;:
.~-.
~~
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, March 10, 2003
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas

~~
~i
~~
'~
V
R~
PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, 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
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
T TT Tl 1, 57
March 10, 2003
PA(,F.
---	Visitors' Comments	4
---	Commissioners Comments	10
1 . 1	Pay Bills ~('1 «t `~ y~ 7~y~
~r~~ ~~ °~~y ~
~
J	12
1 . 2	Budget Amendments ~~li''
'~
/5	14
1 . 3	Late Bills ;J9`i`~x1 ~- ~'d~~c~	19
1 . 4	Waive reading and Approve Minutes .%f bGC'~	22
1.5	Approve and Accept Monthly Reports~S~~'~	23
2.1	K.E.D.F. Semi-annual report	--
2.2	Approve proclamation declaring May 1, 2003, as	
	National Day of Prayer .~b'~t 3	25
2.3	Approve April 12, 2003, as Houston Schumacher,	
	Jr. , Day in Kerr County abCG'~f	28
2.4	Authorize County Attorney to take legal action	
	to remedy drainage problem ivc ~~dF~C	__
2.5	Approval for Kerr County Sheriff's Department	
	to apply for grant for LOCATER system .~~~`~~	30
2.6	Accept Racial Profiling report from Sheriff--~~~~	32
2.9	Advise Commissioners Court of the start of the	
	Rural Library Delivery Service, reconfirm	
	locations for van to stop N~ c~~~f~'	37
2.15	PUBLIC HEARING on revision of plat for Lots 43
' o.~?`lc~
'
	and 44A of Cypress Springs Estates, Phase 1n
~	39
2.16	Approval of revision of plat for Lots 43 & 44A	
	of Cypress Springs Estates, Phase 1 ~'~ ~~'~"'~"r	40
2.8	Consider Non-Financial Work Site Training	
	Agreement with Alamo Area Development -~ ~`'~7	
	Corporation, authorize County Judge to sign	41
2.7	Approve 911 unnamed road letter and cost of	
	mailing same ~~ft.S	45
2.17	PUBLIC HEARING on revision of plat for ,~~x~~`~	
	Tracts 13A, 13B, 14A & 14B of Y.O. Ranchlands	50
2.18	Approval of revision of plat for Tracts 13A,	
	13B, 14A, & 14B of Y.O. Ranchlands	51
2 . 10	Discuss hiring consultant (s ) to assist with ~,,~~ ~-~,~~	
	developing renovation/construction plans for	
	Youth Exhibit Center, approve contracts for same	52
2.11	Discuss setting workshop to discuss ~ossible	
	Maintenance Department issues N~1 ~~ r	91
2.12	Discuss ordering study of the administration of	
	County's OSSF rules & floodplain rules r'~fO~~'	96
2.13	Accept Racial Profiling report for Precinct 4	
	Constable's office ,(~fCl~	115
2.14	Discuss appointments for local representatives to	
	Alamo Senior Advisory Committee ..;1~~'~`	115
---	Adjourned	119
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
3
On Monday, March 10, 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: Good morning, ladies and
gentlemen. I'll call to order the regular Commissioners
Court meeting for Monday, March the 10th. It's 9 o'clock
local time. Meeting was posted -- the notice of the meeting
was posted. At this time, I would like to introduce to you
a good friend of mine, Dr. Phil Tilden, who's a counselor
and former pastor, and if y'all would please rise and allow
him to say a few words for us. Dr. Phil?
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Please be seated.
At this time, anyone who has anything that they would care
to address the Court about on a matter that is not listed on
the agenda -- if you're here on a matter that is listed on
the agenda and you want to address the Court, we'd ask that
you please wait until we call that particular matter that's
on the agenda, and if you're interested in doing that, we
would ask that you fill out a public participation form
indicating your desire to speak. The forms are at the back
of the room. We're -- we're not going to bypass you if you
don't fill one of these out, but it helps us plan from a
3-10-C3
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
4
time standpoint. But with respect to the items which are
not listed on the agenda, is there any citizen who wishes to
step forward and speak to this Court about any matter at
this time? Please come forward, sir. If you would, if
you'd identify your name -- or identify yourself for the
record, please.
MR. FARRELL:
live on Primrose, and that's
JUDGE TINLEY:
relate to a matter that's on
MR. FARRELL:
JUDGE TINLEY:
My name is Kevin Farrell. I
what I want to approach today.
All right, sir. This doesn't
the agenda today?
No, sir.
All right. Please.
MR. FARRELL: We got a problem with our road.
There's a lot of disabled people out there, and I'm one of
them; I'm a heart patient. An ambulance won't even come out
to our house, and they got me classified as sudden death,
anytime. And we did with my grandma and my dad, too.
There's a lot more other people out there. And when we call
the -- like, have to call the Sheriff's Department, it takes
them forever to get down our road. They don't even like
coming down our road at all. Ambulance, they won't come at
all; they tell us they'll meet us at the end of the road.
And we've been trying to get this thing -- something going
on with this road for the last five years, and I think it's
about time we get something done with this road. If there's
3-10-03
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
5
anything we can do.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Where is Primrose?
MR. FARRELL: It's off of Bear Creek Road,
Precinct 1.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We can move the line
about 100 feet and you can have that if you'd like. I was
just trying to be nice here.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me know how I
can help you out.
MR. FARRELL: But the plat that's out there
for that road back there -- I guess it was in '72 when it
was starting to build it -- it was signed by the
Commissioners Court. And we were just wondering, why isn't
anything getting done with it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It is a 1972 platted
subdivision that, on the plat, it says all the roads are
dedicated to the county forever and ever, you know, all that
lawyer talk, and -- but the County Attorney's always said
that, you know, they can dedicate it all day long, but until
the Commissioners Court accepts it, then they are not a
county-maintained road. They are public roads,
non-county-maintained. That's the way it is. And we have
asked the County Attorney for an opinion. About two weeks
ago, we wrote a letter down there and asked for an opinion
about the county Road and Bridge Department doing work,
3-10-03
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
6
using public funds and doing work on a non-county-maintained
road. We're awaiting --
JUDGE TINLEY: Awaiting that response?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. And we've had it
78 times from other County Attorneys on that particular
road, but we'll do it again.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And other roads in
other precincts, as well.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. We appreciate
you being here. Is there any other citizen that desires to
address the Court on any matter? Please come forward,
ma'am, and identify yourself for the reporter.
MS. ALLMON: My name is Doris Allmon, and I
also live out on Primrose. I am this little guy's mother.
And I have had to rush my mother to the end of the road with
a heart attack. My husband was a cancer patient, and we've
had to rush this one down twice with a heart problem. And
we pay our taxes out there. And I see -- I can't see why we
can't get something done. We have put out thousands of
dollars on that road ourselves, and there's about 9 or 11
families right down there at the end of Primrose where we
live, and most of them are elderly, and some of them are
handicapped. And we can't understand, with us paying our
taxes, why can't we get something done, too. I mean, they
3-10-G3
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

tell us to bring our road up to standards, but then we
priced that, too, and it was $150,000. We can have the
whole road paved for that price, you know, and that's
nonsense. I mean, if we can get something done, we can kind
of help keep it up ourselves. But as it is now, when
there's rain or ice or snow, we are blocked in, and there's
only one way in and one way out. And, you know, we feel
like we need some kind of protection in there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you. But
I think what you're going to hear, or what I have heard
historically from the attorneys, is that it's simply against
the law to spend taxpayers' money on non-county-maintained
roads.
MS. ALLMON: Does that mean we don't have to
pay taxes any more?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, ma'am, it does not
mean that, but it also means that I don't go to jail for
going out there doing work on your private property. I'm
not going to jail over something like that. It's against
the law.
MS. ALLMON: Well, that's true too, but I
know Sheppard Rees has been torn up, which was a good road.
And --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a public --
that's a public-maintained road.
3-10-03
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
8
MS. ALLMON: Well, that's what I'm saying.
Why can't ours be public-maintained?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you. I
would -- you know, if -- I wish there was something we could
do. And the attorney is sitting back -- he's a new
attorney, so we can't beat on him. We'll give him a couple
more days before we start beating on him. But, you know, if
they can come up with some way, this County will do whatever
it can to help you folks. There's no question of that. I
mean, it's not that we're trying to be mean or anything.
And --
MS. ALLMON: No, I understand that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- there's laws that
we have to abide by, and that's -- and that's that.
MS. ALLMON: But there's so many families out
in there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, ma'am.
MS. ALLMON: And it's growing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Regulations read that
if you want the County -- to be a maintained road, that you
bring it up to standards and we'll take it over.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, have they
looked into a road district?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I sent it out there
many, many times, Jon.
3-10-03
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That seems, I mean,
probably the best option. Form a road district.
MS. ALLMON: We've tried everything. We're
just kind of like a dead end. And if somebody was to come
out and travel that road, they would know what we were
talking about.
JUDGE TINLEY: I've been on it.
MS. ALLMON: Have you? Then you know what
we're up against.
JUDGE TINLEY: Not real recently, but a year
or so ago, I was on it.
MS. ALLMON: Well, we have improved it some.
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, okay.
MS. ALLMON: But -- you know, and it's taken
a lot of money out of our pocket. And there's just maybe
two or three of us that are doing it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you
think one of the interesting questions that`
recently as part of our letter to the County
that when the Commissioners Court adopts the
not adopt the roads as well, automatically?
an interesting question that hopefully we'll
to pretty soon.
know what? I
s been posed
Attorney is
plat, does it
I think that's
have an answer
MS. ALLMON: Well, I hope we can come up with
some solution. Thank you.
3-10-03
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. Is there
any other citizen that has anything it wants to address this
Court on a matter that is not on the agenda? Anybody else?
We'd be happy to hear from you. All right. We'll move on
to Commissioners' comments. Commissioner 1.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, thank you.
I only have one comment, and I wanted to -- probably
everyone knows of the passing of Don McClure. His funeral
services will be tomorrow at 2 p.m. over at Grimes. There's
a visitation this evening, I understand, there as well. You
know, Don probably -- it would be hard to find this out, but
probably is the longest -- was the longest serving peace
officer in the history of this county; been here just for
absolutely ever. You know, he comes in -- came into my
office and I`d brag about my governor's signed sheets up
there that I'm County Commissioner, and I don't know; he --
he's lost more than have I hanging on the wall, he's been
here so long. But we wanted to remind everyone, we need to
pray for Polly and that family over there. And -- and I
would think that -- in my opinion, if you open the
dictionary and looked up the word "integrity," out there
beside it, it should say "Don McClure." He -- tremendous
servant to our community. And most of us know him in a way
that -~ I mean, if you remember, he didn`t even spend his
budget. You know, budgeted for very, very little, and
3-1~~-U3
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
didn't even spend it. I never did understand how he did
that. I think, like, his gas and vehicle stuff came out of
his pocket. But he was truly a -- truly a servant to this
county, and served it for many, many years, and I think it
would be appropriate for this County to fly the flag at
half-mast today and tomorrow. That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner 2?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My comment's brief,
Judge, but has to do with Item 2.9 on the agenda. The new
library van, which is intended to provide service to the
outlying areas of Kerr County, it's going to be at the front
door at about 9:45 for a great picture opportunity for
Commissioners Court, and also, you know, take this
opportunity to let the public know that this service is
beginning -- will begin very quickly, and it's intended to
bring library materials to the outlying areas of the county
for those who cannot get in to Butt-Holdsworth Library.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The only -- I didn't have
any comments, but I do have a question for Commissioner --
Commissioner 1. When did Don start his law enforcement? Do
you know? I know he --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Before we started
keeping records.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- used to be Parks and
3-10-03
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Wildlife, as I recall.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, he was a Parks
and Wildlife guy, served in the constable position in two
different precincts. Does anybody know?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: In the '40's or 'S0's --
well, I know it had to be the '50's. He was a game warden
and good friend of my grandfather back -- way back then.
Amazing, amazing career.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Amazing career.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree with everything
you said.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner 4?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Nothing, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Like -- like the
others on this Caurt, I would ask that we all keep the
McClure family in our thoughts and prayers as they work
their way through these troubled days ahead. Don was truly
a servant and a wonderful individual. He's an old-school
law enforcement officer, very much an old-school. Never --
never raised his voice, never had to get aggressive. He had
a knack of making his point the right way and getting
compliance, and -- and just -- just truly a remarkable
individual. Let's get on with the business at hand. First
item is payment of the bills. Mr. Auditor?
3-10-03
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
13
MR. TOMLINSON: Besides -- other than the
list that you have, Commissioner Baldwin brought a -- an
item to me that he would like to discuss, I think,
concerning some mahouts for 911. This potential bill -- we
don't have a bill, but it's not -- it's not budgeted, so --
JUDGE TINLEY: That's a separate agenda item,
though.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It goes along with
2.7.
MR. TOMLINSON: 2.7, okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Why don't we address that at
that point? I think it would be more appropriate.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That would be good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Do I hear a motion for
payment of the bills as presented?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do, and I would also
let the general public know that this two-week period of
paying the everyday bills for Kerr County is
226,300-some-odd dollars for two weeks. Very expensive to
run a government.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Baldwin and Williams,
respectively, that we approve and pay the bills as
presented. Do I hear any discussion?
3-10-G3
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
14
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. I notice that
under Health and Emergency Services, there's a payment to
the Hill Country Youth Ranch of $25 for birthday money, and
in the interest of exercising an abundance of caution, I'd
like to be on the record that I'm a member of the Board of
Directors of the Hill Country Youth Ranch, and vice
president, and I have a potential conflict of interest in
that. I won't bring that up again unless -- unless it
becomes necessary.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Any further
discussion? Being no further discussion, all those in favor
of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget
amendments. We have Budget Amendment Number 1.
Mr. Auditor?
MR. TOMLINSON: This amendment is to replace
a printer in Justice of the Peace, Precinct 3's office. The
bill is for $1,585.93. We need to transfer $626.63 out of
Capital Outlay in Nondepartmental to Capital Outlay in the
J.P. office.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do I hear a motion that we
approve Budget Amendment Request Number 1?
3-10-03
15
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 NICHOLSON: I make a motion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Nicholson and Letz, respectively,
that the Court approve Budget Amendment Request Number 1.
Is there any further discussion? Being none, all in favor
of the motion, 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. Budget
Amendment Request Number 2.
MR. TOMLINSON: This request is from my
office. It's to pay $92.50 for my bond. We're asking to
transfer from Employee Training to Bonds in my -- my
department.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Baldwin and Williams,
respectively, that we approve Budget Amendment Request
Number 2. Any discussion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
3-10-03
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
16
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Budget
Amendment Request Number 3.
MR. TOMLINSON: This request is for the 198th
District Court. The request is to transfer $676.02 from the
Court-Appointed Attorney line item to the Court-Appointed
Services. We have a bill for that amount, for $676.02.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, is that for
psychiatrists and those kinds of things?
MR. TOMLINSON: It's for anything that's --
that's not related to an attorney. And the reason we have
two lines -- line items for that is for -- to report to the
State for -- under Senate Bill 7, for indigent defenses.
And, potentially, the County gets grant moneys to --
reimbursement moneys for any expenditures of -- of indigent
defense above and beyond what our -- what our base period
is. In 2001, we established -- the County established --
all counties in the state established a base period or base
amount from their own. Anything above and beyond that, we
get reimbursed from -- or partially reimbursed from the --
from the State.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Like Indigent Health?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is -- is this
particular issue -- is it indigent psychiatric care? Or --
3-10-03
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TOMLINSON: Let me see what this is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And if it is, is
that -- will this one -- is this the kind of thing that we
get reimbursed for? This particular one?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, if we go over the base
period for the total.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: For the year. And this is
for -- for investigation.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When you get -- let's
pretend that this is a reimbursable issue here. When you
get -- when you get reimbursed, where does that money go?
Do you put it back in Court-Appointed Attorney, or does
it -- does it go into the Services line?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, you -- you do have --
there is a stipulation in -- I think it's Senate Bill 7,
that you -- that you spend it for -- for court-related --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Services?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So we're not getting a
true picture at the end of the year when we transfer all
this money out of the lawyers' line into there?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
MR. TOMLINSON: This is -- I did -- this is
related to that, just for information, but I found a
3-1C 03
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
18
paragraph in -- I think it's the Penal Code, that allows --
allows counties to get reimbursed for the appeals part of
capital murder cases.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's about time.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's a hidden paragraph in
there that nobody knows much about.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They let you do it,
but they don't want you to know about it.
MR. TOMLINSON: But it's available, so -- I
have the forms.
JUDGE TINLEY: The -- I note that there was
about $8,000 budgeted for this court-appointed services, and
here we're not halfway through the year, and it's been --
was there a particularly exorbitant or number of expenses
that was incurred early in the year that caused that to be
drained so rapidly?
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't recall, Judge,
specifically what -- you know, anything that's abnormal.
I'd just have to research that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Do I hear a motion that
we approve Budget Amendment Request Number 3?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Letz and Nicholson, respectively,
3-1G-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
19
that we approve Budget Amendment Request Number 3. Any
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion carries. Budget
Amendment Request Number 4.
MR. TOMLINSON: This is -- this request is
for Road and Bridge. It's to pay the vehicle insurance --
or property insurance, actually, for the lease of a -- of a
Caterpillar excavator, $269 for the remainder of the year.
We're asking a transfer from Workers Compensation into
Insurance.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Baldwin and Letz, respectively,
that we approve Budget Amendment Request Number 4. Any
discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. The
motion carries. Do we have any late bills?
25 ~ MR. TOMLINSON: I have two. One is for the
3-10-G3
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
20
U.S. Postal Service for $625. It's out of the Tax
Assessor's budget. It's for Business Reply Mail permit, and
the annual accounting fee for -- for her office.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
a hand check?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is that including issuance of
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Motion made and
seconded that the Court approve a late bill to United States
Postal Service in the amount of $625, with respect to the
Tax Assessor's Business Reply Mail permit, and -- and annual
accounting fee, I believe.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. That's --
JUDGE TINLEY: And authorize issuance of a
hand check in payment of same. Any 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 carries.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. The last one is also
to the U.S. Postal Service. It's for $5,000. It's for
postage for the Tax Assessor/Collector, and I do need a hand
check for that also.
3-10-03
21
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 BALDWIN: That's a lot of money,
isn't it? A lot of stamps. Let me ask it for you, Judge.
Is that a budgeted amount?
MR. TOMLINSON: Oh, yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It is, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Where did we come up so short?
Was -- was there a special mailing that had to be done? It
would seem like that's something you just don't forget
about.
MR. TOMLINSON: We have the money. The
money's there in the account.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's not something
that -- we're not transferring.
MR. TOMLINSON: No, this is just a late bail.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just a late bill.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
JUDGE TINLEY: I apologize for the -- for the
error in my thinking.
MR. TOMLINSON: I think we budgeted, like,
$12,000 to $15,000 for postage in her office.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Williams and Letz, respectively,
3-10-03
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
25
that we approve a late bill in the amount of $5,000 to
United States Postal Service for postage for the Tax
Assessor's office, and authorize issuance of a hand check.
Is there any further discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. And that's
it for that. Okay. I appreciate you straightening me out
there, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I knew what you were
thinking.
JUDGE TINLEY: I was thinking it was a little
big. "Wait a minute, where did this come from?"
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Kind of scary to
understand how you think there, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have before me several sets
of minutes, one being the regular session of the Kerr County
Commissioners Court dated February -- held on February 10th,
another for the special session of the Court held on
February the 6th, and those of the special session of the
Court on February 24th. Do I hear a motion that we approve
those minutes without the necessity of reading or otherwise
examining the same?
3-10-03
23
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 NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Letz and Nicholson, respectively,
that we approve the -- the minutes without reading or
examination for February the 6th, February the 10th, and
February 24th. Is there any discussion? All in favor of
the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. I also have
before me a number of -- of reports from the J.P., Precinct
3; J.P., Precinct 4.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And one
unidentifiable one, Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, this one appears to be
from the Treasurer. It's denominated "Kerr County Payment
Register, Monthly Financial Report." And we have another
one from the J.P., Precinct 1. Another from the County
Clerk's office -- I have two from them, their regular and
then their trust fund. Those appear to be all the monthly
reports that I have.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Move we accept the
reports as presented.
3-10-03
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Baldwin and Letz, respectively,
that the monthly reports as identified be approved as
presented. Any further discussion? All those in favor of
the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just scratching my
ear.
JUDGE TINLEY: I see. Didn't know whether
you were voting late or voting nay. Let's get to the first
item on the agenda. I don't see Ms. Sherry Cunningham
available.
MS. SOVIL: Commissioner Williams was going
to tell her, make sure she knew.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Beg pardon?
MS. SOVIL: You were going to remind her that
she was on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, an e-mail
should have done the trick.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, should have.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want y'all to notice
3-10-03
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
..-.
25
Bill has new hearing aids.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's not working, is
it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I know how these
politicians are. "Huh? Darn thing just went dead." I know
how that works.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This one's ticking;
it's not going dead.
JUDGE TINLEY: Buster, I wish --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The better to hear
you with, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: I wish you wouldn't give away
all the trade secrets here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sorry.
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll pass on Item 2.1.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What is K.E.D.F.?
JUDGE TINLEY: Kerrville Economic Development
Foundation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sherry serves as the
president of both the Chamber and the K.E.D.F.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 2.2,
consider and discuss approving proclamation declaring May 1,
2003, as National Day of Prayer. Ms. Lancaster?
MS. LANCASTER: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Would you like to come forward
3-10-03
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and be heard, please?
MS. LANCASTER: Well, as so many of you
already know, May lst of each year -- or, I'm sorry, the
first Thursday of May of each year has been declared
National Day of Prayer since 1988, when it was amended --
the law was amended by President Reagan. Before that, it
was just anytime during the year, and so different states
were having it. And for the last six years, Clergywomen,
Inc., has been sponsoring the -- and facilitating National
Day of Prayer here. And there is a proclamation that I've
given to our Judge that -- proclaiming this day here in Kerr
County. We always receive one from the President, from our
Governor of Texas, and then the County, the City of
Kerrville, and the City of Ingram, which come -- are
presented during the -- during the day. Also, we have asked
to have our -- our celebration here at the courthouse again
on the front lawn, as we've been doing for the last three or
four years now. And if y'all have any other questions?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's a good thing
you're doing.
MS. LANCASTER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval of the
proclamation as presented.
JUDGE TINLEY: And the observance --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Certainly.
3-10-03
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: -- here at the courthouse,
11:30 to 12:30 on that date?
MS. LANCASTER: 11:30 to 12:30, and then also
from 6:00 to 7:00.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's --
MS. LANCASTER: Thursday, May 1st.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded that we approve the proclamation and authorize the
issuance of the front of the courthouse facilities for --
for the observance of the occasion. Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I'd just like
to comment, I've seen our front -- front of our courthouse,
a chain of people holding hands and praying all at one time
before, and it's just a powerful sight to see, much less the
prayers that are sent up. And I think it's a very, very
neat thing. We all need to participate in that. That's
all.
MR. TILDEN: Judge, if I may make a comment?
JUDGE TINLEY: Certainly.
MR. TILDEN: The reason this has been so
successful is because of this young lady. She works very,
very hard.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Pastor Phil. Any
further discussions? All in favor of the motion, signify by
3-10-03
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Next item is
consider and discuss approving April 12, 2003, as Houston
Schumacher, Jr., Day in Kerr County, Texas.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Houston Schumacher
died December 23rd, and was 75 years old. He's the -- a
third-generation grandson of the -- the west Kerr County
pioneer. For all of his life, Houston was very active in
community events for the community. He's one of those --
Buster and I know Houston very well. I've known him for 21
years, and Buster's probably known him all of his 39 years.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Kinfolk.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. And the rest
of you probably do, too. One of the things I liked best
about Houston was he was one of those guys that went about
helping his community in a very quiet way; very seldom was a
leader in any organizations or needed to hold an office. He
just had a heart for people and helping people, and had a
big impact on our community. He's going to be missed a lot.
I think the only office he ever held was first fire captain
of the Ingram Fire Department, if my information is right.
So, this is a proposal to declare -- oh, yes, Houston's
3-10-03
29
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
going to be honored at the -- at the Game Warden dinner with
a plaque, with photographs of all of his work and all that
sort of thing, so this will tie in with that. So, I make a
motion that we declare April 12, 2003, as Houston
Schumacher, Jr., Day.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Nicholson and Baldwin,
respectively, that this Court issue a proclamation declaring
April 12, 2003, as Houston Schumacher, Jr., Day here in Kerr
County. The -- the event that Commissioner Nicholson is
speaking of is the wild game function that's been held for a
number of years out there at the Youth Exhibit facility --
Ag Barn, if that identifies it better for you -- and Houston
was very, very active with that every year. I don't know
how far back it goes; probably predates my coming to Kerr
County in 1968, but it's very fitting that he would be
honored on that occasion. I -- I would consider it a
personal honor and privilege to sign such a proclamation.
Any other discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify
by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Next item of
3-10-03
1
--- 2
` 3
1
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
30
business is 2.4, consider authorizing County Attorney to
take legal action to remedy a drainage problem. It's my
understanding, in talking with the County Engineer, that
that matter, since being placed on the agenda, appears to be
resolved, and there was a request that it be passed. If --
if that's correct, Ms. Hardin?
MS. HARDIN: Yes, that's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right, very good. Next
item on the agenda is Item 2.5, consider and discuss
approval for Kerr County Sheriff's Department to apply for a
grant for a LOCATER system in conjunction with Amber Alert.
There he is.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Judge, how are you, sir?
JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: As the Court knows,
Amber Alert all got started, we accepted and signed off that
we were good. The National Center of Missing and Exploited
Children has gotten moneys through the federal government
that they will provide to any law enforcement agency that's
responsible for investigating cases of missing children or
abducted children on computer, and it's a complete computer
with printer, scanner attached to it, all the hardware,
software, at no cost to the agency. That allows us to print
up these missing posters of the kids and that, and there's
no obligation to us at all. And any law enforcement agency
3-10-03
31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
^ 24
25
that has those duties can apply for the grants to receive
this one computer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can the computer be used
for other purposes, or is it designated for this purpose?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's pretty well
designated for this purpose. It does come with other
software and that; it's Windows XP operating system they say
you can use, but the way it is and the way we'd have to have
it, we'd have to set up in the dispatch office anyhow, where
we can get this information and send it. So, it would be
pretty well limited to this purpose.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What's it cost us next
year?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Nothing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right. I'll move
that we approve the Sheriff to go do whatever it is he wants
to go do here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Apply for a grant.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Apply for a grant.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Apply for a computer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Baldwin and Letz, respectively,
that we approve Kerr County Sheriff's application for a
grant for LOCATER system, in conjunction with Amber Alert.
3-10-03
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
32
Is there any further discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Next item is
2.6, the Sheriff again. Consider and discuss accepting
Racial Profiling report for the Sheriff. It's my
understanding that you're required to tender us that report,
which by implication, I guess, implies that we're required
to accept it. And beyond that, I'm not sure anybody knows
what's supposed to happen. Correct, Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think you're pretty
well correct. I know the law requires us to compile all the
information, tender it to Commissioners Court March lst of
each year. And --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's it?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There's the report.
What y'all do with it, I don't know. I really don't care.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think the Court has
looked at it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, I can tell you
right now what I want to do with that. I've thought about
this hard, and I've been in -- been in deep prayer about
this. But, I mean, look at that. That is a lot of work for
3-10-03
1
f
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
the Sheriff's Office. That is a lot of paper. And that
costs the taxpayers money for absolutely nothing. Zero,
zilch. By law, he's supposed to bring this thing in. And,
you know, the -- the constables have been bringing theirs
in. We accept them. What do we do? Put them in the trash
can? So my thought is -- is that we need to send those --
or, actually, call Senator Fraser and Representative
Hilderbran and tell them to come get their paper, and we
will bill them for -- what is that, two or three reams of
paper right there, just for your office?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's at least a couple
of --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We need to send the
Senator and the State Representative a bill for us having to
go through this.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think go one step
further; do a resolution that they repeal the law.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree a hundred
percent.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Not only are we
incurring the cost of making the reports, but it's slowing
down our law enforcement officers.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They can`t make a
stop now and say, "Slow down a little bit and go away."
3-10-03
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
34
They got to fill out some paperwork, and they're -- they're
doing that instead of somewhere else doing what we pay them
to do.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, under the new
law -- or under this law. Of course, we're saved from a lot
of the other reporting information that has to be done
because we have video cameras in all our patrol cars, but it
does create a lot more work all during the year, because any
contact that an officer has with a pedestrian or a vehicle,
okay, any contact has to be documented. You have to have
the race, sex, ethnic origin, everything of that person you
contacted, and all that information then has to be entered
into a computer, and then the computer, at the end of the
year, will print out this when you ask for it. And just to
give you an example, like, on this very first one -- and
this is every single contact we ever have during the year.
This first one says that we contact -- on January 13th,
2002, at 5:24 p.m., in the central area of our county, which
was I-10 westbound before Harper Road, we contacted a white
female. We did not search her vehicle. We did issue her a
citation. And she was -- let's see. We did not find any
contraband. And she was driving a Lincoln passenger car
with four doors, and no search of the car was done either.
And that is the type of information we are required to keep
now on every single person we come in contact with.
3-10-03
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
35
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I will put -- I will work
on a resolution; I'll get with you, Rusty, with some of the
details. It's a waste of money, and I would recommend that
we keep all this stuff in one stack and send it to Senator
Fraser and let Representative Hilderbran know --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They need to come get
it. They need to spend their own gas to come get these
things. We don't want to take them up there to them at more
expense.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think we ought to
also note that, in reviewing these various reports, it
occurs to me that I've seen in the newspapers that in some
places, that there's indication that there may be some
targeting of certain groups. And these reports -- none of
these reports raise any red flag about targeting, so we --
it's not like we're gathering data to solve a problem we've
got. We've just gathering data for the sake of gathering
data.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: With no express
purpose.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah, right.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What it shows is we had
2,058 contacts that were required to be reported on. And,
of course, 85 percent of those contacts were with white
subjects, and it goes right along with the popularity (sic).
3-10-03

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
36
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Targeting old, white
men?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about old, fat,
white men?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Let me see if I can find
the name "Buster Baldwin." I know there's a lot of contacts
in here, Buster.
JUDGE TINLEY: There's no names in there,
Buster. You're safe.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But there`s your report.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move we accept the
Sheriff's report and file it appropriately.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Third.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Williams and Nicholson,
respectively, that we accept the Sheriff's Racial Profile
report and file the same accordingly. Any further
discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would -- no, go ahead.
I was going to say I'd refuse to accept it, based on the
waste of time, but I don't know that we have -- I mean, why
do we have to accept it?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, what feeble --
feeble wording there is in the bill says we have to accept
3-i0-C3
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
37
it. Doesn't say what to do with it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We need to accept. I
think our feelings are clear.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further 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: I assume that Commissioner
Letz, based on his comments, is going to be working on a
resolution to present to the Court at a later meeting
addressing this issue, and we'll look forward to that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can we do 2.9, Judge?
Go out and have our picture made?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. If there's no
objection, Chair will move to Item 2.9, item of advice to
the Commissioners Court of the start of the Rural Library
Delivery Service and reconfirm locations for service van
stops in various precincts. Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The agenda item is
what it says, Judge, and the van is outside for the Court to
go take a quick look at and have a Kodak moment. I'd like
to get from Commissioner 4 some affirmation of where you'd
like that van to stop. I believe it was suggested that
maybe it would stop at the Lake Ingram -- that shopping
3-10-03
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
38
center across, but if you want it to go out to Hunt Store or
someplace else, I need to know that as well. Commissioners
1 and 3 have indicated they didn't have a location, but if
they have chosen to rethink that, that's fine too. We're
going to have it stop in at least one location in Center
Point, and maybe two. So, if you'd like to check on that,
please, and let me know, appreciate it. In the meantime,
the van's outside for you to take a quick look at it.
JUDGE TINLEY: We'd welcome you citizens to
take a look-see also. Some of you may live out in the
outlying area. Just a minute. Hold on, guys.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh.
(Discussion off the record,}
JUDGE TINLEY: What we'll do at this point is
go ahead and take our morning recess, and we'll reconvene at
10 o'clock and take up the timed items that are set for
10 o'clock. So, we'll stand in recess until 10 o'clock.
(Recess taken from 9:48 a.m. to 10:05 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll reconvene the -- the
regular Commissioners Court meeting we commenced at 9 a.m.
on March the 10th. We were in recess. I apologize for
getting started back late; we had to run down the bus. It
was not quite where it was supposed to have been, but all is
well that ends well; we found it. I will now recess the
3-i0-03
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
39
regular Commissioners Court meeting and open a public
hearing scheduled for 10 a.m. this morning, that being Item
2.15 on the addendum, that being a public hearing on the
revision of plat for Lots 43 and 44A of Cypress Springs
Estates, Phase 1.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was
closed at 10:06 a.m., and a public hearing
was held in open court, as follows:)
P U B L I C H E A R I N G
JUDGE TINLEY: I note that there was notice
published in the local newspaper that the public hearing
would be held on this day at 10 a.m. Is there any -- any
member of the public that desires to be heard on the public
hearing? Any member of the public that desires to be heard
on the public hearing on the revision of plats for Lots 43
and 44A of Cypress Springs Estates, Phase 1?
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: There being none, I will close
the public hearing, and I will reconvene the Commissioners
Court meeting and move to Item 2.16, which is the
consideration and discussion for approval of the revision
of plat for Lots 43 and 44A of Cypress Springs Estates,
Phase 1.
(The public hearing was concluded at 10:07
a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court
meeting was reopened.)
3-1U-C3
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
40
JUDGE TINLEY: Is Mr. Johnston here? Mr.
Voelkel?
MR. VOELKEL: Good morning.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning.
MR. VOELKEL: I have a request for this
morning on that item. The owner of the property is an
out-of-towner, and we had to send off the films for him to
sign. Of course, we have a bunch of other signatures to
get, too. In that process, the company that was shipping it
back has lost our film copies, so we do not have those here
this morning. I have talked to the owner, What we are
requesting is that if we could maybe table the approval
until the next meeting, I would prefer to come back to court
with the films all signed before we do the approval.
JUDGE TINLEY: I assume no one here on the
Court has any objection to that. We've had the public
hearing, so we've got that already taken care of. We will
just pass consideration of Item 2.16, if there is no
objection from anybody on the Court.
MR. VOELKEL: Thank you, sir,
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Thank you, Mr.
Voelkel. Appreciate that. We will now recess the
Commissioners Court meeting and we will convene a public
hearing -- well, no, we can't do that yet, `cause we're --
that's set for 10:15. We will -- we will reconvene the
3-10-03
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
41
Commissioners Court meeting, and let's go back to --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Gaylyn Dieringer's
here on 2.8, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Item 2.8, consider, discuss,
and take appropriate action on a Non-Financial Work Site
Training Agreement between Kerr County and Alamo Area
Development Corporation, and authorize County Judge to sign
the same. Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Members of the Court,
this is something we've done before, and I'll let Gaylyn
explain it to you. It's very simple. We get the
possibility of some labor for free, I believe. Is that
correct, Gaylyn?
MS. DIERINGER: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, if you'd be so
good as to explain it to the Court.
MS. DIERINGER: Good morning. My name is
Gaylyn Dieringer, manager of the Texas Workforce Center.
Basically, you have a contract or an agreement with us
already, and we're just amending two of the items. First of
all, the first amendment is for both covering Food Stamp
E & T. and -- Food Stamp Employment and Training and the
Choices program, and they're both welfare programs. This
agreement allows people who receive food stamp and cash
assistance to volunteer for Kerr County up to 30 hours per
3-10-03
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
week for three months. The goal of this program is to
provide hands-on experience. And then the second is, we now
have insurance, sort of like workmen's comp. It's called
special risk accidental insurance policy. And, basically,
that is it. They volunteer to work for you. They're
working off their welfare dollar. We cover them if they get
hurt. The only thing we need for y'all to do is supervise,
sign a time sheet, and that is it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Any particular
restrictions as to the type of work that they can be engaged
in?
MS. DIERINGER: No. No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. We provide the
supervision and that's the end of it; is that correct?
MS. DIERINGER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: What about the reporting
requirements under this program?
MS. DIERINGER: What will happen is the
supervisor -- let's just say it's at the Exhibit Center.
They will report to them, work 30 hours a week, and they
just sign a time sheet, and then the customer will return
the time sheet to us.
JUDGE TINLEY: And then you folks at the
Workforce Commission will take care of the -- of the other
reporting requirements --
3-1U-03
43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-,
25
the program?
compensation?
MS. DIERINGER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- that may be required under
MS. DIERINGER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There is no -- no
MS. DIERINGER: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No Social Security?
MS. DIERINGER: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No worker's comp?
MS. DIERINGER: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nothing?
MS. DIERINGER: Right. Basically, they go to
work or they lose their welfare dollar.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are we not already -- is
there a program similar to this already in place?
MS. DIERINGER: Right. This -- y'all already
signed it. It's just we're amending two of the items. The
first time I came in, we didn't have the workmen's comp
insurance. Now we do. Now we have two programs, Food Stamp
and Employment Training, and the other one is the Choices
program, and that is the cash dollar. So, they're going to
be working for their food stamps and working for their cash
3-10-03
44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
assistance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't think we can
say that loud enough. These people are paying the public
back for their welfare --
MS. DIERINGER: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- things. And
welfare-to-work the is the only way. That's the American
way. God bless America. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I would move
that the Court approve the Non-Financial Work Site Training
Agreement between Kerr County and the Alamo Area Development
Corporation as presented, authorize County Judge to sign
same.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Williams and Letz, respectively,
that the Court approve the Non-Financial Work Site Training
Agreement between Kerr County and Alamo Area Development
Corporation and authorize County Judge to sign the same. Is
there any further discussion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
3-10-03
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
MS. DIERINGER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Gaylyn.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We could get number 10
in between now and 10:15 couldn't we? That was a joke,
guys.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How about 7?
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll move to Item -- we can
get 7 in. Item 2.7, consider and discuss approving 911
unnamed road letter and cost of mailing of the same.
Commissioner Baldwin.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. And it's
going to take me about seven or eight minutes just to
introduce Mr. Bullock. As you know, we've been talking
about -- more and more about the 911 program moving in a --
everybody moving in one direction for the first time that
I've -- that I can recall, and this is -- this is another
part of the machine moving forward. As you can see here,
we're going to approve the -- the letter that Mr. Bullock
has brought forward. We're also going to talk about the
cost of mailing. And I think, in our backup -- and I'm
going to get to you in just a second -- in our backup, we
were talking about around $1,000 to get this mailout. Well,
this program is moving so fast and things are changing so
3-10-03
46
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
fast, we're not going to ask for $1,000 this morning; we're
going to ask for $300. Do you like us now?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I knew you would.
This is Jim Bullock, as you know, the Kerr County address
coordinator. Jim?
MR. BULLOCK: Good morning. You have with
you -- or in front of you a sample of the letter that we're
proposing to mail out to all these people on the unnamed
roads. And the $300 that was mentioned would be enough to
cover the postage, the letterheads and envelopes that would
be needed for these mailings.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is the issue that
Tommy stood up and tried to address at the beginning of our
meeting, and I think what he's going -- what he was going to
say is that we move forward with our mailing, be billed, and
pay the bill at that point, is what he was saying.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I clearly think we need
to do it. I have a real -- one minor comment on the letter.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm shocked.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's just that -- and,
you know, maybe I'm being picky or maybe I'm reading it
different than other people, but on the second paragraph,
fourth line, the second word, "present," it seems like an
3-10-C3
47
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
odd word there.
MR. AMERINE: Say again, sir?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would say, "provide
agreed upon..." Make it real clear what we're asking them
to do. And, you know, just a -- and the other thing is
that -- and I'm sure y'all would do this anyway, but provide
the Commissioners with a -- a list -- we don't need copies
of the letter, but just a list of who the letter's going out
to.
MR. BULLOCK: Yeah, there will be a list of
the unnamed roads and the people on those roads that will be
in your baskets today --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
MR. BULLOCK: -- that 911 provided me. I
think it was Friday that I got those.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Super.
JUDGE TINLEY: The only -- the only comment I
would make, primarily for grammatical purposes, in the
second line, Paragraph 2, the last word, "see." Possibly,
in lieu of "see," put in "specified" or "set forth," either
one of those.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the reason we
pay these lawyers.
JUDGE TINLEY: I want you to get your money's
worth, Buster.
3-10-03
48
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 BALDWIN: So there's two changes
in the verbiage of the letter? What --
JUDGE TINLEY: "Specified," I think, is
probably -- would be the better word, rather than "see."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about in place of
"present" or "present"?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: "Provide."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: "Provide"?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we're moving -- this
is great. And also, I mean, Buster, are you sure we need
$300 for this? Well, we're not going to pay till we get the
bill. As I understand, the -- the unnamed road list is --
has been cleared up over the weekend by the hard work of
911, for the most part.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that's exactly
right. It's cut down from $1,000 to $300. That's --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it could even be
going lower.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You'll have to take it
up with these guys here. I'm just -- all I know is what's
being presented before us today.
MR. BULLOCK: It's going to be approximately
150 letters to be mailed out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Under 50 bucks.
3-10-03
49
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: But, anyway, whatever the
amount is, we'll pay it when it comes in.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
MR. BULLOCK: Well, the postage will be
almost $200 for that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN:
argument with these guys. I'll take
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN:
concerned with the way you trim your
before it's over with if you let the
that.
Don't get in an
care of them.
They're going to be
beard and all that
n. I'll take care of
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Stand by. I move
that -- that we approve the unnamed road letter with those
two changes specified, and approve that Mr. Bullock do the
mahouts at his earliest convenience -- or the scheduled
time.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Baldwin and Letz, respectively,
that the Court approve the 911 unnamed road letter and
authorize the mahout by the address coordinator. Is there
any further discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify
by raising your right hand.
3-10-03
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. We will
now recess the Commissioners Court meeting and open a public
hearing set for 10:15, the public hearing being on the
revision of the plat for Tracts 13A, 13B, 14A, and 14B of
the Y.O. Ranchlands.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was
closed at 10:19 a.m., and a public hearing
was held in open court, as follows:)
P U B L I C H E A R I N G
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any member of the --
I would note that -- that notice of the public hearing was
running in the local daily newspaper, specifying the public
hearing was to be held before the Court on this date at
10:15 a.m. Is there any member of the public that wishes to
be heard on that particular item? Again, is there any
member of the public wishing to be heard on the revision of
plat for Tracts 13A, 13B, 14A, and 14B of the Y.O.
Ranchlands?
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: There being no member of the
public indicating a desire to be heard, we'll close the
public hearing, and we'll now reconvene the Commissioners
Court meeting and move to Item 2.17.
3-10-03
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(The public hearing was concluded at 10:20
a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court
meeting was reopened.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Consider and discuss approval
of the revision of plat for Tracts 13A, 13B, 14A, and 14B of
the Y.O. Ranchlands. Mr. Voelkel again.
MR. VOELKEL: This one I have back, so we're
in good shape there. I'm here to answer any questions.
Just to refresh your memory, this was -- this plat was
presented under the alternate platting process, which is a
combination of lots on a revision, and what we've done is
take four tracts at the Y.O. Ranchlands, pretty large
acreage tracts, and combine those into two tracts.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Combining large
tracts -- or smaller tracts into larger tracts is something
that we want to encourage. I don't see any problem with
this or any reason not to approve it.
JUDGE TTNLEY: Do you so move?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I make a motion we
approve it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded that the Court approve the revision of the plat for
Tracts 13A, 138, 14A, and 14B of the Y.O. Ranchlands as
presented by Mr. Voelkel. Is there any further discussion?
3-1G-03
52
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
I assume that carries with it the authorization for me to
sign it. Any further discussion? Being 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.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. We'll now
move to Item 2.10, which also is a timed item that got run
over on top of, and I apologize for that, gentlemen. Item
2.10 is consider and discuss hiring consultants to assist
with helping develop renovation/construction plans for the
Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center and approving the
contracts for the same. Commissioner Letz.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda
based on our last meeting, when we asked Huser Construction
and DRG Architects to come up with a plan for us in writing
with some costs attributed to it, and they've done that, so
I'll turn it over to Wayne Gondeck to present it to us and
open the discussion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir.
MR. GONDECK: Judge, Commissioners, I do
appreciate y'all making it somewhat time-specific. I always
hate to burden the Court with having to do that.
Fortunately, my time frame did get a little bit loosened up
on me today, so if y'all need to discuss this at further
3-10-03
53
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
length, again, that's -- that's your prerogative, and please
don't feel like you have to rush through this on my account.
I did try to forward to you, and I hope that you have in
your booklets there, two documents. One, our letter of
March 5th discussing a proposal from Huser/Adler
design/build group with our recommendations, and two, the
actual design/build services proposal from Huser/Adler dated
the same date discussing the services which they would
propose for the Youth Exhibit Center.
What that does outline -- and I will go back
over theirs to begin with -- are the several steps that they
would take, or propose to take to get to the point of having
an actual schematic design of the facility and a hard cost,
or a guaranteed maximum cost of the project, so that you can
decide what you're going to do beyond that point, and mainly
what the final cost of the project will be and how you're
going to fund that project. At this point, and from the
last meeting, it is our understanding that, one, there was
not a project funding source identified, and two, there was
not a budget identified. So, within this design/build
services proposal, those two items were the two keys that
were going to be searched out and hopefully identified
through this process, was, one, the final scope of the --
the project, and two, the final budget for the project.
To get to that point, though, there was going
3-10-03
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to be the request from the design and construction
professionals for some level of commitment as to the fees
being paid to the service providers for those services. And
on those two documents in front of you, for the design/build
proposal, there was a fee proposal in there for that, and
that was 528,600. And for the independent consulting
architect, which is DRG, there was a fee proposal of $6,000.
And I can tell you on ours, what that proposal was is
basically a fixed-fee proposal based on the -- the
Huser/Adler schedule to have the guaranteed maximum cost, I
guess, provided within basically three months from this
date, broken down into three equal parts of $2,000 a month,
so that we can be retained on a regular basis, available at
any time, and be present, you know, at all the meetings,
both at Commissioners Court, all the workshops, and also
working with them, you know, during that period of time.
So, ours would be a fixed, flat-rate fee, and then I will
allow them to discuss in more detail their actual proposal.
We have looked at this. From our
perspective, you know, looking at it from -- you know, as
your consultant or your agent for the level of services that
they are proposing to provide, it's a reasonable fee. Do
you want to commit that much money up front on this project?
That's back on your side of the table. I can't answer that,
you know, as to -- to whether or not you want to commit that
3-1G-03
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
much money at this time to this project. But for the
services and to have hard costs, a guaranteed maximum price
at the end of this process, it is reasonable. So, I -- at
that point -- or this point, I'd ask that -- you know, do
you have any questions? And where we could go from here --
JUDGE TINLEY: We're not going to get the
answers we need to have, are we, Mr. Gondeck, without
spending some money to get those alternatives and those
specific items that this would provide?
MR. GONDECK: Judge, I absolutely do not
believe you're going to get to that point unless you do
expend some funds or commit to some funds to get there. I
mean, that's my opinion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't look at me.
(Laughter.) Help me with those numbers again. It appears
that your fee is $6,000?
MR. GONDECK: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And what was that
other? $28,600? Or --
JUDGE TINLEY: Six --
MR. GONDECK: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $28,600, and that was
Mr. Huser?
MR. GONDECK: That was the Huser/Adler
design/build services.
3-10-03
56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, that's the
architect as well as the --
MR. GONDECK: The architect and the
construction.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. So --
MR. GONDECK: Did y'all want me to explain
some breakdown in that?
MR.
be happy to answer
doing a good job.
COM
that we -- we have
y'a11 will do any
you to say?
ADLER: You can or I can. I mean, I'll
questions as required. Go ahead; you're
~ISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you want us to say
$34,600 sitting here on the table before
-- I mean, is that what I'm understanding
MR. GONDECK: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, but that's not -- I
mean, I'm hearing that that's to get us a -- the
guaranteed -- get us to the point of having a guaranteed
maximum. I mean, we could probably spend less than that and
get less than that, than a guaranteed maximum. We could --
to me, that seems like a lot of money to spend initially,
but I don't have a problem spending, you know, certainly a
part of that to get something good enough that we can go to
grants or something -- go forward, trying to figure out how
we're going to fund it. I mean, we need to get -- to me,
3-10-03
57
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
l8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
we're -- we can get somewhere between where we are today and
guaranteed maximum price. We don't -- you know, we need to
be somewhere in there. We don't need to be at the end of
that in the timeline right now. I think we need to have
enough that we can go with a plan to go out and see how
we're going to raise the money to do it. And maybe we
can't. I mean, that's really -- I'm probably talking to
either Wayne or Steve or Bill as to, is there a lesser
amount that we can -- could pay and get a lesser product?
MR. GONDECK: Maybe I should let them talk
about the level of service that they're offering to provide
first, and then we could sort of rehash what levels of
service could be provided. That's probably a good way to
approach that.
JUDGE TINLEY: I've got two questions, if I
might. And I don't know whether these are appropriate for
you, Mr. Gondeck, or whether or not they're for Mr. Huser
and the architect that he's teamed with. Number one, it is
my understanding, from reading the information presented to
us at this point, that if we expend that sum of money, the
amount that we expend for the benefit of the design/build
team, that will apply towards the ultimate cost of that if
we go forward with that design/build team on that project.
And, secondly -- I want that confirmed, one. Secondly, if
we expend that sum of money, whatever is -- is provided to
3-10-03
58
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
us in connection with that effectively becomes our property
if we -- effectively bought and paid for if we don't go
forward with it. And that's also my understanding, and I
just merely want that confirmed or not confirmed. I don't
know whether that's for you or for these gentlemen, but --
MR. GONDECK: As far as the second question,
I'll let them specifically answer that. The first question
is in the proposal, as far as the actual fees that were --
will be included in that guaranteed maximum cost, as far as
being included in that second part, that that will be part
of that project.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. GONDECK: But I'll turn it over to Alan
and Steve and let them present it to you, possibly with some
other options that they may have.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Gondeck.
Welcome, gentlemen.
MR. ADLER: Thank you. Thank you, gentlemen.
I think I can probably throw a little light. I am Alan
Adler, the architect with Huser/Adler, and I appreciate the
audience today. First, I guess the answer to that question
is, you buy and pay for the services and the -- and the
product is yours. Typically, the architect owns the
drawings, but they're not for anybody else; they're yours.
I mean, that's the way it works. Nothing's different; it's
3-10-03
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
all very typical A.I.A. type standard agreement. And
absolutely, the services do accrue toward the overall fee.
It is, in fact, the first phase, which is why it is --
that's why you can generate a GMP from it, because it's a
real first phase. The way -- the way we -- and this is to
answer your question, Mr. Letz. The way we went about this
was we -- we know that we need to establish some sort of
range on the budget before we can sort of assess what we're
doing, and we -- and that's -- so we put something less than
what it was before and what we gleaned from the meeting the
last time, which was probably in the range of a million to
two million, two, but maybe fluctuate, as in the original
criteria, 25 percent, which leaves it pretty broad, but it
-- but it definitely doesn't narrow it. I mean, doesn't
allow you to go higher -- too much higher and too much
lower, because we can't do anything if we don't spend some
of that.
What we also did was, we -- we introduced, as
the starting criteria for the design, the -- the same design
criteria package that Wayne put together and that all of
y'all had talked about and we had talked about with you. I
mean, we had -- we understood that very well. And that's
what we want to try and do, give you as much as possible.
Absolutely as much as possible. We know we don't have the
money to do everything, but we're going to have to figure
3-10-03
60
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
out how to do that. The professional services that -- that
are required to take that same program and to get it to a
GMP, I would say, is on Page 3. "Professional fees for this
phase of the work include the following:" The program
evaluation, confirmation, and modification; I see that as
probably three separate meetings. This is apart from what
we do with our -- when we draw and everything else. First
meeting would say -- and let me say right here that the
schedule we're saying is still in line with the original
goal, which was to be completed by January of next year, so
that the livestock show in January would be available and
all that. That's -- I mean, you know, that's -- I
understand -- understand what that is, but that's where --
that's how we couched it.
So, what we first want to do is evaluate the
program -- the written program in terms of the new budget
criteria and the budget being part of that. I see that
probably in a special session, perhaps next week or whenever
y'all think it's the right answer for the -- to kick this
off. In deference to that schedule, that's when I started.
Then we get a pile of information that we can -- we can
start to design to and work on, and we'll develop multiple
schemes in sketch form that begin to answer the questions.
We'll have cost evaluations at that time, too. Also, before
we can do that, we're going to need to do field work. We're
3-10-03
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
61
going to get the survey. We've got to update it; we have to
have the canvass of information accurate. Otherwise, we
can't give you accurate information. So -- so -- and we'll
have to do field work and we'll have to do as-built drawings
to some degree to know how much demolition and how much to
design to and what -- you know. So, we have to -- we have
to do some front-end work, and then we have to have these
meetings.
I see having the meeting, then doing those
sketches, then come back, we have another meeting and we
talk about it, and we get all clear about -- we give you
ideas and dollars and all of that, and then we come back
with some sort of direction. And I know -- for instance, I
know that we want a separate exhibit center, but we can't
afford it. We`11 have to talk about that. I mean, there's
a lot of pieces to this that I know need discussion, so
we'll put all of that, you know, in front of you, get some
direction priorities, and then we'll come back with a
design. We'll take all of that, we'll find multiple
solutions, and -- and put one solution on the table. And
it's at that time that Huser will put the hard GMP to it, so
that when we complete that, we'll have our last meeting to
say, "This is what we talked about doing," and we'll
probably have a couple of alternates. And I'll use parking
as an example. Maybe we want to say, you know, let's add a
3-1G-03
62
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
few extra spaces or clean up what we've got, and see if we
want to afford that -- can afford that later on. But the
end result is a -- is it takes that process to get there.
And it's an interactive process. It's a design process.
It's field surveys. And -- and we -- we looked at it.
And -- and I know -- I know dollars are important to you,
and I don't know any other way to get to that; from A to B,
I mean. That's how -- that's what it takes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Alan, as I see here, you
know, the first meeting pretty much gets us to what the
Commissioners Court want, and y'all to determine truly what
we have. That's kind of --
MR. ADLER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I can see that
that's a big hurdle at that point, because if the Court --
and that's where I would think we need some sort of a cost
breakdown to get to that point. Because if the Court can't
-- if we can't agree, there's no point in spending much more
time on this project for a while. So I think that -- you
know, to me, I'd like to find out what it's going to cost
for us -- for you to sit down with the Court and let us kind
of hash out whatever -- if we can agree on what we want out
there. And, at the same time, I think we do need to get a
-- you know, pretty much to go out there, do some sort of
as-built drawings. I think those are going to be critical
3-10-03
63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-- or not drawings. As-built -- you know, what we have out
there. Because that's going to be critical, long-term, for
the Court to have, you know, if we come to an agreement.
You know, or if we don't come to an agreement as to exactly
what to do, that's kind of -- really, that's a little bit
further than what we did on the asbestos survey, trying to
determine really what the situation of that facility is, you
know, from a professional standpoint.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One of things I see
in here that is a question that we raised before among us,
and we were unable to come up with an affirmative answer,
has to do with verification of existing conditions. What is
usable, what can be converted, what needs to come down, and
so forth. And I see that in your proposal; am I correct?
MR. ADLER: Yes, you do.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. And so that
everyone -- if we go this route, you will be able to tell us
if there is anything salvageable about that facility that we
have effectually called exhibit hall or ag barn or pig barn
or whatever it is?
MR. ADLER: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And how much of it
goes away, how much of it can be salvaged, if any?
MR. ADLER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And/or used in some
3-10-03
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
64
other type of facility?
MR. ADLER: Right. Right. We're going to
uncover all of the options, all financial benefits, the
two-for-ones, if you will, which are -- sometimes make
themselves obvious after you get into it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But that also --
Alan, would that also include taking another look at what
needs to be done to the arena to make certain that it meets
current standards and codes?
MR. ADLER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And is brought up to
speed so that it is a safe venue for animals and people?
MR. ADLER: Yes, sir, that is part of it.
That was part of the original program, and that -- that I
have -- recognize as an important piece to this, too. And
it is part of it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The arena is unsafe?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Electrical parts of
it, I think, are.
MR. ADLER: And the ventilation. You know, I
think all those points are well-taken. Accessibility, all
that. And that will be sort of a constant in your budget.
I mean, you sort of start there, and then you work to all
the other hopeful scopes that we can include. But,
3-1G-03
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
65
answering your question, that would mean, I think, that you
would say on that Page 3 that you would want everything but
Number 5. Is that how you might look at it, Wayne?
MR. GONDECK: Well, but I'm -- sometimes I --
I get to this dangerous point where I think out loud,
especially with the stenographer out here.
MR. ADLER: Right.
MR. GONDECK: And a camcorder. (Laughter.)
Give me two minutes to think out loud. This is a proposal,
and basically outlines the services. Within the Part 1
agreement, which is a standard A.I.A. form, it has the --
the terms of actually termination. In other words, it has
the availability of allowing you to terminate at several
points, both for convenience and for cost. So, as we're
moving through this, it does allow you to terminate the
contract at several points. I think -- let me make -- if I
could, make a few comments. If we're going to do it right,
and if you choose to do it the right way, this is probably
the comprehensive way to get to the point that you really
want to be at.
And I don't mean to say that if you don't
choose to do it this way, that you're doing it wrong, but to
get to the point that you've stated that you want to be at,
then this is probably a good way to get there. However, if
you don't have the resources to get there, you may have to
3-10-03
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
66
choose another way. And I'm talking about dollars and
cents-wise. So, this is -- is probably a very sensible way
to get there if you have the resources. But as you go
through this process, you may want to have an out clause
within the contract to say, okay, we got to this point. We
may see, like you said, Commissioner Letz, we're not going
to get there; we're not going to be able to agree. We can't
get through the first, you know, step here of programming.
You know, can we just tell y'all, "Go away; we don't want to
spend any more money in this process, and we're going to
have to shelve this thing for a couple years," and -- or,
you know, four years -- no innuendoes there -- eight years,
whatever, and come back to it at another time.
But I think, in -- in drafting up the final
agreement, maybe that's the way we should proceed on this,
is that we should break down this fee structure a little bit
farther to -- to make it succinct in each of these steps, or
a process to assign a value, either percentage-wise or
dollar-wise, as to how to deal with this. I would ask, on
my part, if we're not going to be sticking to the schedule,
that maybe I do mine on an hourly basis, rather than on a
fixed-fee basis, because I'm going to be tagging along based
on how long it takes the Huser/Adler group to do this, and
to just be available based on their process. Because, you
know, by the statute, I'm supposed to be involved in
3-~0-03
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
67
overseeing this, and as y'all deal with this. And that way
I don't have to be -- you know, you don't have to be paying
me if nothing's going on.
So, maybe we could do it that way, rather
than just a -- a fee that -- you know, paying me on a
monthly basis forever. No, that doesn't make any sense.
But maybe just on an hourly rate, versus, you know, some
obscure number for every month. But if that sounds
appropriate, maybe that's the way we need to proceed on
this, because the steps are here to get where you need to
be. But if the dollars are maybe not right now, because you
don't know if you want to go all of the way through this
process, then maybe we need to break this down. And I don't
know that they're prepared to say there's a dollar amount to
each one of these line items. Maybe there is, but --
MR. ADLER: I'd rather not today, but I think
his point's well-taken. In every A.I.A. contract, there are
phases, and within this phase we could probably break it
into three pieces, and at the end of the second piece -- the
first piece is information guide; I don't really see how we
can avoid that. And then the second one is where you get
the answers, sort of, from all the different choices, so --
and then the third one is the final product. But that
also -- that final product also, you know, contains the GMP,
the guaranteed maximum price, which I -- I know is an
3-10-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
68
outcome you want, but you could probably stop it at that and
I could draw up the document with those numbers in it. No
question about it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have one question,
Alan. I think before we started this part of the
discussion, you made some reference to doing all of these
things as outlined on Page 3, with the exception of Number
5, the single final schematic. Do I understand you
correctly?
MR. ADLER: Well, that would probably be a
third phase.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, that's not part
of this phase?
MR. ADLER: Oh, yes, it is. It's part of the
overall piece. I'm just saying, in answer to Mr. Letz'
question, that if you want to stop the process in the middle
somewhere, that's probably one of the places you'd -- that's
a break. 'Cause what happens is, right there we get all
these ideas, and all -- and you all decide on the scope of
work. You know, I go back and put it together and Huser
puts a number to it, a hard number. To this point, you've
had budget numbers and order of magnitude and things like
that. So -- so, that's what that step is. If you can't get
to an agreement, like you may, then -- then you can quit
before you do that. That's what it -- but it definitely is
3-10-03
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
69
part of this. Oh, quite definitely.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
MR. GONDECK: Commissioner Baldwin, you made
the comment on the total number of dollars that was out on
the table. There were two items that weren't totally out on
the table at that point, and two things that Alan did bring
up that are traditionally the owner's responsibility, and
one is the -- the actual survey of the property. But I know
that in the past, y'all have expended some funds for actual
property surveys, and I'm not sure where that stands. And
we have received -- or I've seen some documents of some
partial surveys, but I don't know if there's ever been any
final surveys as far as the total outlines of the buildings.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think so.
MR. GONDECK: From what I've seen, it's been
pretty rough.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought we did.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not of the buildings. We
have a survey of the property.
MR. GONDECK: The property and setting the
buildings on the -- the site, I -- I believe. There
probably needs to be some additional work done there, and
probably some elevations and some shots done around the
buildings to give us some basic ideas of drainage on the
site, where we have some problems with drainage on the site,
3-1G-G3
~o
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
so some of that needs to be done. We need to have some
utility work done. And probably what we're looking at there
is, you know, I'd say probably at least $2,500 to $3,000 in
actual survey work that needs to be done that would not fall
within, you know, the architectural end. And then, prior to
doing any type of final structural analysis, we need to get
some geotechnical work done. And, even under the statute,
it does say that the owner is responsible for that
geotechnical services, and that probably -- for this size
we'll be planning on building, probably be somewhere around
$1,500. So, we'd be looking at, for those outside surveying
and geotechnical services, probably somewhere around, you
know, $4,500 to $5,000 of actual other types of
investigatory work.
MR. ADLER: We could look at the survey you
got and see how much is there. And then there's a form that
we have, that we fill out, that says this is what we'd like
in addition, so we could take care of all the management of
that for you. But it is a -- you know, we got to get some
kind of canvass established to start.
JUDGE TINLEY: Question, Mr. Gondeck. Is it
your best estimate and opinion at this time that if we were
to select the option, for example, to -- we've got a
segregation of these various phases, and maybe they're in
three, where the end of the second phase is through Item
3-10-03
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
71
Number 4 as listed on the proposal that you're making; if we
wanted to stop that, for example, as Mr. Letz suggested that
we might -- it might be necessary that we do, is it your
best estimate and opinion at this time that if we were to
pay you on an hourly basis, as opposed to the fixed as
indicated there, that at least on a pro rata basis,
financially, this Court would be better off? Do you
understand what I'm saying?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Want to hire a lawyer?
(Laughter.)
MR. GONDECK: Okay, let me ask you a question
back. Judge, are you talking about within -- if we're
stopping at Number 4? Or --
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
MR. GONDECK: -- if we're continuing this on,
or -- I guess it comes down to -- my question was if you're
going to stop and start this over, the process of this, next
year or so, you know, I'm really not sure if you're going to
spend more money or not. Depending on how many times this
comes up over the next, you know, year, or if y'all, you
know, pick it up again after January of next year, I really
don't know. It depends on how much time y'all want to spend
on it. I'll -- I'll do it either way. Once we finish the
juvenile facility, it sure is going to affect me to do it on
a fixed fee to keep on, you know, coming up here and -- and
3-10-G3
72
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
being here on a regular basis, and -- and not being able to
tie back into another project.
JUDGE TINLEY: Time's -- from a time frame
standpoint, then, based on what you're telling me, because
of the travel time involved with -- with the requirement
that you be here locally anyway on a fairly regular basis as
long as that project's going on, it's your best estimate and
opinion at this point we might be better off just doing it
on an hourly basis?
MR. GONDECK: Well, so far I can tell you
this much; that, for some reason, neither one of these
projects have been scheduled at the same time, or meeting at
the same time, so it hasn't worked out to my benefit very
well. So, it -- to me, it has always worked better on my
part to do it on a fixed-fee basis, just because hourly is
just so hard to keep up with. I can tell you right now,
what I did on this basis to come up with the fixed fee is
just set aside five hours per week for the next three
months.
JUDGE TINLEY: Could you --
MR. GONDECK: That's really what I did.
JUDGE TINLEY: Could you give us a breakdown
through -- through Item 4, for example, on a fixed-fee
basis? 'Cause if we're going to stop, it appears that's
where we're going to stop, is after Item 4. Wouldn't you
3-1G-03
73
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
agree?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we start.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, if we start, yeah.
Could you do that?
MR. GONDECK: Probably so, yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Next question I've got
is for our Auditor. Let's get him in the mix here. Other
than going into reserves to -- do we have any money hanging
around for all or part of this $34,600?
MR. TOMLINSON: We budgeted $22,000 and some
change for major repairs out there that we've chosen not to
touch until we know the outcome of our discussions, so
that -- that line item is still intact.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, we're up to
right at 40.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that's to get through
5. If we stop at 4 -- I mean, I -- I really don't see us
getting to 5 until we get money.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't either
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wait a minute. He
lists 5 things, and the next paragraph says Part 1 fee for
these services is 28, 6.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Five things.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I'm saying; I
3-1D-03
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
74
don't think we're going to spend the 40. Hopefully we can
get through 1 through 4 for 22,000 and change, if that's the
source we use.
JUDGE TINLEY: I was wondering if you were
just going to let them kind of -- kind of glean the clue, or
whether you were going to tell them direct. Now you've told
them direct, Jonathan.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where'd you get the
40?
MR. ADLER: That includes the survey, the
geotech --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, the survey.
MR. ADLER: Wayne's fees, everything.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just kind of added
them up as I -- and we better cut them off now, 'cause we're
up to 40. By the end of the day they're going to be over a
hundred. But, you know, I'm concerned. Tommy is now
talking about the -- 22?
MR. TOMLINSON: Let me look it up.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's talking about the
money that we put in there for minor repairs to that
facility.
MS. SOVIL: Major.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Major repairs to that
facility. What if we spend that here, and we -- and then,
3-10-03
75
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
for some reason, we fall apart? Our repair money is gone.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Taking that one step
further, Commissioner, is it correct that over the last few
years, we have budgeted repair money that we haven't spent
and we've swept that back into the --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Still doing
it, yes. Do you want to go further with that?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No. I just -- yeah.
Your answer suggests to me that -- that using -- if it's
appropriate, using part of the fund would be simply
retrieving money that was budgeted for purpose of the Ag
Barn and spending it on it. But maybe that -- maybe that
rationale doesn't hold water.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And what bothers me
about the whole thing is the comment that Commissioner 2
here made, is that it's -- part of that facility out there
is unsafe. Well, I'm not -- if the damn thing is unsafe, we
need to go fix it. Today. Yesterday. If it is unsafe for
human beings to be in that facility, we either fix it today
or we shut it down. And I mean that. That's not a funny
item at all.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, it's not.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If there is -- if that
thing is electrically unsafe, it needs to be shut down
today; I mean, the doors locked on it. And here we are now
3-10-03
76
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
talking about using the money to fix that thing to -- to pay
these fellows to put together a plan. I'm sorry, I'm just
out in left field. I still can't get my mind around this
thing. I'm not sure we're approaching it in the right way.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Following up on
that, let me ask a question to clarify, at least for me, how
we are approaching it. In this range of alternatives that
we'll be discussing and developing in these three meetings,
is the basis in that range of alternatives to simply
rehabilitate the buildings that we have now? Or does the
base case include destruction and reconstruction of the
buildings?
MR. ADLER: It does both. It will include
both. I mean, we're going to look at all of the options and
angles, and you're going to have to help us with priorities
and budget and things like that. But, no, we're going to do
it all. And that's why I included the criteria from the
original proposal request, because I know that's what you
want to do. But we also know we can't, so what we've got to
do is sift through it until we got the answer.
MR. GONDECK: Commissioner, I would tell you
that it's still up to the Court to come up with that, you
know, base line of what to do out there. As the -- the
consulting architect that came up with the preliminary, you
know, scope of work, I would sit there and say -- I'd
3-10-03
77
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
probably scream and holler and everything else if you do not
at least, one, replace the hog barn, because, you know, it
does not, you know, meet the needs of the intended purpose
out there, at least what was explained to me. And, two, to
renovate the arena to bring it up to the current building
codes and standards. Those -- those are the two things
that, you know, need to be done.
JUDGE TINLEY: But the bottom line is,
without at least going through Number 4, if we're going to
do anything --
MR. GONDECK: There are multiple --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- we're operating in the
dark. And we really should go through Number 5 if we're
going to do something specific and -- and know exactly where
we're going and what's required and what needs to be done.
MR. GONDECK: There are multiple levels of
how to get there. But, I mean -- and I guess I heard, well,
you know, do nothing to a part. And, you know, there are
some things -- there are some things -- there's some minimal
levels of work that have to be done to almost everything out
there. And I guess that's where I probably may stand up in
the middle of something and say, you know, you really have
to do something here, and if you're going to do anything, to
make the project feasible. And I think that's what we come
down to, is that -- and it comes back to, you know, either
3-10-03
78
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
-- either do something or say that it -- that the facility
is, you know, a problem. And there are some serious, you
know, issues that need to be dealt with, and they either
need to be dealt with by doing something about it or saying
that there's -- it's not doable.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: The Auditor indicated that he
had some additional information, I think.
MR. TOMLINSON: We did -- we did receive
approximately $6,000 from FEMA on the flood damage.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Say that again?
JUDGE TINLEY: $6,000 from FEMA.
MR. TOMLINSON: $6,000. And that $6,000 is
not included in the 22 number I just gave, so we have 30 --
around $32,000, $33,000.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that's
specifically supposed to be used for -- specifically for
repair. I mean, you don't -- let me rephrase that. I'm
really trying to ask a question; I'm not telling you what to
do. Isn't it supposed to be -- isn't it specific? Isn't it
earmarked for repairs, not for consultants?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Am I wrong?
MR. TOMLINSON: -- I think it specifically
says that we use it for that.
3-10-03
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
79
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's that we
can't insure it if we don't fix it. Isn't that right,
Glenn?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, the money -- we
don't have to spend it out there, but our insurance isn't
going to cover it if we don't fix it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, okay. I thought
you had to just spend the federal money to hire an
electrician to go out there and fix it, or a roofer to go
out there and fix the thing, as opposed to giving it to
Mr. Gondeck or someone like him.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know; I'm just --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's just what I
thought. Doesn't matter. So, six more thousand, huh? It's
our money anyway; just went to Washington. It's coming
back. All right.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It was laundered in
Washington.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It was laundered.
JUDGE TINLEY: And reduced.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They raked off their
seven billion.
MR. GONDECK: Coming back a little shrunken.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And so we have $22,000
3-10-D3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
80
in the major repairs?
MR. TOMLINSON: There's 23.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Twenty-three. Going
up; we're growing here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we have anything left
in Professional Services?
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't think there -- there
never was anything in Professional Services.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We talked about
Contingency. We didn't anticipate any professional
services?
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Five thousand in
Professional Services?
JUDGE TINLEY: Surveyor, handling any
geotechnical.
MR. ADLER: And we would work on that, make
it as inexpensive as possible.
MS. SOVIL: We got 20,000 in Professional
Services.
JUDGE TINLEY: The decision we want to make
today is, do we want to do anything? And if we do, we need
to get ourselves specifically informed from people who are
able to give us accurate information as to what our options
are and what they're really going to cost, what's usable,
3-10-03
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
81
what's not usable. Is that where I see we are, Mr. Gondeck?
(Mr. Gondeck nodded.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It appears we can find
the money we would have between Professional Services and
Jailer Salaries, or -- (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What -- just for a fun
conversation here, what if we said, look, guys, what we want
to do is put on a new roof on the -- on the old building and
make it kind of look like the arena thing, new roof on it
and replace the electrical throughout the place and put some
new fans over there so those calf ropers can breathe. And
all those -- you know, take out the hog pens and pour some
concrete in there, put pens back -- new pens, paint them,
whatever. That's all we want to do. Now, what do you --
what do you do? What do y'all do?
MR. ADLER: Well, again, when we have that
meeting, which I would like to have, as originally
discussed, I -- that's one of the options, but there's going
to be other things that pop up and crop up. You named some.
I mean, I can name some. I mean, but we're going to cover
them all, and then you'll know where the priorities are,
'cause the dollars will be there too.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But I notice --
noticed in the contractor's program, you know, he's talking
about parking and paving. You know, we're going to -- you
3-10-C3
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
82
know, what kind of -- what kind of parking are we talking
about? What kind of paving are we talking about? Are we
talking about skid-free rock? Are we talking about hot mix?
Are we talking about 47 acres? You know, all those things,
we need to -- we really need to talk about. And I -- I
think we have signage.
MR. ADLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Signage --
MR. ADLER: I think that's important.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, we have --
today, we have a sign out there that -- at our facility that
part of the lettering is hanging down. We can't even fix
the damn sign we have, and here we are talking about another
40 grand or so just to find out what we need to do. But --
you know, so it's at that point that we sit down and visit
all of those little issues.
MR. ADLER: Yes. I want to -- I want to hear
all of that. And --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right.
MR. GONDECK: Commissioner, the main thing is
to quantify all those issues, get them down on paper so you
can decide, you know, how much is it going to take? Are we
going to -- to fix those letters out there that are there?
Are we going to replace -- ar.e they doing their job? If
they were straight, would they do their job? (Laughter.)
3-10-03
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
83
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll give you the
answer right now. The answer is no.
MR. GONDECK: But we need -- but we need to
document that to make sure we can say, how much is it going
to cost to do something right out there? And then, that
way, y'all can make a decision, if you know that's how much
it's going to take here. And by the time we add up all of
these, how many of those do we pull out? How many do we
keep in? So that we can make the decision and go forward to
say, how much of it can we fix?
MR. ADLER: Also --
MR. GONDECK: Does it get another roof? Even
though we can't raise it up another 2 to 5 feet to be able
to get the proper ventilation, maybe we can afford the floor
in there, so at least it is -- it doesn't build up as much
dust and, you know, you can sill have a decent show out
there without the dust. Even though you don't have the
heighth for a good ventilation, you can get rid of as much
of the dust as possible by pouring a thin little slab in
there. There are options. And you get, you know, a sloped
roof in there, and -- to be able to keep it drained off.
There are many options with that.
MR. ADLER: Also, I would think during those
meetings we could flush out all the grants and foundations,
and I know there's a lot out there, because that could have
3 10-03
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
84
some bearing either on time schedule and/or scope of work.
And you can -- I can envision taking a lot of these pieces,
in perhaps three phases, one to -- to identify the livestock
show as the prime candidate for early money, and then you
may have some funds available, so you could have -- you
know, maybe have everything. I mean, who knows? That's --
so we're going from A to Z.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think we can
continue talking about this literally till the cows come
home and not arrive at any conclusions until we get this
information. So --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What time do the cows
get home?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: After 6:00.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ain't coming today.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right after the deer
and the antelope play, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, right. In the
same spot, too.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What
What are we going to do here? What are we
Tell them, "Thank y'all, and we'll see you
we going to vote on something, or what?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think
to me we could either -- we really need to
are we doing?
supposed to do?
around"? Or are
-- I mean, seems
get -- Alan and
3-10-03
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
85
Steve need to get back what it's going to -- kind of break
down the cost a little bit more. But if we ask them to do
that, I think we need to have a pretty good indication that
we're going to, you know, start moving forward.
MR. ADLER: I'd say the next piece would be
to fill out, if you're going to move forward, Part 1,
including those dollars in the -- which will be -- there
will be a spot in there for how you delineate the fee.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, then, basically at
our next meeting, sign a contract?
MR. ADLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the next step. I
hear a lot of silence up here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm cool.
JUDGE TINLEY: We need to keep moving
forward, gentlemen. That's my position.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can't sign a contract
today, so put it on our agenda for the next meeting to sign
a contract or not sign a contract?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The only difference
today, though, would be that you -- that you would fix some
cost to Items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.
JUDGE TINLEY: And Mr. Gondeck's going to do
the same thing concerning his compensation, according to my
understanding. Is that correct?
3-10-03
86
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. GONDECK: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And bring the contract as
well?
MR. ADLER: Yeah.
MR. GONDECK: What I'll have is an amendment
to our agreement from before; it will be a letter amendment
breaking down, per their agreement as to each phase, what
that cost would be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
JUDGE TINLEY: I sense you gentlemen's
frustrations and I apologize for it. I see Steve back here,
and -- like, "What did I show up for?" And I apologize for
that, but we've got some frustrations here, and I think you
guys can sense that.
MR. ADLER: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: And we want to move forward,
but we've got to have these particulars nailed down. And --
and, you know, if we had big scads of money that we were
operating from, it would be -- be wonderful. We -- well, we
probably wouldn't be here. But, for one, I can assure you I
want to move this thing forward and I want to get some
resolution, and let's get it back on the agenda for the next
go-round, and y'all can update that information. And --
MR. ADLER: Is our next go-round two weeks
from today?
3-10-03
87
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
MS. SOVIL: 25th.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 25th.
MR. ADLER: And in -- in terms of my
original -- I originally had said that --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 24th, I believe.
JUDGE TINLEY: It would be.
MS. SOVIL: 24th.
MR. ADLER: 24th? Same time, 10 a.m.? The
schedule that you had originally put in front of us and the
original scope of work had you opening for the livestock --
is that not -- is there no -- is there no end date to this?
We're just going to -- I mean, 'cause I'll put in the
contract a schedule for how this should happen. That can be
aggressive, or I can be consistent and -- I mean, you tell
me.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we need to be
cost-effective.
MR. ADLER: Okay.
COMMISSTONER LETZ: Is probably the biggest
concern, 'cause I don't see any chance of having it, in my
mind, really done by next January, considering we're
approaching midyear. So I don't think we should try to -- I
guess I think it's unrealistic. I think we should get the
most bang for our buck.
MR. ADLER: Okay.
3-10-03
88
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: If we can start prior to
it on part of it, great. If we can't, we can't.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's part of the
options on where to start so as not to affect the stock
show.
MR. ADLER: Well, and that's the way I had --
yeah, that's the way I had put this proposal together with a
real aggressive schedule, but that assumes that the money's
available to start construction, which we know --
JUDGE TINLEY: From a time frame standpoint,
I think you've got to keep as part of the equation in your
mind that we may have to go out and do some arm-twisting and
begging and whatever to -- to raise the money for whatever
we end up with.
MR. ADLER: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: That probably is going to take
some time factor, I would think.
MR. ADLER: Okay. I think I understand.
JUDGE TINLEY: You know, I don't think we
could hold a gun to your head on any kind of a schedule at
this point. It wouldn't be reasonable for us to try and do
that.
MR. ADLER: Okay.
MR. GONDECK: Gentlemen, if I may just
respond to your comment about sensing the frustration, I
3-10-03
89
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
would ask for y'all to please bear in mind that my -- my
biggest frustration in this situation right now is -- is
really not having the answers of how to answer your
questions on how to get you to the point of where you need
to be, and how to really solve your problems of how do you
get going with -- with really not having the resources or --
or the money to get there. You know, how do you -- how do
you do a project without having the money? And I understand
this from working with counties on a regular basis, that
that is always the issue, of how do you develop a project
without having the resources up front? How do you get
started? How do you get moving without having the moneys?
And it is the hardest part of committing the funds and, you
know, of taking funds and, you know, putting them into the
design professionals up front, because, you know, you have
other repairs and things that have to be ongoing. But,
without getting everything down on paper and being able to
quantify, you know, what is there, what needs to be done,
and being able to make those logical decisions, we can't get
to that next point without doing the first part. But we --
we appreciate y'all's patience in working through this.
JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate you folks being
patient with us, and working with you with the frustration
that we've got, and we -- we really, sincerely do.
MR. GONDECK: And I know, from my
3-10-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
90
perspective, I understand it's your project, and how you
want to get it done and when you want to get it done.
MR. ADLER: We'll stay with you. Thank you,
gentlemen.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Appreciate you
guys being here today.
MR. ADLER: Okay. Our pleasure. I'll see
you in two weeks.
MR. GONDECK: Oh, one other point. I do have
another commitment on the 24th, and I'm not sure how to work
around that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If you can't make it, I'm
sure they can handle it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Either that, or -- or we may
want to give some consideration to --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Special meeting?
JUDGE TINLEY: Special.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we want to do --
MR. GONDECK: Unless y'all --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We could do it at the
same time.
MR. GONDECK: Unless y'all meet in the
afternoon or something.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We could do a workshop at
25 11:00. 3:00?
3 10 03
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
91
MR. GONDECK: It's just that there's about --
JUDGE TINLEY: I've generally got detention
hearings at 3:00, and sometimes I'll have --
MR. GONDECK: -- just about 200 miles in
between the two locations.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're going to have a
Commissioners Court meeting at 9 o'clock that day. That's
all I can tell you. That's all I can tell you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have anything else from
you on this issue?
MR. GONDECK: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We'd be better off in
a workshop-type session, away from this Commissioners Court.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think so.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: I really -- I really think so.
We might be able to get that one in the next item, depending
on where we go with it; pair it up with the same thing. I
-- I don't know what Mr. Adler and Mr. Huser's availability
is, but as we try and zero in on something, we'll get with
you. Thank you. We'll now move to Item 2.11, consider and
discuss interest in Court setting a workshop to discuss
possible issues related to the Maintenance Department. Mr.
Letz?
3-10-03
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
92
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda,
and the backup is pretty self-explanatory, because of
several areas. One, I think -- Glenn, help me. Was it two
years ago we went out for bids? Two years ago, we went out
for bids, trying to accept -- and I have -- or to receive
standard pricing for materials and labor for electrical,
plumbing, things of that nature, HVAC. And the agreement --
the actual RFQ document got very, very large, and as a
result of that, I think, you know, we ended up with one or
two bids, if that. I think it's a good idea. I think,
legally, we're probably really required to do this because
of the amount we expend on these areas on an annual basis.
And I just like the -- personally, I think we ought to try
that again. I'll be glad to work with the County Attorney's
office on trying to figure out a -- a form that would be,
you know, relatively simple to receive bids for those
services.
The other thing is, the Maintenance
Department, you know, to me, does a -- a great job on daily
maintenance, but I think, mainly because we really rely on
community service and trustees and things of that nature,
some of the long-term things are not getting done that I see
and I hear about. And, you know, I'm obviously at this
facility more than the others, but some painting in the old
part of the building, handrails, front doors, things of that
3-10-C3
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
93
nature that are not part of the annual schedule. And I
think we really need to possibly look at that issue and get
some input from the Maintenance Department as to how best we
can handle that. And then, third, I just put it on there.
You know, I don't recall that we've ever looked at
privatizing any of this stuff, from lawn care or any -- that
wouldn't make sense, but some of the stuff. So, I just put
this on the agenda to see if the rest of the Court has any
interest in looking at any or all three of these items, and
if they did, I think it's something that we should do in a
workshop setting. Take a little bit of time; we can get
some --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I remember us having
contracts on maintenance, like, in the jail in the early
days. To give you an example, the air-conditioning/heating
units. Mr. Compton's group would come out on a regular
basis and do -- we had this agreement/contract thing with
him and with several different companies in several
different areas. But, why is it we stopped that? I think
that's what you're talking about. Why is it we stopped
that, and -- and how did we stop it? Why did we stop it?
Who stopped it? All the above. I mean, I remember doing
something similar to what you're talking about, and I know
we go to these meetings, and they tell us we're supposed to
do this 'cause we spend "X" amount of dollars.
3-10-03
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
94
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. We were under a
maintenance agreement; I think it was with Compton.
MR. HOLEKAMP: We had a maintenance agreement
at that time with Compton's, and we -- we -- every three
months they were changing filters and checking belts and
that sort of thing on the air-conditioners at the jail. And
we chose to do it in-house. We could save a considerable
amount of money because of the -- the units are out of
warranty; there was no warranty any more. So, that really
was -- after five years, once the jail got to be five years
of age, we were just paying -- or not just, but we were
paying a contractor to come in and change air-conditioner
filters, and I felt like it was better suited that we do it
in-house, which we have saved a considerable amount of money
by doing that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with that.
MR. HOLEKAMP: So that's the reason why that
has taken place.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: I -- I share some agreement
with Commissioner Letz, I think, as to -- as to critical
functions that require certain skills and licensing,
possibly. We need to try and get those on an annualized
contract basis, emergency, non-emergency, so forth. And I
think Glenn can probably identify the areas that his
3-10-03
95
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
department can feasibly or maybe legally handle. And -- but
all of these would probably be a good idea to -- to handle
in a workshop basis to try and figure out where we're going.
And I'm in agreement, we need to -- I think we need to RFP
as much as we can so that if any question is raised about
propriety of how we -- how we pay for the goods or services,
that everything's above-board and that there's no questions
that can be raised that we're in total compliance with state
statutes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think a workshop
would be a good idea. I'm particularly interested in Item
Number 1, and that -- that's a budgeted -- that really goes
to a budget matter, "Discuss long-term maintenance schedule
for all Kerr County facilities." And if we're discussing it
and if you're preparing a long-term maintenance schedule,
you should be including items in that schedule that you
intend to take care of this year and what the cost is
estimated to be. Case in point, the windows in this
building. There are some of them still not done.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Quite a few of them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Because prices came in --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And other things that
have to do with that. So, you know, I think that's an
excellent item, and we ought to be talking more about it.
3-10-03
96
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: Okay. Well, I'll just
get with the Judge, then. We can set a schedule and give it
to Glenn to kind of -- you know, to figure what backup may
be needed. Get with the County Attorney's office, maybe
some contract -- we can kind of hash it out, kind of
discuss, 'cause I think, you know, it's more -- lends itself
to a workshop to get it going, as opposed to a meeting.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe we could have
the workshop in between the hog barn workshop and the arena
workshop. Somewhere right --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Somewhere in the wash
rack area.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In the wash rack area.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or we could do it under
the hanging letter.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. We can't have a
meeting outside the courthouse, though.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Only if we want to disregard
the law. That's okay. Item 2.12, consider and discuss and
take appropriate action to order a study of the
administration of the County's On-Site Sewage Facility rules
and floodplain rules. Commissioner Nicholson.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Before we get into
discussion of the proposal which you see here about
3-10-03
97
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
establishing a study team, I think I need to address the
issue of whether or not -- the issue that's been raised
about whether I have a conflict of interest in working on --
on issues involving the County's septic rules, and
particularly Section 10, and issues that question the -- the
U.G.R.A.'s capability to administer those rules. A couple
of letters in the press recently have been written by people
who were obviously very distraught that I might have a
conflict of interest, and suggest that that conflict arises
because I own a septic system, and that I would -- might be
voting on or pushing an issue that would wind up abolishing
Section 10.
I do own a -- do own a residence on
Farm-to-Market 1340 that's got a septic system that was
built in 1997. I also own properties at Casa Bonita Lodges,
11 of them, and those properties are served by a septic
system that is owned by the Bonita Owners Association. If
one or more of my properties are sold, that will not trigger
an inspection under Section 10. And while it's not
completely relevant to the issue at hand, that septic system
at my house and the one owned by Bonita Owners Association
are both good and functioning septic systems. Mine at the
house is a new one. The one at Bonita Owners Association
was inspected in September 2000 and found to be in good
working order and within the requirements of the state
3-10-03
98
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
standards. So, the -- T'm telling you that to say that I'm
not recusing myself from the discussions on this. I know
that the County Attorney has been made aware of these
issues, first anonymously, and then through the newspaper,
and I won't speak for the County Attorney, but he can -- I
can tell you that he has not told me that I -- that I have a
conflict of interest. Any questions on that?
The agenda item is proposing a study of the
administration of the County's On-Site Sewage Facility rules
and floodplain rules, and the -- the impetus for this study
and the need for making a decision and getting started now
is three things, basically. There is a lot of interest that
we're all aware of among citizens in Kerr County for the
County to discontinue the practice of contracting with the
U.G.R.A., and there seems to be some support among
Commissioners Court members for reconsidering that contract.
And, three, the U.G.R.A. Board of Directors have indicated
that they may not choose to renew the contract when it
expires this fall. So, in my view, it would be prudent of
us to commission a study team to look into the issues and
provide advice to us about what our alternatives are. And
I'm suggesting that that team should be comprised of at
least two Commissioners and the County's Designated
Representative -- that's Stuart Barron -- and other members;
I suggested four out of the community who have some
3-10-03
99
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
knowledge of O.S.S.F. and water matters and some interest in
serving on such a committee.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I -- I'll start off the
comments. I think I agree with you; this is pretty much
what we had discussed, that we need to have a -- you know,
look at this situation prior to the budget time. The -- I
guess my question to you, Dave, right now is, is this to
look at the O.S.S.F. rules or to look at who administers the
program, or both?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Both.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Both? It's both?
Finally -- well, I think we need to do this. The makeup of
the group, I think it probably should have U.G.R.A. board
members or someone that they represent on there. And I'm a
little reluctant to ask citizens to serve on committees of
this type, just because my experience has been that it is
really better for the Court to iron it out. And then I
think we really need to make a very strong effort, through
multiple public hearings or some sort of a public input
phase, that we really need maybe, you know, several around
the county, if that would help, or some process to get the
public involved. But, at this point, I think it's really
more productive, you know, with the Court and Stuart, who's
obviously familiar with the program. And also, if we're
going to look at floodplain, I think we really need to
3-10-03
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
100
possibly get a FEMA representative involved. Stuart knows a
lot about FEMA, but maybe somebody else, because I think
there's a lot of ramifications when we start tinkering with
floodplain rules, and FEMA dictates those. We just pretty
much adopt them and enforce them. But I think it's a good
idea to get moving on it. Just those comments.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I -- are we
going -- you want me to go next?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want you to, Bill.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand your
passion for the subject. I'm not certain I agree with you a
hundred percent on all of it -- all aspects of your passion
for this subject, but I do agree that if we're going to
determine as a Court whether or not we continue to have our
rules administered by another agency, so as not to devote
two-thirds of our time doing these administrative functions
in-house, then we need to have that discussion. We need to
have that discussion with U.G.R.A. present at the table. We
need not have the public telling us at this juncture whether
it is a good idea or a bad idea to involve the U.G.R.A. or
to continue our relationship with U.G.R.A. I believe that
some of the information that we need to glean and make some
determination on is possessed by Stuart Barron and those
folks that work with him directly in the administration of
our rules, and so I would offer another suggestion.
3-10-03
101
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
..-.
25
And since you haven't put this into a motion
yet, it'll probably ring true, but I'll offer it anyhow, but
that two members of the Commissioners Court be selected and
two members of the Upper Guadalupe River Authority be
selected by them -- their director, and that Stuart Barron
be the resource person who provides information to this
group of four, and they will be making recommendations --
discussing and making recommendations back to this Court on
the continued administration of Kerr County O.S.S.F. rules
and regulations by U.G.R.A., and report recommendation be
delivered back to Commissioners Court and the U.G.R.A. not
later than June 1. That would be where I'd like to see us
go. I'm finished.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That -- that sounds
like a pretty good plan. I think it's a good compromise,
two members of the Court. And how are y'all going to -- or
how we're going to choose those two members is a whole
different story, but two members from this Court, two
members from U.G.R.A., and then Stuart being the staff
that's mentioned here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Resource.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Resource mentioned. I
think that's a pretty good plan. But you have -- for us to
get around the voting, it will still be two. Seems like it
would be an odd number.
3-10-G3
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
102
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, all they're --
they're not going to vote; we're going to vote on whatever
recommendation --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand that, but
to come to a conclusion of thoughts, you always -- you
always like to have a non-member, but that's beside the
point. Tell you what I'd like to know today, if we could.
Is U.G.R.A. saying that they're not going to renew our
contract? Is that what's being said?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: In the board
meeting, yeah, they -- no, they did not say they are not
going to renew the contract. They effectively said the same
kind of things, actually, that they've been saying for
several years; what you probably said before when you
administered it. This is too costly, it's too many
problems, we're always challenged on it, and if it's going
to continue like this, we'd rather not have the contract.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But they haven't
taken an action to do that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No, they have not
voted, haven't said they're not going to do it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Of course, what all
that means to me, what I -- I mean, you have to remember,
I've got a little tunnel vision every once in a while. What
3-10-03
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
103
that says to me is we don't pay them enough money to go
along with the program. You know, if we gave them a bunch
of money, they would be happy -- or let me put it in
question form. If we give them enough money, would they be
happy to administer the program? See, T think we need to
know that. If -- if they're not interested in participating
in any way, I mean, why are we talking about appointing two
people to do anything?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It will be a short
meeting.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be a very -- I mean,
if that's the case -- if that's the case, I mean, Item
Number 2.12 is history, in my opinion, if they're not
interested in participating.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, I
think whether or not they're interested in participating,
our contract is either going to be renewed or expired in the
next few months, and we need to do some thinking and
planning about how we're going to -- what we're going to do
about that event, whether it's --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct. It's a
budget issue, if nothing else.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If they come in and
say, "Okay, we need a little more money," and we say okay,
3-10-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
104
we've got to build that into the budget for next year.
So --
JUDGE TINLEY: And --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- it needs to happen
pretty soon. Pretty soon.
JUDGE TINLEY: At a minimum, don't you think
whatever committee is -- is comprised, if it's going to
report back by a specific date of June 1, that at a minimum,
we will know if U.G.R.A. has any interest in -- in
administering and enforcing the program on a future basis,
and if so, what dollar amount's attached to it. We need to
know that, don't we?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we also -- we'd
also have a -- well, by kind of reading between the lines,
we'll have a revised O.S.S.F. rules, `cause Section 10, I
presume, is going to be a part of the committee, to look at
that, and I think it's good to have, you know, input from
both sides on that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with that,
because we've had input, although not directly -- or not
formally, but we've had input from the Designated
Representative that there are flaws with Section 10.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So if there are
3-10-03
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
105
flaws, they need to be corrected.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And I guess their
part of that decision is, are we going to keep it the way it
is, get rid of it, or correct it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We need to know that
somewhere between where we pay them today and what they
assume are their costs to do it, or what we would finally
determine to be our cost to do it directly, is probably a
financial answer someplace in that, and I don't know what
that is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, it's my opinion
that -- and I know I'm getting -- putting the horse ahead of
the cart here. I was just assuming that maybe we knew that
U.G.R.A. was not interested in participating in the O.S.S.F.
program any more. If we knew that today, this whole
conversation is moot. So, we do not know that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So we will know that
through this committee's work. Then, if we continue our
relationship, I would -- I'd like to see the County write
the contract like we should be doing, and put the program
together and get -- let them agree with what we want to do,
period.
3-10-03
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
106
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well said.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: End of preaching.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, how are we forming a
committee?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who wants to do it?
Not I.
(Commissioner Nicholson raised his hand.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll do it with Dave,
unless Bill wants to do it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. If I`m called
upon, I will, but I'm not volunteering.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you sure you don't
want to send a lawyer over there?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Definitely don't want a
lawyer.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You want it back this
year? Is that the deal?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me see if I can
make a motion. Help me out. I move that we -- we ask the
U.G.R.A. Board to join with us in the study of -- of the
contract between Kerr County and U.G.R.A., and that that
study team be comprised of two Commissioners, Nicholson and
Letz, and that Stuart Barron also serve as a resource to the
committee, and that the committee bring a report back to
this Commissioners Court by -- did we say May 1 or June 1?
3-10-03
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
107
COMMISSIONER LETZ: June 1.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: June 1.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In your motion, are
you -- did you say or are you suggesting that we request the
U.G.R.A. to appoint two board members to serve on it as
well?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I intended to say
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My only thing that I
think the -- you know, I agree -- I'll second the motion
first.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Do you have some
comments you'd like to make?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we should put
very specific performance that we want to have, what we want
to have come back on June 1st. We want to know back -- in
my mind, we want to know, does U.G.R.A. want to administer
the contract? We want to have a -- a look at the O.S.S.F.
rules with any recommended changes, or not, and we want to
have a -- a cost analysis as to, you know, whoever's going
to do the program and who it's going to be, if U.G.R.A.
decides not to. A recommendation on those kind of four
things -- or three things, one of them having two parts.
3-10-03
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
108
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner, I think
there are three aspects to that. I don't disagree with what
you're saying. I think we're requiring just a little bit
more. It's going to take some resources on our part to do
that. I believe we have to determine the cost to
administrate the program if it's returned to the County.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Totally. We have to
determine the best possible -- the costs of administrating
the program if retained by U.G.R.A.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And I think we need
to determine whether the program should be self-sustaining,
or by tax support.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree with those, and I
think that -- yeah, I agree with that those three points.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Self-sustaining
through fees; that's what I'm saying.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One thing that is
missing that I would like to see, but it may not be
practical at this point, considering the makeup of the team,
that I would like to see -- to learn what all the best
practices out there are among those other 254 counties, or
at least a dozen of them; who's -- who -- what counties are
administering O.F.F.C. --
3-10-03
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
109
COMMISSIONER LETZ: O.S.S.F.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: O.S.S.F., and in
a -- in a most effective way. Are there any best practices
that we can learn from and incorporate?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't go to Travis
County.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Don't go to Travis.
253 counties.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I suggest there
probably are, Commissioner. I think you'd have to
distinguish those counties that were flat-land counties with
no rivers versus a county that has a river with many
tributaries in the midst of it. Lots of difference.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's why,
Commissioner, I made a joke, not 254, but maybe a dozen.
Maybe there's a dozen counties that have topography like
ours and rocks like ours.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it needs to be
done, but I think
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
we can rely on Thea; she ha
various types at my request
Commissioner. And I think,
counties that have typical
NICHOLSON: Can`t do it now?
LETZ: I think we can. I think
s done numerous surveys of
over the times I've been a
you know, one, we can pick some
-- mostly in the highland lakes,
3-10-03
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
110
you know, area.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was going to
suggest L.C.R.A. has a set of rules that govern us as well.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Get some other rules, see
how they're doing ~t; talk to some other counties, see how
they administer, how they're doing. Find out who to
contact, and then you or I or somebody else can, you know,
visit with those counties and see how they're -- how it's
working.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When you get into --
Commissioner Williams brought up an excellent point here of
comparing some costs and what it would cost us if we brought
the program back over here, hiring people, buying trucks,
dah, dah, dah. Are you envisioning looking at what U.G.R.A.
does today? How many inspections do they make a week? Or
how many programs do they go over? How many sheets do they
look at per week, and how many employees they have over
there that deal directly with O.S.S.F. program? You know,
what -- what are we sending, $30,000 or $35,000? What do we
send over there?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thirty.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thirty-five, I think.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thirty.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thirty. What do we
3-10-03
111
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
get for our 30? I'm not -- I'm not saying that we don't qet
anything for our 30. I'm asking, what do we get for our 30?
Are you envisioning looking into that much of it?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir. And I
think that will be fairly easy to do. The U.G.R.A. staff
has done a lot of work analyzing those numbers and those
issues, and have reported periodically to their -- to their
board, and so there's a lot of information and study already
been done. I have done a good bit of study with the
U.G.R.A. and have some information on that also, so we're
probably well down the road. The issues have been defined.
There may be -- we may want to bring up new issues, but some
of the old issues that are -- have been defined, studied,
and that is available.
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
and five for floodplain? I.
MR. BARRON:
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
BALDWIN: That's correct.
WILLIAMS: Thirty for O.S.S.F.
s that the way it is?
There's nothing for floodplain.
NICHOLSON: It's 30.
BALDWIN: It's a donation.
NICHOLSON: Thirty plus the
fees.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They collect and
keep the fees.
3-i0-03
112
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: -- could you draft a
letter based on that as to kind of what our -- our outcome
hopefully is from this committee on June 1? I just think it
would be helpful to send that letter over to U.G.R.A.'s
president, their board, so they know what we're talking
about. I think we don't need to call them up and say, "Hey,
give us some people." I think they probably need to have a
pretty good idea what we're talking about.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me see if I understand the
motion that's been made, that you've seconded, and areas to
be addressed. And that is a committee be suggested to
U.G.R.A. -- we can't force them to participate, of course --
comprised of four people, being two from the Commissioners
Court, being Commissioners Nicholson and Letz, and two
directors selected by U.G.R.A. And that, as a resource to
the committee, the D.R., Mr. Stuart Barron, serve as, I
guess, ex-officio to that committee to provide information
and resources as requested. And that that committee would
look into various issues and report back to this Court
June lst, the issues to be examined including, but not
necessarily limited to -- I thought you'd have a comment
about that language, Commissioner Baldwin.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: I see. The issues of
economics, of the operation of the O.S.S.F. administration
3-10-03
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
113
and enforcement, if done by U.G.R.A. versus as done by Kerr
County, whether or not the system should be one that is
self-supporting by user fees only, or whether it should be
supported by a combination of taxpayer funds and user fees,
what changes, if any, should be made, including elimination
of various O.S.S.F. rules that are currently in place at the
present time. Does that accurately state what's on the
table at this point?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Close. I'm okay
with it.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'll consider that as the
motion, and the motion that you seconded.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's see if we got any
further discussion on that basis. Being no further
discussion, all in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like for you to
repeat the motion one more time.
JUDGE TINLEY: Madam reporter?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I wouldn't do that
to you.
3-10-03
114
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: Before you go on to the
next one, if Commissioner Williams would sort of undertake
that cost -- I mean, what it would cost to set up our own
O.S.S.F., that's really independent; it's not part of the
committee. And --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's -- develop
that here?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- start developing --
start working on that so we have something to work from, if
you would, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you asking me to
do that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, I'll do it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because, otherwise -- and
if you didn't, I would have gone right down to Buster.
So --
JUDGE TINLEY: Since he's already
disclaimed --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Will you help me out
a little bit?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You heard me up front
and early that I'm not going to participate in it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll do that part.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's pretty
3-10-03
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
115
simple to do.
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll now move to Item 2.13,
consider and discuss accepting Racial Profiling report for
the Precinct 4 Constable's office.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move that we
accept the Racial Profiling report for Precinct 4
Constable's office.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Third.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Nicholson and Williams that we
accept the Racial Profiling report for the Precinct 4
Constable's office. And is there any 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 carries. Next item is
2.14, consider and discuss appointments for local
representatives to the Alamo Senior Advisory Committee. I
placed this on the agenda. If the Court will recall, we've
got -- had one previous vacancy to the Senior Advisory
Committee, AACOG, and another one came open December last
year as a result of a term being completed. You gentlemen
should have in your packet a couple of items for potential
3-10-03
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
116
appointees. We've got two vacancies and we've got two
individuals who have --
MS. SOVIL: They just have -- you're the only
one that has the e-mail.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I apologize. The second
one came in -- the e-mail came in late Friday for Mr. Walt
Harris, and I'm sure you gentlemen are familiar with
Mr. Harris. He's on the 911 Board. He has indicated a
willingness to serve on that also, and he says in his
e-mail, "Recently you advertised that you needed volunteers
to serve on the Kerr County Senior Advisory Committee. I
would like to volunteer to serve on that committee. I am
currently serving on the Kerr 911 Board. I understand that
this is a volunteer position with no reimbursement, either
for time or travel."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's our guy.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Yeah. The other
individual that's -- that has sent me a resume, which is
included in your packets, Mr. Donellan. I think if
you'll -- you have that resume. If you haven't already,
you'll find that this gentleman is imminently qualified. He
could probably run the whole program down there at AACOG.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Probably will.
JUDGE TINLEY: Because his -- his employment
for 20-plus years, or starting back over 20 years ago, was
3-10-G3
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
117
exactly for these kinds of services. He was an executive
and manager in that respect. And so I would offer these
gentlemen to you as our potential appointees to the AACOG
Senior Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I'd offer a
motion to accept the -- or to appoint Mr. Charles B.
Donellan and Mr. Walt Harris to the AACOG Council on Aging
representing Kerr County.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded by Commissioners Williams and Letz, respectively,
that Mr. Charles B. Donellan and Mr. Walter B. Harris, Jr.,
be appointed by the Court as Kerr -- as the Kerr County and
Commissioners Court's representatives at Alamo -- AACOG
Senior Advisory Committee. Any further discussions?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sir, I've got a
question. How -- what does this have to do with that?
JUDGE TINLEY: We just wanted to see if you
were paying attention.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see, okay. All
right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Glad you asked that. I
saw that. I was, like --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, I know y'all --
y'all can't ask those questions. I'm boy dummy here. But,
3-10-03
118
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Thea, why is this --
MS. SOVIL: Wrong side.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, I see. This is a
lot better here.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Two excellent,
excellent people. I can't -- we couldn't have done better
if we'd chosen them ourselves.
JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I'll still
remind everybody, we still need one more appointment to the
Rural Transportation Board.
JUDGE TINLEY: Please help us, you media
types. And in response to our call for these senior
advisory people, I -- Mr. Donellan, when he sent in his
resume, he had clipped to it an article from one of our
local newspapers, so your assistance was invaluable in -- in
getting that gentleman to come forward. And -- and if we
would have initiated the search on our own, I'm not sure we
could have found anybody that was more qualified than
3-10-03
119
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Mr. Donellan, because of his background.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: True. They're
probably not out there.
JUDGE TINLEY: They're there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, they're out
there. They're out there. We just -- the press haven't
done their job to notify them yet. Isn't that what you're
saying?
JUDGE TINLEY: No. (Laughter.) So, we will
again ask for your help for this transportation committee.
Any further business, gentlemen? Hearing none, I'll declare
the meeting adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 11:51 a.m.)
3-10-03
120
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
STATE OF TEXAS I
COUNTY OF KERR I
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as
County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County,
Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 13th day of March,
2003.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
BY: ___ ~~--- -
Kathy Ba i Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
3-10-03
ORDER NO. 27994
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
On this the iQ~th day of March, 2003, came to be considered
by the Court vario~.xs Commissioners precincts, which said
Claims and Accounts are:
10-General for X66, 828. 14; 14-Fire p'r•otection for, X13, 711.26;
1~-Road and Fridge for $18, 9c:7. 04; ~4, 382. 93; i9-Kuhl is
Library for X33,098.33; 50-Indigent Health Care for
$11, 239. 17; 71-Schreiner Road Trust for '~78, 125. 4~;
TOTAL CASH REG!U I RED I S ~ 226, 312. 27.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Haldwin, seconded by
Commissioner Williams, the Go~_trt unanimously approved by a
vote of 4-~-~, to pay said acco~_~nts.
ORDER N0. X7995
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN
JUSTICE OF PEACE PCT. #3
On this the 10th day of March, c003 ~_ipon motion made by
Commissioner, Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Let z, the
Co~_~rt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-~, to transfer
~6~E,. E3 from Line Item No. 10-409-570 Capital 0~_tt lay in
Non-Departmental to Line Item No. 10-457-570 Capital Outlay in
J~_istice of the F'eace F'ct. #3.
ORDER NO. :?799E
PUDGET AMENDMENT IN
COUNTY AUDI70R
On this the 1Q~th day of Mar^ch, X003 ~_~pon motion made by
Commissioner' Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner' Williams, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-Qi-0, to tr^ansfer^
~9~. ~O fr^om Line Item No. 1~-49~-c16 Employee Training to Line
Item No. 10-495-DOE, Bonds in the Co~_inty A~_iditor^'s Office.
ORDER N0. 27997
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN
THE 198TH DISTRICT COURT
On this the 10th day of March, 2QiQi,:~, upon motion made by
Commissioner Lets, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the
Co~_~rt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to transfer
~67E. Q~2 from Line Item NO. 10-43E-4~2 Co~.~rt Appointed Attorney
to Line Item No. 1@-4~6-4V~1 Co~_irt Appointed Services in the
198th District Gourt.
ORDER N0. `7998
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE
ROAD AND BRIDGE DEPARTMENT
On this the 1~th day of March, cOQ~3, upon motion made by
Commissioner Paldwin, seconded by Commissioner Let z, the Co~_~rt
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-Q~-0, to transfer ~~69.0~
from Line Item No. 15-611-~:~4 Workers Compensation to Line
Item No. 15-611-48~ Ins~_~rance - Vehicles in the Road and
Fridge Department.
ORDER iVO. 27999
ARRROVAL OF LATE BILL
TO U. S. POSTAL SERVICE
On this the 10th day of March, 2003 ~_~pon motion made by
Commissioner, Williams, seconded by Commissioner Let z, the
Co~_~rt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to pay late
bill to U. 5. Postal Service for ffi525.00 from Line Item No.
10-499-309 for B~_~siness Reply Mail Permit/Ann~_~al Acco~_inting
Fee Renewal in the Tax Office and a~_ithorize a hand check.
The County A~_~ditor and County Treas~_irer are hereby authorized
by to issue a hand check in the amount of ~E25.00 to U. S.
Postal Service.
ORDER iVO. 28000
APPROVAL OF LATE BILL TO
U. S. P05TAL SERVICE
On this the 10th day of March, ^c003 upon motion made by
Commissioner, Williams, seconded by Commissioner Lets, the
Co~_irt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to pay late
bill in the amount of X5,000.00 from Line Item No. 10-459-305
for Postage for Meter in the Tax Office and issue a hand
check. The Co~_tnty A~_~ditor and Co~_~nty Treas~_~rer are hereby
authorise to issue a hand check in the amount of $5,000.00
made payable to U. S. Postal Service for Postage for meter in
the Tax Office.
ORDER No. ~eo~i
AF'RROVE TO ACCEPT MINUTES AND WAIVE READING
On this the 10th day of March, ~Q~03, upon motion made by
Commissioner, Let z, seconded by Commissioner, Nicholson, the
Co~_~rt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-Q~-0, to accept and
waive the min~_ites of the following: F',err Co~_inty Commissioner's
Special Session on Febr~_~ary E, cOQ~3, Reg~_~lar Session on
Febr~_~ary 1~, x'003, Special Session on Febr~_~ary E4, cQ~03
ORDER N0. ~80~D2
APPROVE AND ACCEPT MONTHLY REPORTS
On this the iQ~th day of March, ?Oi~~, upon motian made by
Commissioner Paldwin, seconded by Commissioner Let z, the Co~_~r~t
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-Q~-0, to accept the
following reports and direct that they be filed with the
Co~_inty Clerk for f~_~t~_tre a~_~dit
Jannett Pieper, County Clerk
General Report Febr~_iary cQ~03
Trust Fund Repast February `0~.?~
W. R. Heirhnlzer, Sheriff
Civil Report Febr~_~ary c0~3
Vance E11 iott, J. P. #1
Febr~_iary E00~
Wi 11 iam Ragsdale, J. F'. #4
February ~00~ '
I'.ari 0' Dell, J. F'. #3
February `0~-3
DRDER N0. ~8~~3
AP'P'ROVAL DECLARING IYIAY 1, ctZ-~;:,
NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER
On this the i~th day of March, c0~3, ~_ipon motion made tay
Commissioner, Lets, seconded by Commissioner, Williams, the
Co~_irt unanimo~_~sly approved by a vote of 4-0--~, the
proclamation declaring play 1, `~03 as "National Day of
Brayer".
ORDER NO. ~BQ~Q~4
AP'P'ROVAL DECLARING APRIL ic, cc^Q~03
AS "HOUSTON SCHUMACHER, JR. DAY"
On this the 10th day of March, c003, upon motion made by
Commissioner, Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Paldwin, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, declaring
April 1~, ~-~r~3 as "Ho~_iston Schumacher, Jr. Day" in FSer-r'
Co~_inty, Texas.
ORDER N0. 28005
APPROVAL FOR w,ERR COUNTY SHERIFF'S
^ DEPARTMENT TO ARF~LY FOR GRANT FOR
LOCATER SYSTEM
Dn this the 10th day of March, 200, ~_~pon motion made by
Commissioner Paldwin, seconded by Commissioner Let z, the Co~_~rt
unanimously appr-oved by a vote of 4-@-~, for the F',err• Co~_inty
Sheriff's Department to apply for grant far' Locater, system in
conjunction with Amber Alert.
ORDER N0. 2800E
ACCEPTING RACIAL PROFILING REPORT
~" FR01~ THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTh1ENT
On this the iQ~th day of March, 203, ~_ipon motion made by
Commissioner, Williams, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the
Count unanimously approved by a vote of 4-~-~, the Racial
Profiling Report from the Sher'iff's Department, as req~_~ired by
law.
ORDER ND. 8007
APPROVAL DF NON-FINANCIAL WORN. 5ITE TRAINING
"'~' AGREEMENT PETWEEN KERR COUNTY AND
ALAMO AREA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIDN
On this the 10th day of March, `003, upon motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Let z, the
Cv~_ir't unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, the
Non-Financial work site training agreement between h'.er^r' Co~_tnty
and Alama Ar^ea Development Corporation and a~_~thori~e the
County J~_idge to sign same.
ORDER NO. X8008
APPROVAL OF THE 9-1-1 UNNAMED ROAD LETTER
On this the 10th day of March, ~00~, upon motion made by
Commissioner, Paldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Cottr^t
unanimo~_~sly approved by a vote of 4-0-0, the 9-i-1 ~_~nnamed
road letter, with changes and Address Coordinator to do mail
o ~_t t .
ORDER N0. X8009
APPROVAL OF THE REVISIDN OF FLAT FOR
•"' TRACTS 13A, i ~P, 14A, 14P OF THE
Y O RANCHLANDS
On this the 10th day of March, EOQ~.?,, ~_tpon motion made by
Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner E~aldwin, the
Co~_trt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-~-0, the revision
of plat for, Tracts i~A, 13P, 14A, and 14B of the YO
Ranchlands.
ORDER N0. E801~@
APPROVAL TO SET UP COMMITTEE TO STUDY
'" THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE COUNTY'S ON-SITE-SEWAGE FACILITIES
AND FLDOD PLAIN RULES
On this the iDth day of March, c0~3, ~_~pon motion made by
Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Lets, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-@-~, to set ~_ip a
committee of Commissioner Lets and Commissioner Nicholson, the
County's DAR Stuart Barron and UGRA to st~_~dy the
administration of the County's On-Site-Sewage Facilities and
Flood F'lain R~_iles, and report back to the Court by J~_~ne 1,
~OQ~3.
ORDER N0. X8011
AGCEF'T THE RACIAL PROFILING REPORT
FROM CONSTAPLE PRECINCT 4
On this the iQ~th day of March,cOQ~3 ~_tpon motion made by
Commissioner, Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner, Williams, the
Count unanimo~_tsly approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to accept the
Racial Profiling Report from Constable Precinct 4, as req~_~ired
by law.
ORDER NO. 801E
APPROVAL OF APPOINTMENTS FOR LOCAL REPRESENTATIVES
--. TO THE ALAMO SENIOR ADVISORY COMMITTEE
On this the 10th day of March, L0Q~.3 ~_ipon motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Lets, the
Co~_~r~t ~_~nanimously approved by a vote of 4-O-Q~, the
appointments of Charles P. Donellan and Walter R. Harris, Jr,.
to the Alamn Senior Advisory Committee.