout that I gave you is a fact sYieet that the Commission has put out, as well as a copy of the draft permit. And when I say it is a draft permit, it kias been out since about September, I guess, or maybe the beginning of October, and it had a comment period date until November the 15th. We did not submit comments on the construction permit, because for the most part it was everything that we had asked for. We did submit about 27 comments to the MS4 permit. The construction permit probably will change very little. Again, the one that you have in front of you is just the proposed permit. There may be same modifications and changes as the Commission does their final permit. And they're supposed to be meeting today. They're supposed to have this done by December the 9th. But we just attended a round cf work group sessions on the MS4 permit and on the construction permit, and, surprise, surprise, surprise, but they're running a little behind. So, it may be later this month before they issue the construction permit, and maybe even into next year before i-e-~ ~l 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 cl 2~ 23 ~4 25 they issue the MS4 permit. So -- but I want to walk you through the construction permit. There is a difference in here between large construction activities and small construction activities. When EPA came out, I guess back in 1990, they came out with a Phase 1 program, and it had construction activities of 5 acres or greater. As y'all remember, before we got T-~'1 as our federal funding, it was called Ice-T, and there was a provision in there that it didn't really roll back until about -- I think it was 1998 that the 5-acre construction activity came into -- came into play. So, that's currently what we're under right now. If you go out and do a construction activity over 5 acres, you should be adhering to an EPA permit. Phase 2 -- and for the -- for the comments that I'm going to make today, they call that the large construction activity. And that's 5 acres and above. Phase 2, when it came out -- Commissioner? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sorry I have so many questions. On the large construction, I think, or as it relates to a subdivision development -- MS. GLOVER: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- if a developer has a large tract of land, over 5 acres, and they're clearing cedar -- MS. GLOVER: Mm-hmm. i~-~-o 72 t 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1 J 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- can they claim that, or is there an exemption for agricultural clearing? M5. GLOVER: Well, yes, there is an exemption for agricultural clearing -- well, agriculture itself has an exemption under the Clean Water Act and under the N.P.D.S. program. Now, when we started talking about this with the Commission, one of the tkiinys they brought up was, oh, somebody's going out and clearing their property. That would be an activity. And it was brought up by the Farm Bureau and others, no, that's an agricultural exemption. And so I think that would be exempt, if somebody's going out, clearing their field, and they really are going to plant it, and they Probably have an ag exemption somewhere on file with the -- with the Tax Assessor's office. But if they're goii~y uut tYiere to clear cedar and then they're going to subdivide it, I don't think that's a clear exemption, because they're going to have to clear it regardless if they're going to go out there and subdivide land. So -- grid in that instance, I think they would be under the Commission's rule. At this point, they're under EPA's rule on the 5 acres. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Road construction, the ayyreyate of which is more than 5 acres? MS. GLOVER.: That's right. And it's not even road construction, it's any disturbance of land of 5 acres i^-G-uz 1 2 3 4 J 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 73 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But on the subdivision -- and I'm just thinking, I mean, how a lot of our development works, and we know what we're working with them. If they're going out there and, you know, maybe planning the subdivision, but don't have a plat and all that, or clearing the land, then they're probably exempt under ag. But once they file the plat, or once we approve a preliminary plat, is that -- I mean, what's the trigger that would make it a subdivision versus a -- an agricultural clearing for -- MS. GLOVER: You know, it's not real clear in the rule, in the permit itself, because it talks about "disturbance of land," and I think that that gets it. But, again, if it is truly for aq, then I think it would be on that owner or operator to go to the Commission, or in defense for not filing a Notice of Intent to the Commission, to say, well, this was aq. It really kind of falls back on them, on their credibility of what they assume that it is. And, you know, I'll get into it a little bit later, but your problem is -- is that you have a Commission inspector come out and see that going on, and they come out and they say, "Well, where's your Notice of intent? Where's your sign posting? Where's your storm water pollution prevention plan?" And you don't have any of that. is ~-o 74 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1~ 18 19 20 Zl 22 23 24 25 And you say, "Well, but this is ag, and we were under that assumption." You should document it very well to show that it truly is for ag use. Small from 1 to 5 is considered small under the permit. Five and above is considered large. So, when Kerr County goes out and they decide they are going to do a road project -- and, for the most part, unless you're going to build something that you're not going outside contract on; you know, if y'all were going to build a new jail -- I realize y'all have recently done that, but if you were going to do that, your outside contractor would probably be responsible -- they would be responsible for getting the permit for an acre and above. So, really, I'm going to really specify my comments on roads, because I think that's where it's really going to hit the pavement, as we call it, with you all as you look at the -- at the permit. If you're going to go out and you're going to do -- and I'm going to talk about small construction activity right now, because you're already under the 5-acre requirement, so I'm going to really specify the 1- to 5-acre, but I'll cover both. If you go out and you're going to do a new road project -- and I say "road project" -- construction of a road project, you first need to determine, is-~-oz 75 1 _ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 lE 17 1£ L ?( 2" 2: 2 2 is it new construction or is it just existing, routine road maintenance? Now, one of the things that I think we were very successful in when we submitted our comments to EPA back in 1998, we said routine road maintenance should not be considered a construction activity, and they agreed with us. And they even gave us a broader definition in the rule than we had asked for. And it says, you know, that routine road maintenance that is performed to maintain the original line and grade, hydraulic capacity, and original purpose of a ditch, channel, or other similar storm water conveyance. For 95 percent of our counties, this is what they do, so essentially they are exempted from the permit requirements. Now, you get into a lot of questions -- and this is what I get. "Well, Sue, what is routine road maintenance?" I think if you're going to go out, if you're going to grade a -- an existing dirt road, that's routine road maintenance. If you're going out_ and you're clearing the bar ditches alongside your county roads, that's routine road maintenance. If you were going to do asphalt overlays, the only thing that -- I think that's a routine road maintenance, er.cept for if you build that road up where you would change the grade; then it gets iffy on whether it's a construction activity. If you have an existing road right now, but you have a really bad curve to it, so you want to go in and you want to straighten that road out, in that area i__y-~~ 7F 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 ll 12 1S 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that -- where you straigh*_en it, which it doesn't take much to get to an acre, that's construction activity and would not be routine road maintenance. For the most part, though, we feel like, again, that 95 percent of the activities that our counties are doing right now on road construction Falls under that definition of routine road maintenance. And I'll just stop there and let y'all ask questions or -- 'cause y'all may have specific questions about road projects you have coming up for ttie next year. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We just opened bids for one which is going to be how many miles, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A ways. MS. GLOVER: But, see, you opened up bids for it, so you'll have a contractor to do that. That contractor, then, will be responsible, because they will be the operator of the activity. They will be responsible for adhering to the permit. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That has to be reflected in the County's contract with the contractor, ~i though? MS. GLOVER: It should. Yes, it should. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sue, we have the Engineer's office behind you there. I was wondering, do you -- MS. GLOVEK: I gave 'hem copies too, __-9-~~ ~~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Commissicner. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do y'all have any questions or comments at this time, or do you want to -- MR. JOHNSTON: This permit you're showing us is the general permit that -- do we issue a Notice of Intent that we refer to this permit number? MS. GLOV~:R: Mm-hmm. But let me go on -- they asked about the Notice of Intent, and that's what's I was going to yet to next. If you decide that -- and you all are doing it; you're not outside contracting to do it, that you're going to do it yourselves, and you decide that it doesn't meet that routine road maintenance definition. If it's 1 to ~ acres, you do not have to submit a Notice of Intent. You have to have one, and that's a form that's going to come out; it's probably going to be a one-page document that the Commission will comply with. And on that, it will say the permit number that you're going under, that type of thing. For 1 to 5 acres, though, you do not have to submit that Notice of Intent to the Commission. You just have to have it on-site. If it's a large activity, 5 acres and above, you do have to submit the Notice of Intent to the Commission, plus $100, and that's for every project that you have going on. Ukay? So, for the smaller projects, you']1 just have to Have the Notice of Intent on-site, and you'll have l _ ,_,~., 7r3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to have -- where it gets -- where 7 think the counties are pollution prevention plan, and that's for any activity. It doesn't matter if it's 1 acre, 5 acres, 3 acres, whatever. Each county ~r each entity that has a construction project that, again, doesn't meet that routine road maintenance definition will have to create a storm water pollution prevention plan. And that plan is on Pages 19 and 20 of the permit, and I didn't -- `cause it's very detailed, but I'll give y'all just the general, is that you want to control erosion and sediment controls, stabilization practices, structural control practices, and permanent storm water controls. Acid -- and, really, your best management practices are going to be to control sediment. As I was cominq out here today on 16, I noticed that TexDUT has quite a few projects going along there, and they've got their silt fencing out l.here, and the water is standing up to here today, but it's doing what it's supposed to do. It's preventing any runoff. And the water's okay to run off as long as it's clean and as long as it doesn't have that sediment in it. Now, the other thing that's unique about the permit -- vi not unique; it says waters of the U.S. or waters of the state of Texas. Well, I would think, well, that would be the Guadalupe River; that would be bigger i_'-S-Gz i9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 stream beds. It's not. When you look at the definition of channel; it's pretty broad. So, it's very inclusive, so that I don't think you could get away and say, well, we're not discharging into -- you're probably discharging into something, because of how broad that definition is. But, again, the storm water pollution prevention plan will be your biggest expense. Most counties, or at least the ccunties that I've talked to at this point -- the MS4 counties have to do the storm water prevention plan as well, and it's -- it's a lot more detailed than the construction will have to be. It will include a site map of where in the county you're -- you're doing the project. Again, your best management practices. Now, one of the things that we argued with EPA -- we even argued with the Commission on this -- is that they shouldn't prescribe best management practices; that that should be left to each entity to determine, because your best management practices that. you use here in Kerr County are not the same that they'll use in Ector County. Because this rain that we got, they're not getting. And that it should be based somewhat on water that you get. There are some exemptions and a waiver, and I think y'all's time period is that if you can do and complete a project between December 15th and February the 19th, you don't have i<-`~-a~ 80 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2~ to adhere to the permit, but we all know that it doesn't usually take -- it takes longer than two months if you're gaming to do a project of, you know, any length and any time. Once you've -- once you've qot your storm watez pollution prevention plan, you've got your Notice of Intent -- whether you submit it or not is based on how big your project is going to be -- then you have to go out and set up some inspection controls which will be specified in your storm water pollution prevention plan. That will say -- that will kind of keep a log of when you go out there and du inspection of the site. Under the permit, you're required to go out once in 19 calendar days just to do a site inspection. This morning, you would be out doing an inspection instead of in here, because if a half an inch falls on your site within a 24-hour period, you have to go out and do a site inspection. And the site inspections are required to make sure that your silt fencing's sTill in place, you know. Although I didn't see anybody from TexDOT uut there doing their inspections this morning, but I can tell you I saw them; they were working. They're doing what they're supposed to do. You'll retain your records for each project for three years. When you complete your project and you've gone through kind of post-construction stabilization, which it talks about that -- that will be one of your best .= 9-a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 10 20 21 22 23 24 25 81 management practices in your storm water pollution prevention plan -- you'll submit a Notice of Termination to the Commission. There's no charge in that, and that's really -- should be a fairly short, short report as well. So, mostly what I see involved from the County's aspect on construction is, one, hopefully it -- what y'all are doing is routine zuad maintenance. You're not building a lot of new roads. But if you are, then you'll have to submit your Notice of Intent if it's over 5 acres. If it's under 5 acres, you'll just have that Notice of Intent on-site. And you'll create your storm water pollution prevention plans. Now, one of the things that we're working on prevention plans, 'cause we see that that is probably going to be your biggest burden. And, really, for your county, once you create one of them -- because, unless you're a huge county, and I can't even think of one in Texas, because Hudspeth and Brewster County is -- their conditions are all still pretty much the same, so -- but once you create a storm water pollution prevention plan, those best management practices that you've -- you outlined tonight, you can use througkruut the county. The only thing that will change is a description of your site, the N.O.I., and your map that shows where you're going to be at. But, for the most part, ~_-~-ua 82 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 we're hoping that once the counties create one of the storm water pollution prevention plans, it can be used throughout with just minor changes to the plan, itself. And we're working at TAC on trying to assist y'all with that. We've applied for and been approved, but, you know, we haven't gotten the money -- shock -- but we've applied for a graiiL from EPA, as well as what we call the Conference of State Associations, which is Texas all the way over to Georgia. We're involved in that association, TAC is, and we've applied for a grant, and we've been told that we've gotten the grant to do a storm water guidance manual that will kind of outline everything that I've talked about today, as well as give you some hints on storm water pollution prevention plans. Also, the North Central Texas Council of Governments, they have a good web site on storm water. They have contracted with an environmental entity to create - they have a B & P manual, because they've been under the Phase 1 program on the 5 acres for four years now, and ~o they have come up with a great manual on what best management practices are out there. And so we hope to share counties, where you don't have to feel like, well, here we are. We're pressed; we probably need to hire an outside environmental engineer firm to come in and do this. So, we're really Lrying to network as well as we can amongst the __ a-~z 83 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 counties to help y'all with the storm water pollution prevention plans. So -- and that's kind of, really, a summary of everything. I know y'all probably have plenty of questions, though. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sue, just about everything that you've said costs money. MS. GLOVER: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And probably a lot -- MS. GLOVER: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- of money. And I -- in my pea brain, the years that we've been dealing with this and lookinq at it, I still don't see the reasoning behind the whole thing. I mean, does anybody other than me see that this is bordering on insanity? Or -- MS. GLOVER: No, you're not. Which this is one time that you're probably not. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; I see. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sue's been around me a little bit. MS. GLOVER: No, Commissioner, you bring up a great point, and one that I did want to follow up with. You know, back in 1998, when we saw this rule, we were just -- oh, we couldn't believe what was being proposed. And we thought, well, we'll submit our comments, and we worked with i_-?-o 84 1 ,-- 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .-. 1 3 14 15 16 17 18 lg 20 ?1 22 23 r 24 25 FPA and we were successful to get that routine road maintenance. I mean, the other state associations, now that they're worY,ing on this, they're, like, thank God y'a11 got that verbiage in there, because that saves most of our counties. I said, well, it does our r_ounties too. But they decided, as y'all know and y'all participated in with our Storm Water Coalition, we -- after the final rule was done, we sat back and we said, you know, here we've successfully obtained some of these things. And so there was a period that could go by without filing a lawsuit, and an environmental group in California filed a lawsuit. At that juncture, the public officials who were county officials that sat on our steering committee of the Coalition decided at that poin`_ to intervene in the lawsuit to protect all those things that we had accomplished. We had our oral argument before the Ninth Circuit in California December the 5th of last year. That Court normally takes 60 to 9i~ days to issue its opinions. It's been over a year, and we still have not heard from the Ninth Circuit. And most of the points that we brought up, Commissioner, were how do you get 1 acre? They were sued -- the Environmental Protection Agency was sued when they came up with a Phase ] rule on 5 acres. That same Court, the Ninth Circuit Court of ~_-~-u 85 1 L 3 4 5 6 8 9 lU 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 Appeals, said 5 acres is arbitrary. Give us some facts. How did you come up with it? And they came back -- the Environmental Protection Agency came back and they came up with a report on construction activities and how it's the biggest contributor fur non-point source, yada, yada, yada, and it still didn't satisfy the Court, really. Because when we made our argument t~ the Court, the Court said, wait a minute. We told y'all 5 acres was arbitrary. Now you've come up with 1 acre. Huw is that not arbitrary? And I'm sitting back there going, yes. Yes, somebody's -- somebody is listening to what we're saying. But what does it mean a year later that that Court hasn't decided? That was also the same court that threw out, you know, the pledge, so they've been a little busy with that. But we really don't know what that means, that they have not answered and -- and ruled on our opinion yet. We were joined in the lawsuit by the Home Builders Association and by the forestry -- Paper and Forestry also. So, we -- one of the arguments -- the biggest argument that we had was we said that it violated the 10th Amendment vL the U.S. Constitution that prohibits the federal government from imposing its programs on local entities. And, again, the Judge said, how do y'a11 say this isn't a 10th Amendment violation? So, I was so excited that day when we left, because 7 thought, gosh, you know, ~-i,z 1 ~~ L 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 _.. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 86 somebody's really listening to what we're saying and they don't think we're nuts. But it's a year later and we're fixing to implement the program, so I don't know how that The Commission has said that on the MS4 permit provisions, that you'll have 90 days from the time they issue the permit to comply with the permit requirements. There's not similar language -- this is on existing construction activities, but not on new construction activities. For instance, if they were to come up and adopt this program; say it did go over into January and they adopted it January the 6th of 2003, and y'all had slated that on January 7th, 2003, y'all were starting a new project. It's really unclear that you would not be under the guise of the permit. And so it is something that hopefully will be clarified as people have submitted their comments. Like I said, we did not submit comments on the construction provision, but other folks did, and that was one of the questions that they had. So -- but, unfortunately, we won't know the answer to many of those comments until they issue the final rule. So -- and we'll continue to watch that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sue, I seem to recall that when we discussed this up here the last time, we were la-y-u 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 87 under some sort of a deadline to file this plan, and we were uncertain as to what that plan was supposed to consist. Are we still under a mandatory deadline to have a plan in place? MS. GLOVER: There is no plan, per se. It's only based on your activities. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All right. So, we anticipate an activity in the reconstruction of a road. MS. GLOVER: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And it's a major project. Are we going to have to file that plan? And, if so, when'? MS. GLOVER: If it's -- if it's a major road over 5 acres, okay, until -- MR. ODOM: March the 1st, isn't it? MS. GLOVER: Well, no. Five acres and above is still under the EPA permit, and I don't think it terminates until -- MR. ODOM: Supposed to be 50,000, if you're at 50,000 or above. MS. GLOVER: That's only the MS4 counties. Y'all are not an MS9 county at this juncture. MR. ODOM: That's right. MS. GLOVER: Okay. But, you know, 5 acres and above is existing law now. If y'all do a project of 5 acres now, you should be complying with the permit. Okay? iz-v-u~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,- 1 3 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 21 22 23 24 25 88 If you're going to go out in that current -- because the Commission does not have authority yet, really; even though they're coming out with a rule, they really don't have authority yet under the 5-acre requirement. So, until -- have to go under the Phase 1 requirements of that. And I'm not near as familiar with it as I am the Phase 2, okay? But let's just talk about the Phase 2 under your question right now, Commissioner Williams. Say it's a 1- to 5-acre project, okay? And that y'all are thinking about doinq it. The County's going to do it. What you would have to do, you would have to come up with your storm water pollution prevention plan. And that is your plan, and that would be for that site. Before you ever go out and shovel any dirt, dig anything, you would have to have your Notice of Intent, which the Commission will come out with that form when they come out with the rule. You'll fill out that form, you'll keep it on-site. You'11 have a construction site notice out there; that's at the very end of the permit. It's an appendix. So, it's a construction site sign; it will be out there, dah-dah-dah-dah-dah, where you're at, what permit guise you're under and that type of thing. But that will be your plan. And it's only based on iz 5 0, 89 1 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1/ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 when you start that activity. So, if y'all don't build a new road or don't do anything major activity for two years, you don't have to do anything for two years. Does that answer your question? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, I see. Commissioner Baldwin's going to have to file that plan, 'cause we're going to do that pretty quick. MS. GLOVER: But, again -- JUllGE HENNEKE: Commissioner whose precinct it's in is personally and directly responsible for the plan. MS. GLUV~:R: And if you're contracting it out, again, it's probably a good idea to make sure in the contract that you say, you know, you will be responsible for adhering to the permit requirements that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has set out, and that kinds of relieves y'all. But that's really -- when it will kick in is when you do a project. So I told most of our counties earlier this year to do all your projects this year that weren't routine. Again, hopefully, the routine road maintenance definition will cover most of the -- of the current work that y'all are doing. Commissioner Letz? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does TAC have a -- a -- kind of like a draft plan that you're providing the counties? I know you say you're working with county -- MS. GLOVER: We're working on one. y ~ 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 90 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You don't have a -- MS. GLOVER: No, sir, we don't, because -- and one of the reasons that we don't is, I don't think the construction permit will change much, but it could change from the final. But we have started on the construction one. The MS4 one we haven't even started on, because, like I said, we alone submitted 26 comments. And, I mean, they weren't 25 -- you know, "Change this." They were 26 pretty lengthy comments that we submitted. So, until we really know actually what's going to be involved, it's kind of hard to get started. And that -- y'all won't have to do that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Once you get the first plan done, the rest of them pretty much -- MS. GLOVER: They will follow. That's exactly right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Put it on computer and fill in the blanks. MS. GLOVER: That's right. And we're hoping that, by sharing that information with the counties, the counties will feel like they don't have to go out and -- and go to the great expense of hiring an outside engineering service or outside environmental engineering service to do it for them. So -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sue, we have for several years tried to form a little coalition of Hill ~~-~-az 91 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 Country counties. MS. GLOVER: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we work together on certain issues. I wonder if it would be beneficial if we was to have a workshop-type situation with contig -- our contiguous counties here, and us host it. I don't know how much information they have. Would it be beneficial to put together a workshop and have you back down here? MS. GLOVER: We could do that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: To present to other counties and try to get all of us on the same page? MS. GLOVER: We could do that, Commissioner. Or what we are also looking at, too, Commissioner Letz, is looking at hosting a one and a half-day workshop in Austin, January -- end of January, first of February, where the first part of the day we would go over construction activity, and we would -- we would kind of walk you through doing a storm water pollution prevention plan, 'cause that's really your -- your storm water pcllution prevention plan. And then the next day, the activity will be on the MS4 permits. So, in that case, unless y'a11 just wanted to, thinking that eventually you might be pulled into it, that, you know, y'all could just come for that -- that half day. So, we're looking at doing that. I just sent a letter out specifically to the 51 counties that were identified as MS4 1?-g-p? 92 1 2 3 4 S 5 8 9 10 11 12 1i 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 counties to see iT they had an interest, or iT they're doing their own thing for that type of workshop. So, if we don't do something like that, I'd be glad to come back out, or if this just doesn't work, you know, we can work around that. But, as y'all know, my life changes on January the 14th, and I become a slave to Austin, so -- so it would be a little more diTTicult. `T'his worked out great for me. 1 was telling Linda, it was so nice driving out here and no traffic. Had to be careful of the deer, but no traffic. So -- but come January, as y'all know, because y'all come to Austin quite often during the legislative session, it really does become very time-consuming. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 'Phis meeting in January or early February, is that free hotel rooms and meals? MS. GLOVER: You know, I wish I could -- I need to land a deal like that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we better have one down here. MR. LESLIE: I need to -- it would be -- one of the things that we wanted to do, Commissioner, is make it very nominal as far as the charge. And the only cost associated with that charge would be the manual that we would come up with that could hopefully help y'all. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. iz 5 ii_ 93 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1S 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. GLUVER: But, again, a hotel in Austin during the legislative session -- you know, hopefully we could find a deal. But in that case, you know, if we started at 1:00 in the afternoon, you know, y'all could come and then maybe come back that evening or something, or if you didn't want to do that, maybe find something less expensive out there. But, yeah, the hotel cost is one of the concerns that we have in having this type of meeting in Austin during the legislative session. But -- JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone else have any questions of Sue? COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No. Good write-up. MS. GLOVER: Thank y'all. You always know my phone number; I'm always glad to answer questions. COMM155IUNER BALDWIN: Thanks, Sue. Tell everybody hi. MS. GLOVER: I will. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Doesn't that just tick you oft? JUDGE HENNEKE: What are you going to do, push back the Sheppard Rees project now'? Okay. Let's wind this one up today. Item Number 13, consider and discuss accepting and approving bonds for newly elected officials at the December 23rd Commissioners Court meeting. Commissioner Letz. iz-v-n~ 94 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 I5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on ttie agenda because I'm going to be out of town the lst -- well, the week of New Year's, first of the year. I know Larry's going to be out of town that same week, and I presume that there will still be a Commissioners Court meeting, but if something happened that day to have a situation where the bonds had not been accepted, so I just recommend ~haL -- because two of us, I know, definitely will be gone on the lst when we traditionally do this, that we do it early just. to play it safe. And if no one disagrees, I'll put it on the next agenda, and we can do them l,heu. Because Januett looked into it; there's no reason we can't do it before the end of the year. JUDGE HENNEKE: Sounds like a good idea to me. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just -- I don't have any problem with it. I just don't. want to take away from the possibility of having -- having the ceremony on January 1. That's meaningful to some people. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, hopefully that still will take place. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I do too. JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Item Number 14, consider and discuss rescinding Court Order Number 27879 and declaring December 24th a county holiday and having the iz-~-t~z 95 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 employee luncheon on December 23rd, 2002, at 11 a.m. Commissioner Baldwin. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. The Court Order 27879, of course, is the recent court order where we had decided that we were going to have the Christmas party on the 24th, but now we would like to rescind that order and say that we would like to have our Christmas party on the 23rd, and then the 24th would be a county holiday. And I would assume that that would be an ongoing thing from -- for years on, and hopefully later on agree to actually trade that day for another one of our holidays, and I thin Y. Columbus Day would be the likely hit. But we could trade that and not take off Columbus Day and take -- use this -- December 24th as a -- as a holiday for people that -- that travel Tor Christmas. I've always felt like that we don't give them enough leeway to -- to -- grannies to travel to Dallas to go have Christmas and bake cookies with their grandkids the day before Christmas. That's important. Basically, that's it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, this -- this year, we would just add another holiday to the schedule, and amend the budget accordingly? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The holiday schedule as part of the budget? .~-9 02 96 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is correct. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You make a motion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I was just going to give everybody the opportunity to shoot holes in it. I move that we approve -- that we rescind Court Order 27879, and declare December 24th a county holiday, and we'll have our luncheon on the 23rd. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. DODGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court rescind Court Order Number 27879, declare December 29th a county holiday, and have the employee luncheon on December 23rd, the year 2002, at 11 a.m. 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.) DODGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number 15, consider and discuss amending holiday schedule adopted as part of the FY 02-03 budget to r_larify that it is applicable only to employees of County departments not headed by elected officials. I put this on the agenda in light of the Attorney General's opinion which was provided to us by Ms. Decker, which basically states that an elected official has the ability to give their employees time off as 12 9-0? 97 1 - 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ._ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 they see fit, regardless of the holiday schedules or other employees that do not work for elected officials, as we are setting ourselves up here for a potential argument that, by having a holiday schedule that applies to everyone, we are unduly interfering with the operation of an elected official's office. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, my preference would be to take no action on this at this time, and relook at it after the first of the year and, at the same time, review our personnel policy. By reading the Attorney General's opinion, there also -- the Commissioners Court, through the budget process, does have some, I guess, authority over the amount of time people work. I think we really need to look at the personnel policy to make it ~~lear that all employees -- at least in my opinion, all employees are to work a certain number of days per year. And if the elected officials choose to give off different days, that's up to them, but they still need to work a certain number of days to get their paychecks. And I believe that is afforded under the Attorney General's opinion. JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, that's what the 12-9 98 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 personnel policy says, is that you have to work a 40-hour work week in order to qualify for salary and benefits. Is that correct, Barbara? MS. NEMEC: That's correct. JUDGE HENNEKE: But. the Attorney General's opinion says that if an elected official decides to close their office, let their people go home, you can't dock them for not putting in 40 hours that tiaeek, because the elected official has made the decision to send them home. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- JUDGE HENNEKE: And I thin Y. it's pretty clear that that's what it says. What this says is that the Commissioners Court's recourse, as part of the budget process, is to look at -- decide if the elected official really needs that many people or not. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, I -- I would request, then, the first of year also that our County Attorney revisit that with the Attorney General and request another opinion, because I'm -- I don't read it quite like that. And I don't -- I mean, I can not imagine the Attorney General -- he's going to keep an opinion up that basically says an elected official can take his -- you know, expand it. You know, and I don't believe -- think our elected officials would abuse it. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Take off the month of i~ y-oz 99 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 June. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. "We're not going to work the month of June." And they're going to -- employees are going to be paid for. not doing any work. That just doesn't make sense to me. And I think that's the implication out of the Attorney General's opinion, that that potential exists, and that just doesn't make sense to me. So, I'd really request that we do nothing on this at this time, and, you know, talk to the County Attorney, have him look at this and our personnel policy, and make -- you know, see what we can do, because I think. that it is not right for some employees, whether or not they work for the County or elected officials, to get paid, basically, differently based on the choice of elected officials. JUDGE HENNEKE: I have no problem deferring it, but I think it's an issue -- and I'll quote from the Attorney General's opinion. "A county commissioners court may adopt a policy requiring a county employee to work or account for 40 hours of work each week to be eligible for compensation and benefits, but the court may not apply the policy to interfere in the administration of another county officer's office." The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: The Sheriff wants to speak. iz-a-uz 100 1 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SHERIFF HIERHOL'LEH: I have one question about that, too. Say, as an elected official, I want to give most of the people in my department off on -- even the i 23rd, just as an example. But since my department's a 24-hour, 7-day-a-week department, there are certain employees I have to have there; you know, your dispatchers and your jailers. Now, if -- it you adopt a -- a holiday schedule that does not affect elected officials' employees or their departments, okay, how can I give those people that I can not give off on -- on holidays that I choose, how can I give them overtime for working those holidays? I don't know if that opinion addresses that I can pay -- have them paid more, you know, or paid overtime -- MS. DECKER: No. SHERIFF HIER.HOLZER: -- when they have to be there. So I think, before -- before -- the only thing I'm asking is, how do I do that? JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, that's not -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only thing I'm asking is, before you go and adopt a holiday -- or a schedule, holiday schedule that toes not include elected officials' employees, I would -- I would ask for a little bit more research done on it to make sure that I can still give my people holiday time, on those that have to work on those holidays. iz-G-oz 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Iol COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think this Attorney General's opinion says you can -- you can give them other days off. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Give them a day off in lieu of. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But when -- and our dispatchers are considered civilian employees in my department. They are allowed only to work 40 hours a week. It's not law enforcement where you can, you know, give them off later and change hours and that. So, if they don't get it in that same 40-hour work week, they get overtime Tor working that. COMMISSIGNER GRIFFIN: Do they have -- do they have holidays? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right now, we go by the holiday schedule the County's adopted for everybody, just like we always have. MS. NEMEC: The only way they can get overtime is if they physically wcrk over 40 hours. SHERIFF HIER.HOLZER.: And a lot of them do. MS. NEMEC: Then you give them overtime. You have to if they physically work over 40 hours. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. That's the way I feel. But if I don't -- if I can't go by the holiday schedule the County adopts, okay, to give them a holiday if 1^_-9-0 l02 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 they -- the only way they get the holiday is if they work the holiday, all right? But if I got to set my own holidays and that, and they're not set by the County, I'm actually authorizing a person to get paid for a day that they shouldn't get paid for, which would contradict this whole Attorney General's opinion, is the way I read it. MS. NEMEC: I think, in a nutshell, what this opinion is saying is, unless the elected official authorizes the County Treasurer to reduce the pay for hours that they didn't work, the County Treasurer cannot do that. I have to -- you know, even though I kuuw they weren't here, unless it's in writing that I deduct a certain amount of hours for those employees, I have to pay them their regular salary. I am not authorized to lower their pay, to reduce their pay Tor hours they didn't work, if the elected official does not authorize -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER.: But if I authorized everybody in the department that we can give off, off, can I also authorize those that couldn't take oft overtime? MS. NEMEC: If they work over 40 hours -- physically work over 40 hours, you have to. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER; Well, dispatchers, it's hard to give them that day off, because -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At another time. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- they're stuck. You 1~-9 0' 103 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 have to do it within that 4U hours. MS. NEMEC: Now, if -- if they work -- if they work 40 hours, and they don't physically work over 40 hours, then it's not time and a half, but what you're saying is then they're cheated out of a holiday because other employees took a holiday. Then tYiey get paid 90 hours plus 8 hours straight time. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. MS. NEMEC: That's how that works. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Even if I choose the holiday? MS. NEMEC: Yeah, 'cause they didn't work over 40 hours. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Going back to the question, you can adopt -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: According to this -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You could adopt the same holiday schedule that we have in the budget. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: There's nothing that would keep an elected official from doing that. It's just saying you don't have to. You could say, hey, I don't want to grant any of these as holidays; I'm going to pick 10 days at random and those are going to be this department's holidays. ~z y-oz 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 109 SHERIFF HIENHULZER: Well, the only thing I'm asking is what that opinion -- the way I was reading it -- I think maybe David can get some clarity on it or something -- is that I just want to make sure that those employees that I couldn't give off, if I chose to, aren't going to get kind of shafted out of some time. MS. NEMEC: if they work eight huuxs that holiday and the total amount of hours at the end of the week is 40 hours, then they get paid for 40 hours plus 8 hours straight time for the holiday. SHERIFF HIERHOLGER: Dispatchers. MS. NEMEC: For the holiday. SHERIFF HIERHULZER: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think Commissioner Letz makes a good point. We ought to take a look at it. JUDGE HENNEKE: I think that's good. I think we all ought to keep in mind that this came up as we were discussing the luncheon. One of our elected officials said, "I'm shutting my office down on the 29th," you krrow, "so y'all do what you want to." And the 24th at that time was not an official county holiday. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We've taken care of that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see your point, Judge. And if -- to me, if -- if Linda, as an example, just 105 1 L 3 4 5 h 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 up and closed her office and let her employees off outside, I mean, to me that's abuse. JUDGE HENNEKE: That's what was said was going to happen. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I know. I know. MS. UECKER: Well -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But, I mean, just -- you know, a common courtesy to the taxpayers, that that's not a normal practice, I don't think. I mean, you don't do that all the time, do you? MS. UECKER: No. Never have. And the point is -- is that I don't think that any elected official, especially not me -- I'm speaking for myself -- is going to abuse that. I want holidays to be what the Court sets. But -- and I know many of you haven't been here, but Tor years I've been trying to get the Commissioners Court to set the 24th as a holiday every year, and we go through this every year. JUDGE HENNEKE: Linda, you never came before us this past budget year or the budget year before that and said, "Wait a minute, would you guys please put the 24th as a holiday?" MS. UECKER: Well, you're right, because the -- one of the years, I think the 24th fell on a Monday, and it was a holiday -- no, it fell on a Friday, and it was 1~-e-o% 106 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 L 1 22 23 24 25 a holiday. And the point I'm trying to make here, I want the Court to set the holidays. I don't want to do it. I want the -- but the 29th has always been a time, because of the child support, that even if the other offices weren't open, I had staff up there getting child support out. And my staff this year, I've got one going to Dallas, I've got -- no, I've got two going to Dallas, and it was just going to be real difficult for them to do that, to get to their Christmas destination without having the 24th off. JUDGE HENNEKE: Of course, an alternative would be they could take a day of vacation. MS. UECKER: They could, yeah. Except that it would leave me two short staff. 'Cause right now I've got two employees that just had heart surgery last week. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I concur. I think -- I mean, I'm kind of with Commissioner Baldwin and with Linda on this. I mean, I think it's -- the 24th should be a holiday. We've done that this year, and if we need to make an adjustment to the personnel policy, I think we should do it when we have more time to look into it next year. JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, fair enough. MS. NEMEC: In all the years past, it seems like on Christmas, it doesn't matter what the holidays are, if you look around, departments do close their offices early right after the lunr_heon. And that's just been what I've i,-y-~~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 15 16 1/ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 107 seen in years past. And I think Linda came up with this because her office always had to end up staying here because oT the child support. Everybody else's oftice was closed down except hers for years. JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't think anybody's objecting to the notion of the 24th as a holiday. The concern that I'm trying to express here is the ability oT an elected official to simply let their people off when they felt it was necessary or convenient, and the fact that the Commissioners Court really has no recourse on that elected official if they choose to abuse their authority in that way. I don't care whether we take the 29th off or not. I mean, that's -- MS. DECKER: I don't think you have any elected officials that are going to abuse that. I mean, I would certainly hope not. I don't intend to. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're going to have a great Christmas party this year. Man, this is going to be fun. JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, that's enough on that one. We have an executive session posted for litigation, so those of you who are not required for that need to leave. (The open session was closed at 11:37 a.m., and an Executive Session was held, the transcript of which is contained in a separate document.) v ~~ 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 L 1 22 23 24 25 108 JUDGE HEI4NEKE: Let's go back into open session, if you'll go out there and open the door? It is now eight minutes until 12:00 on Monday, December the 9th, Year 2002. The Court having concluded its executive session, we'll return to open session. Is there any action required as a result of executive session? Seeing none, we stand adjourned. (Commissioners Court adjourned at 11:54 a.m.) STATE OF TEXAS ~ COUNTY OF KERR ~ The above and foregoing is a true and complete transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 13th day of December, 2002. JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk Kathy n~ik, Deputy County Clerk Certified Shorthand Reporter i_ a-u~ CIRI3ER N0. 'c'788c -- CLfl:[MS RI`dD RCCOUNTS On this the 7th day of December, c:~T4h;=~9 came to be considered by the Court v~sr-i.oi_is commissioned I_,rec:incts, whir_h said Claims and flccounts a~°ec 10-General for 5147,886.318 14-Fir'e F'rotectian for• 58,3;3.348 15-Road and Pr-idge for Sib, 1'1.858 1'-l-F'~_ihlic Library for• 533,98.348 50-Indigent Ilealth Care for-- 53~r,878.138 TOTRL COSH IiE(~~UIRED IS SG76,317.97. Upon motion made by Commis=_:ioner• Baldwin, seconcled by Coininissioner's Williams, the Court ~.tnanimously approved by a vote of 4-~-Qi, 'to pay said claims and acco~_ints. ORDER N0. ~788:s RLIDGET flMENDh1ENT IN IVON-DEF'flRTMENTflL On this the 9th day of December' ~_OQ~' upon motion made by Commissioner Let~9 ser_onded by Commissioner- Baldwin, the Co~ar-t ~.inanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-@~ to transfer- not to exceed 2400~Q~~bO from Line I'teRl No. 50-E41-F'00 Indigent HealtFr Care b~_idget for the p~_irposes of paying the medical reimb~_irsement claim that's 6e en presented for the health care of a person. ORDER NO. c7884 RF'F'P.OVRL TO PRY LRTE FILL TO ROBERT L. FROWN On this tfie 9th day of December' E~OR upon motion made by Commissioner L.etz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimo~.isly approved by a vote of 4-Q~-0, 'to pay 'tE04.1. k~ from Line Item fJo. 1~-511-451 to Robert L. Brown. The County Treas~arer~ and County Ruditar are hereby authari~ed to write a hand check in the amo~.int of '662~0.0~ to Rober~~t L.. Rr~own for door repairs at the Jail. ORDER ran. ._~aar ACCEPT MINUTES AIVD WAIVE READING ^ nn this the 9th day of December, x_00:., ~apori motion made 6y Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Gr'i'Ffin, the Court unanimously approved 6y a vote of 4-0-0, waived readinc and approve the following min~_~tes: Kerr County Commissioners n041 r't Special Session on November 1, 2002 at 1:.0 F'Ih; Rey~_ilar~ Ses=_ian on November 1~:, ,"_'00c at 9:00 AM; Special Session on November 2`~~, ~00~ at 10:00 AM; Special Session on Navemher- c'5, c00~ at E : 30 F'M. ORDER NO. i='788% RCCE=F'T RhJD RF't='ROVE NONTHI._Y REF'ORl"S ^ On this the 9th day of Decemher, '~N0~ i_ipon motion made by Commissioner Let:, seconded by Commissioner Griffin the Ca~_irt ~_~nanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to accept the following reports and clir•ect that they be filed with the Co~_~nty Clerlt for fu't~sre a~_idita Gawn Wright, J.P. #c October- ~0~c Jannett Pieper, County Clerk General Report - Nvvemher~s0c: Tr~.~st 1=~.ind Report -- Nvvmber ~'NOc Robert Tencl-i, J. F'. #t3 November 800."^_ Will.iain Ragsdale, J. F'. #4 November ct~~c ORDER NO. x'7887 ACCEPT AND RE'P'ROVE THE I:F_RR COUNTY H:[uTORICAI CONNISSIOIV' S ~00~ RNNUAI_ REPORT AND L_E(ADERSHIF' On this the 9th day of December, ~?0Nc upon motion made 6y Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Let-z, the Co.-art unanimo~.isly approved by a vote of 4-41-0, to accept and appr~ave the Kerr Coy-~nty Historical Commission's E~02 Ann~_ial Report and Leadership as described in the report. ORDER NO. _78FS8 AP'P'ROVAL OF" EMPLOYEE HERLTN IIVSIIRANCE REMEWRI_ RATF_5 ^ On this the 9th day of December, OQ~O~' ~.ipon motion macle by Cammissioner• Williams, seconcled by Commissioner Paldwin, the Co~_~rt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-Q~-0, the Employee Health Ins.~_~r•ance renewal rates as presented by Mr•. Rothwell. ORDEP. N0. r7Ei89 AP'P'ROVAL OF FINAL. F'LRT OF THE HORIZON SECTION ONE, F'Cl". #1 0n this the 9th day of December, c00'c, upon motion mad by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Cnmmissioner• Let:, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-Q~, the final plat of the Hori~.on Ser_tiorr One, F'ct. #l. ORI?ER IVO. 'r'7H92~ AP'P'ROVAL OF REFUND TO Rh1ERIP'RRf; KERRVILL-E CORP. F'ER RC,REED JIJDOME~IT On this the 9th day of Deceinher°, '00E, upon motion made by Commissioner Let-, seconded by Commiss:ioner• Daldwin, the Coy-n~t unanimously appr-oved by a vote of 4-0-0, of r•ef~and to Rmeripar4< Kerr-vine Corporation per- Rgreed J~-idyment in the amount of ~59,88E.~9. ORDER NCt, ~7Ci91 RF'F'ROVRL OF RESCINDING THE ,IRNURRY 13, L003 DRTE FOR F'UPLIC HERRING ON HCIME DISRSTER RELIEF FUNDS On this the 9th day of December, 200c^., ~_ipan motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Conimissioner'~ Paldwin, the Co~_irt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, thrit the Co~_irt rescind and cancel the Jan~_iary 1;~, 203 date set for p~_iblic hearing on H. O. N. E. Disa<.>ter Relief fur-~ds. ORDER NO. .=789c"' RF'F'ROVRL OF RESOLUTION Iltl SUP'P'ORT OF EXF'EI)ITING THE CONSTRUCTION OF TFiE HERNRNN SONS BRIDGE On this the 9th day of December, c0~c:, upon motion made by Coinmissioner~i_etz, seconded by Commissioner Aa7.dwin, the Court unanimously approved 6y a vote of 4-~-Q~, of resol~_ition in s~_ipport of expediting the construction of the Hermann Sons Pr:idge. ORDER fJO. `r'7C-19 p1CCE=F'T L3IDS FOR RECOPdSTRUCTIOP~I OF SHE{''p'4~RD REES RORD On this the 9th day of December, S4'~~r2, upon mo+.ion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Let z, the Co~_~rt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-4~, to accept; bicl=; for- reconstr~_tction of Sheppard Rees Road and refer them to the Roaad and Fridge Department for their rer_ommendation. ORDER P~lU. c7894 RUTHUP.IZE CUUN"fY RTTURNEY "fU BEGIN CUNllEMNATIUN F'RUCESS TU RCG!UIRE RIGHT-UF-WAY FOR I-IERMRNN SUNS LaRIDGE Un tF-~:is the 9th day of December, 2U0~::, upon motion made by Commi=_sianer Let<, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, t:he Coy"~r~t unanimo~"isly approved 6y a vote of 4-~-Q~, to a~_ithorize the Coy"~nty Rttorney to begin condemnation process, if neces=_ary, to acq~..ii.red 'the right-af--way for the Hermann Suns Nridge. ORDER NC). :?7t~95 flCCEPT RIDS FOR t_ERSC QP~I WHF_EL. LORI)ER -- Ors this the 9th day of December, '~0c:, ~_ipon motion made by Commissioner Raldw:in, seconded by Commissioner Let z, the Ca.vt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-Q~, to accept the <.>ealed bid for lease of wheel loader and refer same to the Road and Pr•idge Department for evaluation and reconiniendation. ORDER NO. ~78'3f RF'F'ROVRL. OF RORD RND BRIDGE DEF'RRTMENT TO ACGUTRE CONSTRUCTION ERSEIhENTS, PROCEED WITH TCDF' GP.RNT, SET F'URLIC HERRING RND SIGPd COMPLETED TCDF' GRRNT RND F'URI_ICRTION FOR TCDF' GRRNT RF'F'I_ICRTION On this the 9th clay of December, c0~c', i_ipon motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconcled by Commissioner- Lets, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-Q~-0, to a~.~thorize the Road and Rr idge Department 'to acquire constr~_icti.on easements to work on private property, and to a~_ithori~e F:err Coi_mty Read and Bridge to proceed with the T. C. D. F'. grant they stsxrted, anrJ to approve p~_~blica'tion and set p~_ihlic hearing fur T. C. D. F'. grant application as req~_iired, stet on December 16, r~0~c at 9 R.M. in the Commissioners' Co~_irtroom and a~_{thor-ize the Co~_~nty Judge to :sign the r_ompleted T. C. D. F'. Final application, and to approve p~_~6lication of the T. C. D. F'. grant application incl~_iding posting and mailing. ORDER N0. :_7097 RUTHORIZING KERR COUNTY ROAD AND BRIDGE DEF'ARTNENT TD Cl_OS3E SHEPF'ARD REES 1=0R L!F' TO T'LJO WEEKS DURING CONSTRUCTION PROJECT On this the 9th of December, ~-00~^, ~_ipon motinn made by Commissioner, Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Co~_irt ~_inanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to authorize Kerr County Road and Bridge Departrtient to Close Sheppard Rees for ~_~p to two weeks d~_~ri.ng constr~_tetion project. ORDER PJO. c7898 ARF'ROVAL OF RFiCINDING COURT ORDER NO. 'c:7879 RND DECL.RRING DECEMBER 2~t, :_00c' a COUNTY HOLIDRY On this the 9th day of December, r09_it_, upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Let z, the Co~_irt ~.~nanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, of resr_indiny Co~_ir~t Order No. :7879 and declaring December ck, E0Q~8 a Co~_tnty holiday ar~d have the Employee 1~_~ncheon an December c3, '~00: at 11:00 A.N.