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, May 12, 2003 9:00 a.m. Commissioners' Courtroom Kerr County Courthouse Kerrville, Texas 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 `r~ '~S v^~ V 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 I N D E X May 12, 2003 PAGE --- Commissioners' Comments 4 1.1 Presentation by Texas Arts & Crafts Educational Foundation, Inc. ~~'~~1~,~~~'`Y~' 7 1.2 Discuss relaxing/forgiving fee for use of Youth Exhibit Center to host pre-UIL Music Festival~~~ -- 1.3 Resolution to TexDOT for participation waiver for~~~7~ Hermann Sons Bridge, authorize Judge to sign same 22 1.4 Minor correction to Vol. 7, Pg. 205, Revision of ,~5'C7.~ Plat for Tracts 48 & 49A of Kerr Country Estates 31 1.5 Abandon, discontinue, vacate 545.16 feet at the~,~,~~> end of Dickey Road, set public hearing for same 38 1.6 Minor correction to Vol. 7, Pg 186, Revision of -, ~~~,;~y' Plat for Lots 17, 18, & 19, Y.O. Ranchlands 48 1.7 Approve amendments to U.S.D.A./N.R.C.S. Project~:~U-~;` Agreements 69-744-3-550 & 69-74420-3-549, and authorize County Judge to sign 50 ~• 1.8 Road name changes for privately maintained roads ~~`~4 1.9 Authorize Sheriff's Department to apply for SCARP program ~ YL .r.~ 56 1.10 Authorize Sheriff's Office to trade four cars and purchase used car for CID -~'~~ ~`~ 73 1.11 Authorize Sheriff's Department to enter into an interlocal agreement with LCRA ^ -'-" ~~~ 90 1.12 Consider appointing Brad Alford as Deputy Constable for Precinct 2 ~:'c' C-~~~~'~S 94 1.13 Set date for Commissioners Court workshop to review first-draft revisions to Kerr County Parks & Recreation Master Plan ~ `~f'S~c`? 101 4. 1 Pay Bills ~ `~(:~~51 109 4 . 2 Budget Amendments: ~~~~~" '~ 113 4 . 3 Late Bi11s %' ~{. ;3'~i 129 4 . 4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports :~ ~G'~IC; 133 5.5 Reports from Commissioners 134 --- Adjourned 159 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 On Monday, May 12, 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. It's 9 a.m. on the 12th of May, Monday. I'll call to order the meeting of the Commissioners Court. This is the regular monthly meeting. I believe the honors today go to Precinct 4 Commissioner. Is that correct? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Probably is. (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. If there are any citizens out here that wish to address the Court on any matter that is not listed on the agenda, we want you to feel free to come forward at this time and do so. If you want to address us as it concerns a matter that's on the posted agenda, we would ask that you fill out a participation form -- I believe they should be on the table at the back of the room -- and to complete that and get it up here. It's not absolutely essential that you do that, but it helps us in terms of planning, and it also helps us that we don't miss you when we come to that item if you've filled out a participation form. So, if you want to talk about an item that is on the agenda, we would ask that you fill out that s-i-o~ 4 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 participation form. If you have something you want to say that's not on the agenda, feel free to come forward at this time and tell us what's on your mind. We welcome it. I don't see a great deal of enthusiasm out here; apparently we're not ready to do that just yet. All right. We'll move on to the next item as posted. Commissioner Nicholson, have you got anything for us this morning? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Week ago Saturday, the Hunt Volunteer Fire Department hosted Congressman Lamar Smith at a barbecue and reception, and the purpose of that was to thank the congressman for all the help he gave the fire department in getting grants and getting equipment from the federal government, and they really have an impressive fleet of trucks out there now. If y'all go out that way, stop in and take a look at it. A lot of things going on with the volunteer fire departments. I'm really encouraged about that. I think we've got good fire protection now, but with the things that are going to -- that are going on, it's going to be even better in the future. That's it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. I just -- one comment. Some of us in this room was in attendance yesterday, the birthday party for my good friend, Ross Snodgrass; he was celebrating his 100th birthday today. But the celebration was yesterday, and I was told there yesterday that the night before, he had gone dancing and 5-1^-03 5 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 danced with every lady in the room. So, Ross is -- I made the comment, I said, "When I grow up, I want to be like him." And I heard all over the room, "Me too. Me too. Me too." So, anyway, one of our great citizens, Ross Snodgrass, is 100 years old today, and we wish him well. That's all. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a couple items I want to report to the Court on, Judge, when we get down to the tail end of the agenda, that I think that the Court needs an update on. But to follow up on what you talked about, Commissioner, in terms of volunteer fire departments, with the help of R.C.& D., all of them, I think, have now filed for some FEMA money and are awaiting various amounts of various things, and are awaiting some word back. I think R.C.& D. folks helped them get that done. That's another good sign. JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Later. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only thing I'd like to bring up is the Hermann Sons Bridge status report. It is well under construction. Road and Bridge has been out there, I guess, zionstop for about three weeks now, first damming up the river, then undamming the river, putting railroad cars across and building abutments. Quite a J - 1 _ - ~ ,5 6 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 structure. Both railroad cars are across the river again. The abutment on the south side is there and the abutment on the north side is -- is under construction right now. Hopefully, sometime -- hopefully next week, I think, the road will be open again from a temporary standpoint. They've done a lot of work up and down there, I don't know, the half a dozen times or so they've been working, and I think special accolades, probably more than anyone else, just because of what he's been doing with equipment, is Dietert. He's been -- I wouldn't want to be where he's been the past couple weeks. He's been perched in the middle of the river on a temporary pile of rocks with a 50-ton crane, moving things around, and not a whole lot of room one way or the other to go. In fact, they had a picture of him -- I think one of his guys, Joe, got him; they took a doctored-up photo and showed the crane lying over in the water, showed it to him, as if it had fallen off. But, anyway -- pretty humorous photo. But a lot's been done out there, and appreciate all the work Road and Bridge has done at Hermann Sons. I know the residents out there are -- will be anxious to get this bridge -- temporary bridge reopened. That's it. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. I want to remind everybody that our next Commissioners Court meeting, which is normally on the fourth Monday of the month, because it is the Memorial Day holiday, will instead be on Tuesday; not ~_1~_n, 7 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 Monday, but Tuesday, the 28th, I believe it is. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 27th? MS. HAMILTON: 27th. MS. SOVIL: 27th. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Whatever the -- whatever the Tuesday following Memorial Day is, that's when we're going to be here. And we will, of course, post an agenda for that, so it will be at the regular time, 9 a.m., but I wanted to remind you of that. That's all I have, so let's get down to business. First item is the consideration and discussion of presentation from Texas Arts and Crafts Educational Foundation, Incorporated. Commissioner Letz, I think you put this on the agenda. And you have -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda just to give the Court an update as to where the Arts and Crafts Foundation is in their project. They have some construction I think they're anxious to get underway, and under our agreement, they need to let us know and keep us kind of aware of what's going on. So, I'll turn it over to Bob Miller. MR. MILLER: Good morning. My name is Bob Miller, Executive Director of Texas Arts and Crafts Educational Foundation. We have a 40-year lease agreement with the County on the piece of property adjacent to Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center, west, or depending how one 5-1~-03 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 '' 0 L 21 22 23 ,,_ 2 4 25 looks at the compass, towards the American Legion property. There's two items in our contract which I'm -- I'm here -- the reason I'm here for today. One of them is, in order to alter the premises, we cannot alter the premises without prior written consent of the landlord. You are the landlord. We'd like to alter the premises. The second one is construction of new improvements. "It is anticipated that tenant will, at tenant's sole cost, construct new improvements on the premises. Tenant agrees that it will construct no new improvements until the tenant has presented plans for said improvements to landlord, and landlord has approved such construction. Landlord will not unreasonably withhold approval." The plans I'm going to show you today or talk to you about today are really what we plan to do and need to do in this fiscal year, 2003, and then also in 2004. In 2003, we need to construct a -- first thing to do is construction of a maintenance yard, which includes fencing, an 8-foot-high fence. We need to secure the perimeter of the entire property. We'd like to construct a 30-by-60-foot metal building for a storage building, move our two portable storage buildings, which are 12-by-24 feet, to that storage yard, and then we would, after the fair, install our -- what is our front entrance now, our big cedar arbor whatnot, as a potential back entrance to the park, since we have it and -i~-o3 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 it'll be ready to go. In 2004, we would like to start construction of the actual facilities at the park, and I've got some drawings for you this morning to -- to show you those things, and it's probably easier to hand them to you to discuss. And I know Commissioner Nicholson was not here when we started this exercise, so let me kind of direct this at him, 'cause this has not changed in overall concept very much from what we started with. This is where the youth -- Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center is. This is where the current rodeo arena is. This is where our maintenance yard would be, which would be right next to the County Extension Agent's office. And this is about 90 feet by about -- oh, I think 140 or 150 feet. We're staying off the fence line here and we're staying away from the Extension Office building by about 25 feet. We would put a back entrance into the -- our property at this point, which would be between the arena and the maintenance yard at that point. We obtained an S.B.A. loan after our flood at Schreiner University to build new bathrooms, and we have a time frame that it's a pretty short fuse from the S.B.A. We have to have this set of bathrooms completed by November of this year. And this would be a stand-alone bathroom facility at the far end of the property. It presents some engineering problems for us, since the sewerage runs this way and downstream to the pump s-1_-... 10 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 house over here, and we had Indians who lived in here, so we have a hard time getting across it. Not quite sure how to solve that problem at this point. The large construction which we hope to start in 2004 would be an office and art gallery and front entrance on the Riverside Drive side of the property and a covered pavilion, and those all have public restrooms attached to them as part of the park facility. This has a catering kitchen and covered pavilion and patio. This area out here, which is the open green area, which is called Exhibit Area A and B, will be terraced, and provide drainage away from our tents. We do a tented fair every year, and -- and what they have found is that if the ground's not absolutely level, when it rains -- and it always rains in May; it's the rainiest month of the year -- if the tents are tilted at all, they collapse, and we have problems. Also, where we are now, when it rains, the water runs through the inside of the tents, washes away anything that the artists have sitting on the ground. So, these are the kind of things we'd like to avoid on those grounds. That's going to require some pretty extensive landscaping and grading on that piece of property, which we would hope to accomplish at least the initial phase of that before the 2004 fair, which we contemplate in our planning on holding on that property. I have some detailed drawings of the other J - 1 .' - li i 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2C 21 22 23 24 25 facilities, and these are the plans for what we call the pavilion, and this is really the public area that could be used for almost anything, but it is an indoor/outdoor facility. The pavilion is 4,766 square feet. It has 625 square feet of bathrooms attached, 1,020-square-foot kitchen, and then another 1,935 square feet of porches surrounding it. And this is a facility which we do not contemplate being air-conditioned or heated. It would be an outdoor event-type facility, suitable for receptions and meetings ar.d conferences of all kinds. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bob, how many people could you seat there for a dinner? MR. MILLER: We're shooting, I think, for a seated -- like, a seated dinner operation of somewhere in the neighborhood of X00, I believe. They keep messing with the square footage, the way they lay it out. The load for the park, bathroom size and everything else, is for a one-hour, 5,000-person load to be what we're designing everything to fit into. The -- and almost everything in there is -- is multipurpose. There's a stage at one end -- a small stage at one end of the pavilion which would also open onto the outside, and so you could do a presentation or -- or some sort of thing on the outside. This sits nestled back up into the trees at the drainage area that we have going through there, so you could actually have seating 5-l~ G3 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 on the far side of the drainage area as well. These steps also end up doubling as an outdoor meeting space, as does the outdoor seating here on this -- this side of it. This is a catering kitchen. Not a cooking kitchen, but a kitchen which would just have solely heating and cooling facilities in it, storage for tables and chairs, that sort of thing, and then a bathroom facility. Some sort of focal point here is anticipated at this point, some sort of a hard, outdoor fireplace, but it's really to be a focal point for somebody making a presentation or reception or something of that nature. Second facility is the office and art gallery, and entrance into the -- into the park. This, as I said, comes off of Riverside Drive. These are permanently installed tickets booths. There is an entrance into the cffice and art gallery area here with reception area, receptionist workroom, office, private bathrooms, and then we step into the art gallery. That actually opens onto a patio also with public restrooms that open to the outside onto the major park area. And, of course, storage areas, which are super important for our -- what we do. We think this facility gives the Arts and Crafts foundation an opportunity to really expand our operations. Our nonprofit charge is to promote Texas art and Texas artists, and this gives us a really neat opportunity to do that on a -1~-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 year-round basis, rather than at just a once-a-year fair. We contemplate doing art exhibits that use our Texas artists on an ongoing basis, which is going to be a super big promotion for them, as well as for us and for Kerrville and the County. Today, I need ask you two things. Number one, I need approval for my fencing and what I want to do in my maintenance yard. The other item that's going to come very quickly, which I'd like if we can today to get approval on, is I'm -- I'm going to need a minimum of two water and sewer taps, and I understand that you all, as -- as the landlord there, need to be the ones to ask the City for that under some prior agreement that you all have with the City, and we will need those, I'm sure, at each end of that property on the Riverside Drive side. So, sewer and water both are on -- on Riverside Drive. Water is also available on the Highway 27 side. There's a water line that runs through the property -- runs across the property approximately right here to a fire hydrant on Riverside Drive at this point. That line provides water to the County Extension Agent.'s office here. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is it -- that's a city line? MR. MILLER: Yeah, the meter -- well, there's a meter here, and there's a meter here. I'm not sure where 5-1~-Q3 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 14 the City loses title and where that becomes the county line. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. The fencing, at the moment, is just that temporary fencing that we discussed? Or is it going to be -- have you changed it? MR.. MILLER: The maintenance yard will be permanent, hopefully. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. MR.. MILLER: The fencing is barbed wire fencing. The Riverside Drive side is really not even replacing it. It is just cleaning it up and trying to get it straight. The rest of it will be a 5-strand barbed wire fence. Most of that will be temporary. They may leave some of it long-term, but for right now, we need to secure the property no matter what. The architect, of course, has wonderful plans for beautiful fences and walls and stuff. We'll have to wait and see what our budget does. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Bob, why don't you let the audience see these drawings -- MR. MILLER: Sure. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- that you presented to the Court? And you might remind the Court who did the architectural work for you. MR. MILLER: Okay, you're right. I apologize for that. The -- these plans were developed really in 5-1~-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 15 partnership with the University of Texas School of Architecture and Artisans Group, Peter Lewis being the lead architect. We had what they call a design sherette. We all went, "What is that?" We finally figured out what a design sherette was, where we had members of the community come in, talk about wYiat their needs were at a facility like this. We had folks like the Mariott X.O. folks come in, talk about what's needed in a catering kitchen for a facility and what sort of meeting space size fit what we were trying to build here. We had a gentleman who is the gallery manager for the University of Texas Art Galleries come in and discuss exactly what is required in -- in an art gallery. And then turned the students loose, and they came up with the basic designs, and there was essentially a design competition. There were two teams; they presented their ideas. They were critiqued, they went back and shined them up, they came back. We melded the two amended plans into one plan, and then this is really the outcome of that exercise. It was a really neat prcject, and they had some wonderful ideas, and we all sat back going, "Gee, I wish I'd thought about that," you know. It was -- it was really nice. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion to approve the perimeter fencing and the location of the maintenance yard and construction of the facilities and maintenance yard. 5-1~-03 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ]2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. MR. MILLER: What is the procedure to go forward on the utility connections? COMMISSIONER LETZ: A second order. We need a second motion, I think. MR. MILLER: Is that -- JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, that the Court approve the perimeter fencing and the location and construction and location -- and placement, I guess it is, of buildings in the maintenance area. Is that correctly stated? Any further discussion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a comment, that -- to the public. When we were looking at the placement, we didn't really talk about that. The main building will be probably on the Highway 27 side of the -- behind the Ag Extension Office. That's correct? MR. MILLER: Well, there is -- there is some placement problems involved there. The water line that goes from the line that cuts across the property into the back of that building and the telephone line essentially bisects that property and creates a -- I'm not sure how we're going to get around it. We may have tc change the size of the building. The water line and utility and the telephone line -- that's an optic line -- goes right straight here. s-i~-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 17 The water line goes out, the optic line comes and curves this way, which keeps us from -- if I put the big, metal building over here, I'm in the way of the telephone line. If I put it -- we originally wanted the maintenance building right dead-center, run a gate here and run people in and out. If I put it -- I can't put it-. here, because I`m over both of the lines. If I put it here, I`m in conflict with the telephone line. What I wanted to do was move it on this side. As Mr. Letz said, when we looked at it, we -- if we do that, we block the two windows from the County Extension Agent's office building. The truth of the matter is, that's a maintenance yard. They may get a worse view of what we stack in front of that than they may with the building. I mean, I don't -- I've got a problem with just where to fit it at this point. JUDGE TINLEY: You're about 25 feet off of the building, right? MR. MILLER: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Your perimeter fencing on the maintenance yard area itself will be about 25 feet off of -- MR. MILLER: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: -- off of the Aq Extension building? MR. MILLER: At least 20. It's either 23 or 25 feet. 5 - 1 ~ - 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 1G 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do I understand that this order that we're getting ready to vote on and the next one, neither of these will result in any cost to the County? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct. MR. MILLER: Correct. to the County. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Nothing will be any r_ost COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You all probably know the answer to this, but I understand that foundation is a not-for-profit corporation. MR. MILLER: That is true. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What's your source of revenue? MR. MILLER: For what? Operations? We operate the fair, and that is our major source of revenue. At this time, in order to build this facility, we will go out to foundations in the state of Texas who support the arts and support building programs for the arts. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further discussion? All in favor of the motion presented, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) 5-_~-03 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 --. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. I guess we now have the sewer and water taps to consider? Is that something that needs to be done at this point, Mr. Miller? MR. MILLER: I think that we -- well, it doesn't have to be done at this point. I think the sooner it is done, it makes it easier for the architects to go through with the planning, get the engineering firms in place. The exact placement of it is not something that I think we could detail today where it is, although I think there's -- showing you where we're going to put the building is -- kind of dictates that they both be at the opposite ends of the property along Riverside Drive. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know that we can't approve the application of two sewer and water taps for the facility. I mean, I -- whenever they need to do them, they can do them, get it out of the way. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that these would still qualify -- in my mind, anyway -- under the prior court order and agreement we have with the City of Kerrville for no charge for these taps. And those go with the -- that overall property, being the Little League side and the Flat Rock Park and this property were all approved by City Council. And I don't believe that there was a -- a limit in their court -- in their -- -l~-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ..., 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2~ `' 1 L 22 23 24 25 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you this. Is there a previous court order appointing you to negotiate those issues? COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move that we -- this Court appoint Jon Letz to deal with the City to -- to deal with these issues. JUDGE TINLEY: Sewer and water taps? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does that mean applying for two as well? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Whatever you need to do, Jon. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second that. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded by Commissioner Baldwin and Nicholson, respectively, that -- that the Court designate Commissioner Jonathan Letz as the Court's agent for negotiating and authorizing the -- the placement of water and sewer tap for taps on the Arts and Crafts Fair lease property, and negotiate with the City in ail particulars in that regard. Is that fairly stated? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's exactly right. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Any further discussion on that? All in favor, signify by raising your s-_~-o3 1 --- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 lg 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 21 right hand. (Commissioners Baldwin, Williams, and Nicholson voted in favor of the motion.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry, COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How did you vote? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I abstained. MR. MILLER: By that vote, I take it that means that from here on out, my discussions are with Mr. Letz. Thank you. Thank you, gentlemen. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Miller. We appreciate -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, Bob. JUDGE TINLEY: -- your report. The next item is consideration of relaxing the fee or forgiving the fee for using the Youth Exhibit Center in conjunction with other facilities to host a pre-UIL music festival for the Hill Country High School music program. And I believe Ms. Elliott -- Ms. Sovil? MS. SOVIL: Ms. Elliott called this morning and is unable to come, and will put this back on the agenda on the 27th. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. So, we're going to pass that particular item, and we'll move on to the next ~_ y__,~, 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 22 item. Next item is the consideration of a resolution to the Texas Department of Transportation for -- of a participation waiver for Hermann Sons Bridge and approval for the County Judge to sign the same. Mr. Odom? MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Good morning. JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, sir. MR. ODOM: I'm here to present to the Court a resolution to the Department of Transportation for Hermann Sons Bridge. It is part of the program for their off-site bridge program, and they contacted us and said that if we would make a resolution and commitment over the next three years to participate in another type of structure, whether it's a bridge or a low-water crossing or a major drainage structure, and with the funds that would be equal to that on the Hermann Sons, we would not have to physically come up with $110,485. So, essentially, it -- my -- I'll read this on the first page here. It says, whereas the usual fund participation ratio for projects on such program is 80 percent federal, 10 percent state, and 1C percent local government; and whereas the Texas Administrative Code provides that under specified conditions, 10 percent local government match fund participation requirement may be waived with agreement by the local government to perform or cause to be performed an equivalent dollar amount of structural improvement work on other deficient bridges or 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 23 deficient mainlane, cross-drainage structures within its jurisdiction, such a project for structural improvement work being referred to as "equivalent-match project." And that's what we're trying to do, is an equivalent match project for $110,485. I've looked at that. It also goes back -- on tree second page here, it gives us that certain conformities that we have, and out of that -- there's six conformities, and 4 and 5 -- all of them apply to us, but 4 and 5 say the work on the proposed equivalent-match project has not begun and will not begin until the local match fund participation waiver approval process has been completed, and the local government will be allowed three years after the contract award of the participation-waived project to complete the structural improvement. So, we have three budget years to do that. And in June -- the following page. You can see, on June the 30th of 2001, I had Hearn Engineering take a look at some low-water crossings. We had talked previously, budgets ago, about low water crossings and bridges and off-site bridges, and there's some plans for the Highway Department, over the next four to ten years, for off-site bridges in various parts of the county. And what I was looking at was structures that I know that we have growth. We have vacant land sitting there in Commissioner Baldwin's area on Town Creek, and I had Hearn take a look at 5-1~-03 1 2 3 4 5 e 7 8 9 10 i1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 different things. Upper Turtle Creek has always been a problem that floods, to get people in and out, to get children in and out of the Ingram schools. I think part of that, now, that the children sort of go to K.I.S.D., I believe, now, but they worked out an agreement. That's a long-term type thing I wanted to look at, as well as looking at Town Creek by the Old Harper Road; that is also inundated. We have a subdivision in there that's landlocked when it floods until the water recedes down. So, I asked Hearn to look at that, and on the following page here, it says Town Creek Number 1, which is up by Old Harper Road. It said that it was probable the length at this site is shorter, and therefore the cost would be lower. Bridge may be feasible for either of these locations. That`s Site 1 and 2. The other site is by Morris Boulevard or Morris Avenue, I believe it is, if you`re familiar with that, right at the city limits line. And that is an odd angle in there, and it's dangerous; it`s narrow. And I note -- noted in the past that there was some interest -- about 500 acres, I think, in there that was available, and was talking about a mobile home park at one time, and I think they came to the Court and that was discussed. But I know that that -- that Holdsworth project is a feasible project over the next couple of years, and that's going in, and I -1,-~~~ ~ 25 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 see that area coming up. I think that the Town Creek would be part of this -- should be a part of something over the next three years that I look at. And if I have to spend $110,500, I believe it would -- I could spend that in there. I think we would do good for the people in that area. I'm not particularly -- I don't think I can get them out of the flood zone, but it's something to look at to widen it, make it safer, bring some elevations up to get across there quicker than the wait for the water, where it's at now. So, I ask the Court to authorize the Judge to sign this waiver that we would -- waiver of local match fund participation for Town Creek. I don't know the wording; I'm not that good at wording, but that's what I`m asking the Judge to -- and this Court to consider, that authorization to sign that for Town Creek project, Site 1 and 2, which I would look at over the next -- this budget year, start to put something together, start to have some numbers and look at hydrology and -- and maybe we do something like the bridges at Hermann Sons. We could put something in -- and some of them may be culverts, but that would come over time. And any of the money we spend on any of this would go toward the $110,500, where we would not have to spend any funds, and not -- Co;nmissioner Letz may be more familiar with it, but -- or elaborate on that a little bit, but I think it's a good project. We could get some other things in the county S-l~-U 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 done without having to participate down there. And I think it's something we ought to do. Better use of our money. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a good idea. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do, too. JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Odom, did I -- did I understand you correctly, right there at the last, that we can identify the Town Creek projects now as participation-waived projects, but if you decide that you want to do that amount of work or some portion of it on some other project, that there would be flexibility to come back and amend this process at any time during that three-year period, as long as it otherwise qualifies? MR. ODOM: I believe so. I believe it does allow me that opportunity. We would have to go back to the State to identify that, and as long as we are committed and the Court is committed by a resolution and I start working on that, I think it`s all in good faith. Should we decide -- I mean, there has to be flexibility in the thing. And talking to Mike Coward, we would have to go get approval from District 15 or Austin, but I don't think there would be any problems about tY'iat. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that's even more flexibility than I had anticipated that this would allow, so that's that much better. MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. And out of these two s-~~-o~ 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 27 sites, we certainly at that point would cover the $110,000. It's logical, it's a viable project, and we would be in there, and it gives me three years to -- to plug numbers in there and complete a project. We may not be all at once, but maybe one section of it, and then we'll look at the other. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't think I've ever seen a participation-waived project before. Seems like we -- we've done four or five off-system projects in the county; Indian Creek, one down in your neck of the woods. I can't remember who -- oh, the High Water Bridge. Some time before God ccmes back to get us, we're going to have that thing. But that's out of the same system, but I've never seen them actually waive our 10 percent, which is a good thing. But I -- I thought I heard you say somewhere in here that we do -- we are required to participate in some way, kind of an in-kind participation. MR. ODOM: Well, it would be in-kind or $110,500 worth of work, whether it's detection, whether it's materials. And then I would imagine we would keep the data, just like we do with FEMA; that we would just use that -- those hourly rates and our equipment rate hours. I mean, our hourly rates are set, and I think we can show in good faith that we spent $110,000. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think one of the -- and 5-~~-03 28 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 believe, to answer the first part of your question, I believe it's a new program -- MR. ODOM: It is. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- talking with Mike Coward. But what this does, it enables us to basically get a lot of in-kind credit if we do the work on that project at Town Creek ourselves. MR. ODOM: Ourselves. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we get much more of a bang for our buck, and it's a -- it's something basically that -- where TexDOT is encouraging us to do something rather than -- 'cause, I mean, obviously, that project's going to be -- well, not obviously; hopefully the Hermann Sons project will go forward. MR. ODOM: Hopefully it will go forward. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And this is a way for TexDOT to make us do another project in addition to that one, I guess is their logic. But it's -- I think it's a new program. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do I understand correctly, Leonard, we have three -- three years in which to meet this commitment for $120,000 -- $110,000? MR. ODOM: Yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Of in-kind work? MR. ODOM: That's the way the program -- --_-o~ 29 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And if you identify certain projects now, and you later want to change your priorities or do something different, that too is permissible? MR. ODOM: I believe so. I can't give you 100 percent that that's correct. I'm going from memory, that I talked to Mike and I feel that we could. I asked that question, but it's -- so much has happened in the last 30 days that I sort of forgot, but I believe that is correct. But we would have -- it would not come from this resident engineer here; it would have to come from District 15, at least from that source down there, if we decide to identify something. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, if the Court adopts this today, and it looks like it probably will happen, we are, in effect, memorializing those sites that you've identified? MR. ODOM: That's right. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct? MR. ODOM: That's correct. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's also important -- this is nothing -- this is not new budget dollars. I mean, we're committed to spend this $110,000 either way. MR. ODOM: Whether it's -- yeah. 5-1~-,~3 30 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: Well, I'll make a motion to pass a resolution to the Texas Department of Transportation for participation waiver for Hermann Sons Bridge, and the location for the work obligation from the County are two locations on Town Creek. MR. ODOM: Good. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the Judge sign. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And authorize the County Judge to sign same. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded to pass a resolution in accordance with motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. 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: Motion carries. MR. ODOM: Thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good work, Len -- pardon? MR. ODOM: Thank you. This is the original, Judge. JUDGE TINLEY: Hmm? 5-l~'-.^,3 31 1 ^ 2 signed. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. ODOM: That's the original. I need that JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I'll get to it. Next item will be consideration of the minor correction to Volume 7, Page 205, Revision of Plat for Tracts 48 and 49A of Kerr Country Estates. MR. JOHNSTON: Morning. This plat, we have recently approved the revision you just mentioned, Kerrville Country Estates. They had a typographical error on the line chart; Line L-8 should have a correction to it. I think it's a correction. We used to have a method in our rules to do an amended plat. I think, during revisions, that section was removed. Doesn't seem like -- like it would be worthwhile to have to refile the plat just for making one little correction. My thinking was, with the court order, the surveyor could probably go over and make a physical correction on the recorded plat in the Clerk's office, and -- without removing it or anything, just making a correction right there. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I we've handled these in the past. We plat because there's no authority in do amended plats. And typographical corrected by court order. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: agree, and this is how eliminated the amended the local government to errors should just be Let me -- how did -- 5-~~-03 32 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 how did that line get in there? Just -- we just forgot to erase it? MR. VOELKEL: That's a good question, Commissioner Baldwin. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My real question, who's going to pay to do this? MR. VOELKEL: You know who's paying for this one. And that's an AutoCAD drawing, so that should not happen in an AutoCAD drawing. I don't know how that came out that way. I don't know how to answer that. It should have been caught, though. That error should have been caught before it was filed, and it was not. My fault. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I've got another question that's related to this issue. It's a little bit -- little bit different, you know. This is the one where Mr. Evans had to jump through all the City/County hoops and some state funding hoops, et cetera, and just totally -- total insanity. I understand he still has some problems; that whatever we did last meeting is not what the State wanted for him, et cetera. Could this line be a part of that? MR. VOELKEL: I'm assuming it is. I'm not aware of any other problem. I think that they just wanted that corrected before they proceed with his transaction with the Texas Veterans Land Board. s-i~-;;~ 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Before anybody changes their mind, let me make a motion to do whatever we're supposed to do. What do we do here? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Authorize a correction of plat. JUDGE TINLEY: Wait a minute. We -- MS. PIEPER: Judge, I do not feel comfortable with somebody coming in and altering an original document in my office. JUDGE TINLEY: We'll, we're going to give you the court order authority, maybe, to do that. I understand your concern, but there'll be some specifics here as to what is done, if the Court approves it. And you indicated there's some precedent for that, Commissioner Letz? COMMISSIONER LETZ: We've made -- I don't remember which one, but we have made -- had a correction on a plat previously, in the past couple years. I don't know how it was handled. I don't know if it would -- whether we changed it or how that was done. I know we've done a correction for a typographical error. MR. JOHNSTON: This probably -- error was drafted, so only the person whose name seals on the drawing is one who makes the correction. MS. PIEPER: I've already had copies of those 25 ~ plats go out. 5 1_ 03 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ^ 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: I apologize, Commissioner Baldwin. I should have allowed you to finish your motion, and I didn't. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That was so long ago. Well, I actually wasn't making a motion, but I would think, Mrs. Clerk, that -- I understand exactly what you're saying, but I think that it makes it okay if there's a court order. You disagree with that? MS. PIEPER: I disagree with that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How do we do these things? MS. PIEPER: File an amended plat. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And get -- what kind of process is that? I tell you what I want to do. I want to -- I want to move forward with our original motion that I think you were making. Did you make a motion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: You asked me for wording of a motion that you were going to make. I'm glad to make a motion. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would you second it? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll second your -- no, I'll make a motion that we authorize the engineer who sealed the plat to make a minor correction to the typographical error for the revision of plat for Tracts 48 and 49A, Kerr County -- Kerr Country Estates. s-i?-~~ 35 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 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second that motion. And I want to say to the Clerk, if there is a -- if there is a -- if this is a problem, then let's bring it back and correct the problem. I just don't -- I just don't think that there's really a problem with it. That's a second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded by Commissioners Letz and Baldwin, respectively, that the engineer who originally sealed the recorded plat in Volume 7, Page 205, being revision of plat for Tracts 48 and 49A of Kerr Country Estates, be allowed to personally correct the typographical error on line chart L-8, to read "N.48°52'01"W." Any further discussion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I think maybe to -- I mean, could that corrected plat then be refiled? Could you not just refile that same plat so that it's clear to anyone that there's a change, that there's -- MS. PIEPER: I can do that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that would solve that problem of, you know, avoiding expense, but at the same time getting every one on notice and your records correct that there's -- it's a different plat. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Will that satisfy your concern? MS. PIEPER: That will work. We can do it 5-1~-03 36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: You want to include that in COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's her -- JUDGE TINLEY: I really think you're probably right. If she -- if she requires that it be refiled, I think that's exactly right. Any further discussion on this item? All in favor -- MR. JOHNSTON: Instead of the term "engineer," you might want to put "engineer or surveyor." But I think this is a surveyor that stamped this one. Correct? COMMISSIONER LETZ: He's an engineer, though. MR. VOELKEL: No, I'm not. COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, you're not? MR. VOELKEL: No, I'm not. MR. ODOM: Don is, but he's not. JUDGE TINLEY: In lieu of the term "engineer" who filed the plat, it will be the "surveyor" who filed the plat. Is that correct, gentlemen? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Who sealed the plat? Signed the plat? JUDGE TINLEY: Sealed and signed it. All right. MS. PIEPER: Normally there's a filing fee due, too, with the refiles. Are they going to be waived by 5-1-G3 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the Court? JUDGE TINLEY: Somehow I knew it was going to come down to a question of money. Lee, do you feel that -- do you feel like somebody's got a grip on you back there? MR. VOELKEL: I'll go with whatever you guys decide is best. That's fine. JUDGE TINLEY: What's the filing fee to refile? MS. PIEPER: Do you know right off? MS. HAMILTON: I don't know for sure. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's big, Lee. MS. PIEPER: It's big. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: As long as it doesn't cost the guy more money. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. JUDGE TINLEY: Well -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If it costs Lee, Lee is the highest vote-getter in Kerr County, and so that means he has more money than the rest of us. MR. VOELKEL: Correct. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And so if it costs him something, I r_ouldn't care less. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sock it to him. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sock it to him. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Fine. -_~ 03 38 1 -- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 JUDGE TINLEY: There's no -- no waiver in the motion as presented. 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 does carry. Next item, consider abandoning, discontinuing, and vacating 545.16 feet at the end of Dickey Road, setting public hearing for the same. MR. JOHNSTON: I'll kick this off. I think there's several other people here that probably want to talk to it. The subdivision involved here, I think, is called -- in one of these documents -- I won't even hazard a guess how you pronounce it. JUDGE TINLEY: Isensee Estates -- or Acres. MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah, that's it. It was abandoned as a subdivision; however, the road that goes into the previous subdivision is deeded to Kerr County for a long period of time; since back in the early 60's, I think, maybe earlier than that. And the present owner -- are you the owner or the owner's representative? MR. EVANS: Part owner. MR. JOHNSTON: Part owner? 25 ~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's Mr. Evans. 5-1" -r.3 39 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. JOHNSTON: Would like to abandon that road. My thinking is that perhaps if they outlined a boundary at the -- at the front part of the road as a turn-around, a cul-de-sac, it would abandon any consideration of that, since the road kind of dead-ends into their property. COMMISSIONER LETZ: They would not be required to do a road. They would just provide the right-of-way for a road. MR. JOHNSTON: If we had the right-of-way. I think we'll give you the option later if we ever wanted to do it. What was your thinking on that? MR. ODOM: Say again? MR. JOHNSTON: Do we want them to build a cul-de-sac or just provide the right-of-way for it? MR. ODOM: Rather them build it than us build it. MR. JOHNSTON: Better them than us build it. (Discussion off the record.) MR. ODOM: Let me -- excuse me. When I looked at this last week -- and it's one of those -- I think it's 40 foot. Am I correct, Truby? MS. HARDIN: Yes. MR. ODOM: 40 foot, and it just goes back there and ends at a house close to Johnson Creek back there. 5-1~-03 1 --- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 --- 1 3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 40 And I would normally just say, well, that's the way it ends; we put a gate right there. But the problem is -- is the houses and the driveways there, I would suppose, and the -- the indication to us was that it's just going to be a single-family residence. I assume that's right? MR. EVANS: That's right. MR. ODOM: And the only thing is, if someone comes down, they start turning around in somebody's driveway, and then we get complaints. At that point, what do you do? And then the taxpayers are at liberty to find a solution. And I don't think that's the case as it is now; there's a lot of room in there, and they can turn around or go to the back. It's just nothing going on. And I would feel more secure than to have a citizen complaining to the Commissioner or to us down here that someone's turning around in their driveway; say a big truck does. We need something down there at that very end, I believe even at 40 foot, maybe, to go outside in that property and create a radius or three-quarters of a radius in there to -- to turn. I don't know whether it's necessary to -- to build it or not. I don't think it's the taxpayers' responsibility to build the cul-de-sac, if it's necessary, other than maybe having the land deeded. That's, I guess, ultimately a decision of the Court. But it just dead-ends. I just would like to avoid any problems or any contentions in -- you s-i_-„~ 41 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2l 22 23 ,., 2 4 25 know, that may occur after we do this. But I just see people having to back up and go in somebody's driveway and private property and turn around. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do we know if the property owner intends to gate the abandoned road? MR. ODOM: He said that he was going to gate it. I guess the -- am I correct? MR. EVANS: Yes, that's correct. MR. ODOM: You know, and it would work right now if we -- I don't know how do you that in a cul-de-sac. I'd kick that around, how you aesthetically make it work where it's there and it looks fine there. The problem -- only problem is, if somebody backs up, they're using another person's driveway, and those houses are pretty close. One's not, but one is right there, and I would assume they would back in, try to turn around there. And we have to put ourselves in that position. What if you lived there? Right now, it's just open field. My suggestion is a cul-de-sac down there. Now, whether it's built -- I'm just -- if there's enough room to turn around, that's super. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only problem -- I've never been out there, but from an aesthetic standpoint, I mean, the fences could go to, like, a "V" and have a cul-de-sac inside it. MR. ODOM: Sure, offset it there. s-lz-o~ 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 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, you know, have a cul-de-sac still by the fencing, and aesthetically make it look nice. MR. ODOM: I mean, it could be done. I mean, it's not too much out of the way, and the radius right there is a solution to -- to eliminate some problems in the future. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, then, you're suggesting that the cul-de-sac is a quid pro quo for abandoning the road? MR. ODOM: That's right, sir. Right now it functions for me. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can you go a step further? When you're asking them for a cul-de-sac, can you get a -- one that fits our regulations, a full-blown cul-de-sac? MR. ODOM: I believe so. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In case there is a development there, -- MR. ODOM: If there is a development. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- we're set up for it. MR. ODOM: I believe it's only 6 acres, so it just sort of runs -- I think 5 is the minimum number on a central water system, but if there was a central water 5-~~'-03 43 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1C 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 L 21 22 23 24 25 system, which I don't know about, you know, it could be divided up into six different -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where would the gate be placed that we're talking about? MR. ODOM: I don't know. I -- it could either be -- it depends where they wish to continue that. It could be right there on that road, and offset -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let's find out from the gentleman in the back. Where would that be? MR. EVANS: Just at the start of the property, off of Dickey Road where the property starts on the right and left. MR. ODOM: Right-hand land, he's talking about. on the plat? MR. JOHNSTON: Could you come up and show us MR. MR. MR. MR. was needed, we cou MR. ODOM: EVANS: ODOM: EVANS: ld take ODOM: You're saying up here? Right here. Right here? Then I thought if a cul-de-sac something right around that way. How are you going to get through there, Doug? That's a fence right there. MR. JOHNSTON: Has to be a 100-foot diameter. MR. EVANS: Yeah. The only -- same problem 5 - 1. - ~"~ 3 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 as you have there. All's you got to do -- I mean, the only thing you can do is back up into that -- that little jog that we'd give there. MR. ODOM: That little jog is probably 8 foot -- 8 foot offset from what I saw on those plans, and then you've got that fence running along that man's house. MR. EVANS: Right. MR. ODOM: That driveway right there. That's what concerns me, is having -- MR. JOHNSTON: We're thinking about something larger than that. Something that would actually, you know, make the 100-foot diameter rule. MR. EVANS: Well, I mean, look at the problem we have down here. If anybody gets off that road at the end, they're trespassing. Then you got to call the Sheriff's Department. I mean, they're right there at the houses. They all get down there and go, "Hey, look at the creek." If they get out of their car and go to the creek, they're trespassing. MR. JOHNSTON: Of course, if you do this, you could fence it off here, put your gate in here. MR. ODOM: So have the radius -- have the radius out here? MR. JOHNSTON: You know, just have enough property there for a turn-around. s-l~-~~~ 45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 l~ 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 MR. EVANS: Yeah. I think -- MR. JOHNSTON: Doesn't have to be like that. MR. EVANS: -- the aesthetics of that -- MR. ODOM: The aesthetics is tough, but how much -- where -- where are you giving 100 -- 750 square feet versus what we give you in here -- what, 500 or 'a tenth of a mile? You're asking for 40 foot there? MR. EVANS: Well, all's I'm saying is the -- then the County quits the maintaining of that road. MR. ODOM: Well, the County might want to come right back here, Doug, and stop it right there. If this is all one, I question why we go back on driveways in the first place. The Commissioner and I have discussed some of this before. I don't know why we're always going -- they have done, and we've continued to do that. Maybe it's better we end it right there. MR. EVANS: That's what I'm saying. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I hate to interrupt ,,.._ 2 4 t hat . 25 -1.-0~ MR. JOHNSTON: And we're saying we would this tri-part discussion, but someone want to show me where the gate's going to be on this map? MR. JOHNSTON: That's -- he's proposing to put the gate right across there. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would have guessed 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 rather have a radius there for a turn-around. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The purpose of this agenda item is to set a public hearing, right? MR. JOHNSTON: Yes, it is. JUDGE TINLEY: I think that's the real meat of it. MR. ODOM: And I think people within 200 feet of that -- that mark has to -- you know, to come in for a public hearing, whether you end it right there or not. I'm just saying that I think if you have a cul-de-sac, you'll eliminate some of the problems. If you don't, then I think that you're going to have people, if they come down -- and I don't think you have that much traffic; that I see a potential problem of backing up into somebody else's private driveway and turning around, particularly big trucks. JUDGE TINLEY: As I see where we are, we'll set the matter for public hearing today. In the meantime, if y'all have some issues you want to work out to present to the Court later after the public hearing on some various alternatives or design schematics, we can take those up after the public hearing, but we've got to have this public hearing on abandoning all or any part of that roadway. MR. ODOM: That's right. JUDGE TINLEY: That's currently owned by Kerr -1_-~? 47 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 2 `~ J County. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir, that's my point. We can go ahead and set the public hearing, and we can work on these issues between now and then, see if we can't come to a resolution that will satisfy everybody. But, Ms. Sovil, when's the first time -- MS. SOVIL: 6/23. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 6/23? I move that we set a public hearing on June 23rd for the purposes of discussing, taking action on abandoning, discontinuing, vacating 545.16 feet at the end of Dickey Road. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: 10 a.m. as indicated? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 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 does carry. The matter is set for public hearing June ?_3rd of this year at 10 a.m., here in this courtroom. MR. EVANS: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consider a minor 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 correction to Volume 7, Page 186, Revision of Plat for 17, 18, and 19 of Y.O. Ranchlands. I think this is another verse of the minor correction -- MR. JOHNSTON: Exactly right. JUDGE TINLEY: -- situation, is it not? MR. JOHNSTON: Exactly right. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. JOHNSTON: The terminology in the -- the note right above the title on the plat refers to the property -- the roads being maintained by Y.O. Ranchland Owners' Association, and that is not correct; it should be adjacent landowners. So, there again, we were wanting to have that, you know, lined out and, you know, revised verbiage written in. COMMISSIONER LETZ: To me, it's the same situation. Correct it when you file it. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Is this a typo, or is it a change in responsibility? MR. JOHNSTON: I think it was just a misunderstanding when they put it in the Y.O. Ranchlands -- normally the homeowners' association maintains the roads, but in this case they only maintain one road, and all the other roads off of that are maintained by the landowners. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Ms. Pieper, is this the same issue? Or you got any additional concerns about s-i~-o~ 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 this one? MS. PIEPER: Same issue. Refile with the deeds. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: How's the resolution worded? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we -- I'll make a motion to approve the surveyor, in this case, or -- MR. JOHNSTON: It would be a surveyor, Charles Domingues. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Approve allowing the surveyor, Charles Domingues, to make a minor correction to the recorded plat of Y.O. Ranchlands, I guess, Revision of Plat for Lots 17, 18, and 19 of Y.O. Ranchlands. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded by Commissioners Letz and Nicholson, respectively, that the Court authorize the surveyor who filed the original plat in Volume 7, Page 186, Revision of Plat for 17, 18, 19 of Y.O. Ranchlands, personally make correction of said plat so that it specifics that the future maintenancelrepair of the roads will be by the adjacent landowners rather than the Y.O. Ranchland homeowners' association, as presently indicated, and, too, that plat then be refiled with the Clerk of this court. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question. Are we s-1~-o; 50 1 2 3 4 5 h 7 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ,.., 2 4 25 given to understand that -- that if there's a refiling fee, that Mr. Domingues pays this time? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Who pays it doesn't make any difference. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Somebody other than us? MS. PIEPER: Whoever brings it in. Whoever brings it in, which would be Mr. Domingues. JUDGE TINLEY: 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 does carry. Next item is consideration of the approval of the Amendment Number 1 to two different agreements on Project Agreement projects between Kerr County Commissioners Court and U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service, and authorize Judge to sign those amendments. Mr. Odom? MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. I was -- Truby handed this to me. I can see where it's confusing. If you will take -- the top page is the amended part for $80,000, I believe. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 88. MR. ODOM: Well, I don't -- I don't know what 5-1~-~i 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 51 your -- mine shows that the top page is in -- there's two amendments. Number 1 is for $80,000. It said, "It is agreed that following-described work is to be performed at an estimated cost of $80,000." On the second page, that item amount is for $88,000. The estimated cost for the work improvements is $75,000. So, I'm assuming what happened is that we had the project down on River Road where we were talking about gabions, and we have been trying to work with people to get something done, and I finally decided that time is -- we've been wasting a lot of time; that we're going to do it with concrete. So, they asked us to sign both of these. I know it seems crazy, and I don't know why it should be the -- the amended part for $80,000, but I'm asking the Court to go ahead and sign both, and the gabions were a little bit more expensive, so they were just saying go ahead and -- and modify this to $80,000, I believe. So that -- that's where I think this is coming from. And why they just didn't toss one out, I don't know. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, we will be approving two different versions? MR. ODOM: Two different versions of it. And, for whatever reason, I -- for -- MS. HARDIN: There's two different agreements. MR. ODOM: Oh, there's two different s-l~-o~ 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 agreements? JUDGE TINLEY: One is - - is no cost increase. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Two different numbers. MR. ODOM: Okay. Well -- oh, there it is, 2-04 and 2-05. I'm sorry, I wasn't prepared when I came in. I have to apologize to the Court. It's two separate ones. This must be for the modified part on the swings, and the other is the other work that we've done. That's what -- that's what it has to be for, then. In other words, there was 80-some-odd thousand, I think, for -- for the river -- for that swing area for -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: C.P. River Road. MR. ODOM: Right, where those kids -- just down from the swings there, where it cut 20 foot deep. And then the other is where -- the other project that we have. JUDGE TINLEY: Basically, you have already performed the work, or have it underway? MR. ODOM: Have it underway. JUDGE TINLEY: So this would merely put us in compliance with the U.S.D.A., for example, which you're doing anyway. MR. ODOM: Yes, sir, that's all. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I would move that we approve Amendment Number 1 for Agreement s-i~-n ~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 53 69-7442-3-549 and Agreement 69-7442-3-550 for the projects between Kerr County Commissioners Court and the U.S.D.A. N.R.C.S. and authorize County Judge to sign same. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for the Court to approve the two amendments and authorize County Judge to sign the same. Is there any further discussion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a question. Just a -- making sure it's not another typo. On Agreement 69-7442-3-550, the location says along Center Point Swing between Comfort and Kerrville. Should that probably not be Center Point and Kerrville? MR. ODOM: It should be between Center Point -- MS. HARDIN: No, it's in Center Point, between Comfort and Kerrville. That's correct. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Between Comfort and Kerrville? MR. ODOM: Well, it is. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, it is between Comfort and Kerrville, but there's no road that connects -- MS. HARDIN: I just printed it; I didn't type it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The road starts in Center Point, though. 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 54 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's also between Miami and L.A. JUDGE TINLEY: Between San Antonio and Junction. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or 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 does carry. Next item is consider the road name changes for privately maintained roads in various locations in Kerr County, in accordance with 911 guidelines. Ms. Hardin. MS. HARDIN: We have eight privately maintained road names. Some of them are changes, and some are unnamed roads. There is one typo I would like for the clerk to make note of, and it's on the 1155 to MacDonald. It should be M-a-c, capital D. Mr. Williams, is there a space in between the -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's all one word. MS. HARDIN: No space, okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just cap the D. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's not -- just a -1~-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 55 question. Is that MacDonald Loop? MS. HARDIN: No. It's -- it's at the end of Fall Creek Road and it's a private road to Granger MacDonald's place. 911 says it meets their guidelines. It's in the same precinct, but it's a different geo region. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MS. HARDIN: I would not suggest that it be named that, but it does meet the guidelines. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As long as the geo regions are different, that's the important thing. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move that we approve the road name changes for privately maintained roads, as outlined in the documents provided by Road and Bridge. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded by Commissioners Nicholson and Baldwin, respectively, that the Court approve the name changes for the privately maintained roads in various locations in Kerr County, as presented by Road and Bridge staff, and it being in accordance with 911 guidelines. Any further discussion or questions? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. -1?-0~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 56 (No response.} JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Thank you very much. Next item is consideration and discussion to authorize the Sheriff's Office to apply for SCAAP program. Is that the correct pronunciation of that? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's as close as I can get. We'll find out a little bit more in just a few minutes. First off, to start out, there's three people I need to introduce that will -- are actually going to present this to you. First is Sylvia Foraker. As y'all may know -- and if you don't, it's a good time to -- she is our Assistant Jail Administrator out at the jail. Pedro Garcia is the Jail Administrator that we stole back from Fredericksburg. Pedro does have experience in the SCAAP 23 ,-. 2 4 25 ~_ 1~ _i~3 MR. GARCIA: Good morning. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Morning. MR. GARCIA: Well, I've been talking to Scott program. He -- they used it over in Fredericksburg. I think you can see that in some of the backup to this. And the next man is Scott Thompson. He is the representative of Vertex, who is the one that kind of acts as administrators, I guess, helping us get the -- the filing of the fees and everything. And I will mainly turn this over to him and Pedro to present to answer any of the questions, and let you understand how it works. 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 57 for the last three or four years at different functions at the jail, at the jail conferences and that on this. And since the first time we talked, we've always thought it was a good idea, since it meant that it was going to make the County money, and it wouldn't necessarily take up too much time for the -- for the employees of the County to get this. It does involve giving them a percentage of -- of what is totally made by the County or what is given to the County, but I believe as long as we get a plus, it's always a good thing. So, we've been talking to the Sheriff about this, and -- and when I went over to Gillespie, they already had that in place and I had a chance to work with it and work with them on it. We did -- when I was there, I believe it was a little over $17,000 the county got, and it took me about five hours of my work, and most of that was trying to figure out who was going to -- who was responsible for doing it, and trying and trying to get with the -- with the Sheriff and them over there, see who he wanted to do it. And -- but it didn't take too much of my time, and I believe the Treasurer's office and Auditor's office over there also did some information -- or had to provide some information. And it's -- like I said, Vertex pretty much fakes care of -- of the major portion of the work on it. Now, this program is -- it's money given to 5-1~-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 9 25 58 the counties by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, and SCAAP stands for State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, which is money given to the counties for housing alien -- illegal aliens. And they don't just have to be from Mexico, but they can be from Canada or any other country. But there's certain guidelines that they go by, and they just get a listing of our information. We put it on a disk and we send it over to them, and they pretty much go through it and pick out what they need and give that information to the Bureau. And they -- they have their way of calculating all that, and they send it back. I'll go ahead and let Scott take over, unless y'all have some questions for me on that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Only question I have for you is, did you learn your lesson? You came back to Kerr County. You here to stay? MR. GARCIA: I sure am, yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right, good. JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Garcia? MR. GARCIA: Uh-huh? JUDGE TINLEY: You say you had the opportunity to look at this on a firsthand basis and to actually utilize it. Is Gillespie County overall pleased with this program? MR. GARCIA: Gillespie County was ecstatic at the amount of -- the way they did this. And, in Gillespie 5-~~-03 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 lE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~- 2 4 25 59 County -- I enjoyed working there while I was there. (Laughter.) But the way it works is, we housed in another county, including Kerr County for a while. I believe we went over to Comanche County for a while. Well, the way they were looking at it the first year they did it, I believe the information they gave Vertex was just on the inmates they had in-county, which totals no more than 15. The Sheriff told me to keep it under 10. So, most of our inmates were -- were sent to Comanche County, which was anywhere from 20 to 30 inmates. Well, the first year that this was done over there, like I said, they just calculated inmates they had in-county, so they don't -- I believe it was at $5,000 or something is what they got back, which is still -- considering the amount of work that -- that has to go into -- to giving them this information, that's still all right. But when it came back the next year we did it, and I -- I cleared it up with -- with them, and we're paying for the inmates to go over there, so why wouldn't we get paid for those as well? And I went ahead and sent the information for them as well, and it came up to a little over -- like I said, a little over $17,000. And I believe y'all have a listing of the different amounts that they've got. Like I said, it was 17,5 or something like that for the second year. So, yeah, 1 was pleased, and so were they. 5-1_-~~3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ,r 24 25 60 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: One of the big differences that Scott will talk about in this, Commissioners, is that, you know, we -- we bill I.N.S. for housing illegal aliens here, but the big difference is we cannot bill I.N.S. as long as they have a criminal charge here, because we're responsible for them with that criminal charge. Once that criminal charge is taken care of, any time they spend in jail after that charge is taken care of, then we can bill -- or, you know, then we bill I.N.S. for that amount of charge. So, normally it ends up being one day or something like that, where we miss out on -- say they're here on a capital murder or whatever, and they're sitting here for an entire year. We don't get to bill I.Pd.S. right now for that entire year. We only bill them for after the sentence, as long as it takes us to get them out. This program is what does all the billing for the whole time we're housing them; it allows us to do that. JUDGE TINLEY: So, even though we've got them under a state charge, in our custody, if they, in fact, qualify as an illegal alien under this program, their -- their housing and board cost will be covered by this program? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Correct. MR. GARCIA: That's correct. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The other thing is -- 5-1,,-r~ 61 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ,,^ 2 4 25 and we'll let Scott get up and explain it all. David Motley, who couldn't be here today -- I think he's at a convention -- did call me yesterday afternoon. He has reviewed this contract, and he said there were a couple little minor tweakings that he looked at, but it wasn't anything of substance, and he had no problem with approving the contract. He'd just get a waiver on these minor things. JUDGE TINLEY: Question. If these folks were not presenting this to us today, would you be filing these same claims through people in your department with the Department of Justice, or -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, we never have. JUDGE TINLEY: -- or whomever? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We never have. We don't have the computer system and the capability to assure that they are all illegal aliens and things like that. They have to go through all the different guidelines. I don't have the manpower; there's no way I could ever have the manpower to be able to do that type of research. JUDGE TINLEY: So, you're telling me that if we go with this program, it's not going to cost you any more manpower, at least of any significant consequence, that you don't already have in place, and secondly, any money that we derive from it is money we wouldn't be getting anyway? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct. I'll 5-1~-U3 62 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 let Scott explain it. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. THOMPSON: Morning, Judge, Commissioners. I'm Scott Thompson with Vertex out of Dallas. And, as we've been explaining, this is the -- and it was -- SCAAP is the right acronym pronunciation for the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program. We're presently working with 86 Texas counties this year to file in this program. This is an annual program, and it's a pool of money that is distributed among the successful applicants. Each year, the number of applicants keeps growing. It -- as the Sheriff is explaining, these are state charges that you're doing pretrial detention, and you're not receiving any funding for them. It's not based on -- on the room and board. The feds changed it three years ago. They have a formula where they collect the jail personnel salaries for corrections officers, and also this year, they have the transportation officers' salaries. And they come up with a -- with a formula there and apply it and come up to a daily cost. We collect the inmate data from the jail administration, and this is based on illegals that have been in your jail on a felony or two misdemeanors and a minimum of four days in jail; those qualify. We accumulate those and we come up with a year's worth of that, and maybe 500 inmate days or 1,000 inmate days or something, and then 5-1~-~3 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 whatever the payroll cost for your county, that figure is applied and submitted to the feds. They, likewise, use a weighting factor, because, as you can well imagine, this is a national program. Salaries in Los Angeles County or New York state or whatever are different than they are in Texas. I get down around the border, some of my South Texas counties like Maverick and Zapata and so on, they're different than Dallas or Tarrant or big cities. But that's taken into consideration; the feds apply a formula to it. Then they announce the awards. The awards are made. The money is drawn down electronically by the County Treasurer or Auditor. Money comes directly to the County, comes into your account, and usually I get a call from the Auditor or Treasurer saying, "Scott, we got our money. Send me a bill." I bill you for 22 percent of the -- of the awarded amount, and you retain 78 percent. So, it's a 78 percent found money factor, anyway. We have also taken over for a number of counties in the past -- probably got a half a dozen; Denton, Hays, Brazos, Webb County, where they were doing the program themselves and we took over for them and increased their award amount by three to five times or more. So, the fee kind of becomes transparent if you can improve the payout that much. But, in a nutshell, that's the way the program works. I'm open to any questions or discussion, whatever 5-1^-03 64 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 you had in mind. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question. MR. THOMPSON: Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understood the Sheriff to say that the reimbursement doesn't begin until after a charge is eliminated, or that you can't claim reimbursement if they have a charge against them, some kind of a charge? MR. THOMPSON: Well, they have to be charged or convicted of a state crime. In fact, this year they're -- they're applying it if they have prior convictions, then charges only will count. Okay. If I -- if I robbed the 7-Eleven, mugged somebody and shot somebody or whatever, and I'm being held in your jail to go to trial, I could be there for weeks, say, before -- before I actually get to trial. At that time, maybe I've got a real good lawyer and I get off with 30 or 60 days in jail, and they give me time off -- allowance for the time I've spent in jail. Maybe I'm there a couple of weeks. At that time, when I'm discharged and released, the I.N.S. would be notified, or the border patrol, and they would pick me up and I'm out of here. The time that I sat in your jail, you're ii~t getting paid by I.N.S. or border patrol or U.S. Marshals or whoever, so that's -- that's the money we're applying for. 5 - 1 ~ - ~ 65 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Regardless of the disposition of the charge? MR. THOMPSON: If the individual -- this year they just changed the statement. Last year it was "charges and/or convictions." This year they changed it to "convictions." We went back and questioned that, and they came back and said, "Well, it's convictions and any prior convictions." That establishes them as a criminal alien. So that you could have pending charges that you don't even have a determination on yet, but if they have a prior conviction on a felony or two misdemeanors, those charges, even though they're unresolved, the time that they're in jail, if it falls within the accounting period, they apply. COMMISSIONER WILLTAMS: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand the contract to read as a three-year agreement? MR. THOMPSON: Yes, it's a three-year agreement. There's a minimum of two years in the program, and the County does have the option to give 30-day notice at the end of a fiscal year if you want to just cancel out, if you decide it's not worth doing. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 22 -- MR. THOMPSON: We haven't had that happen yet. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 22 percent. 22 5-=~-03 66 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 percent? MR. THOMPSON: Yes, sir. I had Denton County -- they were filing on their own and getting $95,000. We took over for them a couple of years ago. We've gotten them 235 and 270, and Weldon Lucas and his people up there said, you know, we don't mind paying you 22 percent if you can up our claim and we don't have to do the work. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So the claim goes through your agency; is that correct? MR. THOMPSON: Well, no. We prepare the data and the claims, and we'll come back to your Jail Administrator; probably will be Pedro. And it's actually an online application that's done from the County. We're not permitted to submit the claim on the County's behalf. It's authorized by the C.E.O. of the jurisdiction, being your County Judge, to file for this program, and they actually want a County employee to submit the electronic application, and likewise to do the download of the funds to your account. You'll set up an ACH electronic funds transfer to your bank account. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Makes sense. JUDGE TINLEY: But all of that work is brought to the Jail Administrator from your people, or this is done by your -- by your organization; you bring it to them? s_i,_n3 67 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. THOMPSON: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: They put it online; the money comes back to Kerr County? MR. THOMPSON: For instance, they could go online today and -- and call an 800 number in my office, and I'd have somebody walk them through to do the registration, which has to be done this year before the 23rd of this month. We have -- they've had extensions; because of the change in the criteria, they've extended the deadline for the final drop-dead date, if you will, of uploading data to June 20th, so we've got almost another month to upload the data. So, what we will do is collect the information from them, get with your Auditor, Treasurer, get the payroll figures. We'll work up some numbers. If we have some questions or corrections, we'll come back and get those, and then we'll provide -- usually it's a data diskette, and we'll send that and say, "Okay, here's your instructions," and you get on the help line here and we can walk you through it. You put the disk in and you upload it, print off these pages saying it's confirmed and your application number and all that, and then you wait. Takes about four to six weeks for -- I.N.S. reins the verification on everybody, making sure that they are, in fact, illegals. And the feds do their part to divvy up the money, and then they announce awards. 5-1~ 03 68 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: I have two questions, just kind of -- just information I'd like to know. MR. THOMPSON: Sure. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One, do the federal people then bill the country of Mexico, ~r whatever country they're from? MR. THOMPSON: No, sir. This -- this is a bill that was set up back in '96, I believe, and it's funded by the Senate and the House each year in Appropriations Committee. It's about $565 million a year for the last two years. This year there is some budget cuts, and they cut it to $250 million. Senator Feinstein has a bill going around right now, and we're working with the Sheriff's Association, of which we're working with 26 state sheriff's associations to assist them in lobbying and writing letters to congressmen and so on to say, you know, every county has its problem, and we need more funding in this program, because it's federal responsibility for the illegals. It's not a local -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with that. It should be their own country. But how -- my next question, how many illegals are in our jail facilities in the state of Texas? About -- about a rough number. MR. THOMPSON: I really have no way to know. Too many. ~-i-o~ 69 1 2 3 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Too many. MR. THOMPSON: Yes, sir. Well, like I say, I mean, there is -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You saved me from 5 ~ saying it. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. THOMPSON: Last year, there were 81 counties in the state that received money from this program. 72 of them I'm doing, or Vertex is. Harris County does their own. El Paso does their own. We used to do Dallas County. At the point that we were getting them $2.2 million a year, they said, you know, "For this percentage we're paying you, we can hire a couple of full-time people and do it ourselves." Yeah, we understand. But they still asked us to help them fine-tune it for the next two years. So -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty, what -- how many do we have in Kerr County on an annual basis? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: On a daily basis? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Annual, monthly, whatever. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I couldn't tell you right off. We'd have to go back and see what their criteria on a state illegal alien -- you know, what actually fits in there. Now, on just the ones every week, we're having border patrol come pick up, okay, illegal aliens. A lot of them are in there one or two days, which wouldn't qualify -i_-o 70 1 2 3 4 5 h 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 for this, and a lot of them are ones that got a misdemeanor DWI or criminal trespass or something like that, ending up with 60 days, 30 days in jail, and we release them. But it's weekly, they're here picking up illegal aliens. You take Fredericksburg, who has half the population we have, and their rebate last year was $17,000. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How much? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 17. MR. THOMPSON: $17,000. JUDGE TINLEY: Net to them? MR. THOMPSON: Well, that was their award amount. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Their award amount. MR. THOMPSON: That's 22 percent less. Yeah, we -- the figures that you have -- if have you the sheet of the awards, those are the awards that were announced by the Bureau, and those -- that's what the draw down was for, and that's subject to my invoice. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And this thing about Denton County that they do, and Gillespie County that they do, what will make it a little bit easier on us is that they also both have the same software company, Software Group, Incorporated, that does all the jail information and that that we download, we have to gather to give to them, so they're already working with that same computer program that -=_-03 71 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 we have to be able to gather that information. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, the -- I think Rusty and I had been through this before five or six months ago, and I liked it then; I like it now. My only question is -- is authorizing a contract that the County Attorney hasn't been with you; I'm uncomfortable with that. But what do you think, as a C.E.O.? What do you think of this contract? Have you had the opportunity to -- JUDGE TINLEY: I just reviewed it very cursorily. Certainly, if you're inclined to make a motion, you could make -- make my ability to sign it conditioned upon the County Attorney's approval of it, subject to any changes he may insist upon or may end up negotiating. But -- but I think your point is well-made. That's really his responsibility, and we need to utilize his -- his office and his resources to see that we're doing things properly. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Approve it in a memo form to you, in writing? JUDGE TINLEY: Either that, or on the face of the contract. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Commissioner, one thing I will say is we got this contract to David last week, and he actually has a copy of it with him. I didn't know if I got that clear. He has reviewed it. He called me yesterday and advised that he didn't have a problem. He said there s-i~-os 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 was little tweakings, but it didn't amount to anything. He didn't have a problem with the contract and wanted me to relay that to y'all, because he couldn't be here today. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand that, but I'd like to hear his voice on the record and -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. The only concern we have is, as he stated, the deadline's the 23rd of this month to get registered, and we have to have a contract to get registered and get this year's funding. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, I will make that motion contingent upon the County Attorney responding in writing. JUDGE TINLEY: Indicating his approval on the face of the contract, for example? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded by Commissioners Baldwin and Letz, respectively, that the -- that the Court authorize the Sheriff's Office to apply for the SCAAP program and authorize County Judge to sign the contract upon the County Attorney approving the contract and indicating his approval on the face of the contract. Any further discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. -~~-o~~ 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 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. MR. THOMPSON: Thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Going to run through or take a break? JUDGE TINLEY: Well, let's -- what's your pleasure, gentlemen? It's about break time. I need to be concerned about this young lady here. She needs a little break time. Why don't we take about 10 to 15 minutes, and come on back? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ten or 15? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Come back at 10:40. JUDGE TINLEY: Is that a motion, Commissioner Nicholson? We'll stand in Recess until 10:40. (Recess taken from 10:31 a.m. to 10:40 a.m.) JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's come back to order, if you would, please. We will reconvene this meeting of the regular Commissioners Court on Monday, May 12th. Next item on the agenda is consider and discuss authorizing the Sheriff's Office to trade four cars and to purchase a used car for C.I.D. -1~-0= 74 1 -- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What this is, is we have three of the yellow cars, the pieces of junk that we downed after we got our last six new ones in, and they are just parked somewhere with major mechanical problems. They're not going anywhere; they can't be used any more. And I have one current C.I.D. vehicle, being the old Ram Charger that y'all have seen around, that kind of brownish Ram Charger. It's been in the department almost 10 years, and it doesn't even have an air-conditioner that's anywhere near functional any more, and won't be; the vehicle itself is not worth putting an air-conditioner back in it to get through the summer. So, I'm asking permission to trade those. Ken Stoepel Ford is the only one that's given us a bid on them, and they're so valuable, all four of them will bring us $4,000. The other thing -- which, for $4,000, I'm not going to get a very good trade-in. Now, we did have a vehicle several months ago that was totaled in a wreck, another yellow one. That check that the Auditor's office got for that insurance on that vehicle was $8,000 something, I would like to take both the trade-in and some of that $8,000 to be able to acquire a C.I.D. vehicle to replace the Ram Charger with, and get through it that way. We haven't, in any of our budget constraints, or budget negotiations -- since I've been Sheriff, we've never purchased -- actually out and out purchased new -1~-u3 75 i 2 3 4 5 E 7 8 9 10 11 12 .- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 vehicles or vehicles for C.I.D. We even have one yellow patrol car that's now a C.I.D. vehicle. And then the other thing we did, we had a seizure that was just being completed when I took office of a valuable vehicle, and we traded that one and I think some old cars that we had in that first year, and were able to get two Ford Tauruses for that amount. One of those went into Warrants and one of those went into C.I.D. So, the only different vehicles C.I.D. has had in three years has been one program car -- program used Ford Taurus, and our C.I.D. vehicles are getting pretty severe. I'd say there's one of them that we're still going to have to keep for another year or two until we can figure another way to -- as we get the new patrol cars moving. Another one of the older ones is that maroon Chevy Caprice that we had. To give you an idea of what the C.I.D. vehicles are like, that vehicle was D.P.S. Sergeant Charlie Seal's sergeant's car when he was stationed here, and when it got traded one year back in because of mileage, Kerr County purchased it, and when I was chief investigator with the Sheriff's Office in '95 -- '94-'95, I drove that vehicle. And our C.I.D. guys are still driving that vehicle, and it's not going to make it another year either, because it had 100,000 miles on it when we got it in about '95. These are some we're just trying to find other ways, 'cause I did make a deal that any of our new cars we -, ,-r~~ 76 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ^ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 purchased are going on patrol, so we've been trying to get those old 100,000-plus, 200,000-plus vehicles off patrol. This is one way of being able to replenish those in C.I.D. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rusty, when we started talking several years ago when we began our leasing program -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- or the rotation program, we had talked about, at some point in our lifetime, that we -- you'd have a full staff of vehicles and we could start -- start moving some of those the older vehicles over to other departments, such as the constables' offices and all that. It locks like we're never going to get there. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, we're getting there, okay? We aren't there yet, all right? We still -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: At what point do you think that that would be -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We still have eight of those old yellow cars with 100,000-plus miles on them. By the time we get -- you know, every year when we've been getting six, okay, we rotate out six of those oldest cars. Those were kept so long that the mileage on those is even too -- too high to pass them down. You can see that by what we're beir_g offered even in just a trade-in. Once we get through that stage, which is going to take probably another 5-1~-G3 ~~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 --- 13 i4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 two years, then we will start rotating out the first of the white cars that we got the first year I took office. Those will have between 100,000 and 120,000 miles on them by then, but they aren't in near the shape that those yellow ones were. We've changed maintenance programs, everything else like that, so at those -- at that point, when you can start rotating out those, those would be the ones that I would come back to y'all and say, "Let's don't trade them in; let's assign them to another department." COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I -- I think we had talked about this a couple of weeks ago. I told them that I had sent you a -- a memo asking you for some information and your thoughts and your intentions and all those things as we kind of -- you know, we were approaching our budget and we kind of want to know those things, you know, at some -- here it is. Here's the note. We still want those questions answered, please. We need that in order to -- I mean, I think that we're in the long-term plan mode just like you are, and we need to -- we need to know, you know, what our -- what the big picture is, because we did make somewhat of a commitment to -- not necessarily just to the constables, but to -- if I remember, constables was -- the word "constables" was used more than others, but it was other agencies inside the county system. But we need to -- we need to sit down and start figuring that out so we -1~-;;~ 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 can see, you know. We want to see an end date of when -- when you're going to be fully staffed with vehicles, when your staff has new vehicles and all that kind of -- you know, all that's done, so we can see what our plan is. You know, what -- at what point are we going to -- are we going to continue to lease six cars every year, or are we going to -- at some point, are we going to cut it down to four? You know, I just think this Commissioners Court would like to -- and I'm kind of putting words in their mouths right now, but I think that they'd agree with me that, you know, for a long-term planning situation, you know, we -- we need to take a look at that. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I agree. And to answer that, in a nutshell, it's going to be two years before we can start possibly thinking about supplying those cars to the constables. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But as far as today is concerned, I mean, just -- I don't know. I'll let these here guys -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: These cars that we're getting -- I'm trying to get rid of today are not suitable for anybody to drive any more. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Seemed like I saw that -~.-i~3 79 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 Ram Charger when I was a little kid, maybe. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think you probably did. But these are not for that -- in your deal, two years before we can start rotating them out. And I hope -- I'm looking at the mileage on our very first set of six; we're watching that to see where it's going to be. I -- I hope at that point, once we hit that maintenance mode or just rotating them, that maybe we can drop that down to four cars a year. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well -- let me just say one more thing, Bill. So, maybe over -- I would hope that you and the Judge are going to sit down soon and talk budgets and all that very soon, I think. Maybe you could possibly visit with him about all of those things, and then he can relate to us during the -- the budget process. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The Judge and I have already had a phone conversation, 'cause I was wanting to find out how his budget process works, and I think we've both agreed that we're going to have a very long, productive, sit-down on working out the budget, and all this has to come up during that -- that process. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, it does. Yes, it does. Arid that's the reason I'm kind of hammering it, because it really and truly has to happen. We heed to -- we need to really work on this and know what exactly what we're 5-1~-G3 80 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 going to do and just kind of -- I go back to Norman Schwarzkoff. When he sets up his wars, you know he's going to go in on a certain day, he's going to do this, and he leaves on a certain date. That's kind of what I -- I'd like to see us do. You know, I'd like to see us have that plan of knowing our entry date and our exit date on these kind of things, so we can get to it. Would you agree to that, Judge? Could you visit with him and relay that information back to us? JUDGE TINLEY: I'm going to be talking with -- and I've told most of the elected officials and department heads that -- that once I put out the preliminary budget request. information, which I'm in the process of compiling now, that once they get a chance to get their information rolling, I'm going to be putting mine together independently. Then it's my intention to meet with each and every elected official and department head and, one-on-one, go through their entire budget. And, obviously, the items that you've mentioned in this memo are going to be items that are going to be very pertinent to that process. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would think so. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They will be, especially this year. I'm very proud of the fact -- and it's something that the Judge and I have talked about, and I know he's got me working on a lot of it, is this is our longevity year for -i~-o3 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 the employees. And I am proud of the fact that, overall, between deputies and jail staff, I have 60 employees in line for longevity raises. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a miracle. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's fabulous. Okay. But that is going to be something that I -- the Judge and I will have to talk about, 'cause that is going to be a very large impact on the salary budget. So, we'll be visiting about all that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oops. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can see -- go ahead, Bill. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, no. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You go first. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Rusty, I think when you're talking to the Judge about all this, you might want to throw in another little tidbit of information, and that would have to do with, of the 24 cars that you have obtained through the leasing program, which is, you know, four times six, that gives you 24 pretty good automobiles. How many of those are on the road at any given time? And -- and the reason I ask that is because that goes to justification for additional vehicles. If you've got 12 on the road and 12 in 5-1~-u3 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 82 the parking lot, I'm wondering why we'd need additional vehicles, so I'd like to have you confirm that with the Judge and talk to him about it. And, secondly, my recollection is the same as Commissioner Baldwin's in terms of the leasing program. When we had established that four years ago, we did so with a clear intent that we would be rotating out of your fleet those vehicles that had excessive mileage on them and that were dangerous, and not -- not up to the utilization that you need, and -- but they would be good enough for constables, perhaps, to utilize in the pursuit of their responsibilities. So, now I'm hearing you say we're two more years away from that, and I'm curious as to why. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Because the fleet we had before we started this lease program was, in essence, of no use when we started the lease program. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's why we started the lease program. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's why we started it. We were running cars with even 200,000, 300,000, and 400,000 miles on them. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand. That's why we started the program. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So it's taken us four years -- instead of trying to replace that entire fleet in 5 -~ ? - 0 3 1 --. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 83 one year, it's taken us these four years, at six a year, to even get back up to the point where we have reliable cars. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But if we authorize six more this year -- if; that's a big "if" -- there would be six more. There would be six of the first ones out of the -- out of the rotation. As a matter of fact, you got six out of the rotation already, 'cause it's a four-year program, and six of them were probably purchased for a dollar apiece. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What -- what it does, we also still have -- okay, that's patrol. I've already said the new cars would always go on patrol, and I stayed behind that, and they do. We have our Warrants division, which averages 93,000 miles a year, okay? And that's just the transport officer. Then you have two other warrant officers. You have the jail that has to use a car. They're all using yellow ones now. All right? If you have a lot of those other -- we have a yellow one in C.I.D., you know, where we've rotated around to use them in different parts of our department to get them off the road, because they are in -- in such bad shape and they are not cars that you want to keep. So, we still have to replace -- C.I.D. and patrol are not the only two parts that use vehicles. We still have four in Warrants, you have a jail vehicle and civil vehicle. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's all part of 5-~_~-03 1 2 3 8 9 10 11 12 --- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 84 what we'd like to hear you document for us. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No problem. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In writing. 4 5 6 it. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No problem. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So we can understand SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Sure. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You may have stretched it a little bit there. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Careful, Buster. COMMISSIONER WILLIA COMMISSIONER LETZ: SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: COMMISSIONER LETZ: your proposal right here. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: MS: How about remember? All right. Yes, sir. My question goes back to Yes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sort of -- nothing against Ken Stoepel Ford, but whenever I trade in anything, I get about half what I can get elsewhere if I take it to any major dealership. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We called -- and we probably burned ourselves the first year we did this, because that -- the ones we got rid of that year had to be loaded and towed out of the parking lot. So, when we called and asked people to come in and -- and look at these cars so s-1~-o3 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 that we can get ideas and bids on them, I think Ken Stoepel is the only one that showed up this year to do it. We did include several of the other ones. Now, I don't call dealers in San Antonio on that, because most of the time what they're doing with these is scrapping them anyhow. They're not -- shipping them to Mexico and letting them be used for taxis or something is about what they do. But we don't have that many that even want to consider taking these vehicles. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And out of these four, how many of them run? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: May be able to get them all started. The Ram Charger is still in use right now. There's no air-conditioner. Maintenance, there's some -- I think a main seal leak on it and a few other things. A couple of the -- the other three, one of them may start. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I guess I probably don't have a big problem if they're in that bad of shape, but I concur with what those two Commissioners have said, and it's going to be -- you know, in my mind, I thought we were going to be rotating cars out to constables this year, so I'm just bringing this up for budget information. That was in my mind-set as to happen. So -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The problem is -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- just have to enter the s-i~-o3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2i 22 23 24 25 86 equation somehow during the budget process. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I agree, and I hope that we can rotate them out to constables as soon as possible, but with what I see and where we are right now and the shape of the vehicles, especially those old ones, these old ones were s~ old when we all started this that it has taken us four years to get rid of these. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I hear you keep saying that, but I was a Commissioner before you were Sheriff, and we were buying four and six cars a year. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Two. The last year that they were bought, there was two. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe two the last year, but I think six my first year and four the year after that. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think there was four. And your first year was how long ago? Okay. My -- the problem is, these that -- the first set of six that we have already have right at 70,000 on them now. The first set of six white ones. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not -- you know. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It just took us a while to replenish this -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know we needed new cars. That's why we entered into the leasing program. But it's just -- I mean, the -- and the idea is that your 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 87 officers need the safe vehicles, 'cause they have the highest chance of being in any kind of a high-speed situation, whereas that is a greatly reduced probability with the constables. They're more just patrolling, and -- I think, you know, to be visible, and warrants, things of that nature. So, their cars do not need to be as good a condition as the department's patrol vehicles. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And we're all in agreement, Commissioner, on getting them down to the constables. I think they should have it. It would help us if a constable wasn't having to use his own personal vehicle a lot of times, whether it's transporting somebody they arrest or actually getting out and patrolling. I have no problem, but these vehicles we're getting rid of aren't even useful for a constable's office. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, I move we authorize the Sheriff to trade four cars and purchase used car for C.I.D. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that the Sheriff be authorized to trade four existing older vehicles and purchase a used vehicle for his Criminal Investigations. Any further discussion? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. I assume that -1'-03 1 2 3 4 5 E 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 88 you're going to use the -- the claims money on that other vehicle to go with this $4,000? It does? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I would hope it does, okay. Or at least a portion of that or something on that claim, 'cause I do need that money, and a $4,000 car is not going to get me much. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Motion should embody COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is true. The motion should embody that, if that's the case. JUDGE TINLEY: And if it's not going to be all of it, it should designate what portion of it, probably. It was your motion, I believe, wasn't it, Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did you say eight? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It was $8,000 something, is -- MR. TOMLINSON: Slightly over $8,000. I don't remember. I'm not for sure. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: $8,000. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just add the words, "up to $8,000"? I'm not sure where this 8,000 bucks is, where it came from. MR. TOMLINSON: It came from the insurance proceeds from a car. 5-1~-03 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 I6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 89 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah. MR. TOMLINSON: Car that was totaled. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I could have sworn we'd already spent that once, but -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, my recommendation would be to spend as much of it -- I mean, all of it, because the more we spend, the better car we get, and that helps us for -- I mean, I say spend all the proceeds towards it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't have any problem with that. I just think it ought to be embodied in the motion. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. JUDGE TINLEY: Do you want to include -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Include. JUDGE TINLEY: -- the 8,000-plus dollars that was received from the insurance proceeds that was previously transmitted to Kerr County? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Any part of that? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: That being the case, any further discussion or questions? All in favor of the motion, as amended, signify by saying "aye." (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 5-l'-03 90 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: A11 opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item is consideration of authorizing Sheriff's Office to enter into an interlocal agreement with L.C.R.A. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: In part of our new radio system, the interoperability to be able the talk to all the other agencies was all part of that. We have two agencies in this area, being Gillespie County Sheriff's Office and Kendall County Sheriff's Office; I guess Comfort or Fredericksburg P.D. also use that L.C.R.A. 900 Megahertz system as their primary radio system. We did not opt and definitely did not want to go to the L.C.R.A. system in this county; it wouldn't work with what we need. But what we do have in our console at the Sheriff's Office in our new radio system, there is one L.C.R.A. radio that allows our guys on the street to be able to be patched, interlinked through our console, and talk directly to the Gillespie County cars or Kendall County cars through that one radio. That was all installed by Dailey Wells as part of our contract on our new system. But we still have to have an agreement with L.C.R.A. to be able to use that radio, 'cause you're actually talking to their radio. The agreement is we're not paying for any equipment, and if you look through that, you'll see where it's all "NJA" and zeros on the equipment. -i_-~'-~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 91 The only thing we're paying for is the one radio in our console, which is a monthly fee of $19.95 or $19.99 a month that we have to have to be able to use that system. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $19.95? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: A month. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Times 24? One $19.95? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's just one $19.95, period. It's only one radio that we have of theirs. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a monthly fee? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: $19.95. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a good deal in order to be able to communicate with those, and we knew this was coming. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, this was just part of what we had figured in the contract. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded by Commissioners Williams and Nicholson, respectively, that the Court -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask a question. JUDGE TINLEY: -- approve the interlocal agreement with L.C.R.A. for the one radio to be able to communicate with outside agencies, and to pay the $20 approximate monthly cost for same, and that the County Judge - _ _ - 0 i 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 92 be authorized to execute that interlocal agreement. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sounds good to me. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any further discussion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're -- yeah. Let's see. We're authorizing the actual payment of it too, of course, or you would. Does that come out of Rusty's salary or the Auditor's salary? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'll find a line item to put it in, Buster. It will come out of our Radio Maintenance. It will end up having to come out of our Radio Maintenance in that part of it. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or discussion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we need to get the contract approved by the County Attorney? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why not? JUDGE TINLEY: Good plan. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Contingent upon -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Subject to the approval of the County Attorney. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Sheriff, will you settle an argument between me and the County Judge? Will a hundred cases of beer fit in one pickup truck? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, real well. It's locked up out on our place right now. Of course, I don't 5-1~-3 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ..~ 2 4 25 93 know how much they got to drink before we seized it all. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who won the bet? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge did. I thought it would take at least two pickups. Bill looks perplexed. Sheriff made an arrest last night on the people that stole that hundred cases of beer. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Anybody we know and love? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Not in my precinct. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It was one of your summer starting early -- it was a beer party that we responded to, and we ended up issuing 16 minor-in-possession citations and one arrest, seized the pickup full of all the beer that had allegedly been stolen from Carson Distributing, so they're still working on it to prove that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you use that pickup? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We're looking at that. It is a -- I just don't know what's owed on it. You probably wouldn't want me to pay it off, so we'll have to see first. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If you auction the beer off, let me know. I want to bid on it. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further discussion? All in favor of the motion, as amended, signify by raising your 5 - 1 ' - 0 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 right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Do you want me to take the forms back until I can get David to look at those? JUDGE TINLEY: I sure do. I sure do. The next item, consider and take appropriate action on appointing Brad Alford as Deputy Constable for Precinct 2. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, Constable Ayala put this in, and I knew it was going to be placed in. I -- in fact, I helped him draft it. He's tied up in J.P. Court 2 all day today, and asked me if I'd present it. And -- and Brad is here to assist us in discussions that take place. My understanding, as detailed in the backup material, is that this would provide some additional courthouse security. There is no cost to the County in terms of -- for services rendered in the event the courthouse security is -- additional courthouse security is needed, and there's no salary involved. There would be a couple items regarding TCLEOSE physical and psychological examinations; some fees for that are involved, and nobody's yet told me where those dollars are coming from. But, other than that, those would be the only costs to the County. And 5-1~-o_j 95 1 "' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1? 18 19 20 21 22 23 --- 2 4 25 what else would you like to add, Brad? MR. ALFORD: That's basically it. This was brought to my attention just to assist in courthouse security in case somethinq comes up. JUDGE TINLEY: Emergency, as needed? MR. ALFORD: It's strictly as needed. Very, very low profile. I have no intentions of really letting anybody know about it, as far as becoming a uniformed officer, badge-packing type deal. It's just going to be something that, if the Sheriff deems necessary during a situation, or his deputy's out of commission, I'll be able to assist. There's times when they're tied up in court. There's, from time to time, some civil papers that may free up one of the Sheriff's guys. I think, Sheriff, you have somebody come by two or three times a day anyway, but it's just, you know, different odds and ends that would help the County out with me being here already. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Does anybody have an answer to where the fees are coming from? I think the bonding, we'd have tc take care of. MR. ALFORD: I have heard some issues on it, and I really don't know if I'm the one to bring that up or not. Again, Constable Ayala and, I think, the Judge have talked a little bit. I've talked a little bit to Commissioner Baldwin and the Auditor. To answer your 5- i 2- 0 3 96 1 2 3 4 5 E 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 question, no, sir, I don't, but I know there has been discussion about it, and I don't know what anybody has decided, if anything. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll start with the Judge and see if he knows the answer, and we'll work our way down here. 23 gained? .._ 2 4 25 - -n~ MR. ALFORD: Very much so. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Sheriff, you had JUDGE TINLEY: Judge doesn't know the answer. I had a discussion with Mr. Alford, as he's indicated. The way it was presented to me was that, you know, his primary function, of course, is collections, but -- but that his being a commissioned peace officer on the premises, if we had an incident arise in the courthouse and the Sheriff's courthouse security people were -- did not happen to be present at the time or happened to be tied up on something and there had to be some absolute, right-this-red-hot-minute immediate action taken, I think the County -- from a liability standpoint, it's better if you have a commissioned peace officer attending to that matter. But it's -- it's an absolute last-gap emergency kind of situation, not -- not a routine courthouse security. That, of course, is the Sheriff's function, and he's responsible for that and provides for it. Is -- is that not the understanding that I 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 something that -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. The only thing -- and Brad and I are friends; I have no problem with whatever the Court decides to do on this. I just don't want it out as a courthouse security, you know, personnel, period, because that is under -- under my responsibility. And, of course, him being a deputy constable would not be under my responsibility. Now, I would hope that any commissioned peace officer that's in this building -- and I don't think there's a one around this part of the state, even if he's from somewhere else, that if we did need him, wouldn't jump in and help, but they do need to be a commissioned peace officer. There is a part of the local code which I had pointed out to you whir_.h ~~uld have an effect on this, and I think y'all may have that as your backup also. Commissioner Williams supplied it, where it does state in there that the deputy constable must qualify in the manner provided for deputy sheriffs, but the constable is responsible for -- let's see. This is not -- let me get to it. I -- okay. It says elected constable who desires to appoint a deputy must apply in writing to the Commissioners Court of the county and show that it is necessary to appoint a deputy in order to properly handle the business of the constable's office that originates in the constable's precinct. And we're not in Precinct 2 in this courthouse. 5-~^-03 98 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 li 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's a very good point. So, you know, I think we're arguing that -- we're not arguing, but we've got a counterpoint here that wasn't brought out in the original issue. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And, personally, I have no problem. I always -- you know, the more help in law enforcement -- there's a lot more bad guys than there are law enforcement, so the more help we get, the happier I am. But some of that, y'all might want to look at. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, Judge, as far as the -- as far as those fees for those medical examinations and psychological examinations are concerned, that's where we are, is where's that money going to come from? I think it's Mr. Ayala's responsibility to figure that out and come before this Court and present his claim, just like -- that's what everybody else does in the county system. If they want to -- if there's to be money moved around, they need to figure out how to do it. We shouldn't be in here trying to figure out how to run his office. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with that. I would invite him back for that purpose. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree with that. The other question I have -- and it goes a little bit to kind of what the Judge mentioned, that, you know, if something happens, you're better off having a licensed peace officer. 5-__-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 ~... 2 4 25 That triggered a thought to me, is that if we don't allow any training for that officer and something does happen, you know, I can almost see us being in a worse situation, you know, kind of having a -- I mean, he's a licensed police officer, but at the same time, we're not giving him any funds really for doing it, or we're not training him. And I can see a flip of that liability if something were to happen -- and I don't think it's going to happen, but just a thought that I had regarding liability when the Judge mentioned it. But I think the more important issues are, as Rusty's mentioned before, this isn't Precinct 2, and also, of course, the budget concerns. JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: On the training, of course, y'all will remember last year I agreed, as part of the training budget, to have the constables join us out at Thunder Ranch for firearms training. I know my department's minimum qualifications, even for firearms training, has gone up drastically in a few years, and I've even lost an officer recently because of the -- our requirements. But we do not pay out of our training budget for any of the constables' deputies to go out there, and that is a large expense, even for that type of -- you know, if you want that type and caliber of firearms training. MR. ALFORD: That's not required by TCLEOSE. s-l,-c? 100 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1C 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 „_ 2 4 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. What is required is a very minimum, but I don't know what is required, and that could be a question later on. Well, if your Sheriff's Department does more, then we can do -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty, up to this point, we haven't required -- we've got other deputy constables that didn't have that. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You still do. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And still do. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm not opposed to it, but I'd like to maybe -- Judge, for you to give us a little insight as to whether or not Section 86.011 of the Local Government Code, Subparagraph (a), by reason of the way it's written and what has been expressed here today as to where the responsibility would be, would these -- do these things match? Are we hand-in-glove? JUDGE TINLEY: In response to that, Commissioner, the -- the general narrative attached to the agenda item where it talks about additional courthouse security, I think that's a misstatement, number one. When I saw that, that's -- that's exactly what struck me. Fiiit the -- the language in the Local Government Code requires the constable seeking the appointment of the deputy in order to properly handle the business of the constable's office that originates in that precinct, and that we must make a 5 - ~ ' - 0 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2i 22 23 24 25 101 determination, in making that appointment, that that constable needs a deputy to handle the business in the precinct. The only thing I can suggest at this point will be to possibly -- we've already get an issue of where's -- if we make this appointment, where these funds are going to come from. Possibly have the Precinct 2 constable appear at our next meeting or some subsequent meeting, if he so desires, to give us the indication of how his desire to appoint this deputy falls under this particular statutory provision, as well as the monetary aspects of it. That would seem to be kind of where we are. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would agree, and I'll ask Constable Ayala to put it back on the agenda next time. JUDGE TINLEY: Any member of the Court wish to make any motion in connection with this action? A11 right, we'll pass on to the next item, then, discuss and take appropriate action on setting a date for Commissioners Court workshop meeting for the purpose of reviewing first-round revisions to Kerr County Parks and Recreation Master Plan, that plan having been originally adopted in 1996. Commissioner Williams. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm not sure everybody on the bench has seen this. You've got a copy of it, Commissioner? 5-1~-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 25 102 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Is that this book? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is the original. This is the 1996 version. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No, I haven't seen COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know Commissioner Letz has seen it, because that's where I got this. This was adopted by the Court in 1996, but I would venture to suggest that probably most of the work that led up to this document probably took place in 1995. And the Court, in either of those years, authorized the hiring of a consultant to do this work, and I think Ms. Sovil reminded me that it cost about $"?5,000 for the Court to get the consulting work done. You heard Mr. Miller this morning talk about their plans for the Texas State Arts and Crafts Fair to build a facility on our property, and they intend to go after grants and so forth, and they have identified certain grants that are important to their particular project. There is that prerequisite, however; it falls back on us. They can't go after a T.P.W. grant and probably an L.C.R.A. grant if we do not have a current Parks and Recreation Master Plan in place. So, again, I'm bringing Jonathan into the loop, because he and I have talked about this in the past, and I agreed to take the project under my wing and see if we -__-G3 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 25 103 could get this done. And we have gotten it done to this point at no cost to the County. So, what's in front of you is -- is a reworking of the old '96 plan, bringing all the charts and graphs and information up to date from sources of U.S. Census Bureau, the Texas Almanac, and everything else we could get our hands on. And the work that was performed that you see before you, most of that grunt work, if you will, was done by the Convention and Visitors Bureau, and a big thank to you Sudie Burditt for that purpose. Now, there are some things that -- in there that are -- a couple things we need to point out. There's some things in there that are not complete. And in the -- in the inventory of park facilities, Commissioner Nicholson, I don't have a lot of information about Ingram Lake Park Dam, Lake Park, or whatever it's officially known as, in terms of its size and amenities, and so if you would be so good as to provide that information back to me, we can incorporate it in a little more completely than it is. And if there are any other parks out there that we don't know about, they need to be included, too. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll try to do that, Commissioner. We were out there the other day trying to figure out whether or not we had a park out there, so -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- it may not be s-,~~-o~ 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 ld4 easy. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Once you make that decision it would be easy if we don't have a park, we'll take it out of the inventory, so let me know. The other thing is, in the last survey -- the consultants performed or did a small community survey, and I know we had a parks board or special committee that did that, and I know they worked on it. And I think there was something like 20Q surveys that they -- that they took a look at and combined the resources. So, what I'm passing out to you -- I'll give you some, Judge; don't want you to feel slighted. We'll give you some -- is a new survey. This, too, was updated from the previous one. It was prepared by Sudie's office, and distribution of that has begun. It has begun in businesses in town, and various people have gotten copies of it through the C.V.B. in Precinct 2. I've had it distributed in Center Point extensively, and it's in the school system right now for those young people to take a look at it, give us some evaluation along with some other people. So, I would ask you to take these and get as many of them as you can. You don't have to do the whole stack, but as many as you can get done, and if you want to do them all yourself, you can do that too. And what I need -- what I need really is the Court to set a date for a s-i~-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 25 105 workshop. So, after you've had a chance to digest this, we need to have a workshop, talk about all the good and the bad and the ugly, make additions, make subtractions and so forth. I'd like to get that done as quickly as possible so that our goal of having it ready for the Court to approve in the last meeting of this month, or no later than the first meeting in June, can be accomplished. This has to be in place before anybody can go out and seek grants for County property. So, I -- what I'd like to do, Judge, is set a workshop, and if it's possible to do so before this week is out, that would be good. JUDGE TINLEY: Before this week is out? Is that what I heard? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If possible. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're going to have a workshop this week? Is that what you're saying? What are you saying? JUDGE TINLEY: That's what I heard. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I couldn't hear you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I had my back to you. If we could have a workshop sometime before this week is out. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 72-hour notice thing and all that? -_~-~~3 I 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 MS. SOVIL: Friday. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Friday morning? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Friday. And this whole thing -- help me just a little bit. The whole thing hinges on Arts and Crafts Fair? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it also hinges -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's no other entity out there? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. Us, too. If we wanted to do something, go out there for grant money, we'd have to -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely. Of course, we have that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, but the old plan expired -- it expired in 'Ol, so we have to have another one. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think Commissioner Baldwin is aware of it, but that old plan was developed out of the grant from L.C.R.A., who paid for that $25,000 for that grant. And the purpose of L.C.R. -- the reason L.C.R.A. did that was so they would then fund $180,000 for the Flat Rock improvements that were done. And I think -- I mean, it makes sense to, you know, update that and not spend any additional money on it. And it's just -- I mean, the -1 '-'~J3 i 2 3 4 5 h 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ,,,., 2 4 25 107 magic thing is that the Parks and Wildlife and some other foundations, you have to have a master county park plan, and, you know, I commend Commissioner Williams for figuring out a way to get one done at no cost to us. COMMISSIONER WILLTAMS: So, everybody check their calendar. I think we can whip this workshop in an hour or less, probably. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's an important day. That's the first day of the Texas A & M/University of Texas baseball series. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER WILLTAMS: What time does the first game start? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not till 6:30. But, I mean, I have to -- may have to get there early. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Preparations. JUDGE TINLEY: Seriously, gentlemen, I -- I have a commitment in Austin in the very early afternoon; let's just say I have to -- needless to say, I have to get there in connection with my -- my stepson, on the staffing there. COMMISSIONER WILLTAMS: If that's not good for you, Judge, how about next Monday? That makes it kind of short for me to get it all pulled back together. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Next Monday is a better day from my standpoint. i,-o3 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 z5 108 JUDGE TINLEY: Monday morning will work. We don't have a Commissioners Court meeting. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All right. I would move that w e set a public -- workshop, not public hearing -- a workshop for the purpose of reviewing and input into this first draft revisions of Kerr County Parks and Recreation Management Plan for the 19th at 9 a.m. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that we have a workshop on the draft of Parks and Recreation Master Plan, as presented, and that's for the purposes of presenting additional input, changes, corrections, et cetera. 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: Motion does carry. Monday, 9 a.m. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. That brings us down to -- I'm not aware ~f anything that we need to go into closed or executive session about. Dv any of you gentlemen have anything there? Okay. This brings us down to the Auditor, payment of the bills. You have them all in front of you -l~-o~ 1 2 3 Q 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 109 there, Commissioner Baldwin. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. MR. TOMLINSON: Any questions? AUDIENCE: Next Monday, here? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Next Monday, 9 a.m., right here. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a question, but I'll ask Maintenance about it. MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: He's not here. Move we pay the bills. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded by Commissioners Letz and Baldwin, respectively, that we authorize the payment of the bills as presented by the Auditor. Is there any discussion or questions? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Looking at Page 8 of Youth Exhibition Center, $5,000 for installing new bay lights in Ag Barn. I don't even know what my question is. Is it -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mine would be, what the hell's a bay light? Or what is a bay? COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question was the same. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think my question is, is this part of our rehabilitation starting with the s-_..-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 funds that we've got available? Or is it routine? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, can you pass those -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure, be happy to, or I'll pull it for you. What's the number? JUDGE TINLEY: 149938. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 149938. Where's the numbers, Tommy? 149938? JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. (Discussion off the record.) COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't think the answer's there. And I don't have any objection to it. You know, lighting is not all that good out there. My -- my issue is, is this part of our strategy, or how does it fit or -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, if it is, we should have been told about it. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Which would imply we have a strategy. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, that's an assumption you could make. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It may be confidential information here. JUDGE TINLEY: You need to get an Aggie in here to help you? -12-u3 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 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right, yeah. Nothing to it. Do you want to finger it out? MR. TOMLINSON: I talked to him this morning. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Benno's Electric. COMMISSIONER LETZ: $5,000. MR. TOMLINSON: Just exactly what it says. there. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Lot of enlightenment COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, what is a bay? Is it like in a fire station, a place where you'd park -- JUDGE TINLEY: I bet you it's over there on that east end, where you've got all those doors coming into that lean-to area on the far side of that -- east side of the arena, and I'd almost bet you that it's lighting that was installed over there. You got a lot of bay doors over there. with bay doors. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bay doors. JUDGE TINLEY: Bay doors. Bay light goes COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: New -- new bay lights. Now, is this our first time we'd ever have bay lights over there in that area? Or we're replacing them? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're not going to 25 ~ figure it out. 5-~~-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 BALDWIN: I think we've pursued this -- MR. TOMLINSON: I talked to him this morning, because I've been working on budget, and as of April, there wasn't anything out of there -- out of the Major Repairs. And I called and asked him if there were any more expenditures to be made. So, I -- we estimate what the annual expenditures are going to be, and that's what I -- that's when I talked to him about the $5,000, and -- but I didn't -- I didn't get any definite answer about what -- what that was. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, you know, the impression out there in the community is that over the last few years, we've budgeted money to keep the Ag Barn up and didn't spend it, and there's just a whole lot of money there somewhere. And Ms. Sovil looked all that up the other day, and there's -- there's not a whole lot of money there somewhere; maybe $15,000 or $18,000 underspent over the last few years. So, that's why I called upon it. MR. TOMLINSON: I know we spent almost 17 last year out of -- out of that line item. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. That's -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Because you don't get major repairs for $17,000, so that's the misnomer. s-i~-o~ 113 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: Yeah. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move we approve the -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Already did that. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Oh, we did? Oh, that's right. We're JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded. And, any further discussion on a motion and second to pay the bills? 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. Budget amendments. MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Number -- Budget Amendment 1 is a request from the County Judge to transfer $250 from the Telephone line item to Conferences. It's for -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve Budget Amendment Request Number 1. Any discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right hand. s-i~-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 ,,, 2 4 25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget Amendment Request Number 2. MR. TOMLINSON: Number 2 is a request from Judge O'Dell to transfer $500 from Part-Time Salary line item to Conferences, and I have a -- have a late bill I need a hand check for payable to her -- her clerk, Betty Sevey, for $190.71. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is the -- the budgeted number is $1,000 for conferences, and that's for the Judge and her -- MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- help? MR. TOMLINSON: I think -- I think that -- that all J.P.'s have a -- have a conference coming up before the end of the year. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So -- MR. TOMLINSON: So that's why she's asking for the additional money. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Asking for additional money, I see. Well, we have to get a handle on this. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I have the same concern, is that all of a sudden, when you transfer money, -i~-~~~ 115 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 it's one item, but -- or area, but we try not to transfer in. But in situations where duly elected officials -- they, a lot of times, need certain training that -- you know, the first year, and I'm thinking it's probably what that is, but I don't want to get a precedent started that we're going to start spending, you know, different amounts on training in the conferences. So moved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that Budget Amendment Request Number 2 be approved. Any further discussion or questions? 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 does carry. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll visit with J.P. 3 about this. JUDGE TINLEY: Budget Amendment Request Number 3. MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. This -- this request is for the County Court at Law. We had transferred $1,947.50 from Court-Appointed Attorneys in the 198th Court to County Court at Law, and $2,476.88 from Court-Appointed Attorneys to Court-Appointed Services for the 198th District ~-1~-u3 116 1 -- 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 i3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Court. I have two bills attached that I need hand checks for. They're both to the same payee. It's Hanna Security & Investigation. One is for $1,220.10, and the other is for $533.78. The reason they're separate is they're for COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that Budget Amendment Request Number 3 be approved, and authorize hand checks to Hanna Security & Investigation, and in the sum of $1,220.10 and $533.78. Any discussion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, I have a question. Tommy, do you know the reason why the County Court at Law has -- is, I guess, spending so much on court-appointed attorneys this year versus other years? I mean, I don't recall them running out of money generally. MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, we went through that -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Last time? MR. TOMLINSON: -- last time. There were the -- it's -- Judge Dubose has been scheduled in that court for Child Protective Services cases, and we estimate that there`s $9,000 to $10,000 that's related to those cases that he didn't budget for. I've talked -- I visited with the 198th Court about using their Court-Appointed Attorneys fees or line item until we get to the point that we have to 5 l~-!~3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 117 quit -- I mean, until we get that court through the year, and that's fine. So, that's -- that's why I'm moving the funds from -- from another court. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But why -- I guess I understand the reason, but I don't understand why we are spending so much more still. I mean, I know where it's going to and what the reason is, but I don't understand why we misbudgeted so far. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I think -- I think the County Court at Law has had some -- some court-appointed service bills, like investigators, and some cases that -- that he didn't plan for. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. It's just something that I think, during the budget process, we need to really take a hard look at that. I don't know whether they feel they need to appoint somebody -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If -- can I comment on that? Even our Sheriff's Office monthly report, remember last year when they changed the court-appointed attorneys? You've only got 48 hours or 72 hours now to offer all these guys, you know, whether or not they need attorneys. And before, they used to do that at their first court hearing, especially the County Court at Law. But under that unfunded mandate-type deal the State came out with, we have to offer them court-appointed attorneys or see if they're going to -~_-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 .~- 2 4 25 need one before they ever go to court; it's right after they get to jail. The J.P.'s have to go through a lot of new forms that even we had to develop and pay for, okay, at the Sheriff's Office that I'm paying for three new sets of forms for magistration. This April's report was -- as far as arrests, was 303 arrests during the month of April going into the jail, and what that's doing is overburdening that Court-Appointed Attorney budget because they're all getting appointed attorneys before they even get offered a plea bargain from the County Attorney. So, you're going to triple what it's going to cost us in court-appointed attorney fees over the next several years. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's something that we need to just track for the -- you know, a year from now, really get with our elected officials, because I think many of us feared this was going to happen, but we were assured that it wasn't going to increase our budget, and try to get that changed. I mean, I don't know if we'll have any success. MR. TOMLINSON: We've already increased the budget by -- by the amount that -- that we received from the State on Senate Bill 7. That -- those funds come quarterly, and I don't remember the exact amount, but it's around $6,000 a quarter. And once those funds come in for -- for this quarter, then we can increase the budget -- or his ~-i-o~ 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 budget again for -- for that amount. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MR. TOMLINSON: So, maybe -- maybe the -- maybe that money will -- will, you know, get him through -- through the year. I also notice that -- that the Court-Appointed Attorneys line item in the Juvenile budget is doubtful that it will make the year. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Even with -- even with the State money that comes in under Senate Bill 7 to kind of prop us up for these additional requirements, the requirement that you appoint those lawyers early, that alone is creating a tremendous amount of time generated by these court-appointed attorneys that you got to pay them for. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I understand that, but I'm -- yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: They've -- the prisoner -- the accused has the right. Once that attorney is appointed, then the attorney has an obligation to forthwith confer with his client. And, of course, whose nickel is that on? You got it. So, it's -- even with that additional State money, it's not going to be enough to stretch by a long shot. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just think the more we track it, maybe we can -- 'cause it's -- the whole -- how they told it, anyway, was it was going to save money because s-i~-o3 120 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 everything gets -- MR. TOMLINSON: Well, this -- this will be our first full year through that process, so -- but, you know, so by the end of this fiscal year, maybe we ought to have a better handle on -- on what that -- that legislation really did to us. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And then track next year, and then we can try to -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: How are the fee rates set? Who sets the rate? MR. TOMLINSON: We had -- we had this issue of the judges of the county submitted a plan to -- to the Office of Court Administration. JUDGE TINLEY: Correct. MR. TOMLINSON: And in that plan, it states what the hourly rate will be. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Submit that plan to who? MR. TOMLINSON: The Office of Court Administration. It's a State agency. JUDGE TINLEY: You got to submit a plan to even be eligible to get any of that money. MR. TOMLINSON: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: Indigent Defense Plan. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, once that's 5-1-C3 121 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 done, then every attorney that participates in this program gets the same hourly rate? JUDGE TINLEY: That's correct. MS. SOVIL: No. County Court gets less, and Juvenile court gets less. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Than your district and federal. JUDGE TINLEY: But the rate is specified in the Indigent Defense Plan. MS. SOVIL: At $50 and $75. JUDGE TINLEY: Upstairs is $70 or $75. MS. SOVIL: $75. JUDGE TINLEY: $75, okay. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If it's a capital murder, it's a whole lot different again, I think, in that plan. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Did we have a motion on this one? MS. SOVIL: We have a motion. No vote. JUDGE TINLEY: 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. Budget ~-1~-0~ 122 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 Amendment Request Number 4. MR. TOMLINSON: Number 4 is for the District Clerk, and we're requesting a transfer of $190.53 from Capital Outlay in Nondepartmental to Capital Outlay in -- in the District Clerk's budget for -- it's for replar_ement of a 1995 computer. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move we approve. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further discussion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Has this computer been purchased and it's in service? MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, it is. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So we're purchasing things without having money on hand to purchase them, huh? MR. TOMLINSON: Well, she had everything -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just joking. MR. TOMLINSON: It was in the budget. I mean, it's in the 409 budget for replacements. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But we do that. We buy things in this county without having money in the budget to buy it. We do that. Here's one. That's all I'm saying. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further discussion or questions? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising _-__ o~ 123 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2C 21 22 23 24 25 your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Now we have the money. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now we have the money to buy it. MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Number 5 is a request from the County Clerk to transfer $141.34 from Operating Equipment to Notices and Replats. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good lord. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve Budget Amendment Request Number 5. Any discussion or questions? 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. Budget Amendment Request Number 6. MR. TOMLINSON: Number 6 is from Judge s-_~-o~ 124 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 Elliott to transfer $82 from Books, Publications, and Dues to Part-Time Salary. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded that Budget Amendment Request Number 6 be approved. Any further discussion or questions? 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. MR. TOMLINSON: Still have one more. JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon? MR. TOMLINSON: Still have one more, about the Road and Bridge check for the -- JUDGE TINLEY: Oh. MS. SOVIL: $10,000. MR. TOMLINSON: -- $10,000. I have a -- a request from Road and Bridge to transfer $10,500 out of Worker's Comp into Contract Fees. I have a -- a late bill with a -- need a hand check for $500 to Salem Pipe and Steel, and it's for the balance of the $10,500 expenditure for railroad flat car for Hermann Sons Crossing. COMMISSIONER LETZ: No question about the 5-1~-03 125 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 expenditure. It's where the funds come from to pay for the expenditure. Coming out of Workmen's Comp? MR. TOMLINSON: That's their request. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's their request. Where was the check -- where did it come out of when we wrote the check? Or has it been coded yet? MR. TOMLINSON: It's been coded. We wrote the -- we wrote the check on Tuesday. MS. SOVIL: Last week. MR. TOMLINSON: Was it last week? Okay. Last -- the end of last week. I'd have to research that one, 'cause -- cause I don't remember where -- I don't remember what line item we charged. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Contract Services? Or are they supposed to take it out of reserves? MR. TOMLINSON: We did charge -- we did charge Contract Fees. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Contract Fees. MR. TOMLINSON: Ten -- 15-611 -- no, we didn't. 611-664, that's what we charged. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd rather, you know -- MR. TOMLINSON: That's what's on the check. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- it came out of the Contract Fees. MS. SOVIL: 664? ____„~ 126 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. TOMLINSON: 664 is what it's charged to. MS. SOVIL: No such thing. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The whole $10,000? JUDGE TINLEY: $10,000. COMMISSIONER LETZ: WP11, the whole $10,500, whatever it was, the full amount. MR. TOMLINSON: I know it came -- that's the RTS line item. MS. SOVIL: Who? MR. TOMLINSON: It was RTS line item. COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's RTS? MR. TOMLINSON: It's for RCS, I mean. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, RCS? MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, expenditure for RCS. MS. SOVIL: Oh, that's that grant. MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: That's a $40,000 item? MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. That's where it came from. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That was the -- that's floods? MR. TOMLINSON: But that was for the flood. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, to me, that's the appropriate spot for it to come out of. I mean, and if there's additional -- and there may be additional -- s l~-c., 127 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: Well, that's my opinion too, Commissioner, but we have differences of opinion with Road and Bridge. That's why it came out of here originally, 'cause I thought that's where it -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Leave it where it is until Road and Bridge explains why they want to make the change. I mean, if it's flood-related, it should come out of the flood line item. If they want to -- if there's additional funds that they need in that flood line item, and they want to transfer it out of Worker's Comp, to me, it -- that's a separate issue. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, that's -- those expenditures in that line item we've already made, anyway. County's already paid those. So, the -- their argument was that we haven't -- that they have not requested reimbursement from RCS yet. But I -- and another argument was that they wanted to keep those expenditures separate, but I don't see that that's a problem. I mean, I think that -- that the $10,000 logically comes from that line item. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Okay. Leave it the way it is. J[JDGE TINLEY: Do you have a motion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not making a motion. MR. TOMLIPdSON: We need to deal with the 5-~-'-03 128 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2i $500, because there was -- they thought that it was going at $10,000. In reality, it was $10,500, so we need to -- we need to write a hand check for $500, and determine where that's to come from also. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion to authorize a hand check in the amount of $500 to Salem -- MR. TOMLINSON: It's an RCS expenditure. JUDGE TINLEY: Pipe and Steel. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Pipe and Steel. MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The funds to come out of the same account as the $10,000. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that the sum of $500 be paid to Salem Pipe and Steel for the railroad flat car, and the money to be charged against the RCS account, which is the same account that the $10,000 payment for the flat car came out of. Any further discussions? 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. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You'll let them know? 22 23 ,.._ 2 4 2~ 5-1~-~'i3 129 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 MR. TOMLINSON: Okay, sure will. JUDGE TINLEY: You got another one there? MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I guess you'd classify this as a late bill, but under Order 27747 -- court order, the Court agreed to pay City of Ingram $17,500 for repairs on the Indian Creek Dam structure. However, we -- we failed to budget that in -- in Flood Control budget, and that's -- that's where the money was to be budgeted. So, we -- I guess we have maybe two options. One is to increase that budget now, or actually wait till October. JUDGE TINLEY: To refresh the Court's recollection, this action was taken, I believe, in September of last year, the infamous Indian Creek bridge. The Court directed that this year's budget contain $17,500 in Flood Control for the purpose of paying that amount to the City of Ingram. And, needless to say, we haven't got there. We have executed and delivered a quitclaim deed to the City of Ingram, and they had the audacity to ask the impertinent question of, "Where's the money?" COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I knew this was going to happen. One of my favorite things. Well, I'm -- when this whole thing started, T was against it, and I'm still against it. I think it's dumb for us to give away property and then give them a handful of money to fix it with. That doesn't compute, to me. However, we need to take care of 5-i~-03 130 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 it. Now, are we talking about Fund 10? MR. TOMLINSON: No, we're talking about the Flood Control. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Flood Control. Fund 5G? MR. TOMLINSON: 22. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 22, thank you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How much is in there? MR. TOMLINSON: There's over a hundred thousand in there. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we declare an emergency? We don't declare an emergency on -- MS. SOVIL: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we need to? MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I'm in favor of doing, is -- is going into that fund and coughing up the 17,5 and get it over with. JUDGE TINLEY: Bite the bullet and be done, huh? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If you make that motion, I'll second it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we declare an emergency and go into Fund 22 for the $17,500 to pay 5-1~-03 131 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 something -- to give to the City of Ingram for the Indian Creek Bridge project, or -- MR. TOMLINSON: For repairs, is what it's for. COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: For repairs. JUDGE TINLEY: As per the existing court order? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, whatever that number was. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded to pay the sum of $17,500, charge it to Fund 22, payable to City of Ingram, that an emergency be declared in order to authorize the same. Any further discussion? MS. SOVIL: Authorize a hand check. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, it's probably a little overdue. Last September. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: And that -- and authorize a hand check to the City of Ingram for $17,500, Buster? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. s-i.- , 132 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.) (Discussion off the record.) COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was just going to comment, I don't see why we have to do a hand check. They can wait a couple of weeks until the check -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could wait till September. That's a whole year. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Where does that bring us to? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: To a close. JUDGE TINLEY: No, no, no, we're not there yet. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fried chicken. JUDGE TINLEY: No, we're not there yet. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, should we tell Constable Ayala what we did with his item? 'Cause he's sitting back there thinking he's going to be heard, and we've already passed over him. MR. AYALA: I'm late. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Huh? MR. AYALA: I'm late. I'm sorry; I apologize. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's already -- 5-1~-!~3 133 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 '' 0 L 21 ?2 23 ,._. 2 4 25 we've already run the train past your station. Coming back in two weeks; put it back on. MR. AYALA: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. That took care of the late bills. Monthly reports. I have before me monthly reports from the County Clerk, from the Sheriff, Justice of the Peace Precinct 3, and Justice of the Peace Precinct 4. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move acceptance. JUDGE TINLEY: As presented? COMMISSIONER LETZ: And approval as presented. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded that monthly reports as presented by the County Clerk, Sheriff, Justice of the Peace Precinct 3, and Justice of the Peace Precinct 4 be approved as presented. 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: Motion does carry. Okay. Now, at the tail end of the -- we have information matters, reports from Commissioners. Do you have anything, Commissioner Nicholson? s-i~-~~ 134 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ,.._. 2 4 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir, I do not at this time. Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: The floor is yours, Commissioner Williams. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have two items. I'll try to make them short, because I know Buster's hungry. The good news is that we have been awarded another $250,000 Community Development grant to continue the sewer project on Ranchero Road; specifically, for households on Ranchero Road, which would begin at Highway 16 and work its way down toward the Nimitz School. This one is for funding in the program year 2004, so that boosts our total for that sewer project to a million dollars. We still have one left in the conduit, and the Grantworks folks tell me that we should be hearing about that -- that one within the next month or so. The second item has to do with Rural Transportation. And no sooner had the ink dried on the letter you sent to AACOG putting me on that Rural Transportation Advisory Committee than I got involved in meetings between AACOG and Dietert Senior Center with respect to the Dietert folks' concerns that they were losing money on rural transportation, particularly in Kerr County. And, as you know, Dietert serves essentially the seniors; that's where it all started, serving the seniors. But they -- they get funding from two _-=_-o~ 1 ^ 2 3 Q 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 `' 3 L 24 25 135 separate sources; seniors' money, which is allocated for transporting seniors, and from the 5311, I believe it is, the transportation, which in general is for anybody in Kerr County who needs transportation, and they are obligated to serve those needs. This all came about in terms of Dietert taking a look at its funding sources and what it believes it's spending on the programs, and they are asserting that over the last three years, they've lost about $180,000. This came about as a result of discussions about who's going to take occupancy of the new intermodal transportation facility on Schreiner Avenue. And I have to -- I have to agree with Dietert that the contract that was being forwarded to them for signature -- if it originated with TexDOT, comes through AACOG. I would -- if I were on that board, I wouldn't authorize signature of it either. So, there are a lot of concerns about that. Bottom line is that Dietert, after having put up $150,000, I think -- I believe it was 120 -- either $120,000 or $150,000 as their part of the match for the 800-some-odd thousand dollar TexDOT grant to build that facility, believes that it can no longer sustain a rural transportation because of the -- the bleeding of its funds, which they honestly believe are supposed to be used for seniors' activities and so forth, and not transportation. s-i~-o~ 136 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 So, the transportation subcommittee met with TexDOT, AACOG, and I was present in that meeting. After having sent a letter to AACOG indicating they would not sign that contract, and effectively they would not take occupancy of that building, move its -- move their transportation unit over there, because it was unclear as to who's going to pick up tYie tab for maintenance and utilities and so forth, and it's really -- it really is a bowl of spaghetti. Bottom line is, more than likely Dietert will get out of the transportation business in Kerr County. And a phone call I had from -- on Friday from Kendall County Commissioner John Kight, who is the chair of the Transportation Advisory Committee, there seems to be some thought that -- that AACOG will restructure the transportation -- rural transportation program and put Kerr, Kendall, Gillespie, and maybe a couple other counties together and take over that rural transportation responsibility, and will more than likely operate it out of that facility on Schreiner Street. So, I just want the Court to know. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: AACOG would take it over? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. That's not the first time, as you know, that AACOG has taken over programs. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not always a bad thing. 5-l:'- ~3 137 1 ''' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 -- 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, I just wanted to bring you up to date. Dietert more than likely will go through the end of its contract year, which will be September, and would not seek to renew its contract. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll be darned. JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's all I got. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just briefly, O.S.S.F., last -- last week, Dave? Last week, Dave and I met with the representatives from U.G.R.A.'s Board. They do the committee meeting, set up and look at where we're going with this. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't see any bruises on either one of you. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It was a -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You okay? COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- you know, a good meeting, I'd say. We got a lot of issues on the table. And I think just the -- you know, I don't want to go too far, 'cause I think nothing was decided. I think the -- the -- directionally, there's some food for thought for everyone. Just going to come back to -- to this table. I didn't understand the actual rules, but I think it's pretty clear -- and Dave can disagree if I don't state these things correctly -- real estate transfers are about dead in Kerr s-~~-o3 138 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2 S County. I think there is discussion -- and I don't want to put any more than discussion -- about two other things possibly. One is the possibility of some sort of a -- a way to get to a long-term -- all septic systems licensed in the county. You know, it's very broad. And then also there was some discussion related to the elimination of the IO-acre acreage exemption in Kerr County, now that we -- or in state law right now, or the state rules. That's kind of what we're talking about. I think there's an agreement as to -- to -- from all four of us that we want to keep -- you know, we want something that is workable that both U.G.R.A. Board and the Court agreed is a good set of rules fir the county. And I think that there's a, you know, desire, obviously, to protect -- the goal being to protect the water resources of Kerr County, both ground and surface. And I think we're going in that direction. I think there's -- we also looked at some other options of just basically adopting state law or state rules as they are, which, incidentally, most of the counties around us are not doing. But adopt state rules just as they are, and really beef iip the enforcement side of it, which would probably cost the County and/or U.G.R.A. money. And also there was some discussion on the cost side about trying to figure out a way to provide financial assistance to the lower economic people that have S - 1 ? - I I ~ 139 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 septic problems. That the big problem that they have is not that they don't want to fix their bad, failing systems; it's that they can't afford to fix them. And we're trying to figure up some sort of a funding mechanism, and maybe that along with a long-range licensing or something like that may be a way to offer a three-year period of -- some kind of a period, anyway, to -- you know, to upgrade the systems. Because it was -- I think I tend to agree; I think we all agree that no one wants a failing system in their back yard. I mean, they're there primarily because they can't afford to do anything else. So, that's kind of what we discussed. JUDGE TINLEY: Did you indicate that most of the surrounding counties do not follow the basic state law on those systems? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think I know one county, and there is -- we're told, I'm sure it's accurate, that Kimble County is the only county around us that has a real estate transfer rule. And the other counties have all eliminated the acreage exemption, surrounding us. Isn't that -- wasn't that what we were told? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't recall. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought that was it, but I know Kimball County has a real estate transfer law. Theirs is -- I don't know if they enforce it or not, but theirs is pretty much if you transfer, you upgrade to a -L_-n~ 140 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 licensed system, period. Now, I don' t know what Stuart said, but all the other - - I believe all the other surrounding counties no longer have that acreage exemption. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think we do plan to and we need to find out a lot more about what similarly situated counties are doing with O.S.S.F. So, I -- I want to make those contacts and get as much information as we can. We may have the -- the best way, or somebody else may have a better way that we haven't thought of. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just a footnote to the two Commissioners' reports. The Court asked me to put together some numbers in terms of costs, and I'm about two-thirds through that project, and I forgot the deadline, but I'll have it done. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think, you know, what -- the main reason for bringing -- even bringing it up, because we see -- we don't even have a direction, I don't think, of where that committee's going to, but everything is on the table. I think we're, you know, looking at what is truly the best way, you know, for Kerr County. I think this is probably the first time that this was really done from the star_dpoint of sitting back and looking at the rules. And, I mean, not even looking at the details; kind of looking more big picture as to what can be done, everything from the existing rules and enforcement, changing -__-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 25 141 enforcement strategies to modifying maybe some areas, maybe going to a licensed -- more of a licensed system, long-term. There's lots of things that are interesting. I mean, by some numbers we got recently, it doesn't appear that there are that many unlicensed systems in the county; maybe 15 percent. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One key learning for me was the -- those failing systems that go to the enforcement stage, there's been something like maybe 18 in the last two years. The answer to the question of why enforcement was required, the answer was because they can't afford to fix their systems. Not 'cause they're challenging the rules, challenging the law or anything like that. Their system's broke and they don't have any money to fix it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it's based on an average $3,000 to $5,000 to fix a system. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know of several situations at least that way. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And there are -- you know, and there's no -- I mean, it's a small number, but it is a health hazard where they are -- where they do exist. I mean -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And you're not talking about just a conventional system"? They could be the aerobic -- -i'-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 25 142 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All the above? COMMISSIONER LETZ: It depends. Whatever, you know, Stuart is saying is the system that they need in that location. And -- but what they -- some of these people really have -- they're in bad shape. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, my aerobic system is about to break me. I am not joking one bit. That damn thing is expensive. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, that's -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Little box, I've spent 300 bucks this week. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The people -- the ones we were looking at are -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How long will that last you? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How long will it last me? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Till it breaks again. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Next week something else will break. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought you were talking about -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, but the -- the ones that are waiting for -- or pending down basically in the -1-03 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 143 judicial side right now, whether we should go through enforcement or not, they're basically cesspools. You can't call that -- there's no system there. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They need some help. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, and they cannot afford -- doing that? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How do you go about COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's -- you know, and that's a big question. But it's a -- you know, if you really -- you know, if the County and U.G.R.A. both committed to fixing the problem, that's part of the problem. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: More than anything else. 12 ---- 13 14 1~ So -- 16 17 huh? 18 19 a million. 20 21 22 23 .-. 2 4 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Government handout, COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just got a quarter of COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe government -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Assistance. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- assistance. But, anyway -- but interesting, the -- I don't think any of us at the meeting felt we should give them the system. It was that -- maybe some kind of a cost share. -i~-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 25 144 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't even know if they can even afford that, based on some of them. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's hard to solve. It won't do them any good to put them in jail. That will -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Situation will still be there. You can't -- I don't think we can condemn your house. There's just no easy solution. JUDGE TINLEY: Was there any mention made, something similar to a paving or curb lien, where they put you on a payout plan; in the meantime, they got a -- got a lien on your property? COMMISSIONER LETZ: We talked a little bit about some mechanism of the County funding it; they pay us back over time. That was discussed, or some way -- maybe some mechanism where we could guarantee a loan, you know. I don't know -- you know, I don't know what -- how you do it. But bottom line is -- JUDGE TINLEY: We already did that on our health deal. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. Well, I mean, the reality is, it's probably going to take tax dollars to get some of these systems fixed. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. -1~-~~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 145 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, you know, how you do that is -- it's a real problem. I have a real problem with, you know, using tax dollars for that purpose, but I really don't know what else you do. You can't take their property and put them the jail. It costs us more money. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, that's counter- productive. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The ultimate solution is to get everybody on sewer, and I think about rural electrification. If you lived out in the country, you couldn't afford to run electric out there. If the government -- federal government actually hadn't stepped in, we probably wouldn't have electricity out there today. So, someday, somebody's going to have to bite the bullet and get rid of septic as a way of disposing of the waste. JUDGE TINLEY: So, that's all you got? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: Only thing I've got is my illustrious HIPAA committee that was appointed has gone around -- I probably need to get them gathered up. We've been presented with some r_ontracts or agreements concerning HIPAA and the sharing of information and handling of information, so probably looking at maybe 11 o'clock in the morning, or as an alternative to that, it could be, like, 10 o'clock on Wednesday morning. 5-1~-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 25 146 MS. SOVIL: Are you going to invite Mr. Rothwell? He's part of the committee. JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, yeah. He's on the committee. He's -- MS. SOVIL: He's from San Antonio, so I would say Wednesday morning rather than t~nwrrow. JUDGE TINLEY: Would you see if you can kind of get that nailed down? MS. SOVIL: Wednesday at 10:00? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: When do you think elected officials can expect your letter of guidance and that coming out about the budget? JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I understand I just got my -- a portion of my longevity information last Friday. I still don't have all of that. That, obviously, is a major plug into it that both the elected officials and department heads and myself need to know. There may be some questions about whether or not people are included that shouldn't be or are not included that should be. It's already been indicated that there may have been at least one that was missed last year, and they got somebody that's been going on here for better than half the year that's not getting paid what they may be entitled to be paid, and going to have to figure out how to handle that. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You also, as -- well, ~-1~-u3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ~0 1 i1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 147 no, Buster was appointed, and I know y'all appointed different Commissioners different departments for liaisons. Do you want me getting with Buster prior to getting with you and also working on our budget part? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not on the budget issues. JUDGE TINLEY: I think you'd have a hard time finding Buster with a search warrant on that issue, wouldn't vou? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I got a room out there he can stay in as long as I need him. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've always wondered about those ankle things. But, no, for budget, that's his job under the constitution. We have an employee that's not getting paid what we promised to pay him? JUDGE TINLEY: That's my understanding. I've not taken a look at the specific dates, but I was advised of that last year; there was someone that was due a longevity, and for this -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The boss failed to get that done? Or we failed to get that done? MS. SOVIL: Both. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Both? But the boss failed to come and tell us to get it done? JUDGE TINLEY: All that is out of the _-1~-03 1 -^ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2C 21 22 23 24 25 148 personnel and payroll, and that's -- that's where I'm trying to get my information, 'cause I think that's the -- that's the bottom line info that we need to work from. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, an automatic JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That really ticks me off. I don't like that. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, I personally -- I think the way the Judge is doing it this year, where the department head actually has to also figure the longevities and the salaries and come up with that dollar amount, where years before we didn't have anything to do with that; that was all done separate, I think that will help us and the department heads make sure they deri't nave anything -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, are you going to -- are you planning to have any kind of a -- I guess an early meeting, either with the Commissioners, to kind of -- seems to me that it would be helpful to you and to the Commissioners if we had kind of a -- in this early part of the process, a meetinq with you to kind of qo over where we stand. 'Cause we're going to be the ones that have to vote or. it dawn the read, and if you're going -- if you think that, you know, we need an increases in Road and Bridge and I think we need an increase in Rusty's area, we're going to -i~-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1? 18 19 20 21 22 23 ,.... 2 4 25 149 end up with a freight train head-to-head. Whereas, you know, some preliminary -- just discussions in general, nothing detailed, to me would be helpful. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I think my obligation is to throw the first budget on the table, the first overall budget. And then, you know, what -- what y'all do about jumping up and down on it or carving it up or whatever, you know, that's your choosing. But my plan was to put together a tentative budget and work one-on-one with the elected officials and department heads on each of their respective portions. And then, based upon that -- or, you know, I may -- I may decide that, you know, they've taken a hard right turn and they ought to take a left. But I'm going to lay in front of you what -- where my budget is. And, rather than have two different runs at the same thing, I'm trying to cut out one of those. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, okay. So, can you explain, then, your process beyond that? JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. Once I -- once I put it all together, what I think is the -- is the good beginning point from the entire budget, then I'm going to throw it on the table, and -- and you guys can just do whatever. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We11, but, I mean, were you planning to have, you know, budget workshops to go over -l~-o} 150 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 it with each department? Or -- or kind of -- I mean, how are you -- JUDGE TINLEY: I'm going to be working with them one-on-one. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess it puts -- in my opinion, it puts me at a severe disadvantage if I'm not going to have the opportunity -- you're saying that we should do it one-on-one, talk to each elected official. I don't see -- JUDGE TINLEY: That' s what I'll do. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know that' s what you're going to do, but it puts me at a disadvantage for me to get -- try to do anything. You're going to give me a budget, and I don't -- I only go through it, don't look at it, so it's going to take us a lot of scheduling time for me to say, okay, I've got a question here on this item in Rusty's budget on line -- or in the J.P. budget. And it's easier to me if we have them come through so we can ask questions. I don't know how the rest of the Commissioners feel. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I would like to have some face time with all elected officials, department heads. I'd like to have scme time. And maybe this is 'cause I'm a freshman and I don't know how the process works. I'd like to have some time with you guys to talk about philosophy or strategy, what -- what's the appropriate role that the -1_-G3 151 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 County pay for things, providing services. Not hours, but at least a few minutes of discussion about those kind of things. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's a good point. What Jonathan's saying, too, Judge, in the one-on-one session that you have with the Sheriff or District Clerk or whomever, it will produce -- it will produce a decision on your part to make up your initial budget based on what they say or what they presented to you, but it doesn't give us any benefit of their arguments as to why they wanted something and you may have denied it in your original budget. We don't know the details of that, unless you're prepared to tell us all the details. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me make a motion. JUDGE TINLEY: What they will initially be -- be requesting will be on a -- will be on a separate document. They'll make their own. I'll make my own. But all of that information as to what their initial request was and what -- what I initially plugged in for them, that information will be available. All that information will be available. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the key. I think -- I really think the Judge is probably right, that, you know, he can do anything he wants to in there, as long as we get to see the original request numbers, and -- and - 1 ~ - ~ 3 152 l -- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 it 12 13 14 15 l6 1? 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that -- and then we -- we can whack on it all we want after that. He simply presents it. We can see what he's done with it, compared to the original request. That's all -- that's all I ask for, is the original request. He can do anything he wants to with it. And then we have the right and authority to go back and do anything we want to. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You understand that I don't disagree with that; I think that's fine. My only point was that we don't have the benefit of the arguments that may have been presented by the department head. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. We can rehash thaw argument, though, if we want. JUDGE TINLEY: And I think you'll spend less time rehashing those few arguments than if you did this face time with every one of them that I'rti going to be doing. And that's what I'm trying to do, is save some time. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I want to hear Rusty come in here and say, "Here's how much money I need and why," so that I'll have some -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not sure you do want to hear that. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me pick on somebody else. So I'll have some confidence that it's a legitimate need and that I can enforce it or not. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, you s-i,-vim 153 1 2 3 4 5 H 7 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2i 22 23 24 2~ know, we'll have to see how -- I mean, I'm certainly open to whatever process -- whatever the Judge, you know, has. But when it gets into long-range planning -- and we talked about cars today. That was a plan that was presented durinq the budget process when Rusty was first elected. If that conversation doesn't take place before the full Court, how's the Court going to know wYiat the plan is? I mean, and you can't tell that by looking at numbers, necessarily. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's true. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, some of this -- and we've got into long-range planning for virtually every department on salaries and -- I mean, not on salaries; on personnel and equipment and computer purchases and some of that stuff. And I -- I hate to see us -- or, you know -- well, and I guess the other c~pticn is we can just call workshops. JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know, which I -- I agree with Dave; I'd like to have them here, because I think you -- it is beneficial to -- even though it's boring and not a whole lot seems to be accomplished, I think it is very beneficial to meet with each department head, elected official. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I would schedule them 30 minutes apart or 15, whatever, and let them come 5-=_-03 154 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2 J through here and tell us what they want us to hear. It's the opportunity for them to educate us about why they need what they do. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As part of the learning curve, you -- we find out the nuances of their department. That's the only way you find them out. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Or you're trying to whittle down on it. We may say you need more money, you ought to be doing this. Not likely, but -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Or. that, Judge, you're going to get with each department head before you make your budget, though, correct? JUDGE TINLEY: Before I make any final overall budget, yes. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. That you're going to submit to the Court. Then the only thing I would -- because there will be differences. JUDGE TINLEY: Sure, there's going to be. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You'll give the department heads the opportunity, then, after he makes his budget -- you'll have his and you'll have a copy of ours -- give us the opportunity, 30 minutes or whatever, to come in and explain the areas that we couldn't agree upon? JUDGE TINLEY: Sure. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: To where we can explain 155 1 2 3 4 5 b 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 it to the whole Court. JUDGE TINLEY: I think, overall, we'll end up saving time, rather than each and every elected official and department head coming in and going through each line item all the way to the end. I dare say that probably -- I don't know; this is just a -- a way -- probably 80 percent or more is going to be resolved in one-on-one between myself and that particular elected official or department head. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But then they -- JUDGE TINLEY: And the base information is going to be there laid in front of you guys so that you can see what they requested up front, initially. You'll see what was initially plugged in, and you'll see what I'm suggesting or recommending as -- a.s the figure that's presently in the budget -- or the proposed budget. And then, if there are two or three or whatever number of those items you want to -- you want to talk to the elected official about, whatnot, give workshops or whatever, yeah, that's fine. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think I -- I like the process better, and I think it will be more productive use of our time, but I'll be surprised if we save 80 percent of the time. I'd probably say 50 percent of the time. JUDGE TINLEY: No, no, I'm talking about 80 percent of the items on the budget. 5-1~-~~ 156 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: Oh. JUDGE TINLEY: We're probably going to end up having resolved by the time it comes time to -- instead of hassling about it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Most of them you don't -- most of them are pretty -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Even if you and I come to an agreement and you submit the budget, they will still have the opportunity to -- JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, yeah. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- question that agreement. If you want to cut it more, give me more. JUDGE TINLEY: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Back to Commissioner Nicholson's concern -- MS. SOVIL: Well, the biggest complaint that I've ever heard from any of the officials is that they come before you in a workshop situation, and they never see whether they got it or not until -- until the budget's on file, ar.d it's too late to argue about it at that point. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner Nicholson is -- well, partially what he's talking about is the -- is that, you know, of all the thousands of times we vote a year, this is -- the budget is the one that counts. That's 5-1~-G3 157 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 big one. And I'm going to -- I guarantee you, I'm going to know what I'm voting on before I vote on it. And if that's -- if that's having -- have Rusty Hierholzer in here five days a week for two weeks, that's what it's going to be, until we can figure out exactly what it's all about. So, I'm with you. I'm with you. We'll have -- we'll have all the face time we want. More than we want. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know how to answer that question. Thea -- I think, somehow, you know, if the -- when the District Clerk comes in and we all agree on something, you have to let her know this is what we agreed on, because when we adopt the budget, she will come in here and say that -- that she didn't know that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, yeah, and she will, and I know that argument. But the reality is, they've got to take the responsibility to go to the minutes and look at it, 'cause they're all posted meetings when those were made, and they can go to the County Clerk's office and find those changes that were made along the way. And it's -- I don't -- you get to a point that I don't think we can rerun the budget every time we change a number. I mean -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: See how the new scheme of things even changes that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. -i^-c? 158 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think it can, because what I'd like -- and I agree with what Thea was saying about the other elected officials. When I walk out of here after a workshop, after Pat presents his, I present mine, we all come together and look at it, at that point, when I walk out of here, I'd like to know what it is, you know, I'm going to have that's filed, what it is I'm not going to have, to where it's finished and not just -- we all talk about, well, we'll look at this, we'll look at this. And then I never know what it is until after my budget's been -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: You can't know that until after July. See, we get to a time -- we won't know -- we don't know the final numbers coming in from the taxes until July 30th. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if we start the process after July 30th, we'll never be done. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, we've got to start now. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I mean, it's -- a lot of it's taken by advisement, and guessing -- based on some, you know, guess. JUDGE TINLEY: Historical figures, projections. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Projections from the c_ l~~_ ~ i 159 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 present budget. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But can we at least get time in there after our meeting and such that we do come through? If -- when y'all get those final numbers, if it's going to change the department head's budget, can the department head have the opportunity t~ come back in here and talk to y'all about that before the change? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. Just -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Could you at least let us know what they're going to be? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Could we let these employees go have lunch with their families and keep me from starving to death? JUDGE TINLEY: I think we hit on that item of significant priority. One of your most favorite things. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, this is one of my significant priorities, one of my favorite things. JUDGE TINLEY: I appreciate the input. Do we have any more reports from any source? Any elected official have any report they want to render? With nothing else to come before us, I declare us adjourned. (Commissioners Court adjourned at 12:31 p.m.) s-~_-u~ 160 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF KERR ~ The above and foregoing is a true and complete transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 20th day of May, 2003. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk BY: _ ~~ Kathy anik, Deputy County Clerk Certified Shorthand Reporter 20 21 22 23 ~..,. 2 4 25 s-~~-o~ ORDER NO, ~8Qi69 APPROVE CON5TRUCTION PROJECTS -- FOR TEXAS ARTS ~ CRAFTS EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION, INC. On th i s the 10th day of h~lay, 2Qt@3, upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-~-Q~, the perimeter fencing and the location and constr~_ictian and placement of buildings in the maintenance area for the Texas Arts and Crafts Educational Foundation, Inc. ORDER N0. 28070 AP'P'ROVE WATER/SEWER TAF~ AND APF~OINT COMMISSIONER LETZ AS NEGOTIATING AGENT On this the 12th day of May, 2003, upon motion made by Commissioner Paldwin, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, with Commissioner Letz abstaining, that the Court designate Commissioner Jonathan Lett as the Court's agent for negotiating and authorizing the placement of water and sewer taps on the Arts and Crafts Fair lease property, and negotiate with the City in all particulars in that regard. ORDER NO. 28Q-71 RESDLUTION TO TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSRORTATION FOR HERMANN SONS BRIDGE On this the 1Eth day of May, EQ-03, upon motion made by Commissioner Let z, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Gourt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to pass a Resolution to the Texas Department of Transportation for Participation Waiver for Hermann Sons Fridge and the location for the work obligation from the County are two locations on Town Creek, and authorize the County Judge to sign same. ORDER NO. 28072 APRROVED CORRECTION TO ^ REVISION OF RLAT FOR TRACTS 48 AND 4SA OF KERB COUNTRY ESTATES On this the 12th day of May, 2003, upon motion made by Commissioner Lets, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, that the engineer- who originally sealed the recorded plat in Volume 7, F'age 205, being revision of plat for Tr^acts 48 and 4SA of Kerr Country Estates, be allowed to personally correct the typographical error on line chart L-8, to read "N. 48 degrees, 52'01"W." ORDER N0. 28473 SET F'URLIC HEARING FOR VACATING A PORTION OF DiCFSEY ROAD Dn this the i~th day of May, 2Q~Q~3, upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Let z, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-~, to set a public hearing on the `3rd day of J+_~ne, 2Q~Qi3, at ifi:L?~+~ a. m. to consider abandoning, discontin+_~ing, and vacating 545.16 feet at the end of Dickey Road. ORDER N0. ~8Q~74 AF'AROVED CDRRECTION TD "" REVISION OF PLAT OF Y.O. RANCHLANDS On this the i~th day of May, `003, upon motion made by Commissioner Let z, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-D-Q~, that the Court authorise the s~_~rveyor who filed the original plat in Volume 7, Faye 186, Revision of Rlat for 17, 18, 19 of Y.O. Ranchlands, personally make correction of said plat so that it specifics that the f~_~ture maintenance/repair of the roads will be by the adjacent landowners rather than the Y.O. Ranchland homeowners' association, as presently indicated, and, too, that plat then be refiled with the Clerk of this Court. ORDER NO. E8Q~7,~., AP'P'ROVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO pROJECT AGREEMENT -- WITH USDA NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE On thi s the i~th day of May, EOQr3, upon mot i an made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-Q~-0, Amendment No. 1 Agreement No. 69-744`Q~-3-545 and Agreement No. 69-744-3-55Q~) F'ro.ject Agreement between Herr Co~_~nty Commissioners Court and the United States Department of Agric~_tlture Natural Resources Conservation Service and a~_~tharized Ca~_inty Judge to sign the same. t:ll~i]()E::F~ I•ItJ., is?[3iFl'Tf, Flf~'I~'FifJVC:I) FiCIF•1D I.1~=11''IE:: L"I°If•1hICiE::~:i F`t:lF: I='I~~:I:Vf~T'I:::L..Y IYIFal:hi'T'fl:l:l•II:::]() F~t:1f1I)',~i t:17•a •t:l•la.<.~ •t:hle~ :L~:'•Lhl r:l<~y r:a•F h'I<:ty, c?i!lC~l.:3, ~.~I:ac:a}•ti naca•t.:i.r:n•ti mcacle:* Lyy t~{anlnl:l.SiiSS:l.allti''r I•I:L{:'llt].I.Si~r7lly Sat?{;~{]1'iC.IE•a (:) I:)y t..(:}n1n11.Sir`::i:l.r:ail{:?'r X:~til.I.t:IW:l.ll, '~:I'1(:? C'.cat.t-r•t. G11iC~17imau~~ly aiap•ravc~~l Icy <3 va•~~ of 4-C~-•0, -t,l-lr^~ -Cca:I. l.raw:i.l•lri 'r'(Ji1{:1 ilitlllfa r:'llc"tl'iLit:?<.7 't'r:a'r I:)'r`:I.Vi:1'~:ti?~.Y nl<":t:l.l'1't:ia:L1lE?{:I 'r (:act{:IS:r :L 1'i V<.•1'r':I.C}llCi :lrac~~~•L:i.an{~ :1.1'1 I'.~:rr•r C:tat.tn•k:y a. l•1 ~~r:~c:~c:a•rclW F~k•rc:I~.rE•rS:s'l:e~c:l I•li:lnlti! t.:l'Ylllll;lr:? ~'•r.xl•lr:lt.~a.l F~r:i,. I•IW Ef~rcaW:.t~al•1 :31:a~~•r ::i I)•ry C:re~~ak. 'T•r7. hl l°I«~r=x)carl