1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT Regular Session Monday, January 13, 2003 9:00 a.m. Commissioners' Courtroom Kerr County Courthouse Kerrville, Texas PRESENT: PA'1"i'INLEY, Kerr County Judge H. A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4 ~~ .~ ~v r~ `~ 1 ,^ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,-. 25 2 I N D E X January 13, 2003 PAGE --- Visitors' Input 3 --- Commissioners' Comments 9 1.1 Pay Bills a-, ~'~~~~ 19 1.2 Budget Amendments?%~Ni~.~7'/~? 21 1.3 Late Bills ~1V`~~K--s7'i.~< 33 1 . 4 Read and Approve Minutes - ~`~'' ~ " ~"` ~ 35 1. 5 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports .-, 7'i~'- ~ 38 2.6 Discuss adopting sick leave bank for county employees 39 2.1 Preliminary plat for The Reserve at Falling Water, LTD, in Precinct 3 -'X%~E' S1 2.2 Purchase of 8.5-ton crane from GSC-~~~^~~ 59 2.3 Approval of final road & bridge alignment for new Hermann Sons Bridge -i ~`%y°~ 63 2.9 Resolution to participate in 216th Judicial District Narcotics Task Force ~~~%-~'~ 69 2.5 Discuss donation and planting of tree on courthouse square ._'%'~~~. 79 2.7 Discuss having an upcoming Commissioners Court meeting at the Union Church -%'j`%~~ 82 2.8 911 Coordinator status report 89 2.9 Discuss adopting 911 addressing letter to property owner, & all related costs 106 2.10 Discuss setting workshop with 911 Board to discuss 911 Guidelines 110 2.11 Clarification of County's authority to assign road names and addresses in Kerr County 113 2.13 Revisions to Interlocal Agreement between Kerr County & r~.G.R.A. to cover current, pending & future projects 118 2.12 Approval of Mutual Aid Agreement for Regional Councils of Government ~ 7°~1.c 137 2.19 Authorize Road & Bridge to haul donated fill material to the Kerr County 4-H facility at Red Rose Ranch %7'~="' 140 2.15 Discuss amending O.S.S.F. rules to abolish Section 10 & set date for public hearing 142 2.16 Discuss whether County intends to not extend current contract with U.G.K.,1. for administration of O.S.S.F. program +,`i'l%'' 153 2.17 Discuss procedures for Commissioners Court d"7/5 166 2.18 Discuss Commissioners Court Committee Assignments 176 --- Adjourned '~'`rj~' ~°`~j~ 19U 3 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ly 20 21 22 23 24 25 On Monday, January 13, 2003, 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 TINLEY: It's 9 a.m. local time, Monday, on the 13th of January, 2003, and I'll now call to order the regular Commissioners Court meeting for this date. And I think the first item of business is the -- I'll call on Commissioner, Precinct 1, Mr. Baldwin, for our opening prayer. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be happy to do that. If you would rise and have a word of prayer with me, then we'll do the pledge of allegiance. (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. The next item of business on the agenda is visitors' input. If there is any member of the audience that has any comment that they wish to make concerning a matter that is not on the agenda -- if you wish to speak on matters that are on the agenda, we would ask that you sign a participation form that we have, or should have at the back of the room. We have those, and we'd urge you to do that so that you can 1-13- i? 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 9 participate with us. But as to items which are not on the agenda, if there are any members oi= the audience that wish to speak, we would urge them to do so and to come forward at this time. The only caveat that I can give you is, we can listen to you, but we cannot engage in dialogue with you. And the reason for that is because, under the law, since it is not posted as an agenda item, we can't engage in discussion, but we can certainly l sten. We'd be tickled to death to do that, so anybody that has anything to -- to say at this point in time on a matter not on the agenda, if they'd rise and come forward, we'd be happy to hear it. Yes, sir? Mr. Eller, Come forward, please, sir. MR. ELLER: Good morning, Judge. Thank you. DODGE TINLEY: Good morning, sir. MR. ELLER: The proper role of government is health, safety, and welfare of the people, and anything outside of that is social engineering. And every time the government tries social engineering, it fails. Now, this bond election for the hog barn does not fall in either of those categories. It is strictly social engineering. Now, I've tried to understand this bond election, and I hear three reasons for it: The exhibition of animals, agricultural interests, and economic impact. And I'd like to briefly go over my opinion of those. If it's for the exhibition of animals, there's less than 1 percent of the _ - . i - i 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1R 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 population of this county involved in exhibiting animals. Now, if we are going to, as a government agency and the taxpayers, spend three and a half million dollars on 1 percent of the people, and if we treat everybody equally, we need a bond issue of $350 million. I don't think we're going to do it. Now, if the reason i_s agriculture interests, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, less than one quarter of 1 percent of the population of FCerr County is employed in agriculture and animal production. That makes our fair bond issue 1 billion, 400 million dollai:s. I'm sure we're not going to do that. Now, if the rea:>on is economic impact -- and my study of economics says if a business is profitable, it came about by about a 35 percent= markup on sales. You reduce that by expenses, and you have net profit. If you increase your sales with no increase in expenses, it becomes pure net profit, and I don't really think there should be any argument about that. So, if we -- the number I hear is $lU million a year, net, of economic impact. That's sales, increased sales with no increase in costs. That means the business people of Kerr County will make three and a half million dollars a year in new profit. If that were true, these people are smart enough to go build a hog barn themselves, pay for it in one year, and sit back and reap three and a half million dollars i i3-r~~ 1 2 3 4 5 b 7 8 9 10 11 12 1J 14 15 16 17 18 l~ 20 21 22 23 24 25 6 in profit every year from now on. I don't believe it. I think it's smoke and mirrors. And I do not believe the taxpayers should be asked to subsidize a very small special interest group of any kind. And I do not believe the taxpayers should be asked to subsidize local businesses when purportedly they're going to get three and a half million dollars in new profit every year. I ask the Court to return to the proper role of government; health, safety, and welfare, and stop social engineering. I ask you to cancel this bond election. Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Than}: you, sir. Is there any other member of the public or in the audience that has any comments that they'd like to make on matters which are not on the posted agenda? Anybody else on matters not on the agenda"? I would note Tor the record that our Congressman, Lamar Smith, has just joined us, and we're very happy to have him here. Welcome, Congressman. Good to see you this morning. CONGRESSMAN SMITH: Thank you, Judge. May I step forward? JUDGE TINLEY: You certainly may, sir. CONGRESSMAN SMITH: It's nice to see some friends here, old and new as well. And, Judge, congratulations to you, and it's just a pleasure being with you. You might recall that one time in a former life, I too i ~?- 3 1 L 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 l~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,-., 2~ 7 was a County Commissioner and on tlZe Commissioners Court in Bexar County, and that was one of -he most enjoyable jobs I ever held, so I know you all are enjoying what you're doinq today as well. I'm not on the formal schedule today, and I know you have a full schedule, so I don't want to take too much time. What I do like is the peephole in the door so I can sort of keep track of what's going on in here, try not to interrupt y'al1 too much, too often. But I just appreciate what you all do and look forward to meeting with you and also being of help to you all any way I possibly can. The most recent issue I've heard about in Kerr County, of course, is the bridge in Comfort, and I know we're all working to do that, and I've written TexDOT to try to get them to help you all out in the county as well. So, we want to do everything we can to help. .C know that that's a pressing concern, at least to one Commissioner, and to all of us, because we're all worried ak~out safety and people being able to get where they need t,o be in a reasonable amount of time. fudge, I don't have anything special. If you have any questions for me, I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have. I am spending the day in Kerrville, checking with constituents, and I'm going to be meeting with my Chamber of Commerce triends a little bit later on, and with Schreiner University officials a little bit later today, as well as talking and visiting with other 1- 1 3 ~ 5 8 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 1~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ~1 2~ 23 L `l 'L~ individuals as well. So, I alway~~ look forward to being in the Hill Country part of my district, particularly Kerrville, and just glad to be with you all today for a short time. JOUGE TINLEY: Piell, we very much appreciate you being here, Congressman, and if you have a few moments, what I will propose to do, with the Court's permission, is in a short bit, after we get a few other matters out of the way, to take our recess a bit early so that any of us that have any questions or concerns we want to express to you, we'll be able to do so. CONGRESSMAN SMITH: I'm not going to rush you. I'll be happy to wait and listen, and whenever it's convenient, I'll be happy to meet with y'all outside of court or whatever is convenient with you. JODGE TINLEY: We really appreciate your time. Thank you foi being here. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One question righY_ quirk. Would you introduce those two lovely ladies with ycu? CONGRESSMAN SMITH: Oh, I'll be happy to, and folks in the courtroom may be interested as well. O'lene Stone, directly behind rne, is the District Director for the ~lst Congressional District, and oversees all of our district throughout the district. Ann Overby, to O'Lene`s 1-13-r~s 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 9 left, is our Kerrville District Office Manager, and represents me here in Kerrville. :>o, if you need help directly and quickly, call Ann. Ann, what's your number? MS. OVERBY: 895-1914. CONGRESSMAN SMITH: And we're in the phone book. And so, between Ann and O'Lene and me, we hope to be helpful to you all at least half the time. (Laughter.) CONGRESSMAN SMITH: Thank you, Buster. JUDGE TINLEY: Than}: you very much, Congressman. We appreciate your being here. Is there anyone else that may have comments to make on items not listed on the agenda? We'll move f=orward, then, with the Commissioners' comments. Commissioner, Precinct 1. COMMISSIONER BALDWIPS: Yes, sir. I have a few. I wanted to remind every one of the stock show, and I'm sure that everybody at the table will mention that. It starts on Thursday, and, of course, we all have duties there, but this is for the audience; that our Hill Country Junior Livestock Show begins on Thursday, and I think it ends up on Saturday, probably. But: it's -- it is a huge event, and it's an honor to work with that program. I had received a phone call -- and I apologize that I didn't get it on the agenda. And we don't hate -- I just want to brief you on it. We don't have to make a. decision on -- I pretty 1-13-09 10 1 L 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1~ 13 19 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 much can make the decision, I think, but on March the 4th, the City of Kerrville Fire Department and the State Liquor Control Board -- A.B.C.? I can't remember what -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: T.A.B.C. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: T.A.B.C., through agreement with the Peterson Founda=ion, are putting on a program at the Ag Barn out in the parking lot, and they -- one of the things they'll do is they'll have an enactment of a DWI automobile accident, where they'll extract someone out I of the car and, you know, do the jaws of life and the ambulance runs up there and the fire trucks, you know, all that kind of thing. And all the seniors -- juniors and seniors from Tivy High School, and Center Point as well, will be there, and it's kind of a DWI awareness type thing. I think we probably have all seen ghat. Their request is they are presently going to have this out in the parking lol, and if -- in case it rains, could they go into the arena and b2 out of there by 12:30 in the afternoon? And there's a little bit of a scheduling problem; there's a roping coming in the following day, and Glenn's staff is going to be setting up. So, I -- I think that I will probably just twist Glenn's arm just a little bit and try to help the -- help all this happen. So, I wanted to say, bring it out. One other item, and I failed to bring the 1 - 1 4 - r~ ? 11 1 3 4 5 6 7 R 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2q 25 letter in here; it's a letter that we all received from the City Manager to Dr. Davis regarding the airport issue. The letter -- lengthy letter, but it basically stated that -- that the City Manager -- or the city system has the City Manager in place to make all the decisions, hiring and firing. I'm assuming that Dr. Davis was asking him to hire a full-time Airport Manager, I think is the gist of the letter, anyway. And he went on to let Dr. Davis know that he was in charge, and he would do the hiring and firing. And, here's my point. And that's creat; I think that's a great program, but my point is that if that -- if that affects the County budget in any way, I highly recommend that they bring that over here before anybody's hired or any decisions are made. If it affects our budget -- and history shows that, in all of our joint efforts with the City, which are many, the City has simply gone out and done what they want to do and sent us a bill. We__1, that ceased a few years ago -- two or three years ago. Commissioner Letz, you remember. And I really think that needs to remain ceased. If anything happens like that, and particularly if it deals with the County budget, I -- I really think that they need to come over and visit with us about it before -- before they take us too far. That's all. That's my point. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Commissioner Williams, Precinct 2. i i ~ ~,; 12 1 .... 2 3 4 5 F 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~~ Z3 29 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I want to joining this Court. J[7DGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Hopefully, all of our service will be in the best interests of the people of Kerr County. I also want to take the opportunity to wish some members of the Court and everyone in the audience and Kerr County a happy and a healthy and prosperous new year. If I may, may I take a moment just to provide a little information on what Commissigner Baldwin was referencing relative to the airport? As you noted, Commissioner, I did receive that copy of the letter, and I served as the Court's liaison to the joint Airport Board. I think Dr. Davis' attempt to emphasize the need for a full-time manager, not a -- not a person whose -- whose responsibilities are divided among recycling and all the other things that had been the case in the past, is probably a pretty good point. What concerned me, and you came close to it, and -- and you did touch on one point -- the fact that they may be hiring a full-time person without benefit of talking about an amendment to the budget. My understanding about that is that they have budgeted in the City budget sufficient to cover that for the remainder of this budgetary year. If that turns out not to be the case, then certainly they're _ ~3-u~ 13 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~~ 23 24 25 going to have to come to Commissioners Court relative to any additional expenditures. But I think an equal to or greater point than that has to do with the fact that there is no interlocal agreement that we can put our fingers on existing between the County and the City relative to the management of the airport, and that needs to be corrected. We need to have a document that says how we're going to plan the airport, how personnel are going to be chosen, and things of that nature. So, I think if this -- if nothing more, it illustrated the need for us to do a little more work to get the partnership up where it needs to be so we all clearly understand what it's about. COMM155IONER BALDWIN: I agree. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's all I have, Judge. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner, Precinct 3, Commissioner Letz. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Really very serious on tYiat side of the table this morning. I just want to remind everyone -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Football season's over. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Baseball season is around the corner. And also, almost more importantly is, going back to Stuck Show, the forecast is calling for 2U degrees t-13-n3 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ^3 29 25 Thursday morning and 21 Friday morning, so I suggest everyone dress warm when they go, because the heating is not real good in that facility. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's a good facility, though. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a good facility. That's all the comments I have. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Nicholson, Precinct 9. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: First, I want to say to the three experienced members of the Commissioners Court that I appreciate and value your experience in government, and the knowledge that you have. 1've come to understand the reasons and the rationale and wisdom behind staggered terms. It's good to have three experienced members of this Court. Also, I thank you for the courtesies that you've extended to me and the help that you've given to me. I'm looking forward to working with you. To the new judge, Pat Tinley, I want to say that I've carefully paid attention Lo your -- your concerns about good government, and I support those, and I'm lookinq forward to working with you on them. I've moved around in my career to join new organizations quite a number of times, and what I've found in doiny that was that in each organization, there was someone who -- who knew how the organization worked, knew how Lhings got done, ~ ~, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ?3 ~4 2S 15 had some memory of how the -- the organization worked, and in the Commissioners Court, I've found that person to be Ms. Thea Sovil. And, Thea, I want you to know that I appreciate your help, and am looking forward to workinq with you. And the last, just to say to my constituents in Precinct 4 that you hired me to be your advocate on the court, and I will be. Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Commissioner Nicholson. I, too, want to thank the other members of the Court for welcoming me. I appreciate -- I appreciate your tolerance of me, and I'll be looking to you for guidance. And I will continue to look to Ms. Sovil for her guidance. As Commissioner Nicholson said, I appreciate her experience and efforts. And, more importantly, I want to welcome all of you here today, because this is your county government and this is your Commissioners Court, and -- and we're here to represent your interests. Our -- our function is to provide you with the services that you want and to solve the problems that you have that fall within the purview of government. So, I want to welcome you, and -- and I want to encourage you to give us input and let us know what you're thinking, communi~~ate the problems that you see out there to us. Oftentimes, we're pretty well focused on a pretty full plate, and -- and figure we've got enough 1-1 +-i~ 3 15 1 ,,_. 2 3 4 5 f 6 7 8 9 10 11 i 12 13 14 1J 1h 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 .-. 25 problems in front of us and we can't recognize the other tell us what's on your mind. And if some of you are uncomfortable speaking before a group, I would encourage you to -- to come to us at any time individually, and I think I speak for all the members of the Court. Tell us what's on your minds. We need to know. We can't read minds, and we really want to know what you're thinking. And we want to represent your interests and do what's best for you collectively, and so I would urge you to do that. The other thing I'd like to do this morning is to thank -- we have with us this morning Mr. Don Bonner. Mr. Bonner is the Assistant County Attorney, and -- and he has indicated an interest to -- to assist this Court in issues that come before the Court. And Mr. Motley, the County Attorney, has reallocated and reshuffled his staff responsibilities to permit this, and -- and I appreciate it, and I'm tickled to have Mr. Bonner here. And a lot of folks don't Lealize the decree ct responsibility and duties that the County Attorney has in county government. The County Attorney's uffice, their responsibility is not just to advise this Court. Rather, the County Attorney also acts as a legal adviser to all the other elected officials, all the ~ -i e-~~~ 1 2 3 9 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 13 ' 19 15 16 17 ' 18 I9 20 L 1 22 23 24 ~5 17 department heads, and also is involved in representing the State and Kerr County in the -- in the prosecution of all misdemeanor criminal cases, and those that are before the County Court at Law, and also all of the J.P. courts, the four different J.P. courts that we have in the county. juvenile cases and mental health cases, and we have a number of those cases, I can assure you. In addition, they have civil responsibilities relating to condemnations and acquisition of right-of-way, and -- and involvement in coordination in civil suits in which the County or any of its officials or employees are named as a party. So, they've got a pretty good responsibility that -- that they've got to discharge, and so it's -- it's something that we need to be mindful of, I think. And -- and that -- I give you that information because, until very recently, as most of you know, I was in the position wearing a lawyer's hat, and I know how uncomfortable it is and for a lawyer to get what we call a "cold inquiry," and that is something that's dropped on them and wanting an immediate answer, and sometimes that's not always possible. And there are a number of legal issues that come before this Court, and as a result, it's oftentimes difficult for a lawyer to be in a position to give an immediate answer, both from the 1-13-[3 18 1 ,-. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ,-. 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ?~ 23 ~4 25 standpoint of it takes research, and then because cf other responsibilities and priorities. So, with that background in mind, I want to make a commitment personally to the County Attorney's office that, as to any matters that I see that arP coming before this Court, I am going to make every effort to identify the legal issues and the legal matters that pertain to that issue, and to try and obtain answers to those before that item will even be placed on the agenda or place it on the agenda. And I -- I think, in that manner, we can -- we can have more orderly conduct of business. There will be less uncertainty about the steps that we're taking if we get those answers in advance. Oftentimes, all of the facts and circumstances aren't known when those inquiries are made. So, I just want the County Attorney and his staff to know that I'm going to make every effort that I can to try and yive them early heads-up on -- on matters that I want to try and move through this court, and I would -- I would hope that my colleagues would do liY,ewise. And we appreciate your assistance, and thank you for being here. Thank you very much. At this point, if there's no objection from anybody ou Cho Court, because of the Congressman's presence, I would suggest that we qo ahead and take our 15-minute recess early, and convene back here at about 20 minutes till 1 3 4 J 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 lb 17 18 19 20 21 G2 23 24 25 19 lU:UU and get on with the business at hand. Thank you. (Recess taken from 9:25 a.m. to 9:40 a.m.) JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's call the meeting back to order, if we could, please. First item of business is to pay the bills. We have our Auditor with us. MR. TOMLINSON: We have bills. One thing I would like -- would like to comment on before I start is that, for -- for the new members of the Court, I just want you to know my office is always open for people to come in and ask about bills to my staff, prior to meetings or at any time. We have a -- that's where all the information is. So, I invite you to come in at any time. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move that we pay the bills. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ser_ond. JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion by Commissioner Baldwin and second by Commissioner Williams that we pay the bills. Is there any discussion? Comments? Like activity? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have one question, if I may. JUDGE TINLEY: All right, sir. Commissioner Letz? COMMISSIONER LETZ: 'Pommy, on the first page, i-i s-" 2u 1 3 9 5 ti 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 I J 16 l~ 18 19 20 G I 22 23 29 25 the -- under Commissioners Court, the first invoice to DRG Architects, is that for the asbestos study or what is that specific part of that for? Do you know? MR. TOMLINSON: That's for the -- that's the contract service for -- for the -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know the -- the $10,000 is the contract, but the 13 -- MR. TOMLIPdSON: Oh, the first -- okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- $1,390 portion of that. Mkt. TOMLINSON: I don't recall what -- what that was. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I presume it's for the asbestos survey. I didn't have time to look that up. MR. TOMLINSON: I don't recall. Let's see. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Here they are. (Discussion off the record.) JUDGE TINLEY: He can find it quicker than we can. MR. TOMLINSON: It was the first one. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's unusual. MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, it's environmental study. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Ukay. 1-1s-u' 21 1 L 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~2 23 24 ~5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the only question I had. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other questions or comments? If not-, all in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) DODGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Next item of business are budget amendments. Budget Amendment Number I appears to he from the County Court. MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. I'm requesting a line item transfer of 5599.83 from Court-Appointed Attorney line item to the Special County Judges line item in the County Court, and it's to pay a -- a Yee to Denton County, where the probate -- probate judge in Denton County sat in for Judge Henneke in a probate matter. DODGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You didn't say Denton County? MR. '1'OMLINSON: Yes, I did. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A judge from Denton County came down here? MR. TOMLINSON: It happened there. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. Okay. So, 22 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 there's some kind of responsibility that Kerr County has in another county? MR. TOMLINSON: Well, it was a Kerr County resident. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Kerr County resident. The hearing was in Denton County? MR. TOMLINSON: Hearing was in Denton, yes. MS. SOVIL: Normally, mental health money's -- it's a mental health. JUDGE TINLEY: Mental health matter? Okay. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, actually, it's a probate judge. It says it's for the estate of this person. JUDGE '1'1NLEY: Guardianship or decedent? MR.. TOMLINSON: Deceased. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. JUDGE TINLEY': Motion to approve Budget Amendment Number 1 by Commissioner Letc. Do I have a second? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Second by Commissioner Williams. Any discussion -- further discussion or comments? Okay, none. All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 1 ~ 3 i 3 23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 L I 22 23 24 25 (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Budget Amendment Request Number 2. MR. TOMLINSON: This is a request for line item change, 2.50 -- $27.50 from Office Supp]ies to Bonds and Insurance for the payment of County Judge's bond. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. JUDGE TINLEY: Y4otion to approve by Commissioner Letz. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TIDILEY: Second by Commissioner Baldwin. Any discussion? Comments? All in favor, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.l JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Budget Amendment Request Number 3. MR. TOMLINSON: This amendment -- or line item change is for the 198th District Court. The request is to transfer $931.93 from Court-Appointed Attorney line item to Court-Appointed Services, and it's to pay a $3,000 invoice fur a criminal case. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ser_ond. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made by Commissioner ]- 1 2- l i 2 24 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1~ 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~4 ~5 Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, to approve Budget Amendment Request Number 3. Any discussion or comments? A11 in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) DODGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Budget Amendment Request Number 4. MR. TOMLINSON: This -- this line item change is the result of the prior court meeting relative to the renewal of the law enforcement liability insurance. We had budgeted -- on -- or we had a budget balance for liability insurance of $58,719. The bill was for $92,605. We have a shortfall of $33,892 in the line item for that liability insurance. My recommendation is to move $15,000 from Jailer Salaries and $18,89 from Nondepartmental Contingency. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion by Commissioner Baldwin. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. DODGE TIPJLEY: Second by Commissioner Nicholson. Any discussion or comments? COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's no other place other than Contingency? I mean, no place in the -- the Jailer Salaries can't take all of that? ~-~j- ' 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 y 10 11 1L 13 19 15 16 17 ]8 19 20 ~l 22 ?3 24 ?5 MR. TOMLINSON: Sheriff says no. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe the Sheriff's salary. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's actually coming from what was unexpended from October 1 to now, and we only have one opening at this time, so you're not going to have that unexpended amount continuing right now. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, if there's more later, we can always transfer it back to Contingency. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other comments or discussion? Being none, all in favor of Budget Amendment Request Number 9, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. We have Budget Amendment Request Number 5. MR. TOMLINSON: This is a holdover from the prior meeting, at the request of the Court. It's for Constable, Precinct 1. The request is to -- is a line item change, to add $500 to Office Supplies, $500 to Books, Publications, and Dues, $500 to telephone line item, which is actually a new line item for that department, $500 for Vehicle Repair and Maintenance, $1,000 for Conferences, $100 1 13 us 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1J 15 17 18 19 20 21 ~, cc 23 2q 25 i for Miscellaneous. From these -- these funds are being moved from -- $500 from TCLEOSE Training line item, $2,457.66 from Official's Salaries, and that would be the -- yes, that's correct, and $142.34 from Group Insurance. We held this over because the constable was not here at the prior meeting, so he's here today to answer any questions. CUMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, one of my questions is, are these numbers in line with all -- $500 for office supplies, is that in line with the other constables' numbers? I mean, this was just laid here this morning. I haven't had time to compare. MR. TOMLINSON: I don't recall what's -- what's in the other budgets. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can you tell me the diLLerence between TCLEOSE training and conferences? MR. TOMLINSON: The TCLEOSE Training line item are Lundy that are received from -- from court costs, and they're actually budgeted in the budget. This -- they're fees that are paid as a part of court costs for criminal cases that pay for officers' training, or law enforcement training. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The reason I asked that question, because in our conference -- this group up here, our Conference line, that is the moneys that we spend to become certified Commissioners and Judges. And here we r i ; - i 27 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 have -- it looks to me that you ha•ae that Conference line for that purpose, like ours, and then you have a separate one for TCLEOSE Training, and I would think TCLEOSE Training is that certification program. I just -- seems like to me there's two lines for the same thing. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, we separate the -- just for the purpose of knowing how much we expend from those. COMPQISSIGNER BALDWIRd: Because of the money that comes in from the fines and fees? MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWICd: I see. Okay. I would really like to know -- I'd really like to know -- Commissioner 4 has a budget in his hand, I understand -- if could you peek at that right quick and tell us, you };now, if it's anywhere near in line with trie other constables. I don't mean to be picky. I'm just -- you know, we've worked long and hard for years to try to get some of these offices looking somewhat the same, you know. And through the redistricting, we have the -- we have the same numbers -- almost the same number of folks out in each precinct, so, you know, the numbers in the budgets should be close to the same. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, maybe you'd want to address some questions to Constable Pickens. Maybe he can tell you kiow he arrived at those numbers. ~-i±-n 28 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That would be great, sure. MR. PICKENS: Good morning, Commissioners Court, County Judge. In reference to Commissioner Baldwin's question, in looking at the other Commissioners' -- Constables' budgets, as far as on the justification for the phone line item, in Precinct 4, the constable has budgeted $400 for his telephone. And being, in fact, that this is a new line item, and the fact that I have the office downstairs where Sheriff Hierholzer used to have his office when he was with the 198th, as far as on the office supplies, the honorable Don McClure had only allocated $50 for office supplies. Being that I'm brand-new to this, I don't have any letterheads or envelopes that I need to get printed up along with business cards, where I feel like they'll be justified to moving $500 into the office supplies. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is the other -- you're just going to deal with Precinct 9 -- comparing yourself to 4? MR. PICKENS: No, sir. As far as on Precinct 3, Constable Garza has $100 allocated for his phone. As far as on the Vehicle Maintenance and P.epairs, Constable Garza has, like, $75, but he also has Vehicle Insurance of $400, which I'm not having on mine. Gasoline, he has $500. I -_~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 1? 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 29 don't have that in my line item. And for Precinct 2, their telephone is $350. That's for Constable Ayala. He also has, like, $553 for fuel and oil. Whereas I feel that, after looking at it all, there was salary from the -- from vctober and part of November that was not paid to anybody, and that's why I've looked at it and requested for the total amount of $3,100 to be moved around the line items. COMMISSIONER LETZ: My concern is not as much this particular amendment. It's just that we have, as Commissioner Baldwin has said, spent a lot of time trying to egualize things. We are increasing a lot of these line items above -- I understand it's your first time; you do need some of these. But we really need -- when next year's budget comes around, in my opinion, these get reduced substantially, MR. PICKENS: I understand. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I guess the only problem I have is that, you know, you have -- do you have a budget reason for these numbers? I mean, have you gone out and figured out letterhead and envelopes and cards are going to cost $SUU -- I mean an amount? Because I just think, from a budget standpoint, rather than just putting numbers here, I'm just asking ii you have gone back and seen and have a basic budget as to how you get to these numbers. MR. PICKENS: Just waiting on some other bids _ L3-~~~ j 1 ,.,. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 5 10 11 12 13 ,-, 19 15 16 17 18 lg 20 21 G L 23 24 ... 25 30 coming in. I've been told there's some people here in the agency that does our business cards for us and so forth. I think business cards, it was my understanding, was going to run, like, 100, 150 bucks. I can double-check on that and see. Understand, this is my first time up here, and I apologize for not being here last time as attending the previous Commissioners Court. I didn't see that there would be a pLOblem having line items moved around without the elected official being here, as far as moving from one line item t~ another. And I understand your concerns, and I assure you, though, that, you know, once we sit down for the budget fur this next coming year, I don't foresee it being that high. I just need to get started up, get going. COMMISSIONEk BALDWIN: Well, of course, Letz -- Commissioners Letz hit the nail on the head. You know, there - there's really no rhyme or reason for these numbers. It just appears that you pulled numbers out of the air, and that's -- and that's kind of the reason we wanted you to come in and explain it. And, sure enough, that's exactly what it is. Can we put it off two weeks, and let's really work the numbers? And do as Commissioner Letz is talking about, actually budgeting, knowing what two boxes of business cards are going to cost or, you know, how much your conferences are going to cost, that kind of thing. . ~-~~~ 31 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 2? 23 ~9 25 MR. PICKENS: I can give you an example. I have a conference I have to go to next week. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good. That just answered my question. Can we put it off two weeks and come up with scme real numbers, or would you like for me to approve this today? MR. PICKENS: I'd like to ger it approved today, if possible, so I can get up and rolling. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I knew you would. So, you don't want to attempt to do it properly? MR. PICKENS: No, I'll -- I'll work with you, Commissioner Baldwin. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. MR. PICKENS: I'll work with the Court if they're willing to wurk with me. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd really like -- and I know I'm being mean -- it appears that I'm being mean, but I really think that we need to get some real live numbers in here that are -- with some thought behind them and some actual, budgeted numbers. Let's get off on the right foot. MR. PICKENS: I understand that. As far as on the phone line item, I don't think it's unfair, due to the fact, like, with Precinct 4 has, like, $400 allocated for them. Precinct ~ has $350 for Y_heirs. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know what that i 32 1 3 4 5 F 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 has to do with it, but we'll work on that. JUDGE TINLEY: Do I hear a motion to approve Budget Amendment Request Number 5? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bobby, you mentioned you had a conference next week? MR. PICKENS: Yes, sir. The conference alone is $225. That's for courtroom security, which is required for the constables. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think that I would be in favor, and I'd make a motion to put enough money in the budget to cover that conference next week right now, out of the -- put $500 in the Conferences from -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait a minute. Let's see -- excuse me. So, you have a -- you have a fee to pay, you have a hotel to stay in, you have gas to put in your car, and so how much do you think that is? MR. PICKENS: The hotel is $47 plus tax. The conference is $225. I'm looking at a two-night stay. The drive up there, gas is -- in my vehicle averages about $25 for an 18-gallon tank. I got that one down pat. So -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How much money? MR. PICKENS: I would say probably around -- to be on the safe side, plus for food, 900 bucks. COMMISSIONER. LETZ: $500. I make a motion to put $500 into the Conference line item from Officials i-r~ ~3 i 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 33 Salary, and then address the rest of it later. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In two weeks. Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that in lieu of Budget Amendment Request Item Number 5, that the sum of $500 be moved from Officials Salary line item, as stated on the request form, to Conferences. Is there any further discussion or questions or comments? There being none, all in favor, so indicate by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. MR. PICKENS: Thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, would you have a few minutes in the next few days to sit down with the two of us and try to work this out? (Mr. Tomlinson nodded.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. MR. TOMLINSON: I can do that. JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any late bills, Mr. County Auditor? MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. We have three, actually. One is -- the first one is to the U.S. Postal Service for $1,500 for the County Clerk. i-~~-~ h 34 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 LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUGGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded, made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, to approve a late bill, and I presume issue a hand check? MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: To United States Postal Service, S1,S00 for postal services to the County Clerk's office. Any discussion? Being none, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Any others? MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. Second one is also to tkie Kerrville Postmaster, $370 for the Treasurer's office, with a hand check. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Ser_ond. JUUGE TINLEY: Motion's been made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, approving a late bill to U.S. Postmaster for $370, and issuance of a hand check on behalf of the County Treasurer. Any discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right I 1 ? 3 35 1 7 3 4 5 h 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. MR. TOMLINSON: One more. It's payable to Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation for $1,277.44. It's for the initial payment -- lease payment for Caterpillar motor grader that will be delivered this week, so I need a hand check to be able to deliver that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is a budgeted item? MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, to approve a late bill to Caterpillar Financial Services, and issuance of a hand check in the sum of $1,277.49. Is there any discussion? Being none, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carried. Okay. Do I hear a motion to waive the reading of the -- approval of the i-i~-~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1 J 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 36 minutes and waive the reading thereof? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, which -- which meeting are we waiving the minutes of? JUDGE TINLEY: Well, okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It might be wise to -- JUDGE TINLEY: Good plan. Good plan. Okay, looks like we've got several of them here. The first one is the regular session meeting from Monday, December the 9th. Do I hear a motion that we approve those -- the transcript and minutes of that meeting and waive the reading thereof? COMMISSIONER, BALDWIN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. DODGE TINLEY: Moved by Commissioner Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that we waive the reading of the minutes and transcript of the regular session on Monday, December 9th, and approve the same. Any discussion? Being no discussion, all in favor, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carried. The next one that we've yoL here are for the minutes of a special session which occurred on the afternoon of Tuesday, December the 17th. Do I hear a motion that we waive the reading of these 1 ~ ~ ~. 37 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2^ 23 ~9 25 minutes and approve the same? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Let z, that we waive the reading and approve the transcript and minutes of the special session meeting for Tuesday, December 17th. Any discussion? Being none, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. The next one that we have here is the special session meeting for the morning of Monday, December the 23rd of last year. Do I hear a motion that we approve the same without reading? COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made by Commissioner Letz, second by Commissioner Williams, that we approve the minutes of the special session on Monday, December the 23rd in the morning, and waive the reading thereof. Any discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 1 - 1 3 - ~ ~ 3 38 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 s 5 10 11 12 13 14 1S 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~5 J~JDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Next minutes I have before me are the emergency session conducted on Monday, December the 23rd. Do I hear a motion to approve those minutes and oaaive the reading thereof? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that we waive the reading and approve the minutes of the emergency session in the afternoon of Monday, December 23rd of last year. Is there any discussion or comment? Being none, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.l JUllGE TINLEY: A11 opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Next item is approval and acceptance of monthly reports. Do we have any monthly reports that need to be considered by the Court at this time? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move that we accept them as presented. COMMISSIUNER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Moticn's been made and seconded by Commissioners Baldwin and Williams, 1 13 _~ 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 l~ 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 39 respectively, that we approve and accept the monthly reports as presented. Is there any discussion or comment? Being none, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) DODGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Okay. That brings us down to the consideration agenda, if I've got everything lined up here correctly. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I'd like to point out that we have a scheduled appointment at 10 o'clock. If you don't mind, I'd like to jump to that, if we could. JUDGE TINLEY: Your point's well-taken, Commissioner. It's already after 10 o'clock, and this item was scheduled for 10 o'clock. And, there being no objection, we'll move directly to Item 2.6 out of order on the consideration agenda, that being consider and discuss adopting a sick leave bank for County employees. Commissioner Baldwin. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you very much. I've had several county -- members of the county family come to me with interest in a sick leave bank, and I've also been informed that probably the guru of all sick leave banks was over at Kerrville Independent School District, and so I 1-i> ; 40 1 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 21 22 23 24 ~J called over there, and Mr. Green was kind enough to come over and make a presenr_ation. I think that they have a program in place, and he -- I've asked him to just kind of tell us what his program's like and see if we can maybe fit it in. And I'd like to tell you up front that I probably would like to take this issue, after -- after we get through visiting on it, and table it for a couple weeks, chew on it and think about it and see if it -- see if school districts fit county governments, et cetera and so forth. So, we'll do it that way, if you don't mind. So, we have with us today the Assistant Superintendent of K.L S.D., Mr. Bob Green. And, Bob, if you'd come to the podium, please? MR. GREEN: Let me share these with you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, thank you. Thank you for coming. By the way, Lamar Smith was here a while ago. MR. GK~:DN: Okay. We have -- we came to this at the -- probably at the request of our employees. We modeled our program on Spring Branch I.S.D. We did use the Texas Association of School Boards legal services to give us advice in developing this. it's certainly not a new idea. We have had it in place in our district for about 12 or 15 years now, and 2've been administering it. It has been a very -- probably a very popular benefit with our employees. We nave some pretty conservative guidelines i ~ - i l 41 1 .- 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 14 I 15 ' 15 17 ~ 18 l~ 20 21 22 23 .... 2 4 25 for administering this. You can look at the specifics of the plan, and this can certainly be modified to -- to fit a county government's needs. I think our employees basically designate one year of their -- I mean one day of their leave each year for the sick leave bank. Those days do not carry over and are not cumulative from one year to the next. And then, when we have employees with a serious need, there's several guidelines that must be adhered to. First, it has Lo be a catastrophic illness. We require medical documentation. It has been a real godsend for us in terms -- we've had several employees that have had terminal cancer, who have had really debilitating illnesses. They were extremely appreciative of having this, both financially and available to them and their families. It is not an inexper_sive thing. We budget -- our board budgets about $12,000 to $19,000 a year in additional substitute leave. These are days that our employees actually have. They have to have used all their sick days prior to asking for the -- for the leave bank. They can apply for up to 30 days each time they apply. They can apply more than once, but we grant the days in 30-day increments, and we grant them based on medical documentation that it is a catastrophic illness. And in most cases, they have to be hospitalised or be under a physician's care for a very serious illness. We do apply it to immediate family i-i~-rJ3 42 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 members. On a couple of occasions, we have had employees who were the only child and had a parent who was in a serious condition or had a terminal disease, where they had to take days to care for that parent, and we have granted it for that. There are a lot of variations on setting these guidelines. The guidelines that I gave you, we worked out over about a year, year and a half period. We used Spring Branch I.S.D. as our model, 'cause they had a successful program for a number of years. The program has worked real well for us. It hasn't been challenged. Probably the main reason that it hasn't been challenged is that we administer the program with representatives of all of our employees. We have a representative from each faculty, we have a representative of paraprofessionals, we have a representative of our custodial staff. So, I work with a group of about six to eight who kind of serve as a board. We meet together when there is a need. They request medical documentation. We sit down and review the needs. A couple of things that we have adjusted, because we now have lonq-term disability insurance in the district, we reduce the amount that we pay on the catastrophic sick leave bank.. If they are receiving worker's comp or if they are receiving our disability insurance, we only pay up to their salary. In other words, 1__3_.,_ 43 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 they cannot be participating in this and receive more actual pay than what their salary is. We don't want it to be salary, helping them in difficult times, but not something where it is a financial incentive and they're making more money than they would if they were at work those days. So, we've taken a pretty conservative stance. Some districts do not deny those things. And, of course, with serious financial needs attached to the sick leave conditions, there may be times where you know they need all the money they can, but the -- our -- really, our philosophy is -- is to try to make this as equitable as we possibly can for our employees. As I said, we've been doing it a number of years. We have different representatives that are on rotating terms that come off and on. We have a meeting, we vote on each of these. We give our responses, whether they are agreed to or denied, back to the employee. And I think you have some pretty comprehensive guidelines. The things that we have had -- to be honest with you, the things that we have had difficulty with are things such as problem pregnancies and things like that. With over 700 employees, we have things like that that come up, that the physician does not classify as life-threatening, but that are very serious, and those are usually when our -- our group has a ~.-i~-u 1 2 3 9 5 h 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ly 20 21 22 ~3 24 25 94 difficult time making a decision. But I would ask you, you know, at your leisure to look at this. I think, in administering personnel for the district over a number of years, when we hire new personnel and for even existing personnel, this is probably viewed as one of the most significant benefits that we give our employees. We pay about 100 percent of their insurance now, but they still feel like that, in a time of need, this is one of the best things that we do for them, so it's viewed very positively by our employees. Our board feels like we've had very little abuse of it, because we have a group that look at this pretty critically before we make decisions. Are there any questions that I might address with you? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bob, do you ever deplete the bank? MR. GREEN: The bank does not carry over from one year to the next. They contribute one day every year. And part of the reason for that is, in a school district, if you let it accumulate, you may not use all the days in the bank in any one year, but you're really kind of obligated to have that number of days available. What we do is, our employees have a card they fill out and they elect to be a member of the bank each new school year. So, by September of each school year, they have an enrollment period. 'T'hey - - -- 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 '0 Zl ~~ 23 24 ZS 45 enroll in it, we enter them on the computer. We actually take one of their local sick days off, and they realize that they're contributing that and that they won't get it back. And that was based on Spring Branch and some larger school districts' experience in terms of you want it to be a year-to-year thing. Some years, we may use nearly all the -- all the days. Other years we may use very few, but it is there sort of as an insurance policy to our employees, and particularly our -- our older employees have appreciated it. I can't think of a campus in our district that hasn't had to access it at one time or another. Sometimes we get to the end of the year and have used very little. Other times -- this year we've had several major issues right at the beginning of the year. But it is a very humane thing in terms of our employees' view of it. They know that it's pretty restrictive in the way it can be used, but it's there for them if a catastrophic illness should strike. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bob, what percent of the employees contribute? MR. GREEN: I'd say about 85 percent. And the ones that -- usually the ones that don't are relatively young, or are paraprofessionals or part-time employees. But we have a very good response from cur employees. Nearly all of our professional employees contribute. 1-1s-ii? 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 46 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do we know what this is going to cost if we adopt it? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir. MR. GREEN: And let me tell you, that was something that we had to address with our board when we considered it. The days that they contribute are there. You know, if everybody used all of their days, you know, we are -- to be in compliance, we would have to provide them those days. But we have lots of employees -- many of our employees that never use a day. You know, it's no problem for them, knowing that when they retire, they'll probably have days left over and days that they've never used. Our board generally budgets a lot less than the number of days that are contributed. Now, what it costs us is -- since those days are there, both locally and with the state, what it costs us if they -- if those sick days exist, somebody could access those days and we'd be paying those salaries, and the salaries are budgeted. But the cost to us is that we know we're going to have to pay substitutes. When an employee runs out of days, we're docking them for those days. That helps us pay the substitute's salaries. So, when we have an employee that is using a number of days, they have run out of days, we do budget about -- anywhere from $14,000 to $20,000 a year in substitutes, which is a very insignificant 1-13-i ~ 47 1 G 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 cost in our overall substitute budget. And what we did is we took the first two or three years to kind of get a feel for it, the number of da}'s that were being used, and kind of get an average, and then we budget a little extra money for substitutes. But, you know, it's -- it is really a real variable thing. But I -- with 700 employees, we normally have six to ten prett;~ significant needs every year, you know. Very seldom do we have less than that. COMMI551ONER LETZ: How many sick days does K.I.S.D. give? MR.. vR.E~.N: They get five local days each year, and that is cumulative. So, when they donate one of those days, they are giving up one sick day for that year. But, of course, as I said, many, many of our employees never use the sick day. rOMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The opponents -- opponents Lo the program -- 1 mean, I've had two phone calls this morning, people wanting to talk about it, and they use the word "abuse." It's an easy way to abuse the system. I really don't see that with the way you have your board set up and the derision-making process of how it's administered. MR. GREEN: I think we've been extremely fortunate, because, you know, I'd venture to say that there has been very little abuse; it's almost been nonexistent, because of the amount of medical documentation. And, i-ia-~ 48 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 GI 22 23 24 25 really, because it has to pass the muster of six or eight people, usually there's someone from that campus that's well aware of the individual's situation, so that we have had very little abuse of it. And it has -- a ]ot of our employees are not going to be in a situation where they can draw worker's comp. Now, what we do have is, we have disability insurance for all employees now that, after 90 days, kicks in and we'll pay up to 60 percent of their salary. So, when we're paying them a day's salary and they've used up all their sick leave, if it's been an extended thing, our -- we have a -- really, our long-term disability pays h0 percent of their salary, so when we give them a day, we're only kicking in 40 percent of their salary. So, we have some protections built into ours. I:UMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Bob, did I understand you correctly that your sick leave program does not allow fur rolling over from year to year? MR.. GREEN: That's correct. They have to enroll each year with one day. And because our sick leave is -- you know, there -- there are different models for that, because our sick leave is cumulative, they get it every year, that's not a problem, because the sick leave -- the live days the district gives them is cumulative. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is cumulative? MR. GREEN: Yes, but the day they donate 1-~s-ui 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 49 comes off of that each year. So, somebody that's been in the district four years may have 20 days of local leave. They're only giving one of those five days that they get each year. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, then -- but regardless of the use from this pool of days, at the end of the budget year or fiscal year, it's gone; is that correct? MR.. GREEN: That's correct, you start over. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So there's no rolling consistently built into the school district -- MR. GREEN: That's right. So the liability really exists from one year to the next. Also, this is a board decision. Our board's consistently approved it, but it is a decision, when we look at the budget each year, that they can approve or disapprove. So, it is a year-by-year decision to maintain it. JUDGE TINLEY: If I understand the import of Commissioner Williams' question, the day each year that's donated to the pool is lost? MR. GREEN: That's correct. DODGE TINLEY: taut the remaining four days that the individual employee retains continues to accrue and rill mover from year to year? MR. GREEN: That's correct. JUDGE TINLEY: So, in actually, you may be i-13-~~ s 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 50 reducing your contingent liability? MR. GREEN: Well, in a way, we are. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my understanding. MR. GREEN: And, as I said, because we have -- we really have -- and I've looked at it for the board on a number of occasions. We really have very little abuse of our sick leave in schools. You know, it does in some ways reduce our liability a little bit each year, when you have that number of days donated -- you know, if you have 500 days donated, those are days that, if they're not used, that we are not physically responsible for. DODGE TINLEY: Any other questions? MR.. GREEN: And please feel -- if you need other information, I'll be glad to provide it for you. There are a lot of different ways of administering this. I'm familiar with other entities tYiat use it, other school districts. So, you know, if you look at this and you have questions or would like some more information, I'll be happy to provide you with information if you need it. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you for taking time to come. JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate you being here. I gather from Commissioner Baldwin that he intends to make no 1-t3-i:3 51 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 motion to take any Formal action on this? COMM1SS1ONER BALDWIN: I'm not going to make a motion. JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody else have a motion to offer? If not, why, we'll move on to the next item, which is back up to 2.1, consider the preliminary plat for The Reserve at Falling Water, Limited, Precinct 3. Franklin Johnston. MR. JUtiNSTON: Morning. You probably have in your packet a -- a memo that I wrote. This drawing's rather large, but the preliminary plat will be larger. The final will have to be chopped up in several pages to meet the size requirenieuLs. Looking over it, the actual entrance to the property is through Kendall County. I understand that their roads are, however, the same specifications that we require on this one, so it would be same road. Several lots have -- have less than 200-foot frontage that's required in the rules, but some of them are just a little less, I guess due to the geography of the property. I think the developer may plan on asking for a variance to those. MR. CRENWELGE: That's right. MR. JOHNSTON: Those particular lots that are that way, like, 5 or 10 feet different to make the -- the lots work out right, several lots -- or at least one lot -- actually, I think it's about half a dozen that have really i-~~~-c 52 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 strange configurations. They're very slender. Lot 33 is an example on size. It may have a problem with the septic setbacks and all that to get -- get it to work on the site. I think U.G.R.A, requested them, you know, placing it -- placing to-scale residence and layout on the site to see how it would work if they Left it like that, or I think they may be redesigning some. MR. CRENWELGE: Well, we're going to redesign, keep U.G.R.A. happy. MR. JOHNSTON: So they may be a little wider than that. Lot 12 contains a -- it has frontage on one road, but has a 24-foot flagpole coming out on another road. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which one? MR. JOHNSTON: I don't know if that's a drainage system or if that's a road. I think it's a road. It may be too narrow for -- to have a road in the drainage -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which lot, Franklin? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Lot 12. MR. JOHNSTON: Lot 12. You don't -- do you know what that is? MR. CRENWELGE: I'm not looking at it, Franklin. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I see. Boy, is that a flag lot or what? 1-13-03 53 1 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1H 19 20 21 L 2 "~ 24 G S COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, it's not a flag lot; it's got frontage on another road. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, I see it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But close. Very close. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not even close. MR. CRENWELGE: No flag lot. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Weird configuration, but it's not a Llag lot. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not a flag lot. MR. JOHNSTON: It's this one. It has that little strip, but 700-foot frontage down the hill. MR. CRENWELGE: They can get access that way or the other way. MR. JOHNS'1'ON: Medford Road? MR. CRENWELGE: Several options. They can either access that or access the other way. MR. JOHNSTON: Okay. So I don't know what the Court's -- MR. CRENWELGE: That's a large lot. It can be -- t_hcy can access a couple different ways, that tract. MR. JOHNSTON: It's not technically a flag lot. Generally, we require more width than that for a road. It's really a driveway, but -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, the entrance i ~ - i 13 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 59 would be on The Reserve -- the road named "The Reserve"; is that correct? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let me -- why don't we let Franklin go through them? Then we can address them. But it's preliminary. I've got some comments I need to make as well. MR. JOHNSTON: I don't -- the developer probably has the answer to some of these. I'll just go through my list. Drainage study. Most of these lots are high on the hill, so they're not in the floodplain, but there would be some drainage studies required for culvert sizing and for insuring that it doesn't increase the flow off of the subdivision boundary. Roads are local roads. There'll be 24 foot of pavement; that's the same spec as Kendall County. This subdivision doesn't really -- the roads don't connect with Falling Water; is that correct? MR. CRENWELGE: Correct. MR. JOHNSTON: It's separate in that respect. The water system is shared, however.. And we'd need, I guess, a letter from T.N.R.C.C., or whatever their new initials are, that -- showing that they have adequate capacity for that. They meet the 5-acre rule. Some of these narrow lots, they might want to show the building setback on the plat. I don't know if that's a requirement, but we have a building setback rule, and since it's a small i i~ r3 55 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 top-of-the-hill situation, then it drops off, they may be attempting to build close to the road, which they've got a 20-foot rule. And we mentioned the O.S.S.F., so that's basically my comments. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we normally show that on a plat, the building setback? MR. JOHNSTON: Sometimes we do, sometimes we don't, as far as the setback rule -- the setbacks. Sometimes it's done by notes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is the setback rule? Outside the right-of-way line? MR. JOHNSTON: There's generally a 10-foot easement around for utilities and a 20-foot front setback for a building. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can I make couple of general comments? The -- the subdivision -- one of the reasons -- or the reason the lots are laid out the way they are is the developer, Mr. Crenwelge -- he knows, clearly, our minimum lot size requirements, which are 5 acres, and he's above that by .E acres, I believe. The lots are driven by building sites. And this is an extremely rough area of the county, and there's a lot of it, and to -- you know, what has been done is what our -- we've kind of been pushing in this direction, by the way, with our Subdivision Rules, is to protect as much land as possible and, you know, _-_3-~~ j 1 ~• 2 1 3 ' 4 5 I 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~ 12 ,.~ 13 i 14 t 15 16 1/ ~ 18 ly 20 21 ,, 23 „^ 24 25 56 cluster homes in the areas that are like this so as to have a minimum impact on the environment, and also just drainage and everything else. So, the reason for the configuration is to maximize building lots, and at the same time, not destroy the terrain and the whole aesthetics of the development. So I think, you know, I don't have any problem at all with the -- the lot configuration, and I think our Subdivision Rules contemplate doing this type of thing. The ones I do have a concern about are the areas around Lot 35 -- well, 32, 33, 39, 35. I'm not -- those are all on a cul-de-sac. I don't really have a concern on the frontage, but I just think we need to make it real clear that there are building sites there. And I think, also, we need to remember that this is a preliminary plat. When they go out there and start cutting these roads and actually doing the work, it's possible that these lot lines are going to move, and they will move. I think it's without question, they're going to move some. Some may get eliminated altogether. So, this is more of a -- you know, an advance concept plan that we're looking at, as opposed to, you know, figuring out, well, you know, this is going to -- this will narrow right there. I think when they get into it -- they just need, I think, direction right now from the Court as to, will we allow less than 200 foot frontage on cul-de-sacs"? I think we -- we have historically done that. _ - _ 3 - ~ i 3 57 1 L 3 4 5 F 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 I5 15 17 18 19 ~0 ~l 22 23 24 25 MR. JOHNSTON: I think, on cul-de-sacs, it's not 200 foot, it's 60 feet. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sixty feet. It doesn't quite meet it on the cul-de-sac. The other one on Lot 12, you know, if -- that 24-foot strip, to me, does need to be changed. It either needs to be 60 foot for a -- whatever is our minimum right-of-way, or it needs to be e]iminated. You know, either one. And that's just -- I had not noticed that until Franklin's note, when I looked at it previously. And the other question I have, is there a variance -- I'm asking Mr. Crenwelge this. Is there a variance needed on any of the roads from a road construction standpoint? MR. CRENWELGE: Going up the hill into the subdivision, there's going to be a serious -- in Kerr County, there's going to be a slope and a curvature requirement. There's only one way to get up this major hill. We're going to need, probably, maybe -- we're still working on that, but maybe a 1 or 2 percent increase in the grade going up the hill. And the curvature may be a little tighter than the subdivision standards, just to get up this hill, but that's ail. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you see any problem with that, Franklin? MR, JOHNSTON: We11, I think we can work with that. we have 12 percent now. If it's up less than 15 -- _ - 1 j - Q ~ 58 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 MR. CRENWELGE: It will be less than 15. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I don't I think it's a -- looks like a good subdivision. I think Franklin's done a good job of outlining all the requirements we're going to have prior to final plat approval. Letter from T.N.R.C.C.; water will be important. You know, the roads will be local roads. I think that, you know, where -- where feasible and where possible, the frontage needs to be 200 foot. But on some of these areas where it doesn't quite work out, you know, I don't have a real problem with a slight variance, considering that he could actually put in more lots if he wanted to in the subdivision. But it's being driven kind of by building site. I did note on -- I think it's Lot 15 that says 98 foot, which is a little bit small. It seems to me that could be shifted -- by shifting the lot lines, you can get up over 150, 175 foot on that one. That seems a little bit small. But, overall, it looks good. Any other -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion to approve the preliminary plat for The Reserve, Falling Water, with the comments noted in court and by Franklin's letter regarding requirements prior to final plat approval. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I will second that motion, with a comment; that we're -- you guys will get to i-~~-~s 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~~ Gc Z3 29 25 59 know Dale. He's been in here for a year and a half now. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve the preliminary plat for The Reserve, Falling Water, Limited, in Precinct 3, with the conditions and caveats as set forth this morning in court, and as further set forth in communications from the County Engineer to -- to the Court and to the developer. Is there any further discussion or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. MR. CRENWELGE: Thank you very much. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, gentlemen. Next item on the agenda is consider purchase of 8.5-ton crane from G.S.C. I assume that's a surplus -- MR. ODOM: Good morning, Judge. JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, sir. Glad to have you here. MR. ODOM: Thank you. I would like the Court to consider us purchasing from the Government Surplus Corporation in San Antonio, as an outlet for state surplus as well as federal surplus. And what we have is a 1984 Pettibone 8~-~-ton crane, and we're going to have a need -- of i-i 3-~~ i 60 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 course, that purchase price is 54,850, very cheap. We've gone down to look at it. It functions very well. We're going to need the use of a crane on Center Point River Road on two projects there; a grade inlay that weighs 7,000 pounds and about 150 feet of corrugated metal pipe, 48-inch, to meet NRCS design. I am also going to need it -- we're proposing to use a gabion-type material on the area by the swing where it was washed out, about 20-foot deep there coming off Highway 27 where it washed down across that area. I also have two projects on Hermann Sons. One is on the far end, where we had the structure wash out twice during the floods. We replaced it twice. And then we'll have the use of it when we work on the structure at Hermann Sons Bridge there. We can utilize it when we start to pull the rail cars up and pull it across, so we will need that help. What I've determined is that if we do this, that basically it would pay for itself, what I would rent a crane for these different projects. The money's going to come out, and I would rather utilize that money to help us in the future, because I have a 42-foot reach. It makes sense that this is not the only project in the future that I can use it for. It's inexpensive. It's well into the hundreds -- you know, $100,000-plus if you bought a brand-new one. So, this was a Navy surplus; it's got 1,400 hours on it. It has hardly ever been used, so it's an i-_. ~? 61 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 L 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2 -j 24 25 opportunity, I think, to pay for itself and to have a use in the future. And this will utilize our funds, I believe, a wYiule lot better than to pay it out on a rental. So -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have two questions. MR. ODOM: Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One is, how do you get this thing from Yoint A to Point B? Do you have to have a truck to haul it? MR. ODOM: Well, this is motorized. It's like our grade-all. It is a motorized unit. It's self-contai~ied, and it can be driven by our personnel to where we need to. If it's a long distance, then we would put on it a Haul truck, the one that we have to move equipment around, and that's the way we would -- on a long ~ distance, I would prefer to do that to save down on maintenance on it. And it can move, but to move around and to adjust itself -- it's self-propelled. It's a Detroit diesel, It runs fine, but it's like me. It's getting a little bit old, but it will function. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then my final question is, you're proposing that you move the funds from Contracts? MR. ODOM: Yes, sir, Contract Fees. I have -- go ahead. -o :. 62 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 IT 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would you make sure that those projects that you'll be taking from are in Commissioner Letz' precinct and not mine? I mean, that's where all the work's going, so -- MR. ODOM: [7nfortunately, that's where all the 54 inches of water, just about, fell. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thanks for the pass. MR. ODOM: I feel confident that if we take it out of Contract Fees, 553, that I have enough, looking at where I'm at and where cur projects are at, that I want to reserve that. I don't intend to start anything until we see how Sheppard Rees is coming down. I have some contingency funds these, plus 1 want to look at the contracts for -- that would be coming up soon for petroleum. S feel like we would have a price hike, and 7 -- that's another subject. But to say that I may hold off on petroleum for emulsion until after Mx. Hussein is resolved, I think very quickly, and -- well, at least I pray it occurs without too much length in time. But 1 think that we'll be all right, I would go into it comfortable that the $4,850 is a good buy for the CouuLy, and it would pay for itself. COMMISSIONEF, WILLIAMS: I move approval of the purchase of 8'-~-ton crane from General Services Commission, and authorize the County Judge to sign contract, transfer the money from 15-611-533, Contracts, to 1-1 -V i 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 2~ 15-611-570, Contracts -- Capital Purchases. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made by Commissioner Williams for the Court to authorize the purchase of the 8~-ton crane from G.S.C., and authorize County Judge to sign appropriate documents purchasing the same, allocate the funds from Road and Bridge Contract funds, 15-511-553, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: A11 opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carried. MR. ODOM: Thank you, Judge. I thank the Court. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. Next item of business is to consider and discuss the approval of final road and bridge alignment for the new Hermann Sons Bridge. Commissioner Letz. COMMISSIONER LETZ: In the packet, I have provided a map that's very difficuit to figure out what's up and what's down. But what it is, is a -- it shows the current Hermann Sons Bridge location and the current right-of-way alignment, and it shows -- as you're looking at 1-13-r~9 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 64 the paper in front of you immediately to the right, an area that says "Alternate Alignment." And then, just to the right of that, there is a dashed line that kind of runs parallel, and then to the right of that there's another dashed line, which is -- to make everyone clear, what we're talking about is this line; that furthest dashed line is the alignment that I'm proposing. And the reason for that is, after meeting with a representative of TexDOT and C.E.C. Engineering, Road and Bridge Department, it is felt that the alignment furthest to the right is the safest alignment for the future road. And this is the permanent Hermann Sons Bridge; let me make that clear. The safest alignment. It is also the alignment that has the least amount of environmental impact. The negative of it is, it is also the alignment that requires the most right-of-way. It does not change the individuals that we're dealing with from a right-of-way standpoint, but it does -- it will require more right-of-way. And that is the right-of-way Mr. Tijerina -- we have not been very successful in negotiating with him on any of the three alignments up to this point, and that is being referred to the County Attorney for him to proceed with negotiations and/or condemnation on -- to obtain that right-of-way. The reason this is on the agenda now is that tkie County is 100 percent responsible for that right-of-way i-i ~- 1 .-. 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,,,~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 65 acquisition, and TexDOT will not proceed too much further with this project until we have that right-of-way, and I don't want this to be a holdup. They have -- or are going to release this for final engineering once the Court approves the alignment, so this will be the -- on~~e this is done, this is it. This is where that bridge is going to be. It is beinq released to their outside engineering firm, which is C.E.C., to do the final engineering on this bridge. When I mentioned environmental consequences, the reason -- it's hard to read on this plat, but there are -- right along the river, there's a couple of cypress trees, and the alignment that uses less right-of-way takes out those trees. One is a 96-inch cypress tree; one is a 66-inch cypress tree, and it is just felt that -- and a number of other trees as well. This -- the furthest to the right alignment, it saves those trees, which I think is important. Those are, you know, if not the largest, they're And -- but the primary reason is safety. I say safety. The reason is that the current road has a double S-curve in it, and we are eliminating those S-curves, making it into a gradual curve. It will be safer coming to the bridge from either motion that we -- i-i~ os 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~~ 23 24 25 66 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, let me ask a question before you do that, please. How much more property are we going to need to take, whether through condemnation or otherwise? How much more than your original -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can't give you an exact answer, 'cause Mr. Tijerina refuses to allow us to onto his property to survey it for any of the alignments. I would guess that we'll be taking about an acre under this alignment, and we'd probably be taking maybe a little bit over an acre -- probably about three-quarters of an acre for the other alignment. Probably -- maybe a quarter to half an acre additional property, somethinq in that area. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. It looks a lot better taking out those curves and more of a straight shot. I knew TexDOT would love that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's great. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, they -- once they got out there on the site, they thought -- the reason they had that alternative alignment is one of the boulders, they thought we were going to like that. When they got out there, they realized that was not a real feasible location, so they concur that this is the alignment. They -- I won't say they like the location; they'll do whatever we say, but -- 1-1 _7- ii 3 57 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: Commissioner Letz told me last week that if they stayed with that original alignment, he was going to go tie himself to those trees and save the trees. He was -- I mean, he's a true -- a true servant of the community. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or find someone to chain themselves to the trees. JUDGE TINLEY: Are we dealing with any more landowners -- additional number of landowners than we were already dealing with? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Cdo. No, we will deal with four landowners any way we do this bridge, and three of them are agreeable and are talking with us and are very happy to cooperate, and oiie has not been so cooperative up i to this point. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You answered my questions. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It may not be relative to this decision, but is his objection to having the bridge at all, or the price that we're willing to pay? COMM155IONER LETZ: I really can't answer that, 'cause he -- I've met with him twice, and he won't give me any reason other than rie doesn't want -- he's not in -- he's in favor of the bridge. He's just not in favor of tYie bridge going on his property. And -- and in his 1-13 43 68 1 •--- 2 3 4 J 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 14 i ~ 15 15 17 ~ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,-. 25 defense, he's got a very small piece of property. But we have been -- you know, I think at least I have been -- everyone that's visited with him has bent over backwards to try to a~~commodate him, and I think we still would like condemnation to be the last resort, but at some point, you know, we're going to have to say, "This is what cae're doing," and then Mr. Motley's going to have to go say, "And we're taking it if you don't agree to work with us." And up to now, he's just -- I mean, like I say, all we have asked for in -- I guess we've sent two letters and two meetings Lhat I've had with him. Two certified letters have been sent to him and one noncertified letter. All we had asked for is permission to get on his property to survey. He refuses to give us permission to come on -- enter his property. When I talk to him, he's very nice, but he wouldn't sign the letter then either to give us permission. But, anyway, so I think the -- I think his objection is that we're using any of his property. He would rather we move the bridge to Lhe left side of the paper and upstream. And, from an engineering standpoint, that's not feasible. It would take a whole lot more right-ef-way, because you would -- as you go upstream, you get to the point that you're not hitting the river perpendicular to the river, so you have to really -- you have to put almost a 90-degree corner on Hermann Sons Road tc yet it to a point that you can hit the i-la-o? 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ly 20 21 22 ~3 24 25 69 river perpendicular, which is what TexDOT's going to require on the bridge. And, so, I mean, it's driven by need. I make a motion that we approve the alignment shown furthest to the right on the attached plat. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve the final road and bridge alignment for the Hermann Sons Bridge -- TexDOT bridge shown furthest to the right on the plat attached to the packet. Is there any further discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, just for the record, Congressman Smith advised me that every time I get a call, he gets a call from the same person, and encourages us to expedite this as soon as we can, which is what he's trying to do as well. JUDGE TINLEY: He advised me to the same effect, Commissioner Letz. Next item of business is consider and discuss resolution to participate in the 16th Judicial District Narcotics Task Force. Mr. Hill. Yes, 1 13-i~=~ 70 1 ,- 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ,,,_ 2 4 >g MR. HILL: Good morning. It's that time of year again when we begin to make application to the governor's office for these federal funds for a Narcotics Task Force in the 216th Judicial District. Basically -- well, actually, the money that they're going to give us this year is the same that it's been for the last two years, so we're not really operating on a true 75/25 percent agreement with them any more. It's more like 29/71 percent for this next year. We have been able to not have to go to each entity for more money. We've got some funds in our program income that we've been able to obligate to make up for any difference, and primarily the difference next year from this year is going to be salaries. Salaries are going tc go up, and tae have to pay -- we have to pay whatever increases each entity gives their employees that's assigned to the task force. However, like I said, we were able to obligate a certain portion -- $17,000 exactly -- from program income that we've accumulated over the years, so that we don't have to hit each entity up for out-of-pocket type of expenses. The cash match portion for Kerr County, they allow us to use the amount that the County pays for the District Attorney for annual District Attorney fees. Also, the amount of money that Kerr County pays to two Deputy Sheriffs, as far as their fringe benefits go. They allow us 71 1 ,.-. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 14 I ~ 15 16 17 ' 18 19 20 21 22 23 .-. 2 4 25 to use those figures as part of the cash match. So, basically, it's not really costing Kerr County anything out-of-pocket to participate in this. It's money that they would -- the County would spend anyway, except for possibly the two deputies that are assigned to us; they could be back working at the Sheriff's Department. But that's pretty much where we stand on that. Something a little different also this year; beginning January 1st of last year, they did away with the Ter,as Narcotics Control Program, which was the oversight unit for the task forces up in the governor's office. They did away with that and they put administrative oversight over to D.P.S. Narcotics Service. Of course, I guess the first_ thing D.P.S. did was get their attorneys involved, and see it we were doing everything the way we're supposed to do. The only thing they've come up with is this Mutual Cooperation Agreement on Extraterritorial Peace Officer Jurisdiction. They felt like, even though we've got a cooperative working agreement between all the counties and the cities, that it didn't spell out exactly the peace oFficers who have the jurisdiction to work in the other's jurisdiction. So, they came up with this multi-page form that, as far as 1 can tell, covers every contingency that could possibly come up and gets everybody in the world to sign off on it, so it would be a true multi-jurisdictional 1 - 1 3 - li 3 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 72 agreement. I've got some numbers of what -- for all of this. We do actually occasionally get out and get to do some work. In Kerr County -- and the reason this is broken down -- it's broken down by counties as opposed to each individual entity, because that's the way we file our charges, so we go strictly by county. But in the last 12-month period from December of 2061 through November 2002, the task force conducted 150 investigations in Kerr County. And when I say we conducted these investigations, these are actual cases that we wrote reports on; there was actually something there. It doesn't include the number of times that we go looking for bits and pieces of information and nothing pans out. During that 12-month period, we secured 80 feluny indictments, filed 35 misdemeanor charges -- and thesz are all drug charges. And we -- in that 12-month period, we seized $102,895 worth of narcotics. So, with all that said, we ask your participation in the program again for another year. JODGE TINLEY: Question. MR. HILL: Yes, sir? JUDGE TINLEY: Has the contract that's been presented beets reviewed by the County Attorney and his staff? MR. HILL: Are you talking about the 1-1?-c~ 73 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 extrajurisdictional -- or Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Agreement, or the whole thing? JUDGE TINLEY: Funding Participation Agreement. MR. HILL: Okay. Yes, sir, it's been reviewed by the City -- the City of Kerrville being the applicant agency, their attorney reviewed this for a good while. JUDGE TINLEY: What about the Kerr County Attorney's office? Has it been reviewed by that office? MR. HILL: I couldn't say. MR. MOTLEY: I don't recall seeing that. I know that the D.A. in the 216th has probably looked it over; I would assume Bruce is pretty familiar with the contents of it, but I don't recall having seen a contract this year on it. But I know it's probably the same as contracts in the past, but I would be happy to look over it. JUDGE TINLEY: I'd certainly feel more comfortable about it. One item in there, there's an indemnity provision of the employees that are outside of our control that, you know, may or may not be a problem. The other question I have is, am I to understand that -- that the task force will be -- if we approve this, the funds would come from Kerr County, being $43,700 roughly; that that's essentially what we would be paying for two Deputy 1-13-Ci 1 .... ~ 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,_ 13 14 15 16 17 18 10 20 21 22 23 24 25 79 Sheriffs that are assigned to the task force if they were in that essentially what I'm given to understand? MR.. HILL: That figure, $43,000, is a breakdown based on what -- if I can explain this, we come up with a budget of what we think we're going to need to operate on for a year. We know that the Byrne Fund out of Washington is going to give us 492,000-some-odd dollars. That leaves the difference, which we have to come up with; it's called rash match. We take -- based on population figures, primarily, that's broken down. That -- that cash match figure is broken down based on population, and this is something that I don't do; it's way above my head. But as I understand it, this is the way the figures come up. The $93,000 is -- I'm not sure what Kerr County pays to the District Attorney every year, but whatever it is, I would think, that would probably not -- doesn't indicate what's really paid in fringe benefits to the two officers assigned to us. And -- would I be right? AtJDIEI`dCE: Assistant District Attorneys. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What it does is, the task force actually, Your Honor, pays a percentage of the Assistant District Attorney's salary -- or the County does, and that Assistant D.A. is the one that prosecutes these. 1-1s-;3 ~s 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 As tar as the two officers that are assigned from the those is just the fringe benefits, is what the County pays as part of this. The salaries of those two officers is recouped by the grant and is actually paid by that grant, so we're not paying that salary at all. And that salary would be much more than even the total $43,000 because of those officers' experience. So -- but the $43,600 is actually part of the Assistant D.A. and the fringe benefits, where if we tried to pay just the two deputies alone, it would be more than that. And the other thing is, in -- in the Sheriff's Office, we get a lot better drug enforcement having two deputies assigned to that because of the amount of time it does take to do drug investigations. It's not just going out and stopping somebody and seizing drugs. Our normal patrol officers do that day-in and day-out. But a lot of these investigations that they do take a lot of time died a lot of manpower and a lot of hours, and there's no way we could do it. So, what -- what the patrol officer and what our department does, the -- the drug investigations that are kind of instant, that we just run across, we can take cdie of right then and right that minute, we handle. The drug investigations that you may need to develop a confidential informant or you may need to do other ~i_n_~ 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 76 investigation work on and it could take weeks or months, we refer all of those investigations over to the task force. And I think you'll see that Kerr County -- actually, in Kerr County is where most of their investigations are done and where actually most of the seizures is done, as we're the largest part of this -- of this operation with them, and I would definitely recommend continuing it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's no question that we get more bang for our buck going through the task force. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Definitely, because you have -- I don't know how many members you actually have in there. MR. HILL: I have eight investigators. SHERIr'r' HIERHOLZER: Eight? With eight investigators -- and, see, even the investigators out of Boerne or Fredericksburg also do investigations into this county. That's part of that mutual agreement. And then our own do investigations over there. But it does drastically improve the -- the narcotics investigations and the quality you can get, because I just can't do it with -- with patrol people, you know, just working their normal shifts. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sheriff, you actually transferred two men from your manpower contingent; is that correct, Lo the task force? 1-13-Ci ~~ 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 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you replace those two for other lines -- other duties within the scope of your responsibilities? Or -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. They -- I just lose two officers that are -- MR. DICKERSON: Do you replace them? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, we do, because if they were to send them back, okay, the only way that those two officers would have a job back with the Sheriff's Office is if we had an opening at that time. Otherwise, they're just unemployed. So, I do get to replace them as far as more manpower actually doing patrol duties, 'cause I like to keep the guys in the neighborhoods and doing the actual -- actual -- not actual crime -- the actual patrol part of it, being in the neighborhoods and that, and let -- we have D.P.S. narcotics personnel here and we also have them here, so it really makes a good -- with those two working together and every agency supplying manpower to it, it really makes for a good narcotics investigation unit taking care of this county. JUDGE TINLEY: What's your pleasure? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion we approve -- what are we approving? Approve the resolution to participate in the 216th Judicial District Narcotics Task i-is-o~ ~s 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Force as presented, and ask that it be sent to the County Attorney's office for approval. JUDGE TINLEY: Subject to County Attorney's approval and review? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct, that's what I said. JUDGE TINLEY: Following that approval -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: And authorize you to sign it. JUDGE TINLEY: -- review and approval, authorize signature. All right. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion is made and seconded by Commissioners Letz and Nicholson, respectively, that we -- subject to the review and approval of the County Attorney's office, we approve the funding participation agreement among member agencies of the 216th Judicial District Narcotics Task Force, and upon such review and approval of that, the County Judge be authorized to sign same. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, please signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. 't'hank you, i-i3-r; 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~, 23 24 25 79 Mr. Hill. MR. HILL: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Next item is to consider and discuss the donation of the planting of tree on courthouse square. Mr. Holekamp. How are you this morning? MR. HOLEKAMP: Fine, thank you. Commissioners, County Judge, I'm representing a request from the Kerrville Garden Club, who is an affiliated member with the National Garden Clubs, Incorporated. They have -- I think they've contacted Commissioner Baldwin also about this particular request. They've requested to purchase and have a tree planted on the courthouse yard representing and honoring freedom, as a freedom tree. And as -- as you'll notice on the note, if approved by Commissioners Court -- and 1 kept Commissioner Letz in mind here. And the tree -- we really are out of places in the courthouse square here to place trees, and i -- I felt like, after two years ago, three years ago when we eliminated some of the hackberries on the outside perimeter, there's a possibility for some placement of some trees there. So, I -- if approved, I would recommend that's where it be placed. They are going to furnish the tree at their cost. They're going to have it planted, and for one year they're going to take care of it, if it's approved by -- accepting this tree by Commissioners Court. 1-13-n3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1S 16 1! 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 80 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What kind of tree? MR. HOLEKAMP: Big-tooth maple. COMMISSIONER LETZ: What are you looking at me for? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with Glenn about placing it out here where the -- where he's taken the -- what kind of trees? MR. HOLEKAMP: Hackberries, and there's some cedars. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hackberries. And there are some other hackberries that need to come out on around. And every time we talk about this, I say that hackberries and cedar trees God made to cut down; that's what they're for. That's the only thing that they're for. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we have too many here. But I think that would work. Glenn, by the way, this is the wife of former County Commissioner Royce Stone in Precinct 4. And, so, I -- anyway, I agree that the place of the planting is really the only question, I think. And, you know, out there where you're talking about, I think, is wonderful. JUDGE TINLEY: Is that a motion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is a motion, as a matter of fact. i-1~-U' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~~ 23 29 ~5 81 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. And I gather the motion is that it be on the outside perimeter, the site to be approved by our Maintenance Supervisor, Mr. Holekamp? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct. I thought maybe y'all would want to discuss this for a couple hours. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded by Commissioners Baldwin and Letz, respectively, that we approve the request to approve the donation of planting of a tree on courthouse square, being on the outside perimeter, at a location to be approved and selected by our Maintenance Supervisor, Mr. Holekamp. Any further discussion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a comment, that a big-tooth maple is an excellent selection. MR. HOLEKAMP: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further discussion? If not -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They only have one they can give us? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, no. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They only have one they can give us? JUDGE TINLEY: My concern is we'll have a ~-1~ 3 82 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ly 20 21 22 2Y 24 25 whole bunch of other folks line up; they want to present their tree. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what will happen. JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. MR. HOLEKAMP: Ms. Stone thanks you. JUDGE TINLEY: Next item of business is to consider and discuss having the January 27th or February 10th -- I presume that's this year -- meeting at the Union Church. I assume that's Commissioners Court meeting. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It is, yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I just -- I thought it would be a fun thing for the Commissioners Court to convene at the old Union Church and have a session down there. And the reason for it would just be fun; it would be a tun thing to do. And I think it would bring -- I think it would bring a focus to the Union Church and -- and their program of rebuilding it, and et cetera. Commissioner Letz i-~3-u3 83 1 ,.-. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,,,~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ,,,, 2 4 25 and I attended the grand opening of it for Christmas, and just -- it's just so nice to see a -- really, a part of Kerr County history. It really was truly a neat thing, and I remember the days -- and, General Schellhase, I remember the days we were trying to get the building transferred over to whoever owns it, y'all or us, or all of us, and it was a pretty exciting -- some pretty exciting moments of trying to figure out how to do all that. And it's done, and it's a neat place, and T'd just like to have a Commissioners Court meeting there. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with Commissioner Baldwin; I'd like to see that happen, too. I just have one question. Perhaps General Schellhase can answer that question. For the special Christmas Eve service, I'm given to understand that you had to get special permission, building -- temporary building occupancy permit or something; is that correct? And would that have to happen again? MR. SCHELLHASE: That's correct, it would have to happen again. We had special permission, because the building was not 100 percent finished and we did not have an occupancy permit. But we've discussed meetings -- as you know, we have several requests for meetings already, and we have been given permission to go ahead and have some from the City. i-~~ .,; 84 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2J COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good. I think it's a great idea. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who do you get the special occupancy permit from? MR. SCHELLHASE: City. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We get a permit to meet in our own building? MR. SCHELLHASE: We get a permit to occupy the building when it has not been completely finished. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I'd better stop there. Although that's ridiculous, but okay. DODGE TINLEY: When this first idea was -- idea was first broached, I had a concern about the provisions of the Local Government Code providing for time and place of meetings of the Commissioners Court, and -- and I believe it's Section 81.005 of the Local Government Code dealing with that. My reading of that section indicates that if you're going to meet somewhere other than at the county seat, under the current circumstances, that there's some requirements that you got to -- some hoops you got to jump through that I'm not sure we can permissibly do that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, the only hoop I saw was that we agree to do it. And that's the reason it's on the agenda, is to agree to do it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought the law, 1-13 03 85 1 ~.. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ,,, 2 4 25 Judge, had been changed to enable that to happen, so long as JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that's -- like I say, when it was first broached to me, my reading of Section 81.005 states that if you're going to meet outside of the county seat, the corporate city limits of the City of Kerrville, certainly, that -- that's one section that it merely takes the -- the action of this Court, but otherwise you've got to have some other action taken and some other conditions existing, is the way I read it. Now, certainly, there's more than one way to interpret that law, I'm sure. But I do have that concern, and apparently maybe we do have a -- a difference on how we interpret that, COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- and I -- I'm going off memory, last time I read that portion, but I thought that referred to regular meetings had to be here. And if we did it at the next meeting, it's a special meeting. 'Cause I believe -- isn't the term "regular" -- our regular meeting Yeas to be held here, but it's silent on special meetings? But, either way, I mean, that's the reason I'm saying that, 'cause we've always had regular meetings here. But, clearly, the Commissioners Court has used many locations other than this building for meetings, including U.G.R.A., the City of Kerrville, and none of the above. I mean, we've -- you know, we've met at the Ag Barn; I believe we had an _ ~ 1 ii 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 11 18 19 20 2I 22 23 24 25 86 actual meeting before. So, anyway -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We are within the county seat, right? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think probably "county seat" is the courthouse, 'I think, in that -- JUDGE TINLEY: Well, there's another provision in that -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: City of Kerrville. JUDGE TINLEY: There's another provision in -- in that same section that talks about located inside the municipal limits of the county seat, which would indicate to me that that indicates the entirety of the corporate city limits of the city of Kerrville. Maybe that's something we need to get the County Attorney's guidance on. COMMISSIONER LETZ: How about a motion -- a motion subject to ability to do it, so we don't have to take it up again? I can't imagine -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Or do whatever's necessary to make it legal. If it takes a notice or whatever it takes to make it work, we have time to do that, I presume, between now and then. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, tell me if I just got a motion. COMM155IONER BALDWIN: Let's do it this way. i 1 s-~ 1 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 lU 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Ll 22 23 24 25 87 Let's select February 10th, to give us plenty of room to get our attorney to tell us yes or no, and then -- actually -- actually, we can bring it back on the 27th. I'll just have it back on the agenda at the 27th. If the attorney says yes, we can go do it. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, essentially, your motion is to refer to the County Attorney if we can meet there, and if so, under what circumstances, and what kind of notices or whatever other conditions may be required? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, that would be a great motion. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's exactly what I said. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I second that motion. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Baldwin, ser_ond by Commissioner Nicholson, that the issue of -- of having the February 10th meeting at the Union Church be referred to the County Attorney's office for review, and -- and as to the legalities of being able to meet there, and if so, under what circumstances or conditions and what types of notices, and the matter to be brought hack here before the Court on the 27th at its 1-13-n3 88 1 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ^0 L 1 22 23 24 ~J regular meeting. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, in your opening comments today, we should do as much research as we can before we hand it_ over. Would you provide him with that? So we -- JUDGE TINLEY: Sure. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Did we have comments yet? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think so. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, if we're going to go to the trouble -- to me, I think it's a bit ridiculous to have to do all this, but if we're doing it, sending this to the County Attorney -- considering we meet at City Council chambers on a pretty regular basis, we meet upstairs on a regular basis, we've met at the Aq Barn before, we meet at U.G.R.A. Why don't we find out the rules for to us meet anywhere, and get a definite answer, so we don't have to refer to this back when we have to go meet at U.G.R.A, later this year? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Basically, I think that is the question. Can we meet outside this building? JUDGE TINLEY: And if so, under what cirr_umstances, with whom, and under what conditions? You're amending your motion to that effect, Commissioner? 1-13-u3 89 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1/ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, actually, that's what I said in the first place. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I'm sorry. All right. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That was easy. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Piece of cake. JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consider and discuss County 911 Coordinator's status report. Mr. Bullock. MR. BULLOCK: Morning. JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, sir. MR. BULLOCK: The project of addressing is proceeding on out at the Emergency Network office, and the addressing portion of it stays well ahead of the notification part of it. And one of the problems there is the -- the Post Office in San Antonio is usually sent a postal route that has been addressed, and they do some notification also. The problem with that is that the Post Office will not accept a postal route that is not 90 percent complete. And on my notes this morning, I had 80 percent, 1-13-r.s 90 1 ~-- <^ 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1Z ,,,, 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ^4 ^~ L 25 but I was -- have since found out they've changed that to 90 percent. And 90 percent or less -- if the route has 90 or less percent complete, that's mainly the pertinent mailing information, and that is very time-consuming on the net -- on the network people, researching that by all the means that they possibly can to try to supply that information to get that up to 90 percent so that they can send it to the Post Office. And, once it gets to the Post Office, there's at least two forms of notification that they send out, and one of them is to request information on the properties that do not have a complete mailing address. And the second type of notification would be notifying the postal patron of their new mailing address -- or their new physical address. The third notice that would go to a postal patron -- or to a property owner, excuse me, would be a letter that is intended to come from the County to the property owner indicating their physical address of that piece of property. And, let's see. At this date, there has been 40 percent of the partials in Kerr County addressed, and 15 percent of those -- of that 40 percent have received a form of the notification. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Jim, let me ask you one question on that point. On the 40 percent addressed, that doesn't include the city of Kerrville? -i-u3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 L S 91 MR. BULLOCK: No. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or city of Ingram? MR. BULLOCK: The 20,600 partials does not include the incorporated areas of Kerrville and Ingram. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. But 40 percent of the -- of the partials have been addressed? MR. BULLOCK: Yes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Outside the city limits. MR. BULLOCK: Right. But only 15 percent of those have been -- have received any type of notification. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Any of the three letters -- or I guess the second or third letter? MR. BULLOCK: They've either received the notification requesting information or the notification of the new physical address. COMMISSIONER LETZ: About how many -- or do you have the number as to how many have received the -- either the letter from the Post Office or from the County? MR. BULLOCK: Let's see. I think that was probably -- if I remember right, that was in the neighborhood of 1,500. At one of our last meetings, they was talking about the incoming calls. That has been a concern of the -- of some of the people involved, incoming calls from the people inquiring about their addressing or questions concerning that. And it has been a very i -j ~, i 92 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 l~ 18 19 20 L 1 22 23 29 25 time-consuming issue for some -- depending on where the call is coming into, it has been time-consuming in getting the response back. And there's -- according to the number of calls that comes in on a particular morning or afternoon, it could Le disruptive in the office that the calls are coming into. So, it's been proposed that a separate line be establiskied that would be nothing more than accepting the 911 calls, and possibly recording those calls to be handled at a later, you know, period of time. And, what I -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIPd: What's the nature of these calls, Lhe problems? MR. BULLOCK: Probably 90 percent of them or more have been discussing the property, itself, as far as location, the road name, so forth. Very few calls have been coming in as to -- in regard to the stipulations that's been issued from the Post Office about the size of the letters, where to place them, you know, describing the location. But 90 percent, I would say, of the calls are more technical than -- than not. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you receiving them now? I mean, do they come in to you? MR. BULLOCK: So far, there's been, I'd say, two that have come to me downstairs. And that's strict -- mainly because of the phone number that's on the notifications that's coming from the Post Office is giving i-i ~-,._ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 93 the Kerr -- the Emergency Network office phone number. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 911 office? MR. BULLOCK: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And so they're getting most -- most of it over there? I mean -- MR. BULLOCK: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Most of it? 80 percent? I mean, how many phone calls are we talking about? Ten? 5,000? MR. BULLOCK: Somewhere in between. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. MR. BULLOCK: I'm not real sure how many -- how many have come in. I do know that they are keeping -- maintaining a log out there of the type of calls that's coming in, and we can get that back to you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's okay. I'm just trying to -- trying to figure this thing out. So, most of them are technical calls? MR. BULLOCK: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And calls that you have the ability to answer? MR. BULLOCK: No, I would not have the -- the information downstairs to do the research to answer those. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I thought. 1-1"s-U? 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1/ 18 ly 20 21 22 23 29 25 94 Well, I've been looking at this for a week or so, and it's my opinion that those calls need to be routed into the 911 office, again, ber_ause they are so technical in nature that only -- probably only those folks out there can answer them, the questions. Plus the fact that -- I mean, we can get another phone put in down here to -- you know, he lays it out here, how many -- 180 minutes of messages and all that stuff that our phone bank will handle, but if you remember, this guy is part-time. He's not going to be employed in the courthouse, as per our contract with him, very much longer. I mean, if we put in a phone line and get started, and all of a sudden he's gone, do we jerk the phone out and then say to 911, "Hey, you have to start receiving these calls"? Why don't we just say that right now and get it over with? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree with -- I mean, on this particular point, I agree with Commissioner Baldwin. I think that it -- I mean, it doesn't make sense -- (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER LETZ: Anvwav, I might add, we agree many times. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is there something coming down the pike? COMMISSIONER LETZ: To me, it makes sense for this to be out at 911. Now, it may -- but from prior conversations 1've had -- and I understand that it's a ~-1?-ui 95 1 .-, 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,,., 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 disruption to them in trying to get other things done because a phone call comes in; I understand that. Is it recording on it, so the calls come in and then either you or -- they can be looked into and then responded to simply and in a manner that seems like it would solve the problem? MR. BULLOCK: That would be the solution. And even phones in -- from what I understand about the current system, you can set the into voice mail without rolling ringing several times before it it could go directly into voice suggested, a separate line, ded would be -- would be great. phone where it goes directly over or -- cr, you know, goes into voice mail. But mail, but the -- like you icated phone line for that COMMISSIONER LETZ: Seems to me that that would be a -- I mean, this is going to be a problem that, as Commissioner Baldwin says, is going to last far beyond the 114 -- 150 hours that you have left under your contract. But also, I do think that it's a -- I mean, it's an imp~ctant -- we need to have some mechanism set up or work with 911 to have some mechanism so at least calls are responded Co quickly, and input however -- have them as nondisruptive as possible to 911. And it seems to me they have a p2i~ue line out there, dedicated line. I don't know 1 - 1 '~ - ~ 3 96 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 GI 2~ 23 24 25 whether their system that's out there right now would work. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think having 911 do it makes some sense. I'm curious about this sample recorded message. The average caller is going to understand what you're asking them to do with respect to "K" numbers and "R" numbers and so forth? MR. BULLOCK: Well, that would be information on the notification. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's there for them? All they have to do is read it? MR. BULLOCK: Right. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Understanding it's another matter. MR. BULLOCK: Understanding it would be a different matter. But it would be some -- it would be some real good clues for the people to -- or anybody that's doing the research on that particular question. That would aid them in finding the -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It wouldn't make it more confusing? That's my only concern. MF.. BULLOCK: It shouldn't. And that's just -- that message -- that sample message is one of my creations, so -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. MR. BULLOCK: Okay. The time estimates for 1-1?-na 9~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 L 1 22 23 24 2J this project, the way it's going and all the research and restrictions that have been put on from the Post Office, and having to continue with the process that they're currently going through, it's been estimated that it would take another two years to do that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How much? MR. BULLOCK: Two -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Years? MR. BULLOCK: -- years. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Two more years, okay. MR. BULLOCK: An alternative would be to totally address the county as a whole, rather than different postal routes. To address the entire county, and then send notifications out. And that's estimated to be done within possibly -- well, the addressing would be done within six months, and then the notifications could go out, and the property owners at that time would be the people that would receive the notifications, and we would not be bringing the Post Office and their restrictions into the loop at that point. And in that notification, you could request the property owners to notify the Post Office, all their service providers, as well as their personal contacts of their new address, and that would keep the Post Office and -- like I say, and their restrictions totally out of it. At that point in time, the County people, liY.e county offices, like 1-13-03 98 1 2 3 9 5 E 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 21 22 23 24 25 the County Clerk, County Tax Assessor, Road and Bridge, all of them could be notified of the changes immediately, either electronically or by printouts. And also, the -- before we sent notifications out, we could contact these various service providers to see if they would accept electronic address changes. We do know that the telephone company would probably not accept it electronically. They prefer to get it from the individual customers. Now, whether the utility companies are that restrictive or not, we don't know yet, but I would suspect that utility companies would probably be like the Appraisal District and be willing to accept the changes electronically. So, we can -- in that notification to the property owners, we can provide all the information or any of the information that's possible to aid them in making their address change request to their ~ providers. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, Jim, what I'm hearing you say is that we can continue on doing what we're doing today, and it would be at least two more years before we turn the key to the job? MR. BULLOCK: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or we could just go out -- which is what this Court has said on several occasions, is just go out there and address everything. And, the way I see it, just go ahead and address everything t-Ls u' 1 ~. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,..., 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 L l 22 23 24 25 99 throughout the entire county, and then you come back and you get into a -- and 911 may want to say something about this -- and you come back and get into a -- into a maintenance mode and start picking up those mistakes that were made, or those little things that were left on the table. But go ahead and get everything done, and then come back and pick up those things that you possibly missed, and that would cut it down from a minimum of two years down to six months? I mean, that's -- this is a tough one for me. Is that what you're saying, though? Something like that? MR. BULLOCK: After that six months, there would naturally be some disputes or problems that would need to be resolved. But, like I say, this would be the housecleaning rather than the -- starting all over from each mail route. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let me ask a question COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Under the six-month plan, from Commissioners Court saying, "Here's your new address." And, with that, would that letter say, "except for mail"? Because, I mean, I'm -- my question is, what's going to happen when the utility bill is changed and the Post Office 1-1 S-i~ 3 100 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 refuses to deliver it 'cause they don't know that address? MR. BULLOCK: Well, the Post Office, in their notifications, have indicated that the old and new addresses are good for 12 months. So, actually, in our notification, the person to be notified would be notified to contact the Post Office, and would then -- in the next 12 months, they would have to be -- you know, they would have to contact the Post Office within the next 12 months. But, supposedly, the Post Office will deliver to the old and new address for a 12-month period. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there -- can we get that in writing from the Post Office? MR. BULLOCK: We got it in their copies of their notifications. JUDGE TINLEY: Is this a matter that we can take formal action of the type that Commissioner Baldwin's possibly thinking about, or is this just mainly an information item, as I read this thing? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I think it's more of an informational item, and just kind of -- I've asked him to bring this as a briefing, as part of his status of where -- where we all are in the -- particularly with Yiis -- Mr. Bullock's position. But I don't -- I don't think that this is really -- I think this is a 911 Board issue. But I -- if it's that simple, which I doubt, but I would i >;-u e. 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~~ 23 29 25 101 like to hear from the 911 side. And, you know, if it's anywhere near that, I would certainly encourage our board members to pursue it. I mean, I would. But I'd like to hear the other side of it. JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Reese? MR. REESE: Oddly enough -- JUDGE TINLEY: What happens if we leave the post office out of the loop, which is what I'm hearing? MR. REESE: You need to be aware that there are going to be some significant changes, as opposed to the way we have been directed to handle this notification process. This that we are proposing will put the land -- the property owner and the occupants and the users into the loop of notification. First of all, when they do take part in that notification to the phone company or the Post Office, there is an element of accuracy that we only estimate in many, many cases. Secondly, the six months issue is not a bad estimate, and the reason is that when we take a property record and we address it and reroute -- we research it, we get 90 percent of the information in the first five minutes, if we're ever goinq to get it at all. We have been tied up with matching addresses for occupants, neuters, and so forth that we have no way of knowing they even exist. That's the time-consuming element. Now, if we do go to this and complete all of 1-13-i„ 102 1 ~- 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~, 9 ~~1 L i J the addressing, a one-time notification, in the process of doing that addressing and notification, we will still be providing the 90 percent information that we're going to have before us. We are just not going to take any more time doing detective work, is really what it amounts to. So, on the one hand, we will have -- we will have a more rapid release of addresses for convenience, for public safety. We will have the citizens -- we will rely on citizen input; that's going to be crucial. I can tell you, and you need to know going in, that, typically, not all the citizens comply with the request to give information. But that's -- that's something for the Court to decide as to whether it's going to be the responsibility of 911, Mr. Bullock, or yourselves to determine at what point you can release information for somebody's use, or just go ahead and get on with it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bill, this thing -- P m going to say this again, because I think it's important. This thing of counting on the people to call the -- be a part ~L the notification, be in the notification loop, you know, somehow we need -- we've got to get this message across, that this is not about us and it's not about the mail service or about our friends finding our homes and all that. It's about a person having a heart attack at 2:30 in the morning and an ambulance being able to find their house. MR. REESE: That's correct. -is-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1/ 18 19 ~0 Zl 2~ 23 24 ~5 103 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all it's about. I couldn't care less if people get mail or anything else, but I want Rusty to know where that house is at 2:30 in the morning. That's what it's all about. So, it would be in the best interests of that person to contact the telephone company to change their address. MR. REESE: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And if they don't, you know -- I mean, there's got to be some personal responsibility in this picture somewhere. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think I almost echo what Commissioner Baldwin said -- that's twice now -- and even go a little bit further than that. I think people need to be responsible for this. I think they need to be responsible, and I think it is a lot easier for 911 or Commissioners Court or both to do a one-time education, promote it with local media, and say, "You're about to get these letters, and this is what that letter says." And if you want your mail changed, I mean, or -- you need to do this. Rather than do it piecemeal, like we're doing now a little bit, and no -- and the public is very confused. I think we do a one-time education effort, give it our best shot we can, and then put it on the individuals to be responsible for, you know, their own circumstances. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: if we took this 1- l i- ~ i 104 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 six-month approach, we would -- that's us or 911, I don't they'll be able to know where that location of that call's coming from? MR. REESE: In every case, no. Until we get the -- the final feedback from the citizens, there are -- there are going to be -- even the way we're doing it now, there are limitations as to -- we've got to know somebody lives at a certain place and their phone number is a certain number before we can get it into the -- excuse me -- the 911 database for display purposes. To get 100 percent, we're going to be able to provide, I would say, 50 percent of the phone numbers. Then people who have phone numbers listed in a business name, you know, they're going to have to take the -- take the bull by the horns and see to it that the phone company or us or you get the -- get the match between this phone number -- this is my address, you know; let's get it in the system. Did I answer your question? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. Having attended probably almost all of these Commissioners Court meetings in the last year and a half or so, I've sensed a lot of frustration amonq the members of the Court about the Court' s inability to move this -- this addressing thing along a little faster. Hnd, frankly, what I'm hearing here 1-i3-~~j 105 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 is that I'm not sure the estimates now are as good as they were six months ago. We seem to be losing ground rather than solving the problem. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we're getting realistic estimates now. MR. REESE: I have some basis behind those estimates. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I don't want to jump into another agenda item. MR. REESE: I think -- go ahead. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the question is, how much of the delay is caused by the guidelines that the Court adopted at the recommendation of 911? Have we made some modifications in there as to addressing streets with multiple residences and driveways and all that? MR. REESE: No, that's not a delay issue. It kiasn't been at this time. We do have a couple of delay issues, and that's unnamed roads. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I'm talking about. MF,. REESE: Well the unnamed COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's a big -- that's exactly what I'm talking about, is that the fact that our guidelines say that if it's over a quarter mile and it's more than two structures, that it has to get an address or a -i~- 3 106 1 2 3 4 S 6 8 9 l~ 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2~ name and an address. And that's where most of the unnamed roads are, in that category. MR. REESE: It's just been -- everything involves the guidelines. What we do, there's always a yes and there's always a no element. There are a couple of -- what we are contemplating doing -- contemplatinq doing now, I think you will find will take care of a lot of these issues that -- that have been dragging around like little anchors all over. JUDGE TINLEY: Do we need to take any action on this? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir, we probably need to get back to our -- Mr. Bullock and his status report. Are you about through with that -- MR. BULLOCK: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- particular part? All right. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Next item of business, consider and discuss adopting 911 addressing letter from the County to property owners and all related costs. My question is, in view of the uncertain status of the previous item, are we ready to move forward on this item? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir, we are not ready to adopt a letter at this time. JUDGE '1'1NLEY: Do you think we ought to just L-1~-~3 107 1 .- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~„ 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~9 ^~ L 25 pass that one? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, no. I want him to touch on that. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you don't mind. MR. BOLLOCK: There had been some -- well, a letter had been created following the current notification process, and I think y'all have a copy of that letter. And the question here would have been if it -- to adopt a version of that letter, and then start pursuing the problems of getting it printed, where to get it printed, how to get it printed, and how to get it mailed. And that's where the related costs are coming in. I have found one company so far -- I've checked with three, OfficeMax and one of the mailbox places, and they were not too interested in discussing this type of mailing process. But the -- the person that was -- the Mailbox did refer me to Copies and More out on -- out in the shopping center behind -- well, close to Rick's Furniture, and he can -- he is set up to handle a mailing process by to}:ing an electronic media and producing the letters, so we do have a source to do that. Then the next problem came up of the postage, and whether or not it would be an envelope-type mailing or just a fold and -- like, a fold and staple-type mailing. So, that was the issue on that. But if we choose to go with 1 1 3 ~ ~ 9 108 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 L3 24 25 the six-month deal, that letter's going to have to be expanded quite a bit with more -- clearer details. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to point out something to you, Commissioner. In this letter, if you'll notice, here is -- here is that "K" and here is that "R." And the "K" is related to -- the person's name? MR. BULLOCK: No, the "K" is a map number. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Map number. MR. BULLOCK: It's just really -- well, it's like a key to that record in -- in the 911 system. The "R" number is the number associated with the -- from the Appraisal District. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Some pretty good information, if you look at it close enough. Okay. Obviously, we're not going to deal with that letter today. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- have you come up with a cost estimate if we went the route you have come up with, or can you come up with a cost estimate as to how much that's going to cost? MR. BULLOCK: Not yet. We'd have to come up with a letter or notification design and see if it`s going to be two or three pages or -- and if y'all would like to include the forms necessary to change addresses. The Post Office has a form that they use. I'm not sure if we could get enough of them to stuff envelopes with, but the Post i 3 - U 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 109 Office will accept in a letter form the name -- the old address and new address, and they'll accept that as long as ~k~e customer -- the customer -- the patron or the resident signs it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think my personal preference would be I'm really going to want to spend a little more time on this. I think we need to start giving some direction -- at least from a budget standpoint, some numbers. My preference would be to send the Post Office form. 7'm sure we could get all we need. We could qet 20,600 or whatever we need of the Change of Address forms from the Post Office at no cost. But what I would like, if we could get -- next time you come before us, is, you know, the estimated postage. If you use the Post Office fcrm, that's going to require a letter, so we're going to need envelopes and printing -- just estimate two pages. That way we can get some kind of an idea of the dollar consequences to our budget, 'cause we don't have funds for this budgeted in the County, I don't know what 911 has, but we're -- I'm guessing we're looking at probably close to $20,000, $15,000, something like that. If we could come up with some kind of good -- I guess a recommendation is what I'm asking. Give us a recommendation of one or two options that we could have to look at at that workshop coming up, MR. BULLOCK: The person I talked to out at 1-13 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 110 Copies and More is more than willing to work with the designing and proposing costs for that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, great. JUDGE TINLEY: I think we're bordering on the next item of business, so if we're through with discussions here, we'll go to Item 2.10, consider and discuss setting workshop with the 911 Board to discuss the 911 Guidelines. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Gentlemen, I put my name on there, as usual, as a service to Commissioner 3. This is -- (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is his issue. And, Commissioner 3rd, just wanted to let you know I'm here to serve you, sir, and this is yours. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mine? But, anyway, I think we need to have a workshop. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good. Me, too. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Set a date and get on with it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, COMMISSIONER LETZ: I see Chuck Lewis in the back, one of our appointees to the 911 Board. COMMISSIONEK BALDWIN: And Colonel Harris. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And Colonel Harris, sorry. 1-13-n? 111 1 3 9 5 H 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 I7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TIDiLEY: Mr. Harris was here a]1 the time. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Appreciate both of y'all coming, actually, for the agenda item today. From a timing standpoint, what would be a -- do you have any preference from a timing -- MR. LEWIS: After the new director is on board. COMMISSIONER LETZ: After the director -- MR. LEWIS: After the director is on board. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that will be? MR. LEWIS: We're having a hand-over meeting on the 23rd. COMMISSIONER LETZ: 23rd. MR. LEWIS: Of this month. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you really -- you're asking that we defer this until probably the first meeting in February? MR. LEWIS: Frobably. Well, you have to give him a chance to become familiar with what we're going to request here, and -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: First or second meeting in February? MR. LEWIS: -- discuss the 911 guidelines. We don`t -- we don't feel that the guidelines that we have t-i3-~~j 112 ~ ^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 l~ 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 2_` right now are really delaying anything. Just -- not really delaying it. It's the procedure we go through that seems to be holding it up. That's why -- the alternative that Mr. Bullock has discussed was just food for thought for you to consider. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. All right, then. Why don't we just postpone this until either the second or -- first or second meeting in February, and we'll bring this back to the agenda. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just one question. The procedure is what's slowing it down. Who has the responsibility and authority to solve that problem? Is it 911 or the Commissioners Court? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to say 911. We appoint two people to sit on -- they're both here to sit on that board and solve -- MR. LEWIS: To do what? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- all the problems. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You said the guidelines weren't the problem; it's the procedures. And my question was, who's got the authority and responsibility to change and approve the procedures? And I'm told it's 911. MR. LEWIS: I can't tell the Post Office that they can do it in less than 90 percent, what we just discussed and explained to you. I don't have that 1-~t-u± 113 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ^3 24 25 authority. I don't have the authority -- I, speaking as a board, don't have the authority to tell anybody what their address is. We provide technical support to the county government to tell people what their addresses are. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Time for a workshop. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Time for a workshop. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, if there's nothing further on this one, let's move on to the next number, 2.11, consider and discuss clarification of Kerr County's authority to assign road names and addresses in Kerr County. Commissioner Letz. COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is one I think we can take action on. If we go back -- go back to our 911 guidelines and look at the court orders for a while, and state law -- as you know, I put a -- a part of the Local Government Code -- I'm not sure which code that's in -- that's in the backup, but that the County has the authority for naming roads and addressing. We have assumed that we are -- we have accepted that authority in Kerr County, but I couldn't find a court order that says we have formally accepted it. And the reason this came up is, working with some utility companies, essentially the phone company, from an indemnity standpoint, it may be a good idea to help them move along if we formally say that we are the authority in Kerr County for addressing and road-naming. And, therefore, _ . 3 - _ 3 114 1 <^ 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I'll make a motion to that effect, that in Kerr County, the Kerr County Commissioners Court has the authority to assign road names and addresses, and those are the official names and addresses for Kerr County. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In the unincorporated areas? COMMISSIONER LETZ: In the unincorporated areas, correct. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded by Commissioners Letz and Baldwin, respectively, that the Court assume/declare/state that it has the authority to establish road names and addresses in all the unincorporated areas of Kerr County. Is there any further discussion? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Does that require a public hearings 1 hope not. It appears in Part (d? that it does. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it does. Therefore, we'll -- I'll rescind that motion, and -- DODGE '1'1NLEY: Are you withdrawing your motion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm withdrawing my motion. JUDGE TINLEY: You're withdrawing your _-~ i ii 3 115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 second, I assume, Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I guess. I don't know why yet, but I will. I don't see what you're talking about. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't see it in 251. COMMISSIONER LETZ: (d). COMMISSIONER wILLIAMS: Yeah, it does. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was wrong. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Therefore, I will make a motion -- I guess it's going to be a 30-day notice, to play it safe -- that at our -- when's the first meeting in -- the second meeting of February? MS. HAMILTON: 24th. MS. SOVIL: It would be the 24th. JUDGE TINLEY: 24th? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let me ask the County Attorney, if I may, a question first. David, for this type of public hearing, is it 15 days generally, or 30 days? MR. MOTLEY: This is just as far as to change the -- cr set up the rules for the naming of the -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's to formally say the Kerr County Commissioners Court has the authority for road-naming. We've already -- the road-naming guidelines are in place for both of these. i-i~-..z 116 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. MOTLEY: I think the County does have the authority. As far as how many days, I really just need to look at it, 'cause I can't tell you. I can look at it real quick and tell you, but -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we're probably meeting after lunch, if you can get us an answer after lunch as to number of days. MR. MOTLEY: I've got hearings at 1:30, so I'll try to do the best I can do with that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: David, wait a minute. The ld) under here, it says, "... may adopt an order under this section only after conducting a public hearing..." We have already adopted the guidelines. We have already done it. That's a done deal. All we're -- all we're saying now -- all we're saying in this court order is, we're responsible. The guidelines say that. And I feel like, by adopting the guidelines, we're saying that we're taking the responsibility. But one of the utilities feels like that they need -- would like to have a little stronger language, and so we're just -- it's a separate -- it's really a separate court order that's simply saying, you know, we're the ones. MR. MOTLEY: There is an order for the -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's not amending the guidelines or anythinq like that. i-13-U9 117 •-- t 2 3 9 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 ZO 21 2~ 23 24 ?_ MR. MOTLEY: This is an order for the particular utility that's concerned about being more specific? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's all it is. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. What -- I mean, the guidelines never expressly said we have that authority. We just -- but we approved the guidelines and we had a public hearing on the guidelines. MR. MOTLEY: And you recognize that you have the support by approving the guidelines, right? And you had a public hearing on the guidelines? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe we did. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, we did. COMMISSIONER LETZ: David, I'd have to check that. MR. MOTLEY: You may be okay right now. If you want me to just double-check, I can do some checking real quick and maybe give you something after lunch, or send you a message one way or the other. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Speaking of lunch -- (Discussion off the record.) COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let's go ahead and I'll table this until the next meeting. We'll find out what 1-is-~~3 lls 1 L 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ~3 24 25 exactly we want to say in that court order. And, David, if you can get back -- I'll send you a memo as to -- MR. MOTLEY: I may look real quick. JUDGE TINLEY: If there's no further discussion on 2.11, then let's go -- (Discussion off the record.) JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I've had a request that we take up, out of order, 2.13, concerning interlocal agreement. Is there any objection to the out of order? COMMTSSIONER BALDWIN: None, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: The Court, at this time, will take up Item 2.13, consider and discuss and take appropriate action on revisions to the Interlocal Agreement between Kerr County and the rJ.G.R.A, for Kerrville South Wastewater Project, to cover current, pending, and future projects. Commissioner Williams. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. This -- this will bring back an item from two weeks ago in which the Court was presented with some proposed amendments to the Interlocal Agreement between Kerr County and the Upper Guadalupe River Authority for the Kerrville South wastewater project. I'd like for Mr. Mosty, if you will, to come up and help us step through these. At the Court's request, I sent this to *_he County Attcrney for his review, and we need to hear back from Mr. Motley as to his thoughts _-_3-n~ 119 1 ..-. 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ,.., 2 4 25 and/or recommendations, if any, with respect to this revision of this document. MR. MOSTY: The members of the Court -- I discussion, but just to remind Texas Rural Development Agency O.R.C.A. And there -- there a Community Development project, have been approved, and one is planning. And then there is a you, there are -- the former has changed its name to re two projects; one, a one a Colonia project, which in construction and one is in pending application for a Community Development grant, and a pending application for a Colonia grant, all of which have previously been approved by both U. G.R.A. and the Commissioners Court. And when Mr. Brown was going through his housecleaning, he discovered that there is only one interlocal agreement that deals with the 2001 Community Development Grant. In fact, there's not an interlocal agreement on the 2001 Colonia grant. So, the concept of this is to create a template of an interlocal agreement that can cover the -- both the existing projects when granted, the pending projects, pending funding, and if the Court chooses to adopt additional projects at a future time, to -- to incorporate those. And this would be the template under which they would be organized, And all of them are generally that U.G.R.A. does the grant work or supervises the grant work, 1 ] 3 !i 3 120 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 oversees the construction. At the end of the project -- the County does the application. At the end of the project, the project gces to U.G.R.A. So, it's really -- the effort here is really to take the one existing agreement and create a template that man cover all of those. I understand from Mr. Motley this morning that he does have some comments or some questions that apparently we're going to have to address. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: r_an we hear from Mr. Motley as to what those are? MR. MOTLEY': We11, I had left a voice mail for Commissioner Williams to try and -- I think what I really wanted the most was to look at the other contract from the predecessor agency to O.R.C,A. -- all those initials run me in the ground -- Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. I wanted to look at that older agreement. But, in looking at this -- and Mr. Mosty and I have talked a little bit, and I had made him aware of some o{ the concerns I had, lt's -- you know, it might be that that would be something that we could take up in another meeting, but let me just highlight some of the questions that I have. 1 was looking, of course, at the interlocal agreement statute, and I, first of all, just kind of question whether or not there is any authority in general to enter into this agreement. There's 791.026 of the _~~_~, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1? 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 121 government Code, which allows for municipalities, districts, or river authorities to make such a contract. In other words, I believe what I'm trying to say is, my understanding of the interlocal cooperation agreement is that it needs to be clear that both sides have the ability to do the particular job before they agree -- this is a conservative view, and perhaps may be a little bit older view, but both sides need to have the ability to do this contract before tk~ey can make a joint contract to -- to handle it together through an interlocal agreement. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Excuse me. Is this opinion that you're stating now different than your position when you reviewed this at the outset, originally? 'Cause this -- this agreement is in effect right now. Not -- not the model agreement, but there is an interlocal agreement. MR. MOTLEY: I hear you. MR. MOS'PY: Do y'all have the red-lined version in front of you? COMMTSSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. MR. MUSTY: That's -- the scratch-outs are the current agreement. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My point is that there is an interlocal existing, signed by Kerr County, in place, and I'm pretty sure you reviewed it before the Court approved it and it was signed. So, is your position on it 1 1.- 122 1 3 9 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 different? That's my question. MR. MOTLEY: I don't know. I don't know if I reviewed the previous agreement. I don't recall having seen it, but I'd be happy to take a look at that, along with that -- that O.R.C.A. predecessor contract. That's -- that was the message that I had left. I thought I needed to take a look at the contract before I could really make some, you know, final calls on a couple of issues. One of the things -- and I have spoken to Richard about this, and he may have an answer for it, so I don't want to address it heavily, but there was a -- an item in number -- it's on the first page -- let's see. No, second page. Just a moment here. It says that the -- after the bids -- after the bids are awarded, it says Tetra Tech shall review the bid package as prepared by Grantworks, shall make such design and consulting recommendations as it deems necessary. Kerr County shall solicit and receive all bids. All accepted bids shall be referred by Kerr County to Tetra Tech and O.G.R.A., who shall jointly evaluate the bids and make recommendations to Kerr County. It says Kerr County shall award bids pursuant to Texas Local Government Code. And then -- Lhat's Number 4 on Page 23, I believe. And then, dropping down to Number E, it talks about if there's a disagreement between U.G.R.A., Tetra Tech, and Kerr County 1 13 ll3 123 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 as to who is supposed to receive the bid or who's the best bidder, then a majority recommendation would control who receives the bid. And I don't think Kerr County can delegate that authority under -- I don't believe you can do that or go by a majority rule. I think Kerr County would have to make that bid decision. That was one of the examples. MR. MOSTY: Let me just address that one right now. I think that thing needs to be reworded, because that's the County's consultant, and the County -- if the County's consultant, U.G.R.A., and the County can't agree. By definition, the County has the majority under there, so it's sort of redundant. I presume you're going to agree with your consultant. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, not necessarily. MR. MOSTY: I guess, theoretically, under that, your consultant and U.G.R.A, could have one idea, and the County could have another. That -- that language was melded out of the old one, and needs to be cleaned up. And if there's an issue about that, we can work that out. Because I -- I agree that there's probably an issue of whether or not you can delegate out your bid-awarding responsibilities. MR. MOTLEY: There was a -- again, I -- you 124 1 .-. 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 1'd 19 20 21 22 23 „_ 2 4 L S know, I'm -- I'm not exactly sure, but when I looked at this Contracts for Water Supply, Wastewater Treatment Facilities. "A municipality, district, or river authority of the state may contract with another municipality, district, or river authority of this state to obtain and provide part or all of: Water supply or wastewater treatment facilities," or go on down the line, "A lease or operation of water supply facilities or wastewater treatment facilities." So, I -- I don't say that the authority is -- is not there under some other provision, but when I was looking through this, I saw the authority to -- for the cities to do this, realizing that cities can do anything, basically, that the -- unless the law prohibits them from doing it, whereas counties can't do anything unless the law allows them to do it. Looks to me as it counties might have less authority than the cities under that specific enumeration of powers. So, I -- I thought that bore some more looking into it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I don't mind looY.ing into it, but, I mean, I'm -- I mean, my memory's kind of like Bill's on this. I think you've been involved on this somewhere along the line for the last two or three 1 1 ~ - I lz5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 ~5 years, and it seems odd that -- I mean, we're way down the road on this, and the state agency granted the money, you know, to the County to do the deal. And it seems odd now to say that the County doesn't have authority to do the deal. MR. MOTLEY: Again, I would -- I'd like to review the previous contract or the previous interlocal agreement. I don't specifically remember doing it, but I -- you know, a few agreements have passed across the desk, so I don't know. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's been three documents, counselor. There was this interlocal agreement to begin with, there was the easement for the access for the Riverhill Bypass, and there was the contract between Kerr County and the contractor. Those are the only three documents, but they're the three pertinent documents. All were reviewed by you. MR. M(JTLEY: Wasn't there a mobile home agreement about easements? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There was a corollary issue, because that had to do with a quid pro quo on the part oL a mobile home operator to put in the sewer line when it got there, but at this rate, it's not going to get there. But that's a corollary issue. JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Motley, is there a requiremeul. under interlocal agreements generally that -- 1 13 03 126 1 .-. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 it's my understanding that this particular document is not going to identify any particular specific project, but provisions that the specific project or -- or -- or subject of the interlocal agreement be identified? MR. MOTLEY: Yes, there is an issue on that, and I have spoken to Richard about that, and he said that -- and I'll let him speak for himself, but he said he didn't see that as a problem here, because it wasn't really under the -- the action being sought today is not seeking to approve any particular contract, but merely to approve sort of a template and put some sort of a structure in place that might facilitate the awarding of future grants and such. The statute in particular is 791.014 of the Government Code. And it does say, "Before beginning a project to construct, improve, or repair a building, road, or other facility under an interlocal contract, the commissioners court of a county must give specific written approval for the project." Approval must be given in a document other than the interlocal contract. So, that would be like the minutes, I would assume, of the court. It must describe the type of project to be undertaken and identify the project's location. Then it talks a little bit about payments, and if payment is made under sur_h an agreement where it's not done i-i_~- s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~5 127 this way, then the payments can be reversed and such. But that seems to require -- and I saw that as a potential roadblock, but I think Richard might want to speak to that now. He talked to me about how he thought that this was -- this document that he's seeking is not trying to approve any particular job, but mainly to set something up in the way of a format that might ease things through in the future. Each do~~ument -- each contract will come before the Court. MR. MOSTY: Each of the four projects, being the two that are in place and the two that are pending, have been individually approved by resolution of the Commissioners Court, and -- and the document doesn't commit the Court to anything new. If there is a new project, and there's an idea of what those might be, they would have to come betore the Court for individual resolution and designation for each particular project and whatever the parameters of it are. JUDGE TINLEY: And the Court approving this template would not commit the Court to any future projects that have not been approved by this Court to engineering services with the one named here, or with the governmental entity named here, in connection with moneys coming from O.R.C.A.? COMMISSIONER wILLIAMS: That's the intent, Judge. _ -9-.J3 128 1 L 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. MOSTY: Yes, this interlocal agreement does not create any commitments that aren't already there, and it doesn't commit to future projects. I mean, it -- future projects would be on an individually decided basis, if and when they come up. COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is just a form contract, basically? MR. MOSTY: Yes, it is, and it's to clean up the fact that -- and if there's a -- if there is a question about authority, I think it needs to be resolved sooner rather than later, because we're in the midst of this, as Commissioner Letz says. We're in it. And if -- if the County doesn't have authority to do so, then I think that's something we ought to find out pretty quirk. JUDGE TINLEY: But you're indicating that these projects are in existence, but nobody's able to find contractual agreements to cover those projects? Is that what I'm hearing? MR. MOSTY: There are four projects. The 2001 Community -- 2001 Colonia, and that is the -- that is the interlined copy that you have in front of you. There is the 2002 Community Development, and that has been funded and is in the engineering phase now. There is no interlocal agreement that has been executed for the 2002 Community Development Program. -_3 ~~_~ 129 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: It's been approved, but there's no agreement to cover it? MR. MOSTY: That's right. It has been approved by resolution. It's in the process; it's been granted, and is in -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're trying to get a contract? MR. MOSTY: It's in progress MR. MOTLEY: grant, is that also lacking MR.. MOSTY: MR. MOTLEY: MR. MOSTY: 2002 Community Development; agreement. The 2001 Community Development an agreement? Did you tell me? No, 2001 Colonia -- No, the -- -- is the agreement. There's a there is no interlocal MR. MOTLEY: Was there a 2001 develop -- Community Development grant? MR. MOSTY: No. The document you have in front oT you -- MR. MOTLEY: That's 2001. MR. MOSTY: -- ~s the 2001 Colonia. That's the only document. MR. MOTLEY: Okay. MR.. MOSTY: And there is a 2003 Community Development and a 2UU3 Colonia, which are in the grant 1- 1 ~- 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ~3 24 25 130 pipeline, and I understand indications are they will likely be funded. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. DODGE TINLEY: And those have been approved, at least by resolution of this Court? MR. MOSTY: Yes, they are approved and they are in the grant process, and I think the understanding is that those will, in all likelihood, be granted and funded. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct. So, what am I hearing? That we have a couple more things that need to be resolved between counsels, County Attorney and counsel for the River Authority? Is that what I'm hearing? MR. MOTLEY: I would -- I don't know if Mr. Mosty has the two particular documents that I was referring to earlier that I would like to review. It's a little bit hard to review these documents just on their own without having some background documents, but I don't know where I would get those. COMMISSIONER LETZ: What documents are there is the documents we have. MR. MOTLEY: I understand. I'm talking about the one that -- the copy of the final version of this document. The final version of this. COMMISSIONER LETZ: There it is. Am I -- unless I'm missing something. _-1~-03 131 1 1 3 9 5 6 i 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 MR. MOSTY: That's it, except it's -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Red-lined. MR. MOSTY: It's got the red lines. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You want red lines? MR. MOTLEY: No, I want an executed copy of the thing. I think we would have one in the Clerk's office or somewhere. I'd like that, and I'd also like to have the T.C.D. P. -- let me get my junk out of here -- T.D.C.P. -- or, excuse me, T.D.H.C.A. contract that's in existence, because there's some reference made back to that, and it's hard to say -- it's hard to evaluate this in total when reference is made back to another agreement that I don't have. MR. MOSTY: I'll give Mr. Motley now the document that has -- that shows at least the U.G.R.A. signature, and it does show the County's signature as well. That's the -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that a copy? MR. MUSTY: -- the copy of the red-lined document you have. That is not the -- if you're talking about grant guidelines, I'm not sure -- MR. MOTLEY: I didn't mean grant guidelines. I mean the agreement, itself. Last year, the Colonia agreement for construction funds from the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. I'd just like to have i-13-~~3 I 1 1 1 3 4 5 H 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 L2 L3 2q 25 132 that. Can I make copies and give this back to you? MR. MOSTY: You can have that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we have an idea when we can get this revolved? MR. MOTLEY: I don't think it will take long. COMMISSIONER LETZ: A date. Next meeting? MR. MOTLEY: Sounds good to me. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll have it back on the next agenda. MR. MS. MR. CON M R. . MOSTY: SOVIL: MOTLEY: MISSIONE MOTLEY: Which is when? 27th. Maybe at that time -- R WILLIAMS: The 23rd. Is it going to be at Onion Church? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We don't know, but we'll let you know where to be. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's up to you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Fourteen days hence, the 27th. MR. MOSTY: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Before we -- is that all we have on this particular item, 2.13? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I guess so, Judge. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got a couple 1-19 ~, s 133 1 .- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,~ 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 2~ 23 ~„ 2 A ~5 observations and a question on it. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSSONER NICHOLSON: I first thought I understood that what we were trying to do here is simply update the contract to -- to take into account the two additional projects -- two or three projects. But, reading the contract, it appears to me that we're looking at an open-ended contract that will cover future projects that may or may not have been identified yet, specifically for projects involving, quote, "treated water, wastewater, or other infrastructure improvements." Updating the current contract's one thing. Entering into an open-ended contract for other projects is quite another one. I've got the same concerns that the County Attorney expressed about Section 6, where U.G.R.A. and Tetra Tech would make a decision about awarding bids. And, then, this is more of a question than anything else. it appears that Groves Engineering, now Tetra Tech, has some duties and responsibilities under the contract, but they're not a party to the contract, so my question is, does the County have another contract with Groves Engineering, now Tetra Tech? And if not, why isn't that entity a part of the contract? JUDGE TINLEY: I think that's an excellent question, and I suspect Mr. Motley may want to address those in his analysis if he can't find such a document. He may r- ~s ~~_ 134 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 y 10 11 12 lj 14 15 15 17 18 15 20 21 22 23 24 2~ recommend that they become a part of the contract, possibly; I don't know. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe there is a contract for engineering services; it needs to be researched. And, just a quick response to your question; this doesn't contemplate -- it contemplates maybe other projects, but only if approved by this Court. And if a matching fund is required, it would have to be approved by the other body as well. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, following up on that -- and this is something I didn't mention earlier. Really, my preference on that, to me -- I mean, I like the fact that we do a formal contract that we r_an just kind of -- as things come up, we can just be done with it, but I don't know whether or not each project needs to have its own contract. I mean, I think so. I think we're doing a form and trying to get a form worked out, but each contract should have a separate -- otherwise, I see great confusion. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, each project. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Down the road. MR. MOSTY: I'm not an authority on that, but I think that as you go through the grant process, you identify what the grant's for, what the funds are, who the contractors are, and what the construction services are, and it is detailed as to, you know, who are the parties and what 1-14-;3 135 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 are the projects, what's going to happen to that project, and all that stuff is a separate body of documents that, really, Grantworks, as I understand, sort of takes the lead on. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct. MR. MOTLEY: Just sort of to anticipate or clear up one other thing, Mr. Nicholson asked if there was some sort_ of agreement between Kerr County and Tetra Tech. I assume that we probably ought to be looking for some sort of agreement between Grantworks and Kerr County, as well. is there something like that? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Court order. MR. MOTLEY: Pardon? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Court order. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Court orders, resolutions, one pla,.e. MR. MOTLEY: That's fine. That's fine. I just want to -- I'm -- I don't have any doubt that that exists. I'm not -- I just wanted to see all the -- and i don't know -- I'm going to have to go back and check memos. The copy of the contract that Richard provided for me does not have any signatures un it, but I can not say that without looking and checking -- I don't recall having advised Judge Henneke on this contract, but I may have, but i-i~-u'. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 136 I don't recall it at all. But I will go back and look and see what I can -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ms. Sovil, could you please go back three years now and pull all our court orders related to Grantworks, U.G.R.A., all this topic? And -- and I guess excerpts from the Commissioners Court minutes related to those as well, so we can see -- evidently, it sounds like Mr. Motley wants all the backup to support what's been done, and that would be the quickest way to get it. MR. MOTLEY: I'm mostly interested in that -- in the contract between Kerr County and the predecessor agency to O.R.C.A., is the main thing I'm interested in. That's something I want to double-check and see. COMMISSIONER LETZ: All the grant workup, all that, it's all through court orders, everything we did. So -- MR. MOTLEY: I'll look at everything that I can find on it, but the main thing I'm interested in, I want to be certain that the contract that we entered into allows certain delegation of certain duties and functions of things. If it does, fine. If it doesn't, fine. I'll let you know. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: You're talking about all the 1-1i-91 137 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2~ 23 24 25 court orders relative to the engagement of Grantworks and -- and Groves Engineering and the supporting documentation? That's contracts -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess. That's what it sounds like he wants. And then, you know, as regarding, you know, approvals, minutes, I guess if it's been referred to the County Attorney or not, you know. So, I know it's a lot of work, but that's what it seems I'm hearing. DODGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. MOTLEY: Somebody give me a time frame. I have a lot of minutes on my computer; I might be able to find them as well, so if you give me a time frame, I might be able to -- I'll help. MR. MOSTY: I think I'll wait to hear from Mr. Motley, and then we'll work on the language. JUDGE TINLEY: If I might, I believe that's all we have on 2.13. 2.12, it's my understanding we were merely waiting for the County Attorney's approval on that Mutual Aid Agreement; is that not correct? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct. JUDGE TINLEY: Maybe we could simplify that. Do you or do you not approve? MR. MOTLEY: I'm all for it. I just want to make sure that there's no local COG that's powering -- I want to make sure we're not cutting off state aid or i-is-~~3 138 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 ~1 22 23 24 25 anything. Other than that, I'm all fcr it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that yes? MR. MOTLEY: Well, that's a yes, but I don't know about some of those others. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, it's, "Yes, but..." I mean, it's yes or -- is it yes or no? MR. MOTLEY: This is a new concept to me, this sharing of County duties at time of crisis under the authority of the 1or_al COG, so I just want to make sure, just in general, that there was nothing to cut us out of state funds, but I think there is not, so -- and so I really -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actually, David, I think what this is, is state and national funds. That -- I mean, that's what we're talking about doing, is sharing -- sharing in that. MR. MOTLEY: Pass through the -- okay. JODGE TINLEY: Do I have a motion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move -- well, let's see what it is here Tirst. I move that we approve the Mutual Aid Agreement for Regional Council of Governments and authorize County Judge to sign that same document. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion by Commissioner -~~_a~, 1 2 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 139 Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court approve the Mutual Aid Agreement for Regional Councils of Government and authorize County Judge to sign that document. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Gentlemen, what time should we recess until? COMMISSIONER LETZ: 1:30. JUDGE TINLEY: Sounds good to me. MS. SOVIL: You have probate at 1:00, 2:00, and juvies at 3:00. JUDGE TINLEY: Bet you I can get the probate at 1:00 taken care of by 1:30. MS. SOVIL: But you also have another probate hearing at 2:00. JUDGE TINLEY: I understand we may -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In this room, Judge? We can -- we can put an end to it pretty easy. JUDGE '1'1NLEY: We'll stand in recess till 1:30. Recess taken from 12:24 p.m, to 1:30 p.m.) DODGE TINLEY: Okay. Let the record reflect 1-13-9 140 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S that we're going to reconvene this regular session for the Monday, January 13th meeting, having adjourned shortly after 12:00, and it is now 1:30. And it looks like the next item of business is Item 2.14, consider and discuss authorizing Road and Bridge to haul donated fill materials to the 9-H facility at Red Rose Ranch. Commissioner Letz. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think this is a very noncontroversial one. We should be able to get through it very quickly. Drymala Construction, the contractor at the new Kerrville high school, has a bunch of excess material they need to get rid of. The Kerr County 4-H facility needs fill material in there construction, and if we can get -- I've talked to Len Odom. He has agreed to make his trucks available if we had -- if he has a court order so he doesn't go to jail. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: It's been moved and seconded by Commissioners Williams and Letz, respectively, that the Court authorize Road and Bridge to haul donated fill material from the new K.I.S.D. high school facility to the Kerr County 9-H facility at the Red Rose Ranch. Any further discussion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: One question. The only material's from Drymala Construction. I don't want to make 1-1±-';5 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 141 it -- it's just from Drymala at the facility. It's not from K.I.S.D. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. With that correction, any further discussion? MR. JOHNSTON: Is there a problem with the County using our vehicles to pick up on private property and hauling to other private property? JUDGE TINLEY: That's a matter, I think, maybe -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: You do it all the time. You pick up at -- at the pit right next to Red Rose Ranch, which is private property, and haul it to another spot. I mean -- MR. JOHNSTON: It's usually for, you know, road use. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The issue is whether we can use it for this purpose. MR. JOHNSTON: Yes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's not the fact that it's private property, you know. It's a -- it's the same issue as to whether you can -- or a county tractor can be used to mow grass, you know, at Flat Rock Park. That's the same logic on that. And I -- I think the Court has granted that authority in the past. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or 1-13-';.3 192 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 discussions? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we ought to turn it over to the County Attorney -- just a joke. Just a joke. I'm joking. JUDGE TINLEY: If there's no further discussion or questions, all in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Let's note for the record that this is to be done if they have time. There's no rush on it. MR. JOHNSTON: Do we know how many yards that is? COMMISSIONER LETZ: 300 yards. MR. JOHNSTON: 300? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Up to 300 yards. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. The next item of business, 2.15, consider and discuss and take appropriate action to amend the On-Site Septic Facility rules to abolish Section 10, Real Estate Transfer Inspection, and set a date for public hearing. Commissioner Nicholson. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm having a little trouble with my voice today, so I'll try to speak up. The -.3-us 143 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 real estate transfer rule, Section 10, was established to provide a mechanism for a spec sample of the septic systems in the county, and require the repair of those not meeting standards. The concept that significant numbers of failing systems can be discovered by employing the real estate transfer rule is flawed. A reasonable guess is that, over 20 years, the rule might result in fewer than 10 percent of Kerr County septics being inspected. The rule's an unnecessary intrusion on property rights, it hinders real estate transactions, it drives up transfer costs, and damages the properties under contract. We need to abolish this ineffective rule, and then be serious about finding effective methods to identify and correct inadequate septic systems. JUDGE '1INLEY: All right. And you are asking that this matter be placed for -- set for public hearing? COMMISSIONER NICHGLSON: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: Is that the extent of what you're requesting at this point? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. JUDGE 'PINLEY: A11 right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I mean, is that a motion, or do you need -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. I move that we set a public bearing on the issue of abolishing Section 10, 1-i~-ni 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 144 the real estate transfer rule, of the O.S.S.F. regulations. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What date? Where? We can't meet outside this room, my god. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What -- second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded, that -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to have a public debate. JUDGE TINLEY: -- a public hearing be set at -- let's get the time and date figured out. I presume -- I don't know what we need in the way of notice, whether it's IS or 3U days notice. We're probably looking at -- what was that last meeting in February, the 24th? MS. SOVIL: 29th. JUDGE TINLEY: If it takes 30 days, that's where we're going to be safe. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let's do it the safe way, be on the sate side and say February 24th. JUDGE TINLEY: At what time? 10:30? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 10:30 would be good. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Public hearing relative to the abolishment of Section lU oT the Kerr County O.S.S.F. Rules, February 24th at -- at 10:30 a.m. That's your motion? 1 - 1 3 145 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~J COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's my second. I've got a question before we get on it. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Is there any discussion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Were you fixing to say something? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thanks. At the risk of taxing your voice, I have to know, do you have any thoughts as to a replacement for, and a way to cause inspections? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I do not, Commissioner. It would take -- it's an issue that would take some study. You know, there are a myriad of different ways that you could -- could do inspections, some of which would probably not be constitutionally correct, and others might, so I don't have the answer to that. I just know that this is -- this is not a good way to go about it. COMMISSIONER BALDWItd: Mm-hmm. Well, I -- I was on the Court when -- when this all began, and we kicked it around, and I remember -- I remember at that time, our -- our O.S.S.F. representative that represented the Commissioners Court and the County, his idea of inspecting 1-1s-u3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1` 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 J 196 septic tanks in the county was to start at Greenwood Forest and go door-to-door and dig their yard up. And that conversation lasted maybe a minute and a half or two minutes, maximum. Sut that's kind of where that started. And we -- we've kicked this thing around, I'm telling you, for weeks and months and months and months, and this real estate thing is the only thing that we have ever found to hang our hat on. And I know that that -- you know, that's the government causing someone to get an inspection. I guess, in my mind, the other side of it is -- is to rely on tk~e property owner to do what's best for themselves. And, I mean, I -- I would, and I know you would do that, but I just don't know, you know, about the general public out there. I mean, my neighbor. COMMLS'SIONER NICHOLSON: Couple comments, Commissioner. There's two aspects of this that are objectionable, One is the rule itself and the way it's administered, but the more critical thing, in my mind, is that it's ineffective. If, indeed, there are a lot of failing septic systems out there, this is not a very good way, a very effective way of finding them. I -- and the second aspect of that is I keep hearing that there are a lot of failing systems, and we keep hearing it's Kerrville South, it's Greenwood, it's other places. I'm not sure what keeps us from putting our energy and our resources, our i is n3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 15 20 21 22 23 24 25 147 money into going after those failing systems instead of this -- this lottery effect. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that's exactly the reason I seconded your motion, 'cause I want to have that discussion. I think it's time to have that discussion. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We11, I don't disagree -- are you finished? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I am, I'm through. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I've wrestled with myself for about several days now, how as to address this particular agenda item, and I don't have a particular problem with a public hearing, but I do have some questions -- because public input is valuable. I do have some comments and some questions, which I don't suspect are going to be answered today, but I want them in the record, because they need to be answered, and I'm going to go through it. If, as you contend, the concept of inspecting septic systems at the time of real estate transfer is flawed, when would you propose to identify failed septic systems, or systems that, while functioning, are not in compliance with state regulations? If the current real estate transfer regulations are, again, using your words, "grossly ineffective," how is it that the statistics that we have been given to believe are accurate by the Designated Representative show that 40 percent of those inspected at _-~3 u~ 1 ,~-- 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 148 the time of real estate transfer have been identified as Would your position be that, unless all failing systems or out-of-compliance systems are identified, should we not try to identify any of them? Further, if, as you state in your agenda memorandum, the current real estate transfer requirement is, quote -- your quote, a very ineffective way to accomplish the goal, unquote, of identifying failing or out-of-compliance O.S.S.F.'s, then, following up on the question that Commissioner Baldwin just asked, do you have a better system? Have you constructed a better mousetrap, if you will, to do this? I think that's very important. I think that to do otherwise -- if we have a better system to put in place, then we should put it in place forthwith. If we don't have a better system to put in place, then we should leave it alone until a better system comes about. I'm also -- I'm also very concerned about one you and I had, but I'm pretty sure that I represented my thoughts to Judge Tinley on one occasion, and that I think the elimination of Section 10, or something equal to or better than, if we can find what that is -- if we don't have 1 .-. 2 3 9 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1S 16 17 18 ly ~0 21 22 23 24 ,--, 25 149 that, we are -- we are encouraging deception, dishonesty, and cheating in property sales, and that troubles me. In effect, what we do, then, we have created a situation where Kerr County gets labeled as a "buyer beware" county. That troubles me greatly. And I would think that all the real estate agents in this county should support that notion, that they don't want Kerr County to become a "buyer beware" county. So, if it takes a county hearing to get these issues on the -- I mean a public hearing to get these issues on the table, then I guess so, but these are my concerns, and I think they have to be addressed. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Those are good concerns, Commissioner. Just -- I'll address a couple -- just two of them very briefly. One, on the statistic that's been floating around that 40 percent of those systems inspected under the real estate rule were found to be failing, I have spoken with the president of the board of the Upper Guadalupe River Authority, and was informed that that's not a good number; that's an exaggerated number, that 40 percent of the inspections did not result in findings of failing systems. I'm hoping in the public hearing, we'll get -- we'll -- by that time, or during that hearing, we'll have better data from the U.G.R.A. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would hope so, too. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think that's the 1-13-^3 150 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2 1 22 23 24 2J only thing I have. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have -- I'm not sure it will advise the Court, but a few ~~omments. And I'm -- let me start out by saying I've never been a fan of Section 10 or of the real estate transfer provision of Section 10. I'm coming from a property rights standpoint; it's a bit of an intrusion. And the fact that Commissioner Williams has said "buyer beware," well, I think we are a buyer -- I'm a buyer beware person, and I think we should be a buyer beware county. I think that for us just to single out septic on that doesn't make a lot of sense, to me. I mean, what about the foundation? What about, you know, the paint? What about everything else? And I think if you started going down that road, all of a sudden we're becoming so intrusive. Triat's a road that I don't want to go down. So, I'm really -- I mean, I don't have a problem at all with eliminating Section 10. I didn't like it when we put it in there. It was kind of a -- how we got to the current verbiage was a -- kind of a negotiation and kind of an agreement amongst the Court to see how it worked. I don't think it's worked real well. I think that, from my conversations with Stuart Barron, I don't -- you know, I don't mean to speak for Stuart, but there -- it's hard to enforce what we've written. It's hard to know really what Lo do. So I think we have problems with Section 10, and not 1-1~-~.~ 151 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ...- 14 15 16 17 18 lg 20 21 22 23 24 •-- 25 necessarily with the concept of figuring out how to find septics that are bad. I think we do need to do that. But, that being said, I have a problem with the public hearing right now. And I take -- in the light of the next agenda item we're getting ready to get to do. And I don't want to get into the situation that we got into last time we looked at the septic, where we had three or four public hearings on septic, and by the time we were done, the public was so exasperated and so fed up, no one came to the hearings any more. And if we go and do anything -- any kind of a change under anywhere else in our septic rules, I'd rather do it at one time. I'd rather let us get our act togeCher, get -- come up -- you know, figure out who's going to administer the program, how we're going to do it, where it's going to be done, and what exactly it's going to say, spend a lot of time on that, and then do one public hearing and get public input, rather than this piecemeal approach. And, for that reason, I'm not going to vote for the public hearing. What I would much rather be in favor of doing is get -- get iL on the agenda for our next meeting, 'cause I don't think we can do it this meeting. Suspend enforcement of Section 10 for six months, in which case we can then take that time -- 'cause I don't think it's working right now. Take that time to come up with a -- and figure 1 -13 -(73 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 10 20 21 22 23 24 25 152 out where we're going on the whole septic issue for this county. I think it's a better approach than to do a piecemeal public hearing here and public hearing there. Just my opinion. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's a good point to consider. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've heard more wisdom at this table in the last 15 minutes than I had in years. Good stuff. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Point of order. would it be permissible for me to amend the motion to -- from what I said earlier to suspend the enforcement of Section 10 for six months? JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think we can do it at this meeting; it's not on the agenda as such. It would have to be a posted item. I don't think a suspension of enforcement would require public hearing, however. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. JUDGE 'TINLEY: I think this issue and the motion before the Court right now is whether or not to hold a public hearing on -- on the elimination of Section 10 on the 9th of February at 10:30 a.m. And that, of course, is in conformance with the agenda item. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I would be willing to -- 1 13 n; 153 I 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll withdraw my second. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- to defer this to the next meeting and consider a proposal such as Commissioner Lett proposed. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. You're withdrawing your motion, then? COMMISSIONER NSCHOLSON: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: And you're withdrawing your second? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody want to take any further action in connection with this particular item at this time? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought I withdrew my second before he gets to withdraw his motion. No, sir. Thank you very much Tor your courtesy. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And Commissioner Nicholson and I will qet together, make sure we're in agLeement with -- with what I was thinking about doing. JODGE TINLEY: Court will next move on to Item 2.16, consider and discuss and take appropriate action to inform the U.G.R.A. of the County's intention to not extend the current contract for administration of On-Site i is-~~~ 154 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 L ~ 23 29 25 Septic Facility program, to establish a transition team to create a plan for administration of the O.S.S. F. program by the County or another entity. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: My thinking here is that it's very likely that we're going to see changes in water government in Kerr County in 2003. I think that for at least three reasons. One, a significant number of Kerr County citizens have petitioned the -- our State Senator and State Representative to abolish the O.G.R.A. Two, the U.G.R.A. has not budgeted funds to administer the O.S.S.F. program beyond this year. And, three, our State Representative has indicated that he will introduce legislation Lo permit the combining of U.G.R.A. and the Headwaters Groundwater Conservation District into a single agency. Fox these reasons and more reasons, T think we need to -- to make a decision that we're going to take back the responsibility for O.S.S.F., and the right way to do this is to appoint a -- a transition team of knowledgeable people to create a plan foc the orderly transition and then the administration. And that that -- appointing that team would be appropriate, whe[.her or not ultimately Kerr County winds up managing it itself or we assign that responsibility to another government entity. Again, I apologize for my voice; I'm having a little trouble. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I got the thumb, so -- on . _~-u3 155 1 2 3 4 J 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 this one, I agree partially with what Commissioner Nicholson said, and primarily with the latter part of his comments. I think that it is appropriate right now for us to take another real hard look at the septic situation, and I -- I would propose the first step be that we invite T.N.R.C.C., or T.Q.E.C. -- T.C.E.Q., whatever they are -- T.C.E.Q., whatever their -- T.C.E.Q. to come down to Kerr County and give the Court and anyone else that wants to sit in -- you know, go over the septic rules and responsibilities. And now I know how this is done; I've heard of this before. I have new questions now. I think I'm a little bit more educated on really what to ask. But there's some questions that I really need to know, and it really goes back to the -- what I hear frequently, the 1,500-foot rule that U.G.R.A. has. I really think that it's critical that I understand exactly how that authority interacts with the County's authority and how T. -- whatever they're called -- T.C.E.Q., you know, how they're going to work with that. I mean, because I see -- i don't want to get into a situation where there's two sets of septic rules in Kerr County, and I could see us going down that road. Commissioner Baldwin is holding up fingers. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Possibly City of Ingram. COMMISSIONER LETZ: City of Ingram, City of 1-13-q3 156 1 .-. 2 3 4 5 6 7 A 9 10 11 12 13 ,r 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~5 Kerrville; they do have some septic left. But I just think that, to me, the first step is to get T.E.C.Q. down here and go over the rules one more time, so I really have a clear team to come out and come up with a recommendation as to who should handle the septic; whether it would be best with a contracted agent such as U.G.R.A., or best for the County to come back, to really look at the cost involved. And then look -- at the same time as that's going on, look at the actual rules we have, and then, you know, try to, certainly before our budget, be able to come back with a recommendation so we can build it into next year's budget. And it's really not a far -- too far off from what Commissioner Nicholson is recommending here. I don't see the point right now in taking any action related to U.G.R.A., 'cause we don't -- I mean, I don't know what we're going to be doing. We don't have a plan yet. I think we need to have a full plan and then, you know, execute that plan. And, to me, what I just outlined gets us down -- we're goinq down that road. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The two -- that plan and the plan proposed here might be compatible and might be able to run parallel. Should we do something different than have U.G.R.A. administer the -- the O.S.S.F. program, the 1-1'-b3 157 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 contract requires that we give the U.G.R.A. notice not less than 90 days before the expiration. I think that's July lst, would be the last day, and that's just around the corner. Perhaps we should have a transition team working on it. And i2 we have one named and operative, they would be also listed in the T.C.E.Q. and doing the same sort of -- of research that we're doing. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess my thinking -- I can't vote to cancel a contract with U.G.R.A. until I know what we're going to do. I mean, I just -- you know, it doesn't -- and I think -- I mean, I'm not -- I have -- honestly have not made up my mind yet whether it's best to leave it at U.G.R.A., try to find another third-party, or for the County to take it back. I'm just undecided. It doesn't make sense to me to, you know, vote to cancel something when I may not want to cancel it. I just don't know yet. JUDGE TINLE'1: If I'm hearing you correctly, Commissioner, you've got no objection to appointing some sort of a committee to study the various ramifications upon cancellation and -- and reallocation of that particular responsibility, but you don't want to take any formal steps to cancel the agreement in place. You just want to see what your other options are and elect some sort of committee or whatevex you want to call it to be put together to look at 1-15-"; 1 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 158 all the ramifications. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Because I don't think -- I mean, if I come down on the side of the fence that I want to continue to contract with U.G.R.A., I think it does a lot of damage to vote to cancel it now. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Your point's well-taken. I think it would be premature -- although we don't have much time, it would be premature now to serve that cancellation, and it would be better to get all the advice and input we can get before -- before we make a decision. 50, I would modify that and make a motion that we appoint a team to study the issues -- the O.S.S. F. issues and make recommendations and proposals about how the County can best handle that in the future. JODGE TINLEY: Do you have any -- any specifics on how you want that committee composed or who appoints it? Or -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I would be satisfied if the Judge would appoint a committee, or some sort of a scheme where each Commissioner appoints a person or two people Lo it. Whatever -- whatever the majority would like. JUDGE TINLEY: Any particular thoughts about that? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We11, if we -- yeah, I have a particular thought about that. If we -- if we do the 1- 1 3 il3 159 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2 L 23 24 25 committee, I would want us -- each cne of us to appoint one. I wouldn't want to put the burden on you to appoint the committee, and then the thing bomb out and just -- we have fair representation across-the-board. JUDGE TINLEY: Your suggestion, then, would be that -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not suggesting anything. JUDGE TINLEY: -- each member of the Court appoint one member of the committee? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One's plenty. JUDGE TINLEY: Is that acceptable to you? Do you include that in your motion? COMMISSIONER. NICHOLSON: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, come back next meeting with a person in mind to -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: What -- well, I mean, looks like we're going -- you've got us going down this path now. I've got a question. What's this committee going to do? what's their charge going to be? Are they going to have staff? You know, we've appointed a lot of committees since I've been on the Court, and if you're going to appoint a committee and you don't give them any staff or funding, they're not going to get much done, because it's going to i-is-~,= 160 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 take a lot of research and time. And, I mean, I would -- rather than appointing a committee, I would really rather two of the Commissioners get together, or if we can find two that want to tackle this, I'm not one of them. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I want to jump in and tell you I'm not the other one, either. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know, it's -- JUDGE TINLEY: If you give me the authority to appoint, I think I figured out who the other two are. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just -- I really think that we're asking the community, you know, representatives an awful -- to do an awful lot to -- you know, to evaluate the whole county's septic program and come back with a recommendation. I really think that's something that we probably ought to tackle ourselves, either through a series of workshops or, you know, appointinq a lead Commissioner, like we've done on other issues. Or something like, you know -- COMMISSIONER TYiis has been done before. exactly when, but an ad hoc studied this thing from top possibility we can maybe ge a look at it to see what -- BALDWIN: Let me suggest this. There's a -- I don't remember committee was put together and to bottom, and there's a t our -- qet that report and take do you have that, Mrs. Sovil? 1 _, ?_ _, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 161 To take a look at that and see what their findings were. And I remember some of it. It was in great depth. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, just a word or two here. I don't know if they're going to be wise like they were last time. I don't even know if mine were included in your compliment. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, they were. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But I'm not the one to be on that committee for a couple reasons right at the outset. First of all, I don't believe that U.G.R.A. has demonstrated it's incapable of administering O.S.S.F. I don't think there's been any presentation of evidence anywhere in the last 12 months to support the allegation. And, secondly, Commissioners Court has, I think, at least twice -- am I correct, Commissioner? -- tried to administer the rules itself, and two times it has said, "Enough of this sticky tar-baby," and they got rid of it. And that's exactly what it is; it's just like a tar-baby. And so I don't want to be on that committee, Judge, if that's what you have in mind, because I have two good reasons in my head why that's not a good way to go. But I think, also, I -- I agree with Commissioner Letz. I think there's too much uncertainty right now in our world, our immediate world, to make any rush to judgment, if you will, and the liability of a water agency. I think it's too early to rush to judgment t-~3-u~ 162 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 about what the Texas Legislature may or may not do. I think it is impossible to rush to judgment about whether or not the governor will sign legislation, if, for some reason, it manages to get to his desk. And, for those reasons alone, I think the best thing to do is to keep in place the system we have. And if we need to examine the flaws in it, then examine the flaws. If we need to build a better mousetrap, then build it. If there's another agency out there that can do a job equal to or better than, fine. If Kerr County has that capability, it's going to be a demonstrated capability as never demonstrated before. But that's -- let's check it out. So, those are my thoughts. Do I still qualify? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's very wise. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very wise. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I don't hear a lot of really differing opinions from anybody. It's just a matter of how to tackle it. What I'm hearing is that, you know, the Court's willing to review the septic issue one more time, and -- but it's a matter of how we do that. I would really -- based on that, I'd propose -- why don't we just start out by setting a workshop with T.E.C.Q.? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good suggestion. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And go from there, and i-ts ~.3 163 ~` I 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 L2 23 24 ?~ just do it through a series of workshops. JUDGE TINLEY: Ukay. We have a motion on the table before us now that a committee be appointed, and with each member of the Court to appoint one person to that committee to look at the various alternatives on administration of the O.S.S.F. program. That's where we are at this point. We have a motion. Do we have a second? (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That motion, therefore, is going to die for lack of a second. Now, did we have any other issues that -- anything else we want to do in connection with this agenda item? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd make a motion that we set a workshop and schedule the T.E.C.Q. representative to come down and give a presentation to the Court on the -- you know, the current law and the status of the U.G.R.A.'s rules and our rules that are in -- I mean, not -- when I say U.G.R.A. rules, I'm talking about the 1,500-foot rule, which I think really needs to be understood by me before we can go a whole lot further, and then go from there. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Letz that we establish a workshop with T.C.E.Q. relative to the current U.S.S.F. status, rules, and -- and the authority of U.G.R.A. in connection with those rules in Kerr County. Is that what I heard you say'? 3 ~i 164 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 J COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Do I hear a second? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not yet. Commissioner, if you can amend that to not necessarily set a workshop, but ask one of us -- ask me to get in touch with the folks in Austin and to see when they can come down and start, the process of setting up a workshop. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I -- I amend my motion to appoint -- to ask Commissioner Baldwin to get a range of dates that we can then vote on at our next meeting. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just have a question. Have we -- for clarification purposes, have we established, ur Have we -- yeah, have we established exactly what we want them to come down and talk about? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: O.S.S. F. rules and regulations. MR. BAP.RON: If y'al1 have any immediate questions, I may be able to answer them. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Then we may be able tO -- in our thinking process, we might be able to come up with some other questions as we go along. From the good Commissioner from Precinct 4. COMMISSIONER LETZ: To me, I look at it as an 1 - 1 ~ ~ 3 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Z3 24 ~5 165 overview of state law and what the County's responsibilities, you know, are, and what the current authorities are in Kerr County. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He has the 1,500-foot rule and all that kind of thing. JUDGE TINLEY: Current status of authority in Kerr County. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm cool there. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, that -- that's good, and I think we'll probably learn something from it. And there are some questions, particularly about the 1,500-foot rule. With the degree of uncertainty that Commissioner Williams pointed to that's on the horizon, some of these things are going to be resolved one way or another this year, in the next few months. This is -- this workshop is not going to move us any further along toward dealing with the issues that we may have to deal with. Perhaps there will still be time after the workshop -- depends on when we have it, but I do worry that we might sit on our hands and not do the planning that's needed, and then again, to rush to do it without giving enough resources and thought. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further discussion? I have a motion and second that Commissioner Baldwin contact 1 1 3 - 3 166 1 2 3 4 5 h 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 l~ 20 21 22 23 24 2 J the 'P.C.E.Q. in order to obtain available dates for a workshop with regard to the current O.S.S.F. rules that are in place under the law and the legal authority concerning O.S.S.F. in kerr County. And I think, by implication, at the earliest possible time. Is that a fair statement? Any further discussion? All in favor of the motion, indicate by raising your right hand. {The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUUGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Next item of business, x.17, consider and discuss procedures for C~mmissi oners Court. Commissioner Letz. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda just, with the new Court in place, sort of procedural things that tend to be -- we need to iron out, in my opinion, before we yet too far into the year. And I think, in the backup, we can go over some of these items. The first one I had is t_Yie presiding member of the Court in the absence of the County Judge. Previously, it was set up where we just started with Precinct 1 and rotated around the table; then ~, 3, and 4, and then back to 1, in the event that the County Judge is not present to act at presiding officer. The opening prayer schedule, I asked Ms. Sovil to pick up basically where we left off, start with Precinct 1 and go on L __ U~ 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 15 20 21 22 23 24 25 167 down through the list until we had a schedule, so we're all, you know, aware of it and see who has what responsibilities on what date. I'm just going to go through and toss all these out; we can just deal with them as the members of the Court want to. The third item is the employee evaluation. 1 really put this one on here more -- not to try to resolve it today, but try to ask the two new members to think about it, because in the six years I've been on the Court, we -- I've never been really happy with the evaluation system that's been employed, and it's a difficult situation. The employees 7'm talking about are those members of the County staff that report straight to the Commissioners Court, such as the Maintenance Director, Ms. Sovil, Len Odom, and people of that nature. To me, they need to be evaluated. And what we've been doing, up to now, anyway, is that each Commissioner does an evaluation. I think I attached the most recent form we've used. And individual -- and those are provided to the employee. They're not, I guess, really mandatory. It's strongly suggested that Commissioners do it, but they don't have to. And that's where the breakdown -- after that point, the breakduwn has always kind of occurred, in my opinion, because none of us have authority individually. we can't really go tell these people what to do. And we've 1-13-~"~3 168 1 ~-. 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 never been able to come to a full consensus as to what the evaluations should be of any employee. And maybe it's not going to be possible, as part of the nature of governing by committee. But, anyway, I put on it here just to -- maybe the new members have some ideas as to how we can more a process, because it's not -- they -- I think they frequently get put in a position of being told one thing by one Commissioner and something else by another Commissioner, and that's not fair to the employee, when what they're being told differs. So, this is more kind of something to think r.. 13 I about . 14 15 16 17 18 l~ 20 21 22 23 24 ?~ Next item I put was the Agenda Request Rules, and that's really -- rule's probably a little bit strong, but it's -- the current process is any Commissioner can get anything on the agenda, and I hope we continue that. And the other part of that is that agenda requests are due to Ms. Suvil by the Tuesday preceding the meeting, for a Monday meeting. And I also recommend, really, that we continue to implement that. And it's strongly encouraged, if not required, that backup material be provided. You know, I think uur current rules say it has to be provided, but I know that I've -- myself and probably almost every other Commissioner teas been guilty of not always having backup, 1-13-~'~ 3 169 I ..,. 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 I7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 •-- 25 and some of the things dent really -- by the nature of them, I mean, backup's just a waste of a piece of paper. So I think, if at all possible, we always should remember to And the other item I added this morning is getting, I guess, counsel, is that each Commissioner sends a memo down there, as we choose. And -- you know, and I know that the three -- Commissioner Baldwin, Williams, and rnyself, all three, have memorandums pending down there right now. Never really had a system as to how to prioritize these; I really don't know how you could prioritize them if we want to. But, you know, Judge Tinley made the comment earlier that he'd like to get as much of this done before things come to the -- on the agenda, to get the legal form approval and such as that. But I'm just trying to -- wondering how -- if we want to, if we should discuss how we're going to handle this and how we're going to have priorities set and things of that nature, so that's the reason Lor the agenda item. JUDGE TINLEY: Your rules and procedures, are they part and parcel of your agenda request in the package also? I notice that they're right behind that. I assume that they're -- 1 1;-~;s 1 ~• 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1S 16 17 18 ly 20 21 22 23 24 25 170 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Really, what I did here, I asked Ms. Sovil to go -- you know, to pull up the things that we were currently using to update the prayer schedule, to pull one page of the evaluations -- or one evaluation, and then to pull the current procedures for agenda and just current procedures for the agenda are fine, and the prayer schedule format is fine, and the other items we talked about with the presiding member of the Court, and that's just kind of -- as long as we know how we're going to handle that, that's taken care of. And I don't know if, in the past, we did a court order on most of these or not. It's really -- Ms. Sovil is nodding that we did. And the easier items -- you know, one being the presiding member of the Court, two, opening prayer, and four, agenda request rules, those are -- you know, I'll make a motion that we adopt those rules as presented and discussed today. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second it. JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion by Commissioner Letz and second by Commissioner Williams that we adopt the presidinq officer schedule by rotation, 1, 2, 3, and 4, and then starting back over; and also that we adopt the opening prayer schedule, agenda request rules and rules of procedure, and I assume that the presiding officer i i „3 171 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 would become part of the rules of procedure at the appropriate space, which is probably going to be under section Roman numeral V. Should we insert that at that point? In the absence of the County Judge, who the presiding officer would be? (Commissioner Letz nodded.) JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, as presented. Is there any further discussion about that? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not by me. JUDGE TINLEY: All those in favor of the motion, signify by raisinq your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The other two items are really more -- the employee evaluation is something to, you know, just be thinking how we want to handle that, if at a11. I mean, we don't have to do anything on that. And then, really, related to the County Attorney, that was just some observations based on some comments that the Judge made at the beginning of the meeting. JUDGE TINLEY: Any formal action that you wish to take on either of those items? COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, sir. t-13-73 172 t 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 41 22 23 24 2° COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm not sure I understand where you're coming from on the County Attorney issue. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it's just the current procedure is that whenever you have a -- whenever any of us have a request, we forward it down there, or occasionally it comes out of an agenda item, and usually in that case, we direct -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Somebody is directed to send a memo. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The Judge or one of the Commissioners is directed to send a memo. And I just -- and, you know, we really -- priority is set in each memo by the person who writes it, and I just -- you know, kind o£ making it clear, that's the way we're operating, and I would recommend we don't operate that way. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know. JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think my suggestion was to necessarily put in place any established procedure, but rather, whichever Commissioner might have an interest in a particular agenda item that that Commissioner sees coming down the pike, try and identify the legal issues or matters that are -- that fall within that particular area, and -- and having done so, submit those items to the County i-i~ o; 173 1 .-. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 77 18 t9 20 Zl 22 23 24 25 attorney ahead of submitting the agenda request. That was what I was primarily referring to, to try and -- so that when we get into discussing the agenda item before the Court, we don't have something jump up and say, well, you know, what about this, that, or the other? Well, we'll hopefully have those questions addressed and know the answer to it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: But, insofar as changing the procedure of whoever has the primary interest in that agenda item, being the one that requested it, I assumed it would go -- go in the same way. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ms. Sovil handed me a note, and it relates to the night meetings. Are we going to continue to have those? 'Cause they're listed on the prior schedule, and I forgot to bring that up. Are we going to -- does the Court wish to continue to have night meetings, or are we going to not have night meetings? It's currently scheduled for once a quarter. Personally, I haven't seen any great turnout, greater at those meetings from the public than any other meeting, but it doesn't really make any difference to me one way or the other. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I - - you know, the -- the purpose of conducting night meetings was to make it such that members of the public -- it would be easier for them to 1-~3 i '. 174 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1 J 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 attend, those that work during the day, and therefore, they could attend. And, on the other side of the coin, you've got some requirements that are imposed upon the staff, maintenance, courthouse security, keeping people after hours from the Clerk's office, Ms. Sovil, and possibly other elected officials, and maybe members of their staff that have matters before the Court. If -- if we're getting the intended purpose accomplished by having additional members of the public present at the night meetings, that's great, but if we're not, as you say, I think we're wasting some resources by doing it. If we're not getting the participation, that's my thinking. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think it's been a noble experiment. I'm not so sure that it has totally fulfilled its intended purpose. And part of that is that, you know, the general public, until the last minute, doesn't know what the agenda's all about, and unless they have a specific thing that they're interested in, they're not likely to attend. So, like I say, I have mixed emotLons. There is value in it. I'm not sure that it's totally successful. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that falls under procedures. Do I hear a motion one way or the other? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner Baldwin, what's your recollection of the benefit or not? r- 1 s- ~ l~s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 I8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just remember we tried that about 185 years ago, and it was like a barn burning there for a while, and pretty soon it died out where just us and some staff people were staying here late at night. You know, absolutely didn't make any sense then. It's been a little bit better this time, though; we've had some pretty good participation. But, again, I -- I -- you know, I want to leave the doors open to serve the public and all that as much as we possibly can, but I really don't see the -- the major benefit of it when you consider asking staff to stay over late and disrupt their family life, or maybe even paying some overtime, you know, where you're getting into costing dollars and cents for the taxpayers. I move we delete the nighttime meetings. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded by Commissioner Baldwin and Williams, respectively, that we -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't ask me any more questions. JUDGE TINLEY: -- that we eliminate the evening meetings. Is there any further discussion? If not -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you, Commissiuuei Baldwin. 1-.3-03 176 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2J JUDGE TINLEY: -- all those -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was bothered, myself. I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He likes supper at 6:30; that's his problem. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Six. DODGE TINLEY: All in favor, raise your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Let's move on to Item x.18, consider and discuss Commissioners Court committee assignments. I included this because, apparently, it had not been addressed in several years, and I tried to distribute those and also do what I thought aligned the interests of the respective Commissioners in their previous areas of expertise, and maybe some new designed areas of expertise. So, I had at least one preference expressed to me, and I tried to incorporate that for Commissioner Williams. And -- but there they are, folks. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I don't -- I'll start down here. I don't mind working with the "Hysterical" Commission at a11. It's -- it's fine. I don't understand the AACOG thing. Where does the Commissioner Williams, _-11-.i3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 ly 20 21 22 23 24 25 177 Commissioner Baldwin, alternate -- what did you do? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good -- I'm glad you brought it up, 'cause I did have a conversation with Judge Tinley along the lines that if he was not -- his schedule did not permit him to attend the AACOG meetings, I would be happy to do that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that what we're saying here? JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. That's why I plugged that in. You specifically requested it, and if you're -- if you're unable to do that, then Commissioner Baldwin would be the alternate. As he was previously, I believe, on the previous assignments. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: I believe that was correct. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actually, I've served on the board down there as a representative of Kerr County years ago. Our County Judge chose not to participate. JUDGE TINLEY: I was not aware of that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that what you're saying? You probably will not participate? JUDGE TINLEY: Well, in looking at some of these dockets that I've got to deal with, I'm thinking that -- 1-13 ~' 178 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 y 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Trip to San Antonio may be kind of problematic. JUDGE TINLEY: If we're going to have consistent representation on that, you had indicated to me that -- that that was a preference of yours, and -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Correct. JUDGE TINLEY: -- I thought, well -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine. DODGE TINLEY: You know. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll do it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIYd: I would recommend that you go down one time, though, and take a peek at it, and -- do whatever you want to do, but I'd recommend that you take a look at it one time; just make an appearance. DODGE TINLEY: I don't think I'd be prohibited from attending, certainly. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. JUDGE TINLEY: And I want to probably do that, but -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, you can appoint us as alternates, and -- good word, but you're still the board member. You're still the member of the Executive Board of AACOG. DODGE TINLEY: I didn't realize that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The County Judge is 1- 13-~~'~ 179 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1S 16 17 18 ]9 20 21 22 23 24 2~ always the Executive Board member of -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: He can't appoint that -- what you're saying is he can't delegate that? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We11, no, I think he can, but I don't -- I'm not understanding that's what we're doing here. I think we're going to keep it in there as -- we're just alternates. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I don't think we can change their rules. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. JUDGE TIS3LEY: I think, so far as primary responsibility from this Court, by the designation here, Commissioner Williams would be -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIC7: That's fine. JUDGE TINLEY: -- primary liaison with -- with AACOG. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And if, on those occasions, you derided you wanted to attend, if that happened, then I would step down and you'd be right there. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, not necessarily. I could attend with you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's okay, either way. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Yeah. i-i~-c~ 180 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 2~ COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- JUDGE TINLEY: I don't mean to -- to put you there and then be able to say, you know, you can stay at home today; I'm going. No, it -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: You need to have some reasonable reliance upon where you stand. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question I have, is that -- well, and I don't know the answer here. Is the -- is the Executive Board something you need to -- like, is there a vote that we need to have at that Executive Board? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, absolutely. COMMISSIONER LETZ: If that's the case, I'd recommend that it be a formal appointment to Commissioner Williams, and then Judge Tinley can go when he can, but that way we always have our vote there. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think that's what we're doing. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my understanding. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It may require the Judge to write a letter to AACOG Board. Is that correct? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, there is a -- ~-i3-'3 181 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1~ 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 I've seen 75, 100 million dollars go through there in one day. It's kind of a serious deal. JUDGE TINLEY: When you had your wheelbarrow, did they manage to -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I got a half a wheelbarrow, brought it back to Kerr County, but the City of San Antonio rakes off most of it before it gets to us. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The EMS Board, I certainly would be happy to stay on that. I really think that the 911 issue, right now, we need to leave it the way it is, in my opinion, because we're -- Letz and I are just now beginning to have an understanding of what's going on over there, and we're, you know, building a relationship with them and trying to get this thing to turn the corner. And I just -- I just think it -- right now would be a bad time to change, it's my opinion. And that's it. JUDGE TINLEY: What do you show currently for 911? The current -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't show anything. Commissioner Griffin and I were the -- were appointed by this -- by the Commissioners Court to be the liaisons over there. JUDGE TINLEY: The only -- COMMISSIONER BALllW1N: Commissioner Griffin -13-u; 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 182 is no longer here. JUDGE TINLEY: The only information I had furnished to me indicated that he was the only designated liaison. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, my name is in there too. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I was not aware of that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I had picked up Letz, and since -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: He needed somebody to carry his bags. I started working with that not long ago. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, that's the end of my stuff. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I only have one comment on -- and it has to do with K.E.D.F. and the Economic Development Foundation. And I guess, just for information only, I am a member of the K.E.D.F. Executive Committee by their election -- appointment and election. I don't represent the County in there, but I am a member. So, I just wanted you to be aware of that. JUDGE TINLEY: That's great. I -- I think, by virtue of their -- their organizational setup, not individually, but in my -- in my representative capacity, I am, too. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: County Judge is by _~-n~ 183 1 2 3 4 J 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2C ~] 2<' 2; L~ 2` reason of the -- of office, yes. As is the mayor. JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can -- can your name be put there instead of mine, so if Pat can't attend, then you can have two votes? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nice try. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you want it there, it's okay. Depends on which -- JUDGE TINLEY: I think this way, we get the maximum votes. If you're an alternate, that -- that's probably tha way to get the max, wouldn't you think? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would think so, yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, as it is. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If two others show up, we've got the executive committee, right. JUDGE TINLEY: That's right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only comments I would have would be -- 911, L mean, if Dave really wants to get involved with it, I don't have a problem, but have I been workinq with tlia~ recently, and it's -- you know, I'm -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If I can just have Animal Control, I'll -- I'll be -- (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Is it the tradition, - 1 3 - i i 184 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 the junior member gets Animal Control? COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, 'cause I've had it for six years. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Soy, we're going to refer a lot of calls to you; mad dog calls, dead dog calls. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I do have an interest in 911. Everything else is fine -- well, the only thing, my name is on the Ag Barn. On Region J, that really shouldn't even be listed on here. My position on Region J is appointed by Water Development Board and the governor, and it really has nothing to do with being a Commissioner. I just keep y'a11 informed because 7'm there a lot. COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: So you don't care what we say. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You can tell me that I'm otf, and I'll just say thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. What I'm hearing is -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let me make a comment for everyone's information, 'cause I don't know if the Judge and Dave know. The County representative for Region J is Judge Sansom out of Real County. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: By law. COMMISSIONER LETZ: By law. You know Judge Sansom? Uh, he -- anyway, Judge Sansom is that 1 13-u3 1 2 3 9 J 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1~ 20 21 22 23 24 25 185 representative for counties. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Did you have something you wanted to say, Rusty? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I do before you vote, but after you get finished discussing it. JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have any further comments? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No. I'm just so happy to have Animal Control, I'll just let it go. JUDGE TINLEY: I -- what I'm hearing is that the -- the assignments, as tentatively presented, with -- with changes of Commissioners Baldwin and Letz on 911, and Region J being omitted totally, that with those -- with those two modifications, everybody's satisfied? Is that what I'm hearing? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Apparently so. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Do I hear a motion to take effect? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just have one more comment. DODGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, would you be interested in K.E.D.F.? I asked Dave if he had any interest in K.E.D.F. And the reason I said -- I mean, it's -- I've 1 19- Il j 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 zl 22 z3 24 25 186 been there. I was an appointee once before, and I don't have a burning desire to go back. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: K.E.D.F., airport, and dogs. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's just a good board. Learn a lot. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, you do. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. With that additional change, do I hear a motion to approve? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Moved by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Letz. The Sheriff has got something he wants to throw in here. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Just a recommendation. With the Sheriff's Department taking up the majority of the County's budget; anyhow, being several million dollars -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Glad you acknowledge it. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I do. And I acknowledge it every time I go to working on the budget. But, in knowing they got -- also got to have a liaison for county facility and maintenance-type, I would appreciate a liaison that would help us with law enforcement out there, because i 1~~-n~ 187 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 we are off-site, you know. Normally -- not knocking any Commissioner, I don't -- we don't see -- and y'all don't see our day-to-day operations, which it does have a humongous impact on the budget. And just somebody that would be a direct liaison working back and forth with law enforcement over there -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd vote to do it. Rusty, will you give me a badge? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about a gun that's not loaded? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can I have a ride in your new S.O.V.'? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'll go down to T.G.&Y. and we can find you one and buy you a gun. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That would work. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Will you give me a ride in your new S.U.V.? SHERIFF' HIERHOLZER: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got some old badges at home; I'll just use one of my own. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Go to another county, Commissioner, please. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think Commissioner Baldwin would be a good one. i-i;-,,; 188 1 2 3 4 5 h 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ]6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SHEF.IFF HIERHOLZER: You know, I would just like to have a liaison that would -- that we could get to come out there and actually see a lot of the day-to-day stuff and a lot of the equipment stuff, that could truly sit down and help during budget time, and just -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In other words, help him come over and sell the program to -- I don't know if it's me or not. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, 1 -- let me think out loud. That may be a good selection, appointing Commissioner Baldwin to that, because he has a tendency to be a little tightfisted, and -- and he might -- he might keep the Sheriff's request for funds under control. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, hcw about a commitment now that we're still going to be friends? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Sure. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I have no problem. JUllGE TINLEY: We add Commissioner Baldwin as the law enforcement/jail liaison? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So I'm in charge of the jail? Is that -- SHERIFF HlERHOLZER: Please. I'll give that one to you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You'll be in charge 1-1~-u3 189 1 L 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 of the Sheriff. JUDGE TINLEY: Is that acceptable to you, Commissioner Williams, amending that, adding that to the motion? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Absolutely. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Fine. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further discussion? All in favor? (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (NO response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Okay. I don't think we've got any Executive Session items, none that I'm aware of here. Information, Commissioners Court, Road and Bridge, Maintenance. Do we have any of those reports? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We accepted them earlier on. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I'm -- I have some here from J.P.'s and -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is something that we hardly ever do, and I'm glad you pointed that out. There's a good section right there Ior us to make comments and talk about projects that we have going and that kind of thing; that's really where it belongs. -13-ii; 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 190 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm going -- for informational purposes, I'm going to add to our agenda henceforth that -- that we have added to that reports from public officials and/or department heads, and also reports from boards, committees, and commissions and boards. And -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good place for it. JUDGE TINLEY: Just to keep us informed, keep the public informed. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Might want to add it on for next time, 'cause I'm bringing in a couple reports. JUDGE TINLEY: It will be there. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Cool. JUDGE TINLEY: It will be there. Okay. That looks like the end of it. There being no further business, I'll declare the meeting adjourned. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You guys did good. Appreciate it. (Commissioners Court adjourned at 2:36 p.m.) i-1s-c°, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1S 16 1/ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 191 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 20th day of January, 2003. JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk BY: ________ _~ ______ Kathy Ba k, Deputy County Clerk Certified Shorthand Reporter 1-13-'3 QRt'iEf2 Ni.j„ c'7':31c CI_.f~]:h1`a RNP r~CCOUIJTS On this the 1.1th day nt Ja.nua.ry, 2N~+3, came to be considered by thre Go+art vario+_rs c:ommis=~ioneci precincts, which said Claims and r•~accn~ants area ]. ki-tiener al for R~E4, ,4~+. 1Els i.=r---F=ir~~e f='r of ect i. oi~i for• 81. ~, 414. 9~~tg 15-Road ?t L+ridye for ~3~J96.~C.k7q 61 1`:3`:3f3 Ta.x t+n'ticipatior; Pdote i`ur ~~%+, 198. rEiig e'>:'--i.''_'i9='r Jail E3ond for 9>;75„Q~14. TOTGL CASH REG!UII~ED, f-+Lt_ f=UNll~: ~~.~;,'~i':~w.'~i~+. Upon motion made L;y Commissioner F~a].dwin, ser-onded 6y Commissioner Williams, the Go~.irt ~~rnanima+_isly approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to pay said accn~_ints. .-, HL1I)C;E_"f R~IENDMENT TN Cf]UNl"'r' CCIUF2T C7n this tr,e i:~,tn day of Jame:+.ry, ~~NC, +apon motion made by Commissioner" Let"z, seconded by Commissianer Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-Q~, to transfer tiF,94.tt~ from Line Item No. 1~--4cG--4~'c Caurt Hppointed f-lttorney. to Line Item fJO. 14J-4c6-415 Special t/ounty Judge. C]RDER NU. cr~it+ I?UUC;E-i RhiENllMENT TN COUNTY JUDGE On this the 13th day of Jaritiar-yy c0N3, ~.ipon motion made by Commissioner Betz, seconrjed by Coinmissianer Laaldwin9 the Co~_rrt unanimo~.rsly approved by a vote of 4-0-~, to transr"er ~27._a~ fr om L_ina Item No. 149--4N0-aiN OtTice S~_ipplies to Line lt-em No. i4~--4NN--2N6 Ban~.3s K 1.RSllT'anCe. ORDf-.R NU. c 791'3 EilJI7GET RNENDNE:NI" IN 19t3T1~ UIfiTRICT CUURI` On this the 13th day of .Ian-7ary, 2V~N;',, ~.ipun motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commi=.;sxuner` Baldwin, the Ca~_irt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to transfer ~`1.~:1.9.~ from Line :Item Nu. 14i--4::G--40c Coy-irt Fippointed F-attorney to L~.ne item No. :L~t7-4db--4~1 Co~_irt Rppointed :3ervices. CI~DEI~ NCl. .-:%31G NUD(.;E'I' RMENliMENT I N NOhJ-DEf='Rl~l-MEI`JTRL, COLJtJTY JRIL RND SHERIFF'S DEF'RIaTMENT On this 'the iSth d•ay of Jan~aar•y, c~~3, upon motion made by Commis, the Co~_~rt r_tnanimo~_rsly approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to pay late bill in the amount of-' ~1,'~77.44 from Line Item ray. 1:°,-(~11--4~,m for initial payment on C~aterl:~illar Moi.or Lir~ader SrJ; 4xh14:~;:;d`:34. The Co~_rnty H~_i~JiCor acid Co~_mty I-reas~_ir er are hereby author-az.ed to write a hand checlt in the ams, the Co~.irb unanimously approved by a vote of 4-~-Q~y waived reeadxny and approved the 'Fol.low:iny mini"~teao K~r'T" Co~.inty Commissioners Cr, ~"ir"t, :;pec.ial Session, Monday, DecemGer c:,~, c.~N~_. or~nEr Nn. ~_~a~f+ FaPF'ROVL-: TCl GaGC:EF'T MINUTES AC`Ill WRIVE rEF~IiING ,~. On this the 1:;ti, day of Jan,aary, '~tin0~9 ~.rpon notion made tay Commissioner Bai.dwa.n, sec:oncled by Commissioner Let^<, the Caa_rrt unanimor_rsly approved by a vote of 4-~-a, wai.ved reaciiny and approved the Following +ninutes: I{err Lo~anty Commissioners Co,.rrt, Emergency Session, Monday, necemlaer• c':',, c'~7~0c'. oRn~R ran. L-, ~,-s flF'F'f~QVf_" flf~II'i flCC(=F'"I" P10PJTHL`r fdEF'Of2"fS On tl-pis the 13th d<_3y of ,Jan~_iary, 1'~k7,3, upon motion made by. i.ommissiuner ):ialdwin, seconded by Commissionc~n~ Williams, tl-re Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-~, to accept the following r^eports and direct that they be 'f=iled with the Co~_inty Clerk far f~.rt~_~r-e a~_{dit: Jannett f='ieper, County Clerk (7enerai.--I}ecember ~NO~' Tr~_rst--December c'04~:=' Linda Decker, ni=_tr•ict Cierk December c~~c Rotrert: L. fenctr, J'. f-'. #f3 Der:~ember r'~krc William E. Ragsdale, J.1-'. #t4 December c'Nk1 ORDER NO. ~'7'a~6 RF'f='FiLIVE pREL.):M1PJF=IRY FLAT l"HE RESERVE Al' (=ALt_ING WATER, LTD flr-, this the 1~;th day of .l'an~_i~iry, ._4_h~", i_iPon motion me:de by L'ommissioner Let::, seconded by L'ommissioner Baldwin, the t:o~_ir-t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-4~-a, ttre F'reliminairy I-'!xt for- the Reser ve, f-all:itig Water, Limited, in f'r°ecinct ~, with comments from L'a~~rrt as follows: a let't'er from T. N.I~.C.G., the rands to be local rands and whiere feasible and where passible, the frontage needs to be .'0@ foot, an~i by Co~.inty Engineer's letter regarding req~_~irements prior to final plat approval to the Court and to the developer. ORDER NU. ~'T9~7 RF~pRUVE p'URCHRSE OF CRANE .~ t7n thi> the 1Cth day of ,7anuary, ~_0N3, ~.~pon moi;ion made by L:ommissioner Williams, seconded ay Nicholson, ttte Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-Q~, the p~arci~a.>e of an 8. `i ton crdye aiiynment 1-or- the new H?rmann (ions 4ar•idye. GRDER {Vd. ~79'r'9 f2ESC1LU"fIdN T'd F'F1R"(TCIF'ATE IN ,,._, c16T1-i .IUDICIRL DIS1"RICI" NARCdI"ICS TASf. F=QRCE Chi tf-iis the 1:~th day of January, i:ONd, ~.ipon motion made try Coirimi>sioner Let z, seconcJed by Comnii.ssianer Nicholson, the Co~_irt unanimo~_isly approved by a vote of 4-0-0, tr,e f~.inding particif:~atxon agreement among mc:~mber agencies of the c16th .I~.~dir~ial Dtistrict Narcotics Task 'r-i]rr_e, ,~_ib.Ject to t1-ie County Attorney's approval. and review, and a~_ithori-r.e Co~_urty ,I~_idge to sigr-~ the same. OftllER Nu. '~lj3N RF~F='RL~VE DC]NRTION RND F'LRNTING OF= TREE On this the i3th day oi= ,7an~_fary, ~~003, ~.fl.;an mot>nn made 6y Commissioner E]a.tdw>rr, seconded by Commissioner Let:_, ttre Co~_Irt ~_tnanimoi.rsly approved by a vote of 4-0-~, to accept the dfanation and planting of tree on the Cour•thn~_ise sgf_fare, being on the o~_itside perimeter. ORDER PJO. ~"7`~U1 FIEF-trt DEC:ISIUN i0 t-104..D FEFRUF~RY 107H MEF-=7ING r7 71-iE UNION CHURCH Orr this the 13th clay of" J:rr~~~.ary, c003, ~.rporr motion made by Cornmissionr~r Sa.ldwin, sec:onded by Comma>sioner• Nicholsor-~, tide l,o~_rrt r_rnanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, referr irry ttre iss.re of having tyre Febr~~rary 10th Meeting at the Union Chr_a•ch until ,Ianraar-y c7 Meeting and having the Cn~.rnty Attr.~rney's; Office review the .legalities, cir•c~_rmstanc:e}, conditions, arrd I~YPes of notices req~_r:ired. ORr)ER No. ,_ t~~ FIF-'F-'I~O~JE r1U'fURL. f~1117 F-1[iREE:h1E:N~~f FOR REC3IONFIL COUNCILS OF CiOVF_RNb1E_NT ,--~ f-1NU F1tJTHORILL COUP)"fY JUDGE. 'T'O SIGN SRNE On this the 13tF~ day of ,Ianuary, c~[lkl, upon motion mane by Commissioner l~aldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the. Court unanimously approved 6y a vote of 4-N-1~, the M~~.tual Rid RyrE_,ernent for Re.gi.unal Council<.> oP Government and <_.uthoriced the County Judge to sign same. URDIii=Ft MO. 'cTS333 f-1F'i='ftOVf1L FOR f2Uf11i R f3RIIJL~F: TO Flf-lUL 1=1LL M(YfEfdIFaL 7U KLRIt CUUM f Y 4--I-I F=HCIL_1 I Y On Chic the i,ttt day of Jaru-iary~ c:~LYO;dy ~-tpon motion made by. L;ommis.:ior~er Williams, seconded by Commiss-ior-~er Let-, tt~e Oo~-irt i_manimo~.tsly approved by a vote of 4-0-VJ, Road z Rridye to hay-il donaa'ted fill. n~ater:ial from the new f<.1,S.U. high scl-cool facility to the Kerr' Co~_uity 4--H facility