~--;.

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
Special Session
Monday, June 23, 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
JONATHAN LETZ, Corlmissioner Pct. 3
DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4
ABSENT: WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
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
June 23, 2003
PAGE
--- Commissioners Comments q
1.1	Presentation from Cypress Creek community	
	concerning enhanced law enforcement CJ~aSCL~.`~S~~Ci1	g
1.2	Request for permission to use county park on	
	Riverside Drive for car show/chili cook-off a~'j3`'~ 21
1.3	Request to override decision of Road & Bridge	
	to not widen Holloman Road ~15C1,'lcj`J`Ch	25
1.4	Update on Mooney Airplane Company, Inc.~l~~•Otc,~/~I~,y~ 44
1.7	PUBLIC HEARING - abar..don, discontinue and	
	vacate 545.16 feet at the end of Dickey Road	56
1.8	Consider abandoning, discontinuing and vacating	
	545.16 feet at the end of Dickey Road~i~ ~j3	57
1.5	Budget amendment to transfer funds from	
	Workers Compensation to Contract Fees ~~~~~	59
1.6	Consider merit increases Uj`iC~~`~Si~i'1	64
1.9	Request for approval to purchase a laser	
	printer for County Clerk's office~jx~ASJIC.11	88
1.10	Review and report from Third Party Administrator	
	C~	~SC~IS SIC
	on pending reimbursement of claim paid by County	91
1.11	Update on status of Worker's Compensation cost	
	and claims C, `~CL~`~~j+v ~	102
1.12	Discuss upcoming Post-Legislative Conference and
~	~~ ~•<-~
~
	<_
j
State County Judge and Commissioners Conference	i.lJ~ICY
~
108
1.13	Discuss status of Kerr County's burn ban ~~(~j J	110
1.14	Consider allowing Water Education Task Force to	
	place a temporary display in the courthouse ~,~?(~	112
1.15	Confirmation and reappointment of Sam Dunkin as	
	Kerr County representative on Board of Trustees	
	of Hill Country MHMR Center ~~^,(~~	118
1.16	Announcement of pending retirement of Eddie	
	Holland as Kerr County Extension Agent CtI~GL~j`}j~r1	119
1.17	Consider ratifying County Judge's signature on	
	Memorandum of Understanding with AACOG for	
	Domestic Preparedness funding ,~ ~(3~	124
4. 1	Pay Bills ~L~I J~'1	129
4 . 2	i
Budget Amendments ~~, ~ `IG . ~~~y`	14 4
4.3	1
Late Bills;~'Q~~l~G,	154
4.4	Approve and Accept Monthly Reports~~~~t~	155
--- Adjourned
156
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, June 23, 2003, at 9:00 a.m., a special meeting
of the Kerr County Commiss=goners Court was held in the
Commissioners' Courtroom, F:err County Courthouse, Kerrville,
Texas, and the following p?°oceedings were had in open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY": Let me call to order the
special Commissioners Court meeting that's posted for this
date, Monday, June 23rd. It's just a tad after 9 a.m., the
scheduled time for the meeting. I believe the honors today
go to Commissioner, Precinct 3.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Would everyone please
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)stand, join me in a
moment of prayer?
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: I want to welcome all of you
here this morning. If any ~~f you desire to speak about any
matter that is listed on thf= agenda, I would ask that you
fill out a public participa-=ion form. The forms are on the
table at the back of the room. It's not absolutely required
that you do that in order to be able to speak. It just
helps us for purposes of planning and to make sure that we
don't miss you when that item comes up on the agenda. So,
if you want to speak on any matter that's listed on the
agenda, we'd ask that you fill out the public participation
form. Now, with regard to items not on the agenda, if
6-23-03
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
4
there's anybody here that has anything on their mind that
they want to tell us about, we want you to feel privileged
to come forward at this time and tell us what's on your
mind, what -- what concerns you. Is there any member of the
public that wishes to address the Court about any matter
that is not on the agenda? Anybody?
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Looks like we got no takers
today. We appreciate you being here anyway. We'll move on
to the next item, Commissioners' comments. Precinct 3.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No comments today.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, I see one of
our firefighters here, and vice president of KARFA, and I
want to let you know that the agenda item to discuss the
contract for the fire departments was deleted from this --
this meeting.
AUDIENCE : O}cay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It will be first
meeting in July. And I apologize, we didn't get the word to
you.
AUDIENCE: Nc> problem, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We called as many
people as we could. That's all I have.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, I have a
couple of things. I noticed in this morning's newspaper
n-23-G3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.^-~
25
5
that Judge Ables is assessing a $100 fine for cell phones
going off in his courtroom. I know that we have not
assessed any kind of fine, but we do have in our -- in our
rules, no cell phones going off or wearing hats in the
courtroom. And I can't remember how the list goes, but it's
something that we need to pay attention to and have respect
for. And I see that Judge Ables is going a step further,
and good for him. It has to stop. I was out nosing around
over the weekend, and I was out at the county park and saw
the motorcycle rally down there, and drove through and
looked at all the wonderful motorcycles. But I noticed
there was a -- like, about 50 port-a-pottys sitting on
County property away from the motorcycle rally. Was that --
do you think that that's for the motorcycle rally? Or --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know. You're
looking at me, so --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are people out setting
their port-a-pottys out there and renting them on our
property?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Possible, but probably
they were there for the rally.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then the final
item I wanted to bring up is my beloved aerobic system at my
house, week before last I spent $436 maintenance on that
thing. Last week, I -- Friday, I spent another $300. This
6-~3-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
6
week I have $200 coming up. That is a grand total of almost
$1,000 just on maintenance items on that thing in less than
three weeks. I can't afford that. I can't afford to live
in the county any more, so I'm putting my home on the market
and hot-footing it back into the city of Kerrville where I
can afford to live. So, I just wanted to let you know that
I'm not going to be there very much longer, Judge. That's
all.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You're not moving to
Precinct 4, are you?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm thinking about it.
(Laughter.) I was thinking about getting me a cardboard box
and moving it down toward Comfort, and -- and declare
residency and run for Commissioner down there, be a
Commissioner in two positions.
JUDGE TINLEY: These new larger
refrigerators --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Pretty good size boxes
available that they ship those in.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can get my whole
family in those big ones. Be nice.
JUDGE TINLEY: You may want to, in the
interim, prior to making yoLir transition, contact that
port-a-potty company and see if they may have something that
6-'3-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
7
you need.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, I could beat
U.G.R.A. in the process, cc>uldn't I? What a great idea,
Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's a thought.
COMMISSIONEF: BALDWIN: Godly counsel right
here. This is good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Better news -- and speaking of
alternatives to septic systems, I received notification
approximately a week ago from O.R.C.A., the Office of Rural
Community Affairs, that a grant that Kerr County had made
application for -- it's actually the second phase, I suppose
you would call it, for Comm.~nity Development programs for
the sewer service out in Kerrville South, in the amount of
$250,000 has been approved. The caveat in the notification
stated that the grant may be rescinded if the State 2004
Community Development Block Grant allocation is
significantly lower than the 2003 allocation of $85,267,000.
I don't think there's any -- any great degree of concern
that that's not -- that that will occur, but the caveat was
there. But -- so now we have -- this will be the fourth
grant that we have in the Kerrville South area for tying
onto that sewer line. We had a $500,000 and a $250,000
originally. Then we received notification a month or so ago
about the second round of 500. Now we have the 250. So, I
F-~3-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
8
thought that may be of interest. I don't think it's going
to extend out quite as far in Kerrville South as you would
need, though, Commissioner Baldwin.
COMMISSIONEF'. BALDWIN: No, not yet, and I
can't wait.
JUDGE TINLEY: I see. But that's all that I
have this morning. We'll now move to the consideration
agenda. The first item is to consider and discuss the
presentation from Cypress Creek community concerning
enhanced law enforcement. ~~ommissioner Letz.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda
at the request of some of the residents in the Cypress Creek
community. We've had -- or I've had, I guess, two meetings
out there with them, along with -- Sheriff's been out there
once, and his deputy severa=_ times, and Constable Garza as
well, and they had Borne concerns. Some of the concerns
relate to budget. And I thought it would be a good idea if
I'd have them on -- well, they asked to come to court. I
thought this would be a good time, during the budget
process, to hear what they have to say. They also have
given me a letter this morning to hand out to members of the
Court. I'll turn it over tc the spokesman, Mr. Falduto.
MR. FALDUTO: Yes. My name is Paul Falduto.
I'm here with Harry Reeh our president, and Neil Dunn,
another one of our members, and we represent the Cypress
r-~~-o~
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,,._ 13
14
15
16
1'I
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
...-.
25
Creek Community Center. We're housed over in the old school
house just off of Cypress Creek Road, way on the east side
of Kerr County, the far east end. By the way, any time
you're riding around on Sunday, we'd like you to stop and
see our community center; we're quite proud of it. Not only
did we rejuvenate the old school. house, but we also put on a
pavilion area where there's reunions and so forth held, and
we're very, very proud of the site. We're in Precinct 3,
and we did send you a letter showing you that we are
attempting to do everything that we can to do our part in
the way of organizing the Crimestopper program. We're
probably about 60 percent through the organization with the
help of the Sheriff and quite a bit of his staff.
We're also quite concerned about the 911
program, and we see that you have taken the time to -- and
finances to update the 911 program, and we're very happy for
that, and we hope that that keeps going the way that it has
been going. As you know, wE= had some very unfortunate
situations happen just in the near future, and that was the
double murders, which is only, like -- I believe it's about
a mile and a half from our community center, which, by the
way, represents about -- we have about 120 members. We
almost probably represent about 70 percent of the people in
the area. Not only did we Izave the double murders very,
very close to our neighborhood, but we also had a home
5-~3-..3
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
invasion here about two years ago, just a little over two
years ago, which ended up in a manhunt, which I think you
all read about in the papers, and we're very, very concerned
about.
In our letter, we talk about three areas of
concern, and there's one other thing besides the home
invasion and the murders. We -- we do nestle along IH-10
and we get a lot of people stopping along that way, and a
lot of intruders, breakdown:, things of that sort. Harry
Reeh is a full-time farmer, and he can speak of numerous
times that -- I think, Harry, you've been robbed what, two
times?
MR. REEH: Yes.
MR. FALDUTO: I think he's been robbed two
times, and the numerous problems that he has with people
coming off of IH-10. We hope that you take the time to read
our letter. The reason that= we're here this morning at
budget time is to appeal to you to add vehicles for your
constables. We feel that a constable with a vehicle, fully
equipped with communications back to the Sheriff's
Department, with all of the rights of a Sheriff's deputy,
would be a valuable, valuable asset, and with a small
expenditure of funds. If he had the vehicle when he's
riding around on his official business, he would be able to
be exposed. People would see him. And as we were talking
5-~ 3-~'~ 3
11
1
~, 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to the Sheriff before, the way that you can -- the way that
you stop speeders is not by stopping one speeder, but it's
being visually there for him, and that slows down all of the
people. That's what slows them down, and that's what we're
attempting to do, and that's what we'd like to do. We'd
like to get the -- get him visible in his everyday means,
give us a better means of communication with the Sheriff's
Department through the constable. He's there. He's being
paid for on a 40-hour basis. We feel that, with the
expenditure -- and I believe we have four constables. With
the expenditure of four vehicles, it would be money well,
well spent, and we're appe~~ling to you today to add those
people, and to go along with us to help us in our program,
our 911 program. Our constable has been out to our
meetings, has been attendir..g all of our night meetings, and
we're quite pleased with what he's doing, and what Mr. Letz
has been doing for us. He's come out to our meetings. And,
again, I just appeal to yolz to increase your budget to at
least give those people thE~ vehicles. And it adds another
man to the -- to the daytime program of patrolling our
roads, and we all need -- }snow that we need that. So, thank
you very much, and thank you for your efforts, and we
appreciate it.
JUDGE TINLE": Thank you very much, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If I might make one other
E-23-~3
12
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
comment, if I may, one of the -- and I've been -- you know,
several meetings, as Mr. Falduto said, and I really commend
the residents of Cypress Creek, because it is probably, from
what I see, the only true community left in the rural areas
of Kerr County. I mean, trey really -- they bond together;
they look out for themselves. And it's kind of going back
to the way things were thrcughout central Texas probably 20,
30, 40, 50 years ago. It's a tight-knit community, and I
applaud the efforts that trey do. I mean, I've been down
there. There have been some heated meetings this year,
lengthy meetings this year, but the bottom line is that
they -- they have a strong bond with each other, and I'm
very happy to try to help them and work with them. But I'm
really -- what I want to erid up by saying is, hats off to
them for being a community in the true sense of the word. I
appreciate it.
COMMISSIONEF: BALDWIN: I've got a couple of
questions. Jon, were you through?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: Okay. You talked
about marked vehicles, I think -- marked cars. And in your
notes, you recommend that we get some from Department of
Public Safety. I don't -- I don't know anything about that,
if they have a turnover of vehicles, what they do with them
or anything.
r-,~-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
13
MR. REEH: That's an organization in Austin
that takes used D.P.S. cars, refurbishes them, puts new
tires on them, and they're available to only county entities
to purchase at a reduced price or half price, fourth price.
That's why -- in our community, we have a Texas Ranger; he
may be aware of that. In fact, when I used to work for the
county 30 years ago, that's all we ever had, was used dump
trucks that were taken from TexDOT. We didn't have the
luxury of a new truck.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just didn't know
D.P.S. did that.
MR. REEH: Yeah, area organization in Austin.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a great idea.
We need to look into that. And I would think our constables
would look into that and bring to the Court the program --
you know, how it works and what the cost and that kind of
thing. You know, I thought. we had had -- I thought we had
had a program similar to that worked out with the Sheriff.
Maybe we don't. Rusty, you. were fixing to make some kind of
comment there. Do you want to comment on that?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The comment on the
D.P.S. cars is, that's the ones, after they turn them back
in, they go up for auction. And you do it -- Kerr County
has participated in that a couple times. Last one, I think
Sergeant Seal's we bought at one time. The only difference
r:-_3-u~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,~ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
14
and the only problem was -- is those cars would have right
at 100,000 miles on them when they turn them back in. And
then I think the last one we bought, you still end up
costing the County a little over $9,000. That's not really
that advantageous, if you buy a car with 100,000 miles on it
that's already got -- or that they're wanting $9,000 for it.
With the wear and tear on police cars, it's just not that
great.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I think what
we're talking about, the main topic here is visibility in
the community. Maybe -- maybe we need to help them purchase
magnetic signs for their doors. The one constable out in
Ingram, there's no question who he is when you see his car.
He has two or three -- I think three signs on his car, and
it's pretty obvious that he's a police officer of some sort.
But maybe that's a -- maybe that's a way to go. Yes, sir?
MR. FALDUTO: That would not give him the
communications. We're lacking the communications.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to get to
the communications in just a second. I just want to deal
with the four wheels going down the road, and communications
is my second question. What are we talking about,
communications? Radios? That link to the Sheriff? Don't
we have that today, Sheriff Hierholzer?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir.
6-~~-(;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
15
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: What's the question on
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think most constables
have in their budgets where they all got radios. I know
we've given portables to a couple of them, some of our old
portables.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you link them up to
your operation?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They can talk to us
anytime they want to. Now, if they -- you know, I'm trying
to see if all of them have a radio in their vehicle. I'm
pretty sure they all do, okay? I haven't had any requests
from any other ones nn them.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: A lot of times their
radios are older and outdated, but they do have radios, do
have communications.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, as long as we
budget for them to have radios. And we can't make them go
out and buy a new radio or used radio or whatever, so I --
it seems that we've done our part there. Did you say that
we needed more people? New constables? More constables?
Is that what you were saying?
MR. FALDUTO: Me?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
r-_ ~,-U 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
16
MR. FALDUTO: No, I said to utilize the
constables in their -- if they had the vehicle and it had
the bubble up on top and -- you know, I mean, there was no
difference between seeing them and seeing a Sheriff's
deputy; that when they're all doing their everyday duties,
coming to our meeting and so forth, we know -- I mean,
there's a vehicle there. Like wtren he comes to our meetings
and parks, he's just another car, where if it was a car that
looked identical to a Sheriff's car, people coming by or
speeders or anybody else says, oh my gosh, they've got
people -- surveillance. I mean, they've got patrols around
here, you know. But, you know, as the Sheriff's told us at
our meeting, at any one time -- correct me if I'm wrong,
Sheriff. You said that there could possibly be five people
patrolling the county at one time?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct.
MR. FALDUTO: That's correct?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir.
MR. FALDUTO:
have five patrols out, as f
out there. I mean, I don't
by a specific road, what it
weeks. This would just add
amount of dollars.
This is a pretty big county to
ar -- with all the roads that are
know what it is for one to come
would be. Maybe once every two
another person for a minimum
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you're -- so what
E-~'3-03
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
17
you're saying, then, you're not talking -- are you talking
about utilizing constables or are you talking about us
hiring new Sheriff's deputies?
MR. FALDUTO: No -- well, we'd love to hire,
but we know that that -- that cost; the Sheriff has already
told us what that cost is, which is astronomical. And that
was our first thought when we had the Sheriff out, was to
put more deputies on, and he said that's impossible because
of the budget restraints. And -- but adding -- but you've
already got -- you're already paying the constables a wage,
so it's just a matter of giving them the vehicle.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, vehicle is the
deal.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Sheriff, would you
comment on the usefulness of the constables in general law
enforcement and whether or not there's some potential for
them to be more useful?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, I think there's --
and I hate to speak for any of the constables without them
being here, but I think there's always potential for them to
be more useful. The thing is, it's just like y'all's or my
position; it's an elected position. A lot of it for a
constable is kind of like a part-time position. They'll
have a full-time job somewhere else, so their availability
is not that much. And their main duties are serving that
r.-~ 3-03
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
18
J.P. court, being -- you know, serving all the small claims
lawsuits and being bailiff in their court when it's going on
and that. But, you know, we're fairly fortunate; our
constables that we have around here do like to get out and
do police work, and they have full authority to as a peace
officer for the state, that they can do any type of police
work that they care to do. And if they had good, marked
cars, yeah, I think it would help that they're visible in
their precinct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the issue, from
talking with the residents of the community, is visibility,
what it comes down to. Ano that there -- I don't think
there's any real argument that the constables have marked
cars -- or, that is, that look like law enforcement cars.
They're more visible, and th.e more visible law enforcement
cars that we have patrolling the county, the -- it's a good
deterrent against crime. And I think, you know, that's
basically, I think, the argument, is -- and I think the
residents that came here today and that I've talked to in
the community, they understand that budget is a big issue.
They've come up with an option of a -- one of the lower cost
ways for the County to provide vehicles to the constables,
rather than going out and buying new cars. The next --
another option would be like you're talking about, is, you
know, providing funds in the budget to enhance the cars they
~~-~ S-G3
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
i4
15
16
17
,g
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
have.
One of the things, and I think kind of where
Commissioner Baldwin's going a little bit with this, is that
we don't have -- we can't make them do certain things. I
mean, we can provide certain things. We can put the money
in their budgets for them to have radios, but we can't make
them spend that money. So, I mean, I think the -- like the
Sheriff just said, our constables now are very good and, you
know, are trying to do patrol work and do more. That hasn't
always been the case. And this Court doesn't have any
authority to make constables do something. The public has
that authority by not re-electing them. I don't think
that's an issue right now, but that's kind of -- you know,
with the radio discussion that I was hearing, but I think
that the -- you know, if there is a way that we c:ari provide
more visible law enforcement cars or vehicles to the
constables, I think it would be -- it's an improvement. I
think it's something that we just need to look at during the
budget process, you know, a:nd see if we can do it.
From what I've heard, Constable, Precinct 4
is happy with the car that 'ze has; he doesn't want his own
car, or a -- you know, a dif=erent used law enforcement
vehicle. But it's just somet=hing we have to look at. I
think would it help. And I t=hink it's something -- when we
get to that workshop, that's something that I intend to look
E-~~_~~
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
.,., 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
very hard at -- look at, and see if there is a way that we
can fund or increase the funding in that area, whether it's
buying used cars or buying more equipment to make the cars
-- you know, make sure that they're up to speed when it
comes to law enforcement.
MR. REEH: Increasing the one in Kendall
County, that constable's -- of course, he loves his job and
he loves exposure, but he patrols all the schools, writes
lots of tickets, is always visible in Comfort, as you can
attest tc, Jon, because you drive through Comfort many
times.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And been stopped by him
like everybody else. Yeah. I mean, constables, they can --
you know, if constables do like the individual that
Mr. Reeh's talking about in Comfort, they're a huge revenue
enhancement for the county as well, because, I mean, every
time they write a ticket, it:'s about $80 for Kendall County,
and it's a -- just talk to t:he J.P., Judge Pressler in
Comfort. In fact, I had re~~son to visit with her the other
day, and she informed me th~it they bring in about $300,000 a
year under that -- from that precinct from law enforcement,
from overall; that's D.P.S., Sheriff's, and constable. But
they -- you know, and it depends. But that constable wants
to do it. And the key is for the voters to elect constables
that really want law enforcement. I think that, from
F-'?-n
21
1
2
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
1i
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
talking with Constable Garza,. you know, he wants to and he
would like to have more funds in his budget for a vehicle.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any formal action to be taken
at this time, gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a report that we
need to receive.
JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate the interest,
and we appreciate you being with us here today. The next
item is to consider and discuss request for permission to
use county park on Riverside Drive on Saturday, the 1st of
November of this year, for ~ car show and chili cook-off by
the Hill Country Automobile Club for a fundraiser.
MR. HUGGINS: Gentlemen, good morning. My
name is Harry Huggins. I'm the vice president and chairman
of events for the Hill Country Automobile Club, which is
stationed and originated here in Kerrville. We're in the
process of having our fiftri annual 4th of July open car show
in River Hills Mall parking lot, which, you know, 4th of
July is a real nice time to be in an asphalt parking lot all
day. And so this is strict:~y a fundraiser for the local
high schools; Ingram Tom Moore, Tivy High, and
Fredericksburg. And we -- this year we've given them about
$4,000 to the three schools -- Center Point, also -- through
this one car show. We'd like to eventually move it to the
county park. And we're -- we have about half the sponsors
6-~3-03
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
this year that we had last year, so we need to do something
else and raise more funds. So, we're requesting from the
Court that we be able to use the park in November, which
hopefully it will be nice and cool. If we don't get rained
out, we'll have another fundraising car show, and eventually
we'd like to make this the annual event. And oiir request is
simple. We are a 4 -- 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, so
we're tax-exempt and all that other stuff. And we're a
local community-supporting club, if you will, and that's all
I'm asking, is that we can use your park -- or our park on
Saturday, the 1st of November.
JUDGE TINLEY: Have you checked the
availability of that date --
MR. HLIGGINS: Yes, I have. We`ve been --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- with the Facilities
Director?
MR. HLIGGINS: -- working closely with the
people downstairs. And we wanted to use the Ag Barn, but
they warted $275 for that, and, my goodness. The River
Hills Mall lets us use their parking lot. They give us
$300, donate it toward the scholarships and all that. But,
see, that's a private entity. The County wants to charge
us. The County wants to c't~arge us, so we can't afford it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You may want to stop
.,.-_
25 there.
E-~3-03
23
1
G
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1i
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. HUGGINS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER B,~LDWIN: I would -- I can't
beliPVe they'd let you off so cheap. But I don't have any
problem with it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's what parks
are for.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what parks are
for. Especially when you're giving to the high schools
and --
MR. HUGGINS: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- helping kids
further their Pducation. Appreciate that very much.
MR. HUGGINS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do I hear a motion?
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: I move that we allow
the Hill Country Automobile Club to use the county park -- I
assume we're talking about right below the Ag Barn?
JUDGE TINLEY: Flat Rack Lake Park?
MR. HUGGINS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONE:~ BALDWIN: For Saturday,
November lst, 2003, for a chili cook-off and car show, from
a.m. to 9 p.m.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
MR. HUGGIN~~: May I --
JUDGE TINLEY: Excuse me. Motion made and
6-~~-03
24
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
i7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
seconded by Commissioners Baldwin and Letz, respectively,
that the Court approve the request by the Hill Country
Automobile Club to use the Flat Rock county park on
Riverside Drive Saturday, November 1st, 2003, from 7 a.m.
till 9 p.m. for a car show and chili cook-off. Now, you had
a question, Mr. Huggins?
MR. HUGGINS: Yeah. I was going to ask if we
could get out the night before and rope off some areas for
the various vehicles and a1.1 that, like we do at the mall.
I mean, it's a minor thing. We won't be camping out or
anything, but just making preparation.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Put out a little fire
ant bait.
MR. HUGGINS: That's all.
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: Thea has something
down there, Judge.
MS. SOVIL: You might remind him there's na
electricity down there.
MR. HUGGINS: We have generators.
JUDGE TINLEY: Y'all plan on using
generators?
MR. HUGGINS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay. Any further
discussion or questions?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think we talked
F-~3-23
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
i8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
about this a little bit once before. I'm not sure that
these kind of decisions require Commissioners Court
attention and approval. And I -- you all have had more
experience with it than I have, so there may be good reason
for that, but I'd be willing to delegate to our facilities
coordinator to make those kind of decisions. But we don't
have to deal with that now. I just make that point once
again.
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. Thank you,
Mr. Huggins.
MR. HUGGINS: Thank you, gentlemen.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item is consider and
discuss a request to override the decision of Road and
Bridge to not widen Holloman Road to meet the right-of-way
standards.
MS. DOERRIES: Hello.
JUDGE TINLE'~Y: Yes, ma'am?
MS. DOERRIE,S: Yes, I'rn Patrice Doerries. I
live at 103 Roland Trail in the Wood Trails Ranch property
c-_~-03
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
i9
20
21
22
23
24
,-,
25
subdivision in the county. I represent -- I'm president of
our homeowners' association, and we are concerned about a
secticn -- the entrance and exit to our subdivision, which
entails approximately 189 property owners, to say nothing of
the families that live with them, and it's regarding 123
records of property. Attached to our request to address you
is a -- a map, and it particularly concerns the road. And
I'm going to let our vice president, George West, address
this. We have met with County Road and Bridge, and they've
been very gracious and helpful in helping us look at this
issue, as well as Dave Nicholson. We are part of Precinct
4. The verbal meeting that we had -- or the meeting we had,
the decision was that they would not widen Holloman Road,
and we are concerned about this, because this is our only
entrance and exit, and there have been several accidents
that have occurred. It is a safety issue. And I respect
the argument that if every county road was put up to code as
it needs to be, you would ]lave hundreds of roads that needed
to be worked on. I would -- I respect that opinion, but I
also know, living there, that we would like the
Commissioners Court to consider overriding this decision,
because we are a -- an entity that does need this additional
space added to the road. And I'm going to let George, the
engineer, address this further.
MR. WEST: Thank you. Some of you know that
6-~3-(i3
z~
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.~
25
I would much rather be singing than speaking. I have no
formal training as a public speaker, but I have stayed at a
Holiday Inn Express. (Laugr.ter.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Last night?
MP,. WEST: I can sing Old Man River. We are
concerned in Wood Trails Ranch over several things. We have
also had a double murder, by the way, which the Sheriff's
very familiar with. We now have enhanced reinforcements,
for which we are grateful. Road and Bridge is taking care
of our roads and has done a magnificent job maintaining our
driving surfaces, for which we are grateful. But we have a
condition on Holloman Road. The piece of Holloman Road
which comes into our suhdivi.sion off of Goat Creek, this is
the only way in and out. It's below the minimum -- current
minimum standards for widths of roads in Kerr County. We
have discussed this with sE~veral people. We have a -- what
-- the real reason we're hE~re is, we have a dangerous
situation there, and we're concerned about the safety of our
citizens and their property. We -- we know that the ideal
situation would be to bring the right-of-way up to the
minimum standards. We have now been told, I believe, that
the current existing right-of-way through there is about
25 feet.
I've done some measuring -- since Patrice
said I'm an engineer, I'm a retired registered engineer and
E~-~~-o?
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
surveyor. I've done some surveying out there myself, and
the wire fence on the north side belongs to Ruth Bauer, and
her property, I feel like, is on the property line. There's
about 2 feet between the fence and the edge of the pavement,
and then the pavement's aboLit 17 feet wide, and on the south
side of -- of this strip of Holloman are several obstacles:
A wooden fence, which is only 21 feet from the wire fence;
trees with masonry circles built around them which extend
into the so called right-of-way and are right up next to the
driving surface. The dangerous situation is that when the
mail truck, garbage and trash trucks and occasional Fed Ex
and UPS go in and out, citizens have a hard time getting
over far enough to let this happen to keep from running into
them. We've got one person on our board, Fred Etheridge,
who has already lost two side-view mirrors off of his truck
because of this situation.
And, really, I think what we're after is to
request the Court to invest=igate clearing the existing
right-of-way, whatever that: is, to the extent that we have a
safe passing condition on she road. That's what we're
after. And whatever the Court feels like it takes to do
that -- you know, get the surveyor out there and measure,
make field notes and a drawing showing exactly what's there,
and then the decisions can be made about what to move and
what not to move. But we really do need a little wider
-~3-03
29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
traveling surface than 17 feet for these trucks and
passenger vehicles to safely pass each other. That's why
we're here. That's our requ<=st, and we will thank you for
whatever you come up with to help us out. Thank you very
much.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. Anybody
on the court have any questions of these individuals?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a question. It's
probably not really to the individuals; it's to either
Franklin or Leonard. That's a county road? Holloman is a
County road?
(Mr. Johnston nodded.)
MR. WEST: Yes, it is.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm sympathetic with
the -- with the homeowners' association. That road's not
wide enough; it needs to be wider. I'm not sure I would
describe it as dangerous, but certainly, you can lose a
side-view mirror in there; I can believe that. The dilemma
we have here -- I'd like for Franklin or Len Odom to speak
to it. The dilemma we have here is that, in order to
provide some relief and widen that road, we need more
right-of-way. And if we set that precedent of -- of fixing
something that was a mistake in the past here, then we can't
afford to live up to that precedent and fix all the other
mistakes that we have out there. So, I'd like to hear from
E-^3-u3
30
1
~- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1i
12
,_, 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.--~
25
Mr. Odom and Mr. Johnston.
MR. JOHNSTON: Well, what George says is
what's on the ground; the way it was developed, I guess,
when the subdivision was first put in. The limitation we
run into, when he was talking about the barbed wire fence on
one side, then there's a wood fence on the other. There's
some people that live -- I think there's one or two houses
on that side, so if we move that fence, you're moving into
their front yard; they're real close to the road. So,
it's -- that's not a good s:_tuation either, but it's what's
there. And I guess, like wE~ discussed, the only way to do
it is to condemn property and to move it from the north
side, I think, to move the road that direction.
COMMISSIONER ~1ICHOLSON: Are we certain that
neither one of those fences is in the right-of-way?
MR. JOHNSTON: 1 think Lee was out there.
Didn't you do some work on that?
MR. VOELKEL: Yes, sir.
MR. JOHNSTON: The fence is right on the
right-of-way?
MR. VOELKEL: Basically on the right-of-way.
MR. JOHNSTON: Basically on the right-of-way,
about a foot or two.
JUDGE TINLEY: On or in?
MR. VOELKEL: On. On the right-of-way. I
6-~3-03
I
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
31
don't think they protrude into the right-of-way whatsoever.
JUDGE TINLEY: They are up against the
right-of-way?
MR. VOELKEL: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: But not actually within the
right-of-way.
MR. JOHNSTON: So the fence is probably on
the property line.
MR. VOELKEL: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, are these deeded?
Is the right-of-way deeded c>r is it by prescription?
MR. JOHNSTON: Do you know?
MR. ODOM: I'm sorry, what was the question?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is the right-of-way
deeded or by prescription?
MR. ODOM: There was -- it's un -- let's put
it this way; it is -- it is padded. No, wait a minute, it
shows a road in there. The way that we find it -- and I
want Lee to address this. We've looked at this several
times in the past. What we have is 22 feet. We think Lee
has been out there before doing some surveying at Holloman
and Wood Trails, and we pulla_d a corner back off it we
found, but that fence along the north side is shown to be
cn. When we pleasured, Commissioner Nicholson and I went out
and we pulled 22.4 feet betw~=en the fences, and -- and then
-~3-03
32
1
2
3
4
5
6

8
9
10
11
12
^, 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,--
25
up to 24 feet, 25 feet. There's nothing -- the subdivision
-- it was a flagged subdivision when it was set in. Now,
what I mean by "flag," it was a real narrow entrance. Seems
to be prescribed, what you have on the ground. So, the
other -- other part of the subdivision is 50 foot; this is
only 22. That's all that we can find that's there. And we
had Lee look at it, and I would like for the County Surveyor
to address that. But we've done all that we can possibly
do. I don't see the infringement up in there. It's narrow,
but it's been that way, I guess, since 1968 or early '70's
when that subdivision's beers put in. We've got a little bit
more traffic.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me say something.
Holloman -- that part of Holloman Road is not a part of that
subdivision, is it?
MR. ODOM: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Holloman Road came in
about the time Noah's Ark did. They've been out there --
MR. ODOM: A long time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- a long, long -- I
mean, generations. And -- blot the subdivision came in 1977.
MR. ODOM: Okay.
COMMISSIONER E3ALDWIN: If I remember, which
was prior to Commissioner Ba7.dwin being the Commissioner out
there, I'd like to add. But all we're talking about is the
c-^_3-03
1
~- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
33
Holloman Road part of it going --
MR. ODOM: 'I'o Wood Trails.
Is that right?
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: -- to the subdivision.
MR. ODOM: Whatever it needs.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that would answer
.,-.
25
r-~3-03
MR. ODOM: Well, up to Wood Trails there.
Now, Holloman turns to the left and goes back to the old
ranch back there, but it's this narrow neck part in there.
And, as a matter of fact, once you hit that corner, Buster,
you go back to the left, it's only 25 foot. And that's
Kitty Cowden and them gave .hat. And the lady that owns
that property there will not give anything; we've tried --
attempted in the past. Our position is that if this -- this
was -- has already been there, and for the County to go and
condemn something and set precedents, I just think that
we're going the wrong way. I would like to think that the
citizens in that -- in that association could purchase more
right-of-way and then come to the Court with something, and
then we would look at it. But to set precedents, our
position is we don't think we should.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think you have two
options; homeowners purchase the land from Mrs. Bauer, or
Mrs. Bauer, out of the kindness of her heart, give you 20 or
30 feet, whatever.
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
I7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
34
it right there, if we coula just get "X" amount of feet from
here all the way around to the curve to the entrance, and
it's done.
MR. ODOM: We've put all the road that we
could possibly put in there to be safe.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think in this -- from a
precedent standpoint, what they're outlining is exactly
what's been done county-wide in the past. I mean, there are
many situations where additional right-of-way, people -- I
mean, the roads need to be, you know, tweaked a little bit
from a safety standpoint, and the County recognized that.
And if the people are willing to give the right-of-way, the
County was willing to do thE~ legal work to accept the
right-of-way. But I don't know that we've ever -- at least
in my precinct, we've never condemned to get the additional
right-of-way.
MR. ODOM: On something that's already set a
precedence over, you know, many years. I mean, it's not
something that just came up iri the last couple years. It's
been something that's been there since that subdivision went
in.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think what I'm
hearing you say, just so the residents understand clearly,
if they acquire the right-of-way or get Mrs. Bauer to give
the right-of-way, then we world do the legal work to receive
c--3-U3
35
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.
COMMISSIONER. NICHOLSON: What Mr. Odom has
said -- has told the owners is that if we'll -- we can qet
the right-of-way through one of those two means that you
mentioned, we will widen the road.
MR. ODOM: And we'll make it up to the
standards that we've got, t!~at meets the road back there,
and I have no problems with that. But for us to go in and
condemn the land and to do =hat if it's not given, I don't
think we need to set precedents doing that. But I would
like, if there's any other questions, to have the County
Surveyor to say what he's found.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Odom -- Mr. Odom, I'm not
that familiar with -- with t:he property on the ground. It's
been a while since I've been there, but I heard a comment
from the Surveyor that these fences are up to and adjacent
to the right-of-way. Do we have any -- any growth over into
the right-of-way, in terms of shrubs, trees, or anything
like that, that it might be helpful to trim back and at
least give the perception to a driver that it's -- it's
wider than it is, and maybe qet them to drive closer to the
outside edge?
MR. ODOM: Well, there's a -- there was a
complaint about vegetation, ~~nd we cut that. And, to my
knowledge, there hasn't been anything else, but we've gotten
c-~'3-03
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
in there tc cut that vegetation back within the last 30, 40
days, I guess, and we've addressed that. Anytime we have a
complaint like that, we normally respond and put it into the
system to try to get to. E~ut it has a curb on one side.
That curb's been there since I've been here, for l2 or 13
years, and that's on that north side of that fence. And the
other one's an old wooden fence that's -- as a matter of
fact, I think that gentleman's even laid out the corner
there. They've had accidents up in the front right there.
As far as a rash of acciden~.s, I don't recall that on any of
the reports that I received up in there. Maybe there hasn't
been anything filed. But I -- we'll be more than happy to
let Lee -- I asked Lee to be here to substantiate what he
found on the ground.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the thought of -- the
thought of condemnation, I don't like that thought, taking
people's property away from them, anyway. That's not a good
neighborly thing to do. Plus, my understanding is that it
would cost you in legal fees. I mean, you go out and buy
the lady's property, almost, compared to -- you know, I
mean, if you just -- just th= legal fees on condemnation.
It's not the right way to go. Mr. Motley is very, very
hesitant about moving in that direction. So, to me, that
takes -- that takes that option off the table. Lee? You're
up, buddy. The highest vote--getter in all of Kerr County
6-^3-Gi
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
right there. Unopposed for' how many centuries?
MR. VOELKEL: Too long. I don't know that I
can tell you any more, other than what you see is what you
get as far as that right-of-way's concerned. As they have
said, there's fences on both sides of the road. Those
fences are basically right-of-way, property line. Whether
there are any trees or things of that sort that's inside the
right-of-way, Judge, I -- I didn't address that, so I don't
know how to answer that one, other than the fences are
basically on the property 1=Lne, and we have a very narrow
right-of-way there. And the research I've done, I can not
find any dedications for that road, but I'm with
Mr. Baldwin; I think that road came about long before the
plat did. It was added to the plat. I don't think it's a
part of it, as far as dedicating anything. Just to show it
as Holloman Road and their access to go through the road.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody have any further
questions of the surveyor? Thank you. Appreciate it.
MR. WEST: Judge, can I make one more
statement?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, Mr. West.
MR. WEST: What we would like to see -- and
I, as a surveyor, would like to see is for Mr. Voelkel and
his field crew to go out there and find the property --
corners of the property on both sides of this road in
5-:'3-U3
38
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
question, bring it togethez~ and actually determine what's
left in the middle. That would be the space we've got to
work with. There is questions now about whether it's
25 feet, 20 feet, 22 feet. I don't think anybody knows
exactly what it is. I would like to know. And if it's
25 feet, I'm pretty certain that that 25 feet can be cleared
so we'll have a safe driving condition. That's what I would
like to see happen out there. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess the question I
have, and it goes back to something that Mr. Voelkel said,
if it's by prescription, it ''s difficult to determine exactly
what it is.
MR. VOELKEL: That would be a correct
statement, too. Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, kind of --
prescription is kind of -- depends, I guess, where the
fences are, kind of. I mean, it's -- I mean, so many of the
roads in my precinct are by prescription. It may be it's
kind of wherever the old farmers and ranchers put the fences
a long time ago, and kind of where the road ended up being
is kind of where it is. It is where it is. So, I -- you
know, that's why I asked the question, is it a deeded
right-of-way, because then you can pinpoint it. If it's by
prescription, it may be 10 feet and it may be 50 feet. It
just depends on where the read is. That's kind of what you
E-~?-n3
39
,.__
1
2
3
4
5
6
r
8
9
10
11
12
,..~ 13
14
15
76
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
have to work with. So, I think it's -- you know, to answer
Mr. West's question, it's ~~ifficult -- it's impossible
without a deeded situation to -- you know, to, like, point
four points out and connect: the dots and figure out that's
the right-of-way. It doesn't work that way, unfortunately.
Now, if the -- if the people involved would deed the
right-of-way to the County, then we could -- there's
something to work with.
JUDGE TINLEY: I note in the -- in the
information that there are ,some references in the field note
descriptions to -- to the two tracts of land out there that
are describing not the right;-of-way tract, but the tracts
apparently adjacent to the night-of-way, and which it --
there's course and distance; up to a so-called right-of-way
line of a public road. But, as Commissioner Letz said, if
there's -- if there's riot some sort of an instrument by way
of right-of-way deed or -- or some sort of specific easement
or conveyance of a right-of-way that specifically describes
that, whether it be by separate instrument or by plat
itself -- and I don't think the plat that we're looking at
here related to Wood Trails Ranch -- while it may dedicate
the roads within the subdivision, this lies outside of the
subdivision; therefore, it cannot dedicate that road.
MR. WEST: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: But without having some sort
c'"-~3-U3
40
1
-- 2
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-,
25
of specific dedication instrument on the road itself, as
opposed to adjacent property, up to an existing so-called
public road, what we're left with is a prescriptive
easement, and so what it is on the ground is what it is that
you get.
MR. WEST: gust like the surveyor indicated,
I'd like to find out exactly what it is on the ground.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think we've determined what
it is or. the ground, according to what the surveyor has
indicated.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 25 feet is what the notes
say.
JUDGE TINLEY: What you look at, you go out
there with a tape measure, ar.d that will tell you what you
got. What's being utilized as a roadway is the roadway.
MR. WEST: L__ke I said, though, I think you
need to get the south side --- the south corner of the
property on the south, the north corner of the property on
the north, bring it together, establish those points, and
what's left, that's the prescriptive right-of-way, whether
it's 25 feet or 20 feet or 22 feet or whatever. Then we'll
know what we've got. That's what a surveyor has to do, go
out and find the property corners and measure up to the
so-called roadway.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, yeah, up to the -- it's
-=3-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-,
25
41
pretty easy to figure out where the roadway is. Just go out
there ar~d look, and if it's road, that's your roadway. If
it's not road, it's not the roadway.
MR. WEST: T:~at hasn't been determined. Only
way to find out is to establish where the property lines are
of the property on both sides, and what's left, that's the
roadway. And what are you -- only way you're going to do
that is to come from the back corners of each piece of
property.
JUDGE TINLEY: Maybe your legal
interpretation and mine differ a bit, Mr. West. A
prescriptive roadway is what's actually being used for the
roadway. And even if it doesn't go all the way up to the
adjacent property line, that doesn't enlarge a prescriptive
roadway all the way to the adjacent property line,
necessarily. You might get the Supreme Court of Texas to
agree with you after 8 or 12 years of litigation, but my
background tells me that a prescriptive road easement is
what's actually being used as the roadway and the passageway
in question. So, I'm not -- I'm not sure that identifying
the parameters -- the outside parameters of the adjacent
property owners is going tc give you what's left between
them as being the roadway. What's -- what a prescriptive
roadway is is what's actually being used for --
MR. WEST: Again, what's there to provide
6-~3-G3
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
that safe driving condition?
JUDGE TINLEY: It may well be that with that
additional engineering information, you could go to the
adjacent property owners and get them to quitclaim anything
outside their property line. But, here again, you're back
-- you're back to square one of one of two options that Road
and Bridge has indicated they'd be willing to work with you
on to resolve the issue, if -- if that would, in fact,
permit you to gain additional space between the two record
ownership areas.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think my final comment
is that we can just ask Leonard to go out and look at the --
see if there's anything more they can clear. You know,
that's about all we can do at this point.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's in good shape
now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, let me ask you
a question in line with your statement. If -- let's say
that Mrs. Bauer decided to deed another 15 feet to the
County, so she's deeded -- we have deeded 15 feet, and then
we have 25 feet prescription. What happens with that? I
mean, that -- how would you deal with that, as far as County
ownership and maintenance and all that?
JUDGE TINLE`~': Well, the -- the public has
acquired a right of prescriptive portion. The -- the
h. - ~ ~ - ~ i
43
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
additional 15 feet would be to the governmental entity, the
County, for the benefit of the public.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, what we legally
really own is 15 feet? Or do we consider the 25 feet
legally owned? Which I do.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: By prescription?
JUDGE TINLEY: -- you do. Under the -- under
the terms of the law, it's a recognized doctrine in the law
that, in essence, gives the public ownership -- a right to
continue use of that. That right has -- has arisen through
the prescriptive and continuous use of that particular area
as a roadway. The right is in the public. Right's in the
public.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Best solution to
this dilemma right now seems to be to persuade Ruth Bauer to
give us another 15 feet of right-of-way, and then go in
there and widen that -- widen that road. How do we go about
that? Who's -- who works cn convincing Mrs. Bauer that
that's the right thing to c.o? Me? I'll do that. Thank
you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Yeah, I guess
it would be. I was thinking the homeowners of the
subdivision, but that's outside the subdivision, so it's
really up to us. And she'~~ a very nice lady; I know her.
6-~3-03
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
44
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. No further action?
We'll now move to the next item on the agenda, consider and
discuss an update on Mooney Airplane Company. I notice
Mr. Happy just joined us.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to introduce
the president of Mooney Aircraft, Nelson Happy, and I also
see in the audience Dave Pearce, the County/City Airport
Manager. So, Mr. Happy, thank you for coming to
Commissioners Court. And I've visited with him by phone and
just asked him to kind of give us an update on what's going
on at Mooney Aircraft.
MR. HAPPY: Great. Well, I'm glad to be
here. I was sort of scoope~~ by the newspaper writing a
story over the weekend, so a lot of my thunder was taken
away, but it's always bette_~ to be here in person, anyway,
and be able to tell you from my heart what's going on and
answer any questions. Sometimes when you're dealing with
starting a company from scratch, seems like the progress is
slow, and yet when you -- in my situation, looking back to
this time last year, we had around 16 employees. The
company was basically shut down, and we were in the process
of planning and thinking about what to do with the company,
but we really weren't there yet. Now, a year later, we have
about 175 employees. We have a backlog of about 15
5-"3-U3
45
1
,- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1~
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
airplanes that have been sold, but not delivered yet, and
the company's back to normal in many respects. It's not
fully back to normal, but it's -- it's on its way. So, in
retrospect, looking back, that's a lot of accomplishments by
a lot of people in a pretty short time.
We had a tremendous benefit, though, because
we had some really good Mooney employees that have just been
waiting to come back to work. Nice thing about Kerr County
is that many of our employees are ranchers and farmers, so
they had other things to do while Mooney was shut down. But
they -- their love in their heart was still in making
airplanes, so they didn't go off to other cities or leave
the state, go somewhere else. Instead, they're pretty much
staying around home, waiting for something to happen, which
showed a lot of faith, I think, in the company. The thing
that I've discovered is that we are dealing with 175 Texans,
and these are people that are proud of their work. They do
a fine job. They're hard workers, but they're also very
independent. And managing 175 Texans at Mooney factory is a
challenge to management, and fortunately we have good
managers that are Texans themselves, know how to do it. But
I've been very impressed by the independence and the -- the
feeling of pride that our employees have in the company and
the product.
And I might just say a little bit about the
E-_.-.,5
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
product, because that's the only reason we're in business.
A Mooney airplane is a four-place, high-performance airplane
made out of aluminum, principally. And our main competitors
who make similar size airplanes don't have as good
performance; they're not as fast, they certainly don't have
the range that the Mooney c.oes, and most of them -- most of
our competitors are made out of a composite material which
hasn't been proven over time. Composites are -- are good.
They certainly have many advantages, but when it comes down
to knowing what will last, we know that metal lasts the
longest, and if a repair is necessary, metal can be
repaired, while many plastic parts cannot be repaired. So,
it's more economical, if a repair is necessary, to have a
metal airplane.
As the Mooney company has had a resurgence
and we've started selling airplanes again, the aviation
press has picked up on this and we've had some tremendous
publicity at no cost. For example, probably the biggest
aviation magazine is the AOPA Pilot magazine, and this month
in June, they featured our airplane on the cover and did a
four-page story with pictures about our airplane in a very
favorable light, and saying that it was the number one for
what it is, a high-performance, single-engine,
piston-powered airplane. I've had many, many calls from
pilots all over the world interested in buying a new Mooney
c-~3-03
47
1
--- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,_. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and talking about the company. People tell stories about
Mooney. It's a legend. I think today it's the only
airplane made in Texas. Arld although San Antonio has a good
aerospace business, none of- the companies in San Antonio
actually have ever, in recent history, made an airplane.
So, we here in Kerrville are doing something even in the big
city they're not able to do.
And, as a matter of fact, I've had calls just
in the last two weeks from major European manufacturers
interested in potentially having us do work for them here in
Texas, because they know the quality of the work we do, and
we know -- they know the capability of our plan. And in
history, Mooney's had a lot of international work. We are
the only company ever to team up with Porsche, for example,
in Porsche-Mooney. We teamed up with Aerospatiale of France
to develop the TBM-700, whi~~h is the premier turboprop,
single-engine airplane. We teamed up with the Japanese in
building a Mitsubishi MU-2. So, it's nothing new for Mooney
to be working with foreign ~~ompanies, and of course, Mooney
itself has been owned in the past by foreign companies. So,
we work in a little bit more of a plane than is just totally
local; we are working on international projects. We've also
sold two Mooneys this year in -- one in Germany and one in
France, and we expect international sales to resume. They
used to sell about 15 airplanes a year internationally, and
H-23-03
48
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that was pretty much shut down under the prior management,
but we're emphasizing again getting back into international
markets. We've opened a distributorship in Mexico and one
in Germany, so we should start seeing more international
sales happen.
Having said all that, that doesn't mean we're
finished or everything is perfect or that it's all -- all
the hard work is behind us, because that just isn't the
case. The company is moving toward having the assembly line
work in a normal fashion by September. We've had to work
off a lot of partially completed airplanes that were in
inventory at the time we took over the company a year ago.
And the problem of shutting down an assembly line and then
restarting it is that every plane that wasn't finished now
has to essentially be hand-built, because the assembly line
isn't running. So, each of our airplanes is built more like
the Rolls Royce used to be ~=han a mass-produced product.
And that is good for the customer, it's good for the
airplane, but it's lousy for profits or our shareholders,
and only until we get running in a normal assembly line are
we going to see that the company's going to achieve a
reasonable level of profitability.
From another standpoint, we're a public
company; our stock is tradi~zg over the counter. We've been
catching up on all our fina~ZCial reporting, and it's now
6-~s os
99
1
.,-~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
current with the S.E.C. Arld that has been a big job for
Rich Lucanatti, our contro=_ler, and Jim Price, who is in
charge of our accounting for our parent company, these
people who are kind of unsung heroes. They don't turn a
wrench or make anything, but they make it possible for to us
comply in a very difficult legal environment for a small
company. So, we're really hoping that by the late fall,
we'll have our assembly line running normally, we'll have
our sales back at a pace of= seven -- roughly seven airplanes
a month, that we'll have delivered all of the backlog of
airplanes that we have and will have created a new backlog,
and that the employment in the company will probably be
around 200 employees. Today it's around 175. We expect
that we'll probably be adding 25 more employees over the
next feca months. Ultimately, total employment may go to 250
as situations normalize.
One thing we have emphasized is that we are
interested in quality first=, and air safety and quality are
hallmarks of what we do. LVe don't compromise in those
areas; we make sure that every plane that's finished goes
out as perfect as it can be, and we're always putting
emphasis on improved quality control and modernizing our
ways to make high-quality F~roducts, because that's the key.
We can see down the line, after we normalize our operations,
there's certainly opportunity for dealing with international
.-~3-G3
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
companies, for doing assembly work, to do other things in
our factory. We have about 415,000 square feet of available
space. It's not all efficient. Some of it is old, some of
it is obsolete, but much of it is quite usable. We've had
great support from the City and the County in our
applications for some grants and low-interest loans from the
State of Texas, and I understand that those applications are
moving along very well.
We've had tremendous cooperation and support
from the Airport Manager and Airport Authority, and we
really view that as critical to our existence, because
without good management of the airport and without a lot of
cooperation from it, it would be impossible for us to do
business. We particularly like the fact that we have an
uncontrolled airport, so we can take off and land when we
need to. We do have a lot of test flights. Every airplane
is flown 10 to 12 hours in tests before it's signed off and
delivered, so you can imagine, that's a lot of test flying
and a lot of access to the airport. I think that the
improvements that are goin-~ on at the airport are really
very desirable. We've been working hard to deal with some
environmental issues and infrastructure issues at the
airport, and I think we're making really good headway on
those. Part of our grant application is to do some
infrastructure improvements with respect to our sewers and
6-~3-C3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
..-. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
51
waste disposal systems, as well as paving and parking.
We are a puk~lic facility. We do lease the --
the facility, and partly from the County, partly from the
City, so we want to be good. stewards of the property that
we're leasing. I know we will be back to discuss with the
County and the City an extension of our lease. There's
approximately 11 years left on it. We would like to extend
it to a total of 30 from now. That will assist us in
getting some additional financing. So, that's something
that is in the planning stages, but we will be dealing with
you in a formal way of te7_ling you what we have in mind and
discussing that, and I expect that that will be coming up
very shortly. Probably irl the next week or so, we'll have
some proposals about exteriding our lease at the airport.
Obviously, we have to work: closely with the Airport Manager
and lay all this out as a -- as a long-term plan. But I --
my basic feeling about thE~ company is that, 50 years from
now, there'll be somebody else standing here talking to some
other group of Commissioners about Mooney, and we'll still
be making airplanes and tr..ey'll still be number one of what
they are.
The tradition of Mooney goes back 50 years.
I'm sure that Al and Art Mooney, 50 years ago, expected the
company to last this long. They put together a good product
that's evolved over the years, and it's been very, very
6-~3-03
52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
successful overall, and I expect that that tradition will
continue. And, interestingly, in general aviation, which is
now in the lowest point financially in my life, it's the
toughest economic conditions in history for general
aviation, yet we're still able to generate sales, generate a
backlog, and see interest. Partly, this may be due to the
fact that we were shut down for a while, and so there was a
pent-up demand, but nonetheless, that's very important, I
think. So, I think that we have made a lot of headway in 12
months. I'm proud of the work force that we've been able to
rehire. I'm proud of the product that we make, and I think
our long-term is good. I think we've tried to be good
neighbors and encourage our employees to get active in civic
affairs and county affair; and city affairs and things that
they can do themselves to help the Mooney image in the
community, because we do think community involvement is
important. Our focus hasn't been as much on community
involvement as it has beers to just get our business back
running, but I expect tha-~ you'll see more activity on our
part as that objective is met. So, I hope that gives you a
pretty good overview, and if anybody has any questions, I'll
be happy to answer.
COMMISSIONI~R BALDWIN: I don't have any
questions. Of course, my big concern is our citizens that
-- that work for you.
o-^3-U3
53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. HAPPY: 3~ight.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And do everything we
can to take care of our people. That's what makes this
thing work, you're absolutely right. Talking about
integrity, people of integrity.
MR. HAPPY: Right, that`s the key.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good folks. Thank you
very much.
MR. HAPPY: Great. My pleasure.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Appreciate very much you
coming.
JUDGE TINLE`.C: Mr. Happy, we appreciate you
being with us, giving us this report.
MR. HAPPY: Great. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLE"Y: Look forward to working with
you some more.
COMMISSIONER LETZ:
COMMISSIONER BALDW
COMMISSIONER LETZ:
great? What makes the airplane -
about -- you mentioned body, but,
the best?
I do have a question.
IN: I'm shocked.
What makes the Mooney so
- what is so different
I mean, how does it become
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That tail fin. The
tail fin.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: In five minutes or less.
6-~3-03
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-~
25
MR. HAPPY: It was just a good design. It
started out good in the 50's, and it was before the time of
computer design. Art Mooney was a genius, and Al Mooney
too. They both were extremely -- sort of Wright brothers
type people that had new ideas and fresh ideas. By the time
the airplane evolved into the '80's, there were people like
Roy Lapresti, who was an expert in aviation performance.
Again, these are seat-of-tr.e-pants people. They weren't
computer guys, but they knE~w what made an airplane fast, so
they were able to take a great design, speed it up by
eliminating drag and weight. in the airplane, and they
focused on speed and range. They didn't focus on useful
loads, so as a result it's a relatively small airplane in
terms of capacity for seating; it's only four-place. But
most of our customers only fly with themselves and one
passenger at the most, so u-eight isn't a big important
factor for them. But, by reducing the total weight and by
having the least air resisl=ance and a good ratio of power to
the overall weight of the airplane, it's able to give
exceptional performance. And it's amazing to see how many
competitors we have with big companies; Piper, Cessna,
Beech. They've never been able to make a product that has
performed so well.
In addition to that, because it's been around
so long, all of the opportunities to improve it have been
6-23-U3
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,-~.
25
thought out, and all of -- there are maybe 10 or 15 more
ideas that we're working on now that we can upgrade. Most
of the things that a design could improve with have
happened. So, we've had the benefit of a lot of years of
experienr_e with the design and building of the plane, so
it's been improved over a long period of time, whereas many
other products haven't. I think that's helped. In
addition, it's just one of those products that evolved due
to genius, and can't be re~olaced. It's unique in that
sense. And we've taken the basic air frame, the design, and
made three models out of it. The least expensive is now
called the Ovation 2, and then the middle one is Ovation
2-DX, and the fastest airplane is the Bravo DX, and we
expect that we can tweak all of them a little bit more and
get a little more performance out of them. But I think the
bottom line is just the uniqueness of the original design.
And then, in addition to that, I feel that the metal -- our
metal construction is helpful too, because we have a good
weight ratio. Composites tend to be heavy. And so we have
a lighter airplane as a result of that. I hope that's --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you.
MR. HAPPY: Quick explanation. I`m sure an
engineer could do better.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I wouldn't understand the
engineer, though. Thank you.
-~s-us
56
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
MR. HAPPY; 'T'hank you very much.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, Mr. Happy.
Thank you, Mr. Pearce, for k~einq here as well.
JUDGE TINLE`.C: We have a timed item on the
agenda that we're late getting to, but it's now that time,
so at this point we will recess the Commissioners Court
meeting and call to order <~nd convene a public hearing
concerning the abandoning, discontinuing, and vacating of
545.16 feet at the end of Dickey Road out in Precinct 4.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was
closed at 10:18 a.m., and a public hearing
was held i:7 open court, as follows:)
P U B L I C H E A R I N G
JUDGE TINLEY: Public hearing is now open,
and any member of the public who wishes to speak with regard
to this particular issue, why, I would ask that you please
feel free to come forward. Is there any member of the
public that wishes to speak with regard to the abandoning,
discontinuing, and vacating of 545.16 feet at the end of
Dickey Road? Not seeing anybody indicating they wish to be
heard on this, I will close the public hearing, and I will
reconvene and call to order Commissioners Court meeting and
take up the item immediately following the public hearing.
(The public: hearing was concluded at 10:19
a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court
meeting was reopened.)
E-^_3-03
57
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: That is the abandoning,
discontinuing, and vacating of 545.16 feet at the end of
Dickey Road. Mr. Odom.
MR. ODOM: Irl the past, we have met with Doug
Evans, and Commissioner NicYiolson went out to the property.
I see no problems. We discussed the cul-de-sac, I believe,
the last time we were in col~rt, and what we proposed. We
went out in the field, and Doug Evans agreed to that. And
I'll let him address anything else after me, but we have no
problems as long as that is followed through, and I would
make this abandonment contingent upon that cul-de-sac being
finished like we proposed. And I think that will help that
piece of property and allow people to turn around without
getting in other people's driveways.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody have any questions of
Mr. Odom?
COMMISSIONEF'. BALDWIN: The way I understand
it, coming off of Highway 27, there is a -- I don't know how
much of Dickey Road -- that: is going to stay a County-
maintained road?
MR. ODOM: Flight. Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONEFZ BALDWIN: It provides access to
a home or two?
MR. ODOM: .C believe that there's two homes
or three homes there. Doug?
6-C3-03
58
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. EVANS: There's four homes.
MR. ODOM: F~aur. There's several residents
there, but what we're doing is going to the back end of
this.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; 500 --
MR. ODOM: To the 6 acres, I believe, is
platted back there, from memory, and that will end at the
far end of that property, and that cul-de-sac will turn
around there. We had concerns because of the narrowness of
Dickey Road, of people getting down there and having to back
up and tearing up fences or whatever if there was a gate.
And I think this will circumvent any problems we would have,
but it would not affect any of the residents up there.
COMMISSIONER. NICHOLSON: Mr. Evans, anything
you want to say?
MR. EVANS: No. Just that we -- like
Mr. Odom said, that we agree to do the cul-de-sac to the
specifications of Len. And -- and we'll go forward with
that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: In my view, this is
a -- this is a good move for the County and for Mr. Evans,
and with the construction of the cul-de-sac, that won't just
accommodate anyone, so I propose that we -- that we approve
abandoning, discontinuing, and vacating 545.16 feet at the
end of Dickey Road, contingent upon Mr. Evans' completing
6-~3-U3
59
1
.^- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the cul-de-sac.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second -- third.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's made and seconded
that we abandon, discontinue, and vacate 545.16 feet at the
end of Dickey Road in Precinct 4, contingent upon a
cul-de-sac there being constructed upon specifications and
in the manner as approved by the Road and Bridge Department.
Any further discussion or questions?
COMMISSIONED LETZ: I was raising my hand to
vote.
JUDGE TINLEY:
signify by raising your right
(The motion ca
JUDGE TINLEY:
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY:
very much, Mr. Odom.
All in favor of the motion,
hand.
rried by unanimous vote.)
All opposed, same sigh.
Motion does carry. Thank you
MR. ODOM: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Evans, we appreciate you
being here.
MR. EVANS: Thank y'all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go ahead back and pick
up 1.5, consider budget amendment to transfer funds from
Workers Comp to Contract Fees. Mr. Odom?
E-~3-c~~
60
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
•--
25
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Last year, when the
budget was set, there seemed to be an excess of funds placed
in Workmen's Compensation. Today, I -- when we put this
together, we looked at how much outlay we had and what the
estimate was for our workmen's comp. Talking to Tommy this
morning, we feel comfortable -- I had asked for $35,670.84.
That was excess that we felt like was in there. But,
talking with Tommy, there rr;ay be mitigating circumstances,
but I need -- I would ask the Court -- and Tommy can talk
about this, but he agreed that $20,000 would -- I could take
out of that Workmen's Comp and put into Contract Fees. I
have three more months, and I assure you, my budget is very
distraught at this time. Flood damages have really hurt us.
We have completed the NRCS, which we're still awaiting funds
from that. Hopefully this week I will meet with them to
finalize that project.
We have one project left in FEMA, and that
has been $500,000 to $600,000 outside our budget. Of
course, 75 percent was paid by those entities, FEMA and
NRCS. The other 25 was in--kind for the County, whether it
was actually materials or V~hatever, hours by man. But our
budget's -- we've been trying to survive, and that's what
I'm trying to do here. It's not anything -- I just -- three
months and one week still =_eft before the new budget, and I
need material for patching,. whatever may transpire in those
~-~~-os
61

,.-.
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
next three months, so I'm asking that that $20,000 be
shifted out of Workmen's Compensation. I feel comfortable
that -- talking to Tommy this morning, that that will be
sufficient. He feels comfortable with that number.
JUDGE TINLEY: Essentially, what you're
asking for is just a budget amendment within your own
budget?
MR. ODOM: Within my own budget.
JUDGE TINLEY: Of $20,000 from one category
over to another?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Doesn't change the
budget whatsoever.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval of
transferring $20,000 from Worker's Compensation to Contract
Fees --
COMMISSIONEF: BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONERZ LETZ: -- in Road and Bridge
Department.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve budget amendment for Road and Bridge Department to
transfer $20,000 from Worker's Compensation to Contract
Fees. Any further questions or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I do have a question
related to this. Leonard, out of the -- well, due to the
flood, I know that we've -- we had some court orders, you
6-?~-c~
62

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
know, authorizing if you needed the money, we'd basically
find the money. Did we have -- have we ever transferred any
money actually into your budget to make up for the flood
damage? Or --
MR. ODOM: I have had a line item, FEMA, and
we've been plugging those numbers in there. I am probably
in deficit on that one. The $104,000 is what I had with
NRCS, actual outlay of money, and we have not received
anything there. I'm not quite sure if they function the
same way that FEMA does. I was hoping I had some excess
funds, but I've done it cheaper than what they estimated,
and so I'm -- I won't know ~~zntil this week whether I will
get excess funds above that. That was $113,000, so there's
only $5,000 or $9,000 extra that we -- that I could use if
they paid me what they pro~~osed to pay me.
COMMISSIONEF: LETZ: But -- I mean, but in a
-- I mean, there's obviously -- there's a budget increase
because of FEMA, NRCS, other funds coming in, but outside of
those funds, we haven't tr~~nsferred any money into your
budget?
MR. ODOM: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: From the general fund or
from flood --
MR.	ODOM:	To my	knowledge,	we haven't.
We've -- I've been	working	off	those line	items, trying to
6-~3-03
63
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~-..
25
hold the budget without -- jest making it work, and I think
y'all can see that as you look at the bills. I've been
trying to balance it and not ask you for anything. So,
that --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought that was the
case. I was just wondering.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that includes two
truly major projects, largez~ than normal in this county;
Sheppard Rees, and, of cour:~e, the bridge down at -- at
Jon's place. That he stayed in budget and worked very hard
and moved some things around and made it work. And with
all -- with all that -- you know, and those are -- I know
the Sheppard Rees project was -- is a little larger than
what we normally do, so he -- I mean, he tiptoed on ice to
get that thing pulled off, and with all that in mind, he's
still doing an excellent jcb with his budget. Excellent
job.
JUDGE TINLE~`: The flood moneys, you -- you
put out the work and used t;he materials, and it's
after-the-fact that you get reimbursement for those, if I
understand correctly. Isn''t that --
MR. ODOM: 'des, sir. They -- they will re --
they estimate a cost to re~~air the damage, and if it didn't
hit a certain amount, they didn't give me anything, you
know. So I had to repair a lot of things this year that I
6-"3-03
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
didn't get any money for, so it was excess -- you know, the
budget's been really tight. But they reimburse me
75 percent of this estimated cost of -- to complete that
project, and I have to supply 25 percent and for in-kind,
whether it's equipment, manpower, ~r actual materials that I
put in there. So, I have to tweak it. It's --
JUDGE TINLEY": But the point is, you go out
on the hook first before you ever get any reimbursement.
MR. ODOM: Right.
JUDGE TINLE`C: Yeah, okay.
MR. ODOM: That's the reason that line item
was in there, and it was a deficit. Then FEMA came back
with money they projected to give us.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I appreciate your
efforts. Any further questions or discussion on the motion?
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. Let's see
if we can't get the next _tem in right quick. Consider
merit increases. That, again, is one of your items,
Mr. Odom.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Which item was that,
h-~3-03
65
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,,,,,, 2 4
25
Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: Number 6.
MR. ODOM: 1.6. In July we had, of course,
our floods of 2002, and I've had a lot of people, but
predominantly it was in Commissioner Letz' area and
Commissioner Williams' area where most of the damage was
done, and I had four people. We completed that, and I would
like at this time to ask -- I know it's outside normally,
but we've looked in our budget, and I have four people I
think have really worked hand. I don`t -- I have Doug
Koennecke and Steve Kraft. Deter Geurin helped me down in
the river. He's helped movf~ stuff around, hauled -- been
down in the river; we made -ghat bridge work. And Truby has
been in with me since the day it started, just two of us in
working the floods and putting this book together and
working with FEMA and doing everything she's done.
What I'd ask the Court is a 2 and a half
percent increase. I have it in my budget. What -- and you
asked me how. I've had son.e retirements and attrition. And
out of that, I can give this -- this increase without
affecting my budget whatsoE~ver. And I've also figured it
into next year's budget, a7_ong with longevity and
certification and cost-of-~_iving increases, and I've already
submitted that to the Judge, and it all balances. It's not
one penny more. As a matter of fact, it's only 2 and a half
E.-~3-03
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 increase, compared to the 5 percent that was asked.
I think we've done a real good job, and I think it`s an
opportunity to show some people that we appreciate what
they've done. And I ask the Court to allow me to do that by
June the 30th, in the next pay period, and to give them that
2 and a half percent increase without affecting anythinq, or
no increase.
COMMISSIONEF: LETZ: I guess I have a problem
with it from the standpoint= of out of budget cycle, and
things of that nature -- you know, you and I discussed this
briefly.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There is no question that
you're right, that certainly the three out in the field,
Douglas, Deter, and Steve, worked very long hours, did --
did things in their -- you know, things that -- probably
Deter more than the rest, 'cause he operated equipment
that's clearly beyond what. we normally in the county
operate. I trust that they all earned overtime pay based on
the hours they worked; at least I hope they were, but I just
don't know how we can give an increase without a -- I guess
a job description change t=hat justifies it. I think if we
do that, we get in a situation of just basically throwing
the Nash study and any other salaries that we've done out
the window, because you're, all of a sudden, because of a --
E-23-03
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
you know, a unique situation, someone that did additional
job functions, on a permanent basis. I've racked my brain
to see if there's any way to -- maybe to provide some
additional compensation, wh=_ch is probably the best
"attaboy" that the County can do. They certainly deserve an
"attaboy" for what they've done, but I don't know how do you
that, and that's my dilemma that I have. I mean, it`s just
how we can do this with the County policy. But I agree with
you that those individuals clearly -- most of it was in my
precinct. Way above their normal job responsibilities. I
just don't know how we recognize that.
MR. ODOM: ti~]ell, I respect your opinion. Of
course, I differ. The Nasrl study was to place people in a
position that they were, and I'm not asking to get outside
the Nash study. I'm asking to take something that I have.
I wouldn't ask for this -- 'cause I couldn't do it if I
didn't have some retirements which were at higher pay and
that reduced it back down. I just think that it's there. I
don't know if a pat on the back and an "attaboy" is enough.
Sometimes it is. But if it's there, I think it's my
responsibility to try to help my people. I mean, everybody
would love to have one. _- think these four individuals
are -- truly have put a lot of time and effort into it, to
help the county. And that. flood was as good as -- as great
as the '78 flood. It took: two years. We're coming out in a
h - ' 3 - 0 3
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
year. And a lot -- a lot of big work was done, and you know
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
MR. ODOM: BLt I would ask you to consider
it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got -- I got a
question I think the County Treasurer can answer, Ms. Nemec.
Actually, I got several questions. Is it correct that --
that the Local Government Code bars us from giving bonuses?
MS. NEMEC: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: In our -- in our
policies, do we have a -- do we have a policy about granting
merit increases?
MS. NEMEC: The policy -- our policy on
granting merit increases is that they have to come before
the Court to be approved. It doesn't state that it cannot
be done during a budget year or that it has to be done
during the budget process. It just says that we have to
come before the Court to get it approved. And I think --
looking at it from the outside in, I think the only thing
that you all need to be concerned about, and I've said this
before to other courts, is that because a department has
money to give merit increases, and then if somebody else
from another department comes to you and says, "My
employee's done a great job. I don't have the money in my
c-~3-03
69
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
budget," but they've done a great job, just because that
department doesn't have the money in their budget, you`re
discriminating against that employee if you don't give it.
So, it's kind of like you -- there has to be a policy to
where you're going to take =nor granted the work -- 'cause a
lot of times, like the Road and Bridge, you see those
employees and you can vouch for them, what they have done,
but if another department u~~stairs comes to you from
wherever, you're not in there; you don't know and you can't
back them up as much. So, it's just something that has to
be decided amongst you all.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: My third question
is, have we granted merit increases in the past?
MS. NEMEC: Yes. Yes, there have been
exceptions in the past.
COMMISSIONEF: NICHOLSON: I'm supportive of
this request, because I think it does a lot for the -- for
the department. I think it motivates employees by showing
that good work and hard work's appreciated. And also, I've
generally seen and believe that we`re not paying our people
quite enough, that we need to find a way and we need to pay
County employees more than we're paying them now.
JUDGE TINL~Y: I have some recollection of a
merit increase request coming before this Court last year,
and the response of the C~aurt at that -- at that point --
6-~3-G3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
~o
the merit increase message was, well, I've got the money
already in my budget, so it will not require any increase in
my budget. The Court's response, according to my
recollection at that point, was that if you've got the money
in your budget, you know, we really don't have much say-so
over it, or words to that effect, and the merit increase was
permitted.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don`t recall that
exactly. I do believe -- I mean, the prior Court, meaning
the -- bas~cally, when the budget was put together with
Judge Henneke and the Court approved it, there was a policy
of giving elected officials leeway in their budget to kind
of adjust salaries a little bit, as I recall -- and we
actually have enough elected officials in the audience that
can correct me. In your -- I mean, some of that, like, you
were given a 5 percent increase that was kind of to do with
whatever you wanted, as I recall, or some amount.
MS. UECKER: That's a totally different
subject.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that was part of --
but that was one thing that was done. On the -- I don't
recall the Court ever giving a merit increase without a job
description that changed, that justified the increase. I
mean, I think -- and we di~~ do that, but there was a change
in job description. And, you know, whether that was, you
h-?3-~3
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
know --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't think it --
MS. NEMEC: May I say something? A merit
increase really --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just a second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Hold up.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: May be just a matter
of semantics, Mr. Letz, but if there's a change in duties, I
see that as different than a merit increase. By definition,
a merit increase says, through your job performance and
energy and all that, you've earned a larger -- larger
salary, where a job description increase says we're asking
more of you or requiring a higher skill level or something
like that. That's probably just semantics.
JUDGE TINLEY: Reclassification, as it were.
COMMISSIONEF: NICHOLSON: Yeah. Go ahead.
MS. NEMEC: And normally you go up with a job
description reclassification, not -- not across. Across is
merit, and that is for -- used for giving -- for exceptional
duties. I believe it was ~~ good four or five years ago when
the Court did some merit increases in the middle of the
budget year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: In the past four or five
years?
MS. NEMEC: Yeah, it's been a long time.
6 - ' 3 - L 3
72
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
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're affecting
future budgets.
JUDGE TINLEY: I understand that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Number one
And
know, I agree with you. ThE~se guys -- I was there part of
the flooding as well, and tz~ying to answer your telephone,
and these guys were way bed°ond the call of duty. But I
just -- I can't go along with allowing an increase in the
middle of the budget process -- I mean in the middle of the
budget year. Certainly, we'll consider it in the next month
or so in the budget process, including it in that. But
today, I -- today I'm not going to be able to support it.
Nothing against these people. They're great people.
MR. ODOM: But may I interject something?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure.
MR. ODOM: That I -- you know, I agree with
you; if I had a change in the budget, if I was going to
affect this year's budget and have a long-term effect over
next year, I wouldn't be asking for it. But what I've done
is be able to -- to give this increase and still not
increase anything next budget year. The one I've submitted
does not affect it a bit, Buster, and I'm still 2 and a half
percent under net -- under' what was proposed with the
increases. I mean, I'm --- we're really -- it doesn't affect
~-^_3-03
73
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
~8
19
20
21
22
23
^, 2 4
25
my budget. If it affected it, I wouldn't come to you. I
wouldn't ask you to do this.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you telling me
that -- it has to work one of two ways. Next year, you
would take out that 2 and a half percent --
MR. ODOM: It's already figured into the
budget. It's already figurE~d in what I gave the Judge.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But that increases the
budget by 2 and a half percent for future years.
MR. ODOM: WE~11, sir, but the increase was to
have been for 5 percent. I only increased the total budget
for crew salaries 2 and a half percent, and I'm not at
5 percent.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know a thing
about your 5 percent, but you're transferring money from one
line item to another line item. You're decreasing one by 2
and a half and increasing one by 2 and a half. When we get
into the future budgets, that 2 and a half will be in both
lines. That increases the budget.
MR. ODOM: Well, let's see if I --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll tell you
something just as important, though, is there are -- one,
two, three, four -- five elected officials in here that I
would be willing to guess that they're wanting to do the
same thing.
F-~3-03
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
MR. ODOM: Well, then I --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not trying to be
unkind or anything. I'm just trying to speak reality here,
that it will affect the taxpayers' pocketbook a pretty good
chunk.
MR. ODOM: Well, what was projected by the
Treasurer, I'm less money -than what she projected, what you
sent out to start the budg~°t. I didn't -- we're not
affecting the budget. We're reducing what was projected
over 2 and a half percent, but for next year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You'll have to sit
down with a pencil and piece of paper and show Buster.
MR. ODOM: I'll be more than happy to. But
that's what I'm saying; I really am not affecting this
year's budget whatsoever, because of Danny Smith and Ray
Cook.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand this
year's.
MR. ODOM: This year's.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In the one year, right
now.
MR. ODOM: The way I figured this, if the --
this rolled right on into it, I still save money by giving
these increases. I've still reduced it probably $4,000
that's excess, okay? Maybe.
5-~3-G3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
~5
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me say it a
different way, Mr. Odom. Next year, these four employees'
salaries will continue to be 2 and a half percent more than
they would have been had we not -- if we took this action,
but your total payroll for these work crews will -- will
increase less than the guidelines for next year?
MR. ODOM: That's right, sir. That's exactly
right. What the guidelineti; are given, we're less than those
guidelines with this incre~~se.
MS. NEMEC: May I explain why that happened?
'Cause I know, Buster, you're wondering if it's going to
impact at 2 and a half percent in the next budget year, how
is it -- you're wondering urhere that increase is going.
It's because the employees that he had that retired were at
a step and grade that is way up here, and next year
they're -- that -- when thE~y left, that grade went to a one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So when you replace
them, it goes back to one.
MR. ODOM: That's right.
MS. NEMEC: Exactly.
MR. ODOM: :>o we figured all that in. I
figured everything in, and I reduced the amount that was
projected, and we're less rloney -- I'm not costing the
taxpayers any more money. Longevity, I'm still saving
money. And that met the guidelines.
r - _ ~ - G J
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
76
MS. NEMEC: When I had projected the position
schedule for next year, these people had not effectively
gone, so I projected them at that rate that they were in.
MR. ODOM: Tt.at's right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's an interesting
concept. I'm going to have to give that some thought.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I guess my
final word on this -- and I'm not willing to take action
today, but I'm not closed totally to it, either. I mean,
and I think and the reason is -- I'm seeing Commissioner
Nicholson nod a little bit -- I agree with what he said
early on, in that we need t.o figure out a way to, I guess,
reward excellent performance by employees so we can keep
them. But, at the same time, we have to be able to do this
on a county-wide basis in a policy, and have it -- you know,
not have long-term or drastic long-term budget impact. And
what I -- you know, and if any elected official or
department head is able to come up with a way that works
throughout the county, where we can, you know, I guess, get
more done, become more productive with either the same
people or fewer people, we need to figure out a way to
reward that. And that's kind of what we did here. We got
more work done during this flood because of some -- and
saved the County money; there's no question in my mind that
these individuals, you know, saved the County 20, 30, 40,
G-23-03
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
~~
$50,000 by doing a lot of this work themselves, as opposed
to contracting it out. So, there's clearly -- we did save
money here because of excellent performance, but we need to
figure out a way to get that into our policy. If we can
figure out a way to do it so all departments can benefit, I
can be in favor of it. I just can't -- I need a little more
time to figure out how to do it, maybe come up with some,
you know, guidance. Maybe Dave and I can talk a little bit,
and elected officials, because I think it is a good
direction to try to take the County to do things like this.
I'm just not sure how we do it and not have -- you know,
really get out of control budget-wise down the road. So,
it's kind of a -- not today, but maybe.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me see if I understand
correctly. I'm told, and I'm going to take it at face
value, that any merit or ecuivalent-type increases must be
approved by the Court. But, on the other hand, I'm -- it's
been indicated that no such. merit increases have been
requested or approved in the last four to five years? Is
that what I just heard a mcment ago?
MS. NEMEC: In the middle of the budget year.
JUDGE TINLE~': In the middle of the budget
year. Ms. Nemec, what occt..rred in your situation last year?
MS. NEMEC: Last year, that was during the
budget process. And during the budget process, if you don't
h-~~-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
78
go over your bottom-line figure, then you're able to give a
merit increase, as long as you don't go over the bottom-line
figure.
JUDGE TINLEY: I see. And the effective date
of that increase?
MS. NEMEC: Was October 1.
JUDGE TINLEY; That was --
MS. NEMEC: October 1.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Okay. And how
long had that employee been with us at that time?
MS. NEMEC: She was here a year this
February, so -- eight months.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- are you
finished, Judge?
MS. NEMEC: I don't know what difference that
made, but eight months.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the other thing
that, you know, we commonly have done on the merit side in
the past, we have pretty much -- when it was requested, when
we have had someone retire and we've brought somebody else
back, there was somewhat of a -- I mean, the grade was set
somewhere -- not always at a one. I mean, it was felt that,
to get a person, we needed to hire someone at a -- you know,
a 15/5 because -- and justify it because of experience.
~-~3-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
..-. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
79
That has been done. So, we have -- I don't want to say
arbitrarily, 'cause it clearly was a rationale and a reason
where we have adjusted the merit side of the step and grade.
So, there is precedent for doing it in those situations.
And if -- it enters into a whole thing that I really need to
get my thought process around, is to -- you know, I guess
for an example, say some of Leonard's people went and got
experience on new equipment that we didn't -- they weren't
able to use before, didn't know how to use before. How do
we regard that? Right now we don't have a way to increase
their -- in the policy. It's not just Leonard. If, you
know, someone goes and -- on their own time, not paid for by
the County -- gets experience in certain computer processing
that enables them to do their job better, and should that
person not get a merit increase for that? You know.
COMMISSIONER- BALDWIN: We do that. We do
that -- almost do that with the Sheriff's Office.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, the Sheriff's
Office, we do. They get educational -- you know.
JUDGE TINLEY: Educational increases.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: I guess the point where -- the
defining paint that I'm hearing now is that, as long as
you're within budget -- as long as you're within budget, the
elected official or department head can make whatever
6-~3-03
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
80
adjustments that that elected official or department head
wants to make for a budget year on the basis of merit.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I don't think
that's what's we've -- I mean, I think the Court has always
made those -- made those calls, and once it's done, it's
there forever for that employee. So, I think that there's
a -- it has -- I don't -- it has been done occasionally, it
seems now, during the budget process.
MS. NEMEC: Another thing the Court did,
whether it was this year or last budget year, last year,
was -- and it's not -- it wasn't anything about merit, but
basically it's the same thing, is everybody's supposed to
enter at a Step 1. If a person has more experience than
entry level, then the elected official comes to the Court
and asks if they can come in at a higher step, and that has
been approved also within the last year or so.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mrs. Uecker?
MS. UECKER: Historically, I think this --
the Commissioners Court has always been very, very reluctant
to give merit increases, period. You know, the only way
we've been able to do it in the past is during the budget
process, if someone has retired and you bring someone in at
a lower -- the entry scale, we've been able then to use that
money to give to the people that are going to take tYieir
places. But as far as giving merit increases generally,
n ~3-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
81
I -- I can only remember that happening one time. And it
was a great idea then, and I've always said it was a good
idea, is in addition to thF> cost-of-living, a 2 and a half
percent merit increase to be distributed as that elected
official r_hooses. In other words, if you want to give one
person 5 and the other one nothing, that's fine. But as
long as I've been an elected official, since 1987, that's
only happened one time.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I would say we don't
have a merit increase program.
MS. UECKER: No, we don't.
JUDGE TINLEY: Doesn't sound like it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what was I was
thinking. That one time, that was maybe three, four years
ago, it seems.
MS. UECKER: It's been about -- been about
four or five years ago, actually.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was on the Court.
MS. UECKER: It worked very well, because the
Court did not -- they cannot. and should not have any say
into which employee gets a merit increase. But if you've
come -- and say, Leonard, tr.is year you've got 2 and a half
percent to do with as you like. He may wish to give one
person, you know, 7 and a half and nobody else get anything.
But the call is his based on how he knows his employees
5-~3-03
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
82
perform. But, historically, this Court -- I mean, there has
been all but that one time, no merit increases.
MR. ODOM: t;ounds like I'm trying to set a
precedent here. I guess so. I -- to me, you know,
mathematically, financially, it -- it works. It is a
savings. It is less money than what I have -- what I'm
spending right now because of these retirements. And next
year it doesn't affect it at a11.
MS. DECKER: Many of us have done what he's
wanting to do now. I mean, I've done it, but it's been
during the budget process.
MS. NEMEC: And that's what I did last year.
MR. ODOM: If I knew --
JUDGE TINLEY: That seems to be the
demarcation line, is you -- you plug it in planning for a
new budget year. Did you rave something you wanted to say,
Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I -- Linda hit on it
pretty close, and that is ghat the County really never has
had a good merit increase deal. And what Jonathan's talking
about, studying it and loo~:ing at it, I would think it would
be more -- we all have, like, an overtime line item in our
budget for people that have to work overtime. Why stop
there? And I don't know if it's even possible that each
department head be given so much money at the beginning of
F-~-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
83
the budget process to use for merit increases, because a
merit increase, to me, is not just a one-time -- and
Leonard's guys, I'm sure, deserve it, but it's not just
something that occurs bec~~use they did a fabulous job there
one time. It's an overall. They're -- in the -- in kind of
the spectrum of those job duties, they're all the way up at
ttie top, doing -- hitting everything fabulously, instead of
being the low one on it.
(Cell phone rang in the courtroom.)
SHERIFF HI:~RHOLZER: You'd better --
COMMISSION:~R BALDWIN: Get Judge Ables down
here.
SHERIFF HIi~RHOLZER: But if they were given
in proportion to how many employees they have or whatever in
their department, a certain amount that the department head
could then use for merit increases during that year.
MS. UECKER: And that would impact --
SHERIFF HI]?RHOLZER: Yeah.
MS. UECKER: -- other budgets.
MS. NEMEC: What happened when that policy
was in place, though, is, like, the departments that only
have one employee, like, for instance, mine and County
Judge's, they were only g_~ven 2 and a half percent, and so
they only had 2 and a half percent to give that one
employee. Whereas the other departments, they get a larger
'c-~3-03
84
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
portion, and if they chose not to give three of their
employees merit increases,. but they were able to give one
employee three merit incrE=_ases, so that didn't really work
either.
SHERIFF HIERHOL7ER: I think it goes along
the same lines as the educational/longevity. The Court can
then limit the number of merit increases per employee per
year. If it's just one, and it says that you can't give one
employee more than a 2.5 percent merit increase in a year.
COMMISSIONI?R LETZ: I think this is something
that -- it's a good discussion. I really think that it
needs to be part of the b~~dget, and I think the -- you know,
as part of our budget, we go through the personnel policy
and all that, as well as <~ll -- kind of all lumped together.
And I think it's good. I think it's -- clearly, in my mind,
we need to reward our better employees. I think -- I don't
want this to be a situati<~n where you're paid based on your
number of years and that': it. I mean, it's a job for life;
you get paid whether you do a good job or bad job. We need
to have a policy that our better employees get paid more.
MS. UECKER: Well, I don't think -- well, at
least in my office, that doesn't -- you know, I don't do
the -- how many years you've been here. But -- and I think
because of the step and grade and where we put those people
determines, you know, morE~ what you were talking about. You
5-~3-G3
85
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
know, pay the good ones a =_ittle bit more. That goes to
responsibility. But the --- the County has never really had
a merit -- merit -- a real'_y true merit increase program.
MR. ODOM: F3ut this is what I'm asking for,
is a true merit. So --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's get back to the
issue of today. Leonard, with your explanation of what -- I
did not understand what yotz were doing --
MR. ODOM: I should have put it on paper a
little bit better, but I ---
COMMISSIONER2 BALDWIN: -- totally before we
came in here.
MR. ODOM: --- thought maybe y'all saw the
COMMISSIONERZ BALDWIN: But you have moved me
somewhat over towards you, and I can see where there
possibly may be three vote~> here to do that. But I'm -- if
you would like to bring it back in the next meeting and try
it again -- and, I mean, I want to think about it. I want
to think about it and I want to talk to these elected
officials and get counsel from them and -- and the Treasurer
of how this thing really works and all that. But I -- I
will reconsider it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Did Mr. Williams
give me his proxy? No? That's a good proposal,
6-~3-G~
86
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.
	MS.	DECKER: I think -- I	mean,	I'm	not --
Leonard's pr	obably	doing	t}7e right thing,	but,	you	know, I
could do the	exact	same	th=Lng. What it's	allowing	is using
retirement -	- you	know,	retired employee	money	to	give merit
inr_reases.	And al	though	treat's the only	out we	've	had, it's
the only way	he's	got to	ge, that's reall	y not	the	way it
should be.						
COMMISSIONEF. BALDWIN: Well, but that -- that
issue needs to be dealt with in policy, though. In a policy
setting, not in here dealing with Leonard's people.
MR. ODOM: In this instance, I'm not going
that way. I'm going with the fact -- the way that I have to
do it, it works. You know, I have no other option to do
this right here. I could care less what ttie -- you know,
what the elected officials are talking about here. That's
fine for them, but at this point, this time on this earth,
I'm talking about this merit increase for these people. And
it does work, sir.
MS. DECKER: Except that you're going to be
setting policy. And, you know, I'm for it, but I'll be here
next month.
MR. ODOM: Well, then you have the funds to
do that, I'm sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there --
E-~3-03
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
87
MR. TOMLINSON: I have a comment, just a
brief one.
JUDGE TINLEY': We've got a, quote, merit
increase program, but we don't, quote, have a merit increase
program.
MS. UECKER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: But I think there needs to be
some -- some sound, logical policy where you pay for
performance -- for superior performance, and that's why you
-- that's why you are able to retain good employees who are
performing at the top of tr~eir game, as opposed to just
run-of-the-mill individual. And we want to keep those
people.
MR. ODOM: I want to keep that -- and some of
these people will be coming up for retirement soon, and
they're young. I want incentives for me to keep them.
I've -- I've lost probably 30 years experience when Danny
and Ray Cook left.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thirty years each.
MR. ODOM: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any formal motion to
be offered on this? If not,, we'll stand in recess until
about 10 after.
(Recess taketl from 11:00 a.m to 11:10 a.m.)
c-~3-o~
88
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLE~': Okay. I'll call the meeting
back to order. Next item on the agenda is consideration and
discussion of request for approval to purchase a laser
printer from Office Max for $249 from remaining $1,730
Operating Equipment item, to be used in County Court at Law
section.
MS. PIEPER: Gentlemen, this is just a budget
amendment within my own budget. I have the money. I would
just like to request to purchase a printer, and we have a
little thing from Office Max that shows we can get one for
$249.99. However, Shaun informed me this morning that, for
whatever reason, Software Group doesn't like the Brother
printer. So -- but I would like to request the money to
purchase a printer.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Up to $250? Is that
what you're saying?
MS. PIEPER:
COMMISSIONER
doesn't like Brother?
MS. PIEPER:
or something. I'm not real
going to call and check on
and he hasn't got back with
COMMISSIONER
MS. PIEPER:
Yes.
BALDWIN: Software, Inc.,
Supposedly it can't be networked
sure what the deal is. He was
them, and that was this morning,
me. So --
LETZ: Is this a replacement?
No, this is an additional
6-?3-G3
1
^ 2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
~-.. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
'' 4
L
25
89
printer, because I have thz-ee other deputies that are
sharing this one printer, and in the County Court at Law
section, they have to do mass mahouts every week for
notices of hearings and motions for continuances and all of
that. So, trying to share one printer, it's just delaying
their process of getting all this work done.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Buster, you had
mentioned $250. We had to replace one -- two of ours during
the year, and I think we did get them at Office Max, a laser
printer, and they're running closer to $600 for a good one
that will work with the network, we had to go with. I don't
know what it was. Tommy, $650 or something like that? It's
going to be more than $250.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I wasn't questioning
the amount. I mean, I was questioning -- how much do you
want?
MS. PIEPER: Well --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In the court order, we
need to have a specific numk~er, in my opinion.
MS. PIEPER: I have $1,730 left in this line
item.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You try to ask her how
much she wants.
MS. PIEPER: So, I'll -- so I would like
$700. (Laughter.)
h-~~-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
90
COMMISSIONEF: BALDWIN: Well, it's your money.
It's your employees. You clo what you want to do.
MS. PIEPER: Well, but I'm having to come in
to court because this was riot a budgeted item.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's also a capital
expenditure.
MR. TOMLINSON: No, it's not.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, it's not equipment --
MR. TOMLINSON: It's under $1,000, so, in the
original budget, that -- that item would not typically be
listed in the budget anyway.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSO]Q: So, the account that she's
taking it out of is not a capital expenditure item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So she doesn't need to be
making this request of us? Is that what you're telling us?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's actually right, it is.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See ya.
MS. PIEPER: I was always told if it was not
a budgeted item, that I needed to come to you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Under $1,000, it can come
out of Operating Equipment. If you're trying to buy it out
of Salaries, you have a problem, but Operating Equipment, it
h-~3-n3
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
can come out of there.
MS. PIEPER: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Solved that problem. Next
item, consider and discuss a review and report from
third-party administrator on pending reimbursement for claim
paid by Kerr County on behalf of employee. Mr. Bothwell.
MR. ROTHWELL: I'm here.
JUDGE TINLEY: There you are.
MR. ROTHWELL: Got up here before you looked
up. I'm Ray Bothwell. Commissioners and Judge, thank y`all
for inviting me back on this subject again. We have now
filed and received, in my opinion, probably all the funds
we're going to get from the reinsurance company on this --
on this claim. As you know, there was about $400,000
transferred from, a reserve account of some type, and I'm not
really sure what type, and we have received slightly over
$200,000 back, leaving $200,000 outstanding. The final --
the final appeal and respo:~se to that appeal from -- on my
company's behalf was that, due to the nature of the
procedures on the 5th of September -- and I guess you'll
recall that this person was in the hospital, transferred to
a transplant unit about the 3rd of -- about the 29th of
August, and on the 5th of September, there was a device
implanted or hooked up to a device that was -- was totally
set to continue the -- the life's blood flowing for a period
6-^_3-03
1
---~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
...,., i 3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
.-,. 2 4
25
92
of time until the transplan'•= procedure was actually
completed.
The reinsurance carrier, under their
insurance contract, believes, and I think I tend to agree
with them at this point, that the 5th of September was the
magic date that they would pay through, and they have paid
through that date. From the 5th to the 11th, or to the --
when the transplant -- when the procedure was actually done,
it was strictly a life support system that was -- that kept
this person living, waiting on the -- on the procedure.
There was -- and we kept going back. There was a variety of
things happening during that 5th to 11th. There was some
diabetes control management:. There was some other life
systems necessary to be -- to be supplemented. Their
opinion has come back, and we've had a third party look at
it, and the opinion came back that, yeah, there was diabetes
problems and there was this and that, but it still was a --
they were on this support :system that -- that, had they
turned it off, there wouldn't have been a need for anything
else.
So, I think the -- the County has about
$200,000 that we had hoped to get the majority of back. We
are apparently not going to be able to. I have discussed
with the Judge some -- some options that I would like for
y'all to discuss amongst yourselves, and at some point come
6-^_3-03
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
93
back with a recommendation ~o the Court on how we want to
proceed with that. And I t:~ink that's probably the end of
my report, unless there's some specific questions. And,
under the circumstances, I'd as soon not be real specific.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I'm confused.
And I don't want to get into specifics of this case. So --
and a transplant took place after -- at some point, correct?
MR. ROTHWELL~: Yes.
COMMISSIONED: LETZ: So, if an employee, you
know, gets injured and gets put under some sort of life
support waiting for some other procedure, as soon as they
get put on that life suppoz:t --
MR. ROTHWELL: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- they no longer have
insurance coverage?
MR. ROTHWEL-~: No. This particular procedure
has -- has forever had a $250,000 maximum benefit with it.
That's not true with -- with cancer or other kinds of
procedures, but with a transplant of any type, the County's
plan has always had -- it's one we inherited at E.B.A.
We've asked a few times, do we want to change any of the
benefits. We've talked specifically on one occasion about
that one. We've never changed that benefit. It only
relates to transplants, and there's a specific $250,000 cap
on that benefit.
6-~3-0?
94
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: Are there -- I have no
idea. I mean, is that a reasonable maximum for transplants?
MR. ROTHWELL: Yes, when it's handled
properly through a transplant network, it is.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: What's that mean?
MR. ROTHWELL: Well, it means, like, in our
program with the County, we have Lifetrack Transplant
Network, and Lifetrack is a large transplant network --
P.P.O., if you will -- that has fixed rates all over the
country. At Johns Hopkins, at Baylor, at Anderson, at
Stanford, they've got fixed rates for varying kinds of
transplants. This happened so quickly and in such a short
time period with someone that was not on a transplant list
to start with, that Lifetrack did not have the ability to
enter into that. The reinsurance company actually uses
Lifetrack also, but the procedures were so rapid and did
unfolded so rapidly that my company actually didn't know
about the transplant until the 10th, that it was -- that the
transplant was going to take place.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess the other
question is, and the root of the -- from a dollar
standpoint, why wasn't the Court told this in December?
MR. ROTHWELL: Well, I think the Court was
told that, that -- that we felt like we would get a large
percentage of the money back. We've ended up getting about
6 - ~ 3 - 0 3
95
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,~ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
50 percent of it back.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, there's -- I
mean, it seems that it's pretty -- I was under the
impression that there was a strong likelihood of getting
most of it, if not all of it, back. And it seems that the
-- because of the transplant rule for this procedure,
whatever, that it would be real obvious way before December
that this was going to be the maximum the County was going
to be able to get back.
MR. ROTHWELI~: We felt like, when we -- when
I made that presentation, rind again at the smaller meeting
that took place prior -- prior to that happening, that we
would. We -- we had talked to the reinsurance company, and
we felt like we would get the majority of it back, based on
-- at that point in time, our understanding, we thought that
this -- this piece of equi~~ment was being used from the 9th
forward. That was the ear:Ly report that we got. When we
got all the records and st<~rted really looking at them, he
was put onto a support system on the 5th, about 10 o'clock
in the morning, and we were going under the impression that
that -- that all happened on the 9th.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean --
MR. ROTHWELL: And we felt like we would get
paid through the 9th.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, as I recall, this
h-2~-03
96
1
^ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
came through in December. .And, I mean, certainly we would
have records, or should have records on this type of an
expenditure, in a two-month period.
MR. ROTHWELL: We frequently don't get claims
in -- the full claims in and all the records that we request
within 90, 120 days. When we start requesting details from
hospital providers, that's not over the line.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I suspect that you would
get that very quickly if they weren't going to get the
money.
COMMISSIONER. NICHOLSON; Mr. Rothwell, I came
into this issue in the middle of it, so I probably don`t
have the background the otriers do. What is your role here?
MR. ROTHWELI~: We are the T.P.A.,
administrator of the County-sponsored plan.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So -- so you`re --
you're representing us? You're not --
MR. ROTHWEL=~: Yes. We don't represent the
insurance company, we reprf=sent you.
COMMISSIONEi~ NICHOLSON: Okay. So, I -- I'm
also ignorant about insurance, so help me out here a little
bit.
MR. ROTHWELL: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One, I'm -- I'm
two things. I`m surprised that I could run
6-~'3-03
97
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
up a medical bill that would be underpaid by $200,000, and
that the provider would be looking to me to pay $200,000 in
addition to my county insurance. And I'm also surprised
that -- that my employer, Kerr County, is out $200,000 after
having purchased an insurance policy. And can you help me
with those two?
MR. RCTHWELL: I'll try. First off, this
claim was slightly under a million dollars; it was $982,000
or something like that. As I said, it unfolded rapidly. It
was one of those -- it's one of those rare things that --
that one thing led to anotr.er to another to another. You
know, it's very infrequent that a person gets a transplant
of that type without being on a list for a period of time,
and this person was not. Now, to address the insurance
plan, Kerr County uses a --- wYiat we call a fully funded
self-insured plan. Rather than going out and buying an
insurance policy from -- from Allstate or Blue Cross or
someone, we go out and we shop and we buy the reinsurance.
And in the County's case, :it's set at $50,000, and we have
the ability to -- to structure the benefits under that kind
of a plan, kind of the way we want it to be structured, and
we can add benefits or delate benefits or change benefits
as -- as you go along from one year -- you know, at renewal
tune. It allows an employF~r a lot of flexibility in
designing the kind of plan they want. The $250,000

98
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
transplant benefit, handled appropriately, in my opinion, is
still more than 80 percent of most transplant costs. The
costs related to this particular one was just astronomical,
not particularly related to the transplant, but all the
things that happened during that period of time were deemed
to be related at the time. I do know that -- that the --
the estate -- or I'm led to believe that the estate is not
being chased for the balance of the money, around $600,000
or so.
COMMISSIONEF'. NICHOLSON: I understand that if
I -- as a county employee, i.f I got caught up in these same
set of circumstances, somebody would be trying to bill my
estate for either $200,000 or $400,000?
MR. ROTHWELL: If you -- yes. If -- if,
under the same set of circumstances, and your estate had
some value in it that made chasing worthwhile.
COMMISSIONED NICHOLSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONED LETZ: More than that. It would
be more like $750,000 they'd be looking for.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's scary. So,
then, the -- the only remaining question is, we -- the
Commissioners Court put the County at risk for over $400,000
that we didn't -- didn't have to?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We weren't required to do
E-_~-oi
99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~.. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-
25
MR. ROTHWELL: Weren't required to. I think
the -- I personally think the decision the Commissioners
Court made at the time was a very good, very valid decision.
And I do think that -- that there is -- and I think that
Judge Tinley will hopefull~~ discuss it with y'all, a method
of getting the majority of the money back, back into that
reserve account.
COMMISSIONEF: NICHOLSON: Okay. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLES': It may be something that we
have to discuss in executive session because of potential
litigation aspects and so forth, but Kerr County was put at
risk to the tune of $400,000.
MR. ROTHWELI~: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Kerr County has no legal
liability to pay that on behalf of the employee, correct?
MR. ROTHWELL: That's true.
JUDGE TINLEY: But we've gotten half of it
back, and we now stand out $200,000.
MR. ROTHWEL=~: That's true.
JUDGE TINLE`~: That's where we are.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If I can make a comment,
the only comment I'd like is, on the September 5th to
September 10th, have you visited with the other employee
that this was -- that was involved in this to see if those
dates are really accurate?
E - 3 - U 3
100
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ROTHWELL: We know the dates are accurate
from the hospital records.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But, I mean, as far as
being a life support situation on that date to the next
time, I'm not -- I'm not positive. And I think the employee
that's still with us ought to be interviewed to see if
there's a different type of appeal on when that date was
going into effect.
MR. ROTHWELL: According to all of the
medical records, the -- the device that was used kept the
organ that was going to be transplanted operational.
Without that device, at 10 o'clock on the morning of the
5th, that that organ was gone. That's where the decision
was made.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I'm not so sure that
other part to that -- or agree to that, the way that all
went down. I was there toc> a lot of that time and during
that time, and I'm not -- ~~ou know, I'd just like to -- at
least the employee interviewed to see if there's an appeal
on that part of it as to those dates, 'cause that could get
back a lot of that other money. I'm not so sure that's
accurate.
JUDGE TINLE~': Well, it may well be that
Mr. Rothwell will want to talk to that individual that
you're referring to, Sheriff, and that -- that may be -- may
G-~3-03
101
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
be another option that we have, as far as trying to pursue
the balance of the $200,000 that Kerr County was not legally
obligated to pay, but at this point is out.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: But I think, at this point,
the consideration of further avenues, we'll probably looking
at executive session because of the potential litigation or
other administrative legal recommendation aspect.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does what you're talking
about -- I mean, litigation -- all relate to what the
Sheriff is talking about? It seems to me what he's -- if
what he's saying is correct, there may be action the County
could take or employee could take -- or the employee's
estate could take against tr:e hospital.
JUDGE TINLE~~: I hope the Sheriff has
somebody with some information to give the --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I have no problem
setting up a meeting between Mr. Rothwell and that employee,
because I think hearing it from that employee -- you know, I
may be wrong. I'm trying to recall. All of that did happen
so fast and all of a sudden, but I don't think there was a
life support situation for a week.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'd be tickled to death to get
any leverage that we can, and I'll leave you gentlemen to
pursue that avenue. But as to if and how and when we go
5-~3-03
102
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
forward, I think that's a matter that's going to have to be
-- we need to get the County Attorney involved and get into
executive session. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you talking about
executive session today, maybe?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, the County Attorney's
not here. And --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I recognize that.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- there wasn't a suggestion
of an executive session till just the last little bit.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Rothwell.
MR. ROTHWELL: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLE`_': Next item on the agenda,
consider and discuss an update on status of worker's comp
cost and claims. Ms. Nemec? I asked Ms. Nemec to be here
today because it's been brought to my attention that since
January 1, we've had had 26, I believe was the number,
quote, claims, unquote, that were filed under our worker's
compensation program, and I thought maybe we needed some
clarification as to if, in fact, these are claims in the
sense that they are pendi;zg claims or have been adjudicated
before the Workers Compen;~ation Commission, or they were
merely the first notice o:r accident or injury or incident
reports required by our i:~ternal policies or whatever it is.
E-~3-C3
103
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
I just want to get a handle on where we were on that.
MS. NEMEC: I have a little printout here for
you. You can pass it around.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
MS. NEMEC: i~]hat this is here is just the
date of the injury and the department for where that injury
took place, the position, and then the type of injury,
These are claims that were filed in our office and have been
submitted to our worker's comp carrier. We tried to get a
report from them as to how many are ongoing as of last week
and what the dollar amount_~ were that were paid out for
these claims, and Jim Maddox' office was unable to give us
that because the quarter doesn't end till next Monday. And
so I'm --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; Who wasn't able to
give you --
MS. NEMEC: Jim Maddox' office. They're the
ones that work with this. It's where we get those figures
from.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. NEMEC: Anyway, so I can -- I can get
those figures to you Monday, but they were not able to give
us those figures. But this just kind of gives you a rough
idea on where the accidents are taking place and what kind
of accidents they are. But there are 26.
6-~3-03
104
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: So, at this point, we don't
know the cost that's been ir.~.curred in connection with these
claims?
MS. NEMEC: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: And we don't know if -- are
these merely notices of injury, and we don't know whether
there were ever actually a claim filed with the Worker's
Compensation Commission?
MS. NEMEC: These are -- these are injury
reports that were given to our office, and then we, in turn,
turn around and file them ~~ith the Worker's Comp Commission.
Now, whether any money was paid out on them, that we don't
know till we get that report. But, more than likely, just
from hearing what's going on and he]ping people with these,
they more than -- they normally always go to the hospital or
a doctor, get some kind of treatment.
JUDGE TINLEY: You say these 26 represent
notice of an accident or injury to your office?
MS. NEMEC: As of January lst.
JUDGE TINLEY: And you then refer the matters
to our worker's compensation carrier? Or to the Texas
Workers Compensation Commission?
MS. NEMEC: To -- to TAC. We report them to
TAC, to the --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. They underwrite our
E-23-U3
105
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
'' 0
G
21
22
23
24
25
worker's compensation program as Texas Association of
Counties?
MS. NEMEC: Right.
,7UDGE TINLEY: So we don't know what
percentage, if any, of these have actually been filed as
claims with the Texas Worker's Compensation Commission,
then, do we?
MS. NEMEC: We don't know how many. I'm
certain there are several, because we're on the phone daily
with them from one employee or another, so I can tell you
that there's several of thE~m --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. NEMEC: -- if not all, just by the way
the phone calls come in on a daily basis.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Barbara, do we provide
worker's comp for all the volunteer fire departments?
MS. NEMEC: Yes, we do.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: All but one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All but one.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If you'll indulge
me, I'm still working on my education here. Again, I'm a
County employee and I'm injured on the job, and I go to the
emergency room, get some treatment. Then I come dawn to
your office and fill out a form?
MS. NEMEC: Yes.
6-~3-03
106
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
any receipts?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do I -- I give you
MS. NEMEC: No. What they do is, when you
get to the emergency room, t~hey'l1 call our office to verify
that that, in fact, was a worker's comp injury. If the
department has not called us to notify us that there is a
worker's comp injury, that the employee just hasn't made it
down to our office yet, if we don't have that notification,
then we need to verify with the department head that there
is an injury at the emergency hospital in order to verify
it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you.
MS. NEMEC: What we do is verify that, yes,
they were injured on the job, whatever ones. We send all
the paperwork to TAC. Thezz they investigate the matter to
make sure that it does fall. under worker's comp.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: These all go to the
emergency room?
MS. NEMEC: Not all of them. Not all of
them. Some might wait a day or two and realize that the
injury is worse than what they thought it was, and just go
to a regular physician. And then there's some that are
injured that have to go for ongoing therapy, and --
COMMISSIONI~R LETZ: I believe I mentioned,
most of these look like they're not life-threatening.
E-23-0?
107
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. NEMEC: You'd be surprised what goes to
the emergency room.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, that`s where I'm
going with this, is that -- I mean, is it possible for the
County to contract with a clinic so we don't have the costs
of these people all going to the emergency room?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I know it's -- I
know it's been done for other employers that I have worked
for. There's set doctors that they're to go to.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or clinics?
MS. NEMEC: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. NEMEC: So that's all the info I can get
now. I can get you those figures when I get them.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Nicholson asked
you if the employee comes to your office and fills out
paperwork. Is that always the employee, or does it
sometimes come to your office as a notice of an accident or
an incident from the department or the supervisor, or does
it sometimes come to you that way and you never actually see
the employee?
MS. NEMEC: It sometimes does come that way,
and when it does, we'll notify our worker's comp carrier
that there has been an in-~ury. However, we'd have to track
down that employee. That employee needs be to be the one
6-~3-03
108
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
i4
15
l6
l7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that fills out that report. In the past we've had someone
-- a department head that filled it out for an employee
before, and it was not accurate and we ran into all kind of
problems, so the policy is t=hat even if it takes a week, we
have to track down that employee and go to their home, fill
out the paperwork with them or whatever, but it needs to
come from them.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, your arrangement
with Texas Association of Counties, through whom our program
for worker's comp is underwritten, is that you will get a
statement from the employee affected?
MS. NEMEC: Right.
JUDGE TINLES': Okay. And whether you get it
right away or a week or two later, whatever, but --
MS. NEMEC: We just have to notify worker's
comp right away that there has been an injury.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. That`s all
the questions I have.
MS. NEMEC: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consider and
discuss the Post-Legislative Conference and State County
Judge and Commissioners Conference. Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. I just
wanted to bring this to you gentlemen's attention, that
these -- these two conferences are coming up. The
E-~3-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
..-.. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
109
Post-Legislative Conference is in August. They take money
to go to, so I just wanted t:o let you know that the -- if
you -- if you're intending on going to these things, you
need to find some money. I understand that the
Commissioners Court's travel line is zeroed out, and so good
luck there. The -- also, the legislative conference, I
don't think, offers educational hours anyway. It's more of
an informational-type situation. I have a call in to TAC
right now, and they have not returned my call as of break
time this morning, that -- what I'm going to request to do
is, when this conference is over in August, that they send
someone down here to Kerr C'.ounty and to do a mini
post-legislative conference right here in Kerr County, and
invite the contiguous counties to come over, 'cause I
know -- you know, if we're broke, most of those other
counties are broke as well and not able to go to Austin to
see this thing. So, that's what I'm -- we're attempting,
and we've done that on a c~~uple of occasions. I'm really
not sure whether they're g~~ing to be able to pull this one
off or not., but anyway, that's in the -- that's in the
makings. And then there's this other conference in Corpus.
That's in the new budget, and we'll have the opportunity to
pick up some -- the rest of our hours if we so choose. I
just wanted to bring that to your attention today. No
action needed. I'm ready to go to Item Number 13.
6-~3-03
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
JUDGE TINLEY: That's what we'll do.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Good idea.
JUDGE TINLEY: Consider and discuss status of
Kerr County's burn ban. Commissioner Letz.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just put this on the
agenda -- I know we're currently operating under the 90-day
burn ban, and with the amount of rain, it, to me, would make
sense just to cancel that burn ban, and if we want to go on
a new 90-day burn ban in mid-July, late July, we can put it
back on the agenda to do sc.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When`s this 90 up?
How far are we in it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Since early June.
MS. SOVIL; August.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: August?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess we could leave it
on, too. It's just that --- either way. I just put it on
there so we can discuss it, 'cause I believe all of the --
currently, county-wide, we're under a burn ban right now,
because they all expired last night. I just wanted to get
it on the agenda so we either extend them or cancel it. At
least I would extend mine.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Supposed to rain again
Thursday, by the way.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would make a motion to
6-~3-~3
111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
cancel the current burn ban.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
cancel the current county burn ban. You're speaking of the
one, I assume, that was for a period of 90 days unless there
was some placement on or off by the individual
Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Correct.
JUDGE TINLE~": And you're just wiping the
slate clean?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can put a new one
back --
COMMISSIONED BALDWIN: We can bring it back
anytime.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 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 TINLF'Y: Motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, on that, it may be
a good idea to put that on the agenda, you know, for the
next couple of months, yo~~ know, every meeting, so we can
act if we need to, so we don't get caught in a situation of
r-~3-03
112
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
having to go to an emergency meeting again.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think that that's
the solution to my problem.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We just put it on. If
there's no action -- we can just put it as the last item on
the agenda. No action, we ~~an go over it, but that way --
'cause it can -- conditions can change rapidly, you know.
COMMISSIONER. NICHOLSON: I think if KARFA
representatives were here, they would be urging us not to
take the burn ban off, leave it like it is. But if we go
the route you've suggested, that would, I think, satisfy all
concerned.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Anyway, and we can do
that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consider and
discuss allowing the Water Education Task Force to place
temporary display in the courthouse. Mr. Letz again.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda
at the request of Charles Napper with -- he's in the
audience -- with U.G.R.A. W.E.T., Water Education Task
Force, is a -- a group of entities that have gotten together
in Kerr County, and primarily to promote water education. I
represent the County on that board. Commissioner
Nicholson's on there from a --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: West Kerr County.
E-~3-n;
113
1
.-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
i3
14
15
16
i7
18
19
20
2 1
2 2
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- west Kerr County
chamber standpoint. City, LJ.G.R.A., Headwaters, Riverside
Nature Center -- anyway, numerous groups are on there. And
working with them, U.G.R.A. has put together a display.
They would like to be able to put that display in the
courthouse somewhere. So, I'll turn it over to Charles
Napper from U.G.R.A. to explain what they have and what they
need. Charles?
MR. NAPPER: Well, currently we have a -- a
poster display; it's a tri-fold that's about 10 foot wide,
maybe 2 foot deep, that would stand up, and these posters
will actually Velcro on the=_re to it. And each one is just
a -- has a conservation ti~~ that can be offered to -- to
anybody that comes by and reads them. And they all offer
something different to someone else. Not everybody goes
about washing their vegetables the same way. Not everybody
leaves all their water rur_ning while they brush their teeth,
but they may leave their water running when they're washing
their car. So, I think it's important that we get these
conservation tips out there just for -- you know, sometimes
if you don't know, you just don't know. But if you're
willing to work anyway you can, best time to start
conserving water is right now, not when we need it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The display is 10 feet
long?
~-~~-~~?
114
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. NAPPER: I believe it's about 10 feet.
It can be adjusted as far a;> how wide it is, but I believe
how it's set up right now, it's about 10 foot wide and about
2 foot deep.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Trying to figure out
where we have a 10-foot wall in the courthouse that we
could -- are there smaller -- is there a smaller version?
MR. NAPPER: I'm sure we can make a smaller
version. One of the things that we're going to be -- we're
talking about with the Ci'~y of Kerrville is just actually
taking one or two posters at a time and just having them on
a rotation through City Ha11 over there, because they don't
have an area to hold the tri-fold. Riverside Nature Center,
we're just putting those on the display corkboard that they
have over there. And so, you know, not everybody's able to
maintain that -- that full tri-fold the way that -- that we
have an area over there at the Guadalupe Basin Center. So,
we can -- we can definitely work with y`all, and we can
fiqure out something to set: it up.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thea, you had a comment?
MS. SOVIL: There's one spot, but there's
chairs. If we move those ~~hairs from the -- this glass door
over here, I think that's more than 10 feet.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think it would
have much more of an impact for people to look at if you had
-~3-03
115
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the full --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'd like to get it
all there if we could. It's; -- I think water education by
conservation is -- maybe it's longer-term, but it's one of
the keys to solving water problems. And I base that on
thinking about back in '~0's -- you won't remember this,
Commissioner; you were too young, but we began educating
people about energy conservation, and much of it was
directed at children. Children would then educate parents
to turn off the lights. Arid I think that's had a
significant impact on that. And there are other examples.
So, while this probably is not earth-shattering, this
concept of trying to educa~e people, it can have a very
positive impact. We've got lot of traffic in here, a lot of
people hanging around waiting to conduct business, and
probably a pretty good spot for it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My only question
was -- I have a question and a suggestion. My question is,
how -- we're talking 10 fcot or 2 foot deep and all that.
How long of a period of time are we talking about?
MR. NAPPER: That is up to you. However long
that the -- the Court fee=_s that --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What are y'all going
to say?
c'-23-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
i8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1 "16
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Month of July?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The month of July?
MR. NAPPER: And I know that Riverside will
be keeping it through -- Riverside Nature Center has day
camps going on this summer. One of the day camps started
this week, and I believe it lasts for the week, and then
another one starts in July sometime, and they`ll have it for
that day camp also.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we should do it the
JUDGE TINLE": July and August? Or just
August?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just August. August.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, Judge, if we run
out of room, I could also -- you remember how, back in the
olden days -- you guys would remember this -- probably back
in the early 1900's, how they used to wear those displays?
I could --
JUDGE TINLEY: Sandwich board, we call them.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, sandwich boards,
y'all called them. I could wear this thing as I'm on my
patrol, the hall monitor patrol, and just kind of wear them
up and down the hallway if there's nothing else.
JUDGE TINLF~Y: Why don't you come up here
c-~'3-03
117
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
and -- stand up, Buster, and let's see how these are going
to fit. I think they'll fit= just about right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You can just kind of
stick them on my back.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, one on either side
there. I think it's about the right size.
COMMISSIONEP. BALDWIN: May have to bend the
one on the front to kind of form, but -- well, I mean, I'm
just trying to offer my sez~vices. I'm here and I'm out
there, out there patrolling.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that
we authorize Charles Napper to work with Thea Sovil to find
a place in the courthouse to place this for the month --
this display for the month of August.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. 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 respon~~e . )
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries.
MR. NAPPER: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item is consider and
discuss confirmation and .reappointment --
MR. NAPPER: I'd also like to say that, as
c-~3-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
118
far as getting this set up, taken down, and if there's any
problems that you -- you're needing to have it moved or
anything like that, just contact me and I'll take care of
all that.
JUDGE TINLEY: You'll hear from Ms. Sovil.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, Charles.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Charles.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consider and
discuss confirmation, reappointment of Sam M. Dunkin as Kerr
County representative on tr:e Board of Trustees at Hill
Country Community M.H.M.R. Center. I put this on the
agenda. I received notification from the -- from the
M.H.M.R. Community Center people that Dr. Junkin's
appointment was going to expire in August of this year, and
we are authorized one member of that board -- Kerr County
is. There's some counties that collectively have to agree
on one, but we're authorizF~d one. T took the liberty of
calling Dr. Dunkin to see _if he would be willing to continue
serving. He indicated that he would. Dr. Dunkin, as most
of you know, is the former chief out at Schreiner University
for many years, has been very active in this community in a
number of different capacities, and I think has really done
yeoman's service on this board, and I would urge that the
Court consider reappointing him for another two-year term.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
6-~3-03
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
119
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY; Any discussion? All in favor
of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion ,parried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item,
consideration and discussion of the announcement of pending
retirement of Eddie Holland as Kerr County Extension Agent.
Mr. Holland, we finally got to you.
MR. HOLLAND: Finally.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good to have you with us
today.
MR. HOLLAND: I wrote a letter to the Judge
and expressed my appreciation over the years that I've been
employed as the Kerr CountS~ Extension Agent. I started here
in -- in March, I guess, of 1982, and always said when I
started out that this was the county I wanted to come to.
And I'd been in extension <~bout 10 years when I arrived at
my mecca, and I looked forward to it, working in this county
all those years, and it's been wonderful working with
different County Commissioners Courts throughout that time.
And it's always been interesting, Rusty, the different, you
know, complexion of the Court that I've seen along the way.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Oh, yeah.
h-~3-U3
120
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. HOLLAND: But they've all been very
supportive, and they've all had some big differences as
well. I know when I was hii:ed back -- I guess it was
probably a February meeting, the district agent at that time
was Doyle More, and he brought me up here and he said,
"Now, don't be alarmed if they don't move that day to hire
you as the new county agent." He said, "This Court's a
little different." And they were a little different. And
we drove up that day, and, I mean, the parking -- remember,
this is '82 now, and this parking lot and everything around
here was packed. I said, "N.y gosh, is there going to be
this kind of controversy to hire me?" You know, and that
was -- you know, going back in time now, Buster that was
whenever they were deciding the spike buck deal.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah.
MR. HOLLAND: But I didn`t know that, and
neither did Doyle at that time. And so they ushered us back
to the -- there was a little, small room in the back, and
they -- they stopped the court in here and they went back in
there and they hired me as the new county agent. But I
thought that was -- that wa:~ quite interesting, that time
when they did that. But, a~~ain, the Court has been very
supportive in all budget action throughout the years.
And -- and then Judge Denson was the County Judge when I had
some prodding along the way from Buster and from Thea about
6-~3-~3
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
aspiring to do some Nation~~l Association ventures, and I do
appreciate, you know, thei~° support and the Court's support
for the time that I've beers gone, you know, doing this
National County Agent Association work. And I know it's
taken time out of the county, and we've had good staff pick
up the slack and do that, ,end I do appreciate what the
Court -- and everyone's efforts, so I just want to let y'all
know, and I'm sure that they will continue.
As you know, all of the state has been going
through budget woes as well, and they've had some cutbacks,
and that's why they're having this volunteer early
retirement. And I'm 10 months shy of when I would have gone
out anyway. And so, anyway, they offered this, and I'm
taking it. As I'm finishing up this National County Agent's
thing, it's a perfect fit; just kind of finish that. I only
had 10 months left, and they offered this, so that's why I
chose to do this. I'm sure that they -- you know, the
County, they recognize the importance of the Extension
Program in Kerr County, and I feel sure that they will, you
know, contact the Judge and -- and come up with some, you
know, plans for hiring a replacement for me. Arid I
suspect -- this is -- again, there's nothing official; I
don't know, but I suspect by September, they'll have someone
in here. That soon, they should.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Eddie, is that Darrell
6-23-03
122
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
li
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~-.
25
Dromgoole that does that?
MR. HOLLAND: He's gone. It's now actually
Cheryl Mapston.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I remember her.
MR. HOLLAND: One of the budget things they
did was to consolidate. Rather than having two different
ones supervising the same district, they thought it would be
more cost-effective having one. And Darrell has been
supervising down in Corpus for the last year and a half,
anyway, with the retiremeni~ down there, so now Cheryl is
going to be over the Court -- over this -- this district.
Actually, they've moved kind of like, you know, y'all have
moved your regions. Now they've clustered Kerr County with
west, and it is now 6, whi~~h is El Paso, 7, which is San
Angelo, and our district h.as moved in with them, and they
call it the western region now. So, that's a cluster, and
so they have -- those three districts are together. And the
one that Darrell moved to is in Corpus, which is the south.
It's 12 and 11 and 9 or something, but they're -- they're
clustered down there. So --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Will Cheryl still be
out of Uvalde?
MR. HOLLAND: She'll be in Uvalde, and she'll
be, you know, serving, and she'll be the one that will be
the contact for the Court on that.
6-^3-03
123
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good.
MR. HOLLAND: Nothing's really changed on
that at all, but I just wanted to, you know, come and -- and
express my appreciation foz~ y'ap's support over the years,
and, you know, thank y'all very much.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Holland, what
are you going to do irr ret__rement?
MR. HOLLAND: Well, assuming I can get my
house sold here, Dave -- you know, and my wife still has
four years left before she -- she's a teacher, and so she's
not giving up her contract here. She's going to do that. I
have a place -- a ranch in Llano County, and so I'm going to
-- I guess, as the old saying, you know, ranch when all the
money's gone. That's what I plan on doing, some of that up
there.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, good luck to
you.
MR. HOLLAND: Thank y'all. Like I said, I'll
still be around.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You'11 still be
judging pig shows, one thing or another.
MR. HOLLAND: Coming around the shows in
Kerrville. That's still going to be our regional area to
come back to.
MS. SOVIL: Pecans.
6-~ 3-L' j
124
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
COMMISSIONEF. BALDWIN: Yeah, pecans.
MR. HOLLAND: Oh, yeah, pecans. And I'll do
COMMISSIONEF: LETZ: Eddie, appreciate all
you've done. You've done a lot for the youth of Kerr
County, as well as for Kerr County, but especially the
youth. You've spent many, many hours, done a lot of good.
Appreciate it.
MR. HOLLAND: It was a lot of fun. We've had
a lot of success over the years.
JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate your service,
Eddie, and I know all the :young people over the years have
benefited from -- from your efforts. And I know Kerr County
generally, by virtue of Eddie's involvement in the National
Association and holding that office there, has gained some
attention nationally.
MR. HOLLAND: It's been good.
JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate your efforts
there. Good luck and godspeed.
MR. HOLLAND: Thank y'all.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Muchas gracias.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consider and
discuss ratifying County Judge's signature on Memorandum of
Understanding with AACOG for Domestic Preparedness Funding.
This matter was held over from last time. That was the
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
125
traditional signature on th~~ -- on the communications
trailer that -- that we sent down to AACOG.
COMMISSIONEF: NICHOLSON: I move that we
ratify the County Judge's signature on the Memorandum of
Understanding --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- with AACOG for
Domestic Preparedness Funding.
COMMISSIONERZ BALDWIN: Second that motion.
JUDGE TINLE": Motion made and seconded that
the Memorandum of Understanding for Domestic Preparedness
Funding be approved, and the County Judge's signature on
same be approved. Any fur~her discussion or questions?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And this -- the
agreement, as I recall -- inhere was some questions about
costs to Kerr County and some unanswered questions at the
last meeting. All those have been resolved? This is not
going to cost Kerr County <~nything to accept the grant?
SHERIFF HIEI~HOLZER: Initially, it will not
cost Kerr County anything. And let me clarify that. There
is a meeting on the 1st of July at 9:00 in the morning that
I was invited to at AACOG where the committee's going to
actually put together the communications trailer and
what-all's actually going to be in it. They're all going to
be ordered at cne time, five of them around this region.
~-~3-03
126
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
1
..-, 13
14
~ 15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-.
25
They'll all be identical e~:cept for their capabilities. We
will be able to use it locally for anything we have going on
at any time we wish. We do own the trailer. We just agree
that, if possible, okay, i:E there's an event in San Antonio
or anywhere else in the region, that we would try and take
that trailer there if it's called on to be used.
Maintenance costs on the trailer -- on that trailer, as the
discussions were going, they said the -- I think they're --
the grant is actually $80,000 for allotment for the trailer.
That's going to take care of everything on the trailer at
first that's needed. The (:ounty won't have to buy anything
or put anything into the trailer. Now, later on through the
years, you may have to rep=_ace tires on the trailer, you
know. You may have to replace a piece of radio equipment
that may go out in it or something like that, but it's
County-owned. It is a county trailer.
JUDGE TINLE`~: Five-year commitment, correct?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And there's a five-year
commitment on the trailer to the AACOG -- to this region.
Now, there was a lot of discussion, mainly about the other
type of trailer, on maintenance, because in this money that
was federally handed down, there is nothing in there about
maintenance. But, you know, when you get into the
decontamination trailers and the decontamination chemical
suits, all that kind of stuff, that ends up having a shelf
6-z3-:~~
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
127
life, okay? Who pays to replace those? So the thought at
that meeting was the government will end up coming down
later with a -- a maintenance figure, at least for
decontamination, to replace equipment and that. Whether
they do it for the communicrations trailer, I would have no
idea. And, thank goodness, maintenance on communications
equipment is not near what it would be on the
decontamination.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If we don't like our
experience with the trailer, we can give it back in five
years.
SHERIFF HIEI~HOLZER: After the five -- no,
after five years, we own i1-. I mean, we own it anyhow.
They're giving us the money. They're actually ordering the
trailer. We own the trailer the day it gets here. The
agreement is just that we'll- use it --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: In five years, we
can make a decision about whether or not we like owning a
trailer. If it's too expezlsive --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Or whether we want to
stay as part of that agreement.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't see very
much risk.
SHERIFF HIEF~HOLZER: The deal -- and,
Jonathan, this will help you. I don't know if it will help

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
128
Comfort, because I'm not sure Kendall County was awarded
anything in that. What the -- on overall -- and you have to
recall, there's another $100,000 on top of this 80 that
we're getting for equipment. What that will also do that I
learned was, all our volunteer fire departments, people like
that, we will buy the protective equipment or any equipment
that's needed for either a Kaz-Mat spill, you know, a
terrorist-type situation; it's a multitude of all kinds --
it's a disaster-type thing, okay? That we can help furnish
those volunteer fire departments with equipment. That's
what that $100,000 is. It's not just the Sheriff's Office;
it's for all around. And wr.at I'm -- I've told them at
their next KARFA meeting, I'd like to attend and talk to the
members there and see how trey want it, because I don't
think we want to buy these Class A chemical suits -- you
know, protective suits that may run $1,000 or so, and just
issue them out to volunteers. I think we want, maybe, one
or two issued to that department, and then. keep the rest of
them in storage the same place we're going to have this
trailer. The only immediate concern with the -- with the
trailer -- not immediate; I don't know how long it's going
to take them to get them once they order them -- is emptying
out those records out of the other half of that building out
there to store it in.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
E-~3-G3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,-_
25
129
JUDGE TINLE~~: 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~: A11 opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLE`.~: Motion carries. We don't have
any items today for executive session that I'm aware of.
Now we get down to the approval agenda. Mr. Auditor, you're
finally up. Payment of the bills is the first item.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I had one question
earlier that I'm going to bring up now, just to point the
issue out. But I went and visited with Tommy this morning,
and we had to go hire a lawyer to get to the bottom of it,
but we finally did -- no, that's not true. But on Page 9,
the very top -- the very top department there, and the third
item, Stroeher and Company, four tires for $403. It seemed
to me that a couple years ago, that we have taken our -- our
maintenance moneys and put them into the -- into the salary
lines, included it in with the salary, and then we're
responsible for our own maintenance of our vehicles. And
when I saw this, it was ce-mainly the contrary to that, and
this is not the first time we've seen this. Several years
ago, we had a major knock-clown-drag-out in this room over
this exact same issue. Anc~ -- but it's not what it appears
E-33-03
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
to be. You may want to as}~, what is it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What is it?
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: Okay, thank you. The
way I understand it is, this gentleman has -- has purchased
the tires through the County, and -- and then has -- is
reimbursing the County for the tires. Because of some --
maybe some kind of purchasing program or something, you
think?
MR. TOMLINSON: I would suspect -- I haven't
talked to him about it, but. as far the car is -- the car he
uses for his job, he's actL.ally paying his -- for the tires
himself, but he purchased it through the County. I think
probably because we had that company we deal with frequently
for Road and Bridge and Sheriff's Office, and so, for him to
get the benefit of pricing on -- on those tires for his
vehicle, he chose to purchase the tires there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you
something. I use my truck and car for County business, and
I go out and look at roads and visit with folks, and will
the County buy me new tires?
MR. TOMLINSON: We're not buying --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm just asking a
question. Will the County --
MR. TOMLINSON: You're mixing things here.
The --
E-23-03
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
131
COMMISSIONER F,ALDGJIN: Do you think the
County will buy me new tires:'
JUDGE TINLEY: You want a simple, one-word
answer?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Would it pay
for -- the County pay for my oil changes and maintenance on
my vehicle?
JUDGE TINLE": Probably not.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. That's all.
MR. TOMLINSON: Part of what you're talking
about, about the -- the amount of travel moneys that got put
into -- into the salary, --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
MR. TOMLINSON: -- most of that has to do
with mileage or -- or oil changes for -- or travel that that
elected official or department head might have within the
county. At one point in time, the County had a travel
allowance, and you had -- each person had the opportunity to
pay for whatever it was they used for their vehicle. There
was a tax problem for -- for the individual, and there was a
withholding problem for the County, because we -- the County
did not require specific records for that reimbursement.
And because we did not require specific mileage charts or
6-23-~~3
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
records for elected officials, then the Internal Revenue
laws required us to put that in the salary. So, that's --
that's the background on why -- why that amount was --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, let me ask you
this. Judge, I won't spend much time. I'm sorry, I just --
this is kind of --
JUDGE TINLEY: Take all the time you need.
I'm going to take a shot at it in a minute.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, okay. At one
time, we had -- we had in-county travel and out-of-county
travel. Now we've rolled everything into the salary line.
Now, is that, in your mind -- I just started thinking about
this the other day. Just, kind of, some flags went up in
what's left here, is that, see, to me, that travel outside
the county, when we go to conferences, to me, that's what
it's for, is for our education.
MR. TOMLIN~~ON: That's --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that for me to go
to -- if I'm -- okay, I'm on a committee with TAC. Does
that pay for my meetings with TAC?
MR. TOMLINSON: Not -- not the travel
allowance part of it. The -- the Conference line item or
Training line item, whatever -- whatever you want to call
it, is for that purpose.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Pays for mileage,
6-23-c3
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
133
whether it's going to a conference or a meeting?
MR. TOMLINSON: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So --
MR. TOMLINSON: You know, we have -- I mean,
for constables, I -- this h~~s been an ongoing discussion for
13 years that I remember, but there have been occasions
where -- where the County's agreed to -- for instance, for
an example, pay the auto coverage on that -- on that
constable's car. Because the County did not furnish that
vehicle for the constable. And, I mean, there's -- there's
line items that the Court has approved in the budget process
for maintenance on vehicles or fuel for the vehicles. So, I
mean, it's -- what's there .is a result of, you know, what's
happened in -- in the budget process.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You'll see in the
budget there that almost every -- and I know Commissioner
Letz has worked on this for years. Almost every constable's
budget is different. One of them has fuel and oil, the
other one has gas, and the other one doesn't have any of the
above. Craziest thing.
MR, TOMLINSON: That's right.
COMMISSIONEi~ LETZ: I think, just to follow
up on that a little bit, how we got out of whack again, I
mean, as I recall, when I first became a Commissioner, the
E-~~-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
134
Commissioners and the constables were $1,200 a year, which I
think was a travel allowance, and it was tacked to salaries.
And I was one of the proponents that the salary -- why don't
we call it salary, put it in that line item, so that no one
gets anything? And none of the Commissioners -- they didn't
care anything, but sometimes the constables started adding
back in gasoline and maintenance. And they did it -- oh, I
can remember exactly how they did it. They did it very
slowly. When they were given discretion -- a discretionary
amount of budget through the budget process to do what they
wanted with, they decided th~ay wanted to use their $500 or
whatever the amount was for gasoline. One wanted to use it
for tires, and we left them do it. And then, all of a
sudden, it's in your budget. Then we're starting to fund it
automatically. Darndest triizzg you`ve ever seen.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's exactly right. You're
right, that's exactly what happened.
JUDGE TINLEY: I got two questions on this
particular item. Number one, this Stroeher and Sons or
Stroeher-Olfers, are they on some sort of a state contract
over there?
MR. TOMLINSON: I think so. Isn't that what
you said?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They had the state bid
where you buy -- we purchase all our patrol vehicle tires
6-~ ~-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
135
from them.
JUDGE
comparable price for
SHERI
wonder about is, I'd
'cause if it says it
vehicles --
TINLEY: So, we can not buy for a
county purchasers here locally?
EF HIERHOLZER: Only thing I would
be curious what that state bid says,
has to be used on governmental
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm going to get there.
Just --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the reason.
JUDGE TINLEY: Stroeher and Olfers is being
utilized because it's state contract price, not because, you
know, we checked with two or three local suppliers and they
said "X," and Stroeher and Olfers says "Y." I'm kind of
like Commissioner Nicholson. I need to get a little
education here and help me out. The constables utilize
their own vehicles, correct?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLES': And, several years ago, what
was travel has been rolled into their salary, in part to
compensate them for the use of their own vehicle, correct?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. That -- in general, I
think that's a	true statement.	I don'	t --	there's	some --
you know, some	specifics that -	- that	are	contrary	to that,
E-~3-03
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
136
as the Commissioner alluded to, but generally, yes, that's a
correct statement.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And they all supply
their own vehicles?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, they do.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. And, as part and
parcel of that, since it is their vehicle, they in turn are
permitted -- or not prohibited, I guess would probably be a
better approach, from using it for whatever personal reasons
they want to use it for, correct?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: When they're not using it for
what they feel is Kerr Count.y's business, they use it for
whatever they want to. Okay. When this purchase of these
tires was made at Stroeher and Olfers through the state
contract account by Kerr County, that amounts, does it not,
to a certification that that's a tax-exempt purchase?
MR. TOMLINSON: He represented that, yes,
that's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, then, that's an
erroneous representation, wouldn't it be? I mean, these --
these goods or services are not going to be utilized solely
for governmental purposes.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Unless he uses his car
6-23-~3
137
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1g
19
20
21
solely for governmental purposes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, certainly. If his car
-- he's not prohibited from using it for --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And whether he
reimburses the County or not.
JUDGE TINLEY: Whether he reimburses the
County or not, that -- that': not the issue.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, don't yell.
COMMISSIONER IJICHOLSON: Couldn't he say that
-- that he's on duty 24 hours a day?
JUDGE TINLEY: He could say he's on 24 hours
a day. Buster could say he's on duty 24 hours a day.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I am.
JUDGE TINLEY: He checks his roads out like
you wouldn`t believe.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But he's a law
enforcement officer, and everywhere he goes, he -- he might
have occasion to -- to be i1~ the business of law
enforcement.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: When he's in the county.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: When he's in the
22 county.
23
24
.-,
25 you're
JUDGE TINLEY: If he stays in the county.
COMMISSIONEF; LETZ: Well, I agree with what
6-~3-~3
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
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Where do
We've got us a slippery slope here, as
under this scenario, what's to prevent
Stroeher and Olfers, saying, "Put some
here. I'm going to reimburse Kerr Cou
problem."
we draw the line?
I see it. And -- and
me from going to
tires on my truck out
qty, so that's not a
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we know you don't
drive around for the county.
JUDGE TINLEY: You don't know that. You
don't know that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's the same thing.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sure. Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I --
JUDGE TINLEY: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sorry I brought it up.
JUDGE TINLEY: Now, if -- if, in fact, his
budget permits Kerr County to take care of all of his wear
and tears; tires, batteries, things like that, that normally
are -- are recurring maintenance items, that`s a different
story, but I don't see that in his budget.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I don't have his budget
with me, but I think there is a line item for -- for
maintenance on his car. But --
JUDGE TINLE`~: I see one for equipment
repair.
~-~~-c~~
139
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
MR. TOMLINSON: But it's not near that much.
JUDGE TINLEY: $150 for equipment repair.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's his pencil
breaking.
JUDGE TINLEY: There's nothing for insurance
on here either, so that's not= in the equation.
COMMISSIONER ]~ETZ: But even if it's in the
budget, I think the argument is the same. You're -- it's
the potential of using government funds for personal use.
Unless he's using that vehicle 100 percent for county
purposes, I mean, whether or not it's in the budget. I
mean, that's almost an irrelevant point, to me. I mean, if
you're -- if he uses that car at all for personal use,
that's not right, in my mind.
JUDGE TINLEY: If part of the consideration
for him having travel moneys rolled into his salary is that
he uses his vehicle in the performance of his duties, then
he's out of the ordinary scope of maintenance. He's on his
own nickel, the way I see it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the way I am.
JUDGE TINLEY: And utilizing some state
contract to get a better deal or to avoid otherwise
applicable taxes, I think, is wrong.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I do too.
6-~3-03
140
1
2
3
4
5
6

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-_.
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's the same as me.
I mean, I can't -- I would never go to over there and try to
purchase tires for my car. Would you?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just tell him don't
do that any more.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. That's -- I
mean, if it's wrong. I doll"t know. That wasn't my point.
My point was that the guy's reimbursing -- it looks like
here that the County's buying him some tires, but that's not
the case. He's reimbursing the County. That was my point.
And it takes a lawyer, of course, to get off down into the
dump.
COMMISSIONER. NICHOLSON: I'm sitting here
trying to figure out how Commissioner Baldwin can get
reimbursed from U.G.R.A. fc>r his septic expenses.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's try.
MR. TOMLINSON: When you're talking about
partial use of, you know, a vehicle, what do you do about --
about the guy that -- that's a Road and Bridge supervisor
and he drives his pickup home? Or the Sheriff's --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Deputies.
MR. TOMLINSON: -- deputies that drive their
car -- the deputy's -- yoLi know, county car from home to
work and work to home?
JUDGE TINLEY: Rusty, are your guys permitted
6-~ ~-os
141
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to pack up their family and go to Wally World?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I didn't think so.
It's --
SHERIFF HIERF3OLZER: It's not a personal use.
They have them at their house to make them available. Now,
I mean, sure, you're going to have somebody on his way home
may stop at Circle K and pick up a gallon of milk. That's
going home.
JUDGE TINLEY: Or a six-pack.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: May do it. They may go
to H.E.B., but he's not allowed to put his family in that
vehicle and use it for --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the policy,
though, addresses a lot of that. I know it's an issue, and
if it's a surrounding county -- we have some that -- we have
some of our county employees that live outside of Kerr
County and that vehicle's driving across the county line.
They don't go very far <~cross the county line, those that
I'm thinking of, but I know in a neighboring county, they
will take Sheriff's vehicles to the -- to Pleasanton.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Not this one. My guys
who live out of county --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're wrestling with
that same issue about using -- you know.
y-_~-~~
14
1 MS. SOViL: You could put it in your general
2 provisions in your budget book on what you will pay for and
3 what you won't pay for, and that makes the whole thing
4 cut-and-dried.
5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think you'll hear more
6 about it in the budget process. A couple of the constables
? came over and got with us about vehicles and that, and what
8 we recommended to them is look at, like, the last one we
9 purchased from the Ford dealership, you know, the -- the
10 program cars. You can get a Taurus for about $11,000.
11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a little
12 bit -- it's one thing if it's a county vehicle that's
13 used -- that we permit to go home for the -- basically, it's
14 for the benefit of the County to have them have access to
15 that vehicle at a short notice. I think it's a lot
16 different when we use a~zy private vehicle, and use the --
17 you know, their position to get anything done to it, for
18 that matter, because there's no difference between constable
19 or Commissioner, Jannet:t, anyone on her staff, anyone else
20 in the county. I mear. --
21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If there's
22 nothing -- if there's nothing wrong with it, and there may
23 technically be something wrong with it, at least it gives
24 the appearance of something wrong.
25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
6-"'3-~~3
143
1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. There went
2 another 15 minutes of my lunch, Buster.
3 JUDGE TINLEY: You'll make it.
4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not going to bring
5 this up, but if I were, I'd say something like, if you look
6 down at the bottom of the page, it's the same company, same
7 tires for about $40 difference, c.~nly the Sheriff is charged
8 more.
`~ JUDGE TINLEY: Maybe he bought more tires.
10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's a good question,
11 Buster. I might want a copy of that one. I'll go talk to
12 Stroeher.
13 MS. PIEPEF:: Size tires, probably.
14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I didn`t say that, so
15 no sense even bringing it up.
16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I believe those are
17 16-inch, and the other ones --
18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah, sure.
19 You're trying to get out of it now. But, Judge, outside of
20 all that, I'd like to make a motion that we pay our bills.
21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
22 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
23 seconded that the bills as presented be paid. All in favor,
24 signify by raising your right hand.
25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
5-~3-C3
144
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.}
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wasn't that fun? It's
good to go through these exercises every once in a while
during the lunch hour. Good for you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Budget amendment requests.
Number 1.
MR. TOMLINSON: This request is from the
Treasurer to transfer $30F~.95 from Office Supplies to
Postage.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve Budget Amendment Request Number 1. Is that a
question? 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: Budget Amendment Request
Number 1 is approved. Number 2 is from the Sheriff's
Department.
MR. TOMLINSON: This is a request from the
Sheriff to move $1,770.60 out of Software Maintenance,
$839.18 to Investigation Expenses, $357.97 for Radio
6-23-03
145
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
Repairs, and $573.45 to Vehicle Equipment. I do have three
late bills that go along with this. One is to -- for -- to
reimburse the Sheriff for $817.11, and a Robert Weissinger,
a hand check for $1,700 for installing cameras and camera
strips, and one to H.E.B. far investigation supplies for
$116.59. I have a fourth one -- I didn't see that one.
That one is to Chevron for $115.83.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: These are in connection with
this -- this budget amendment request?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: The whole amendment request is
only $1,770, and you've got about $2,500 worth of hand
checks.
MR. TOMLINSON: Part of the amendments
were -- part of the line items had money there, part of the
money there. So, the amendment is just for enough to pay
the bills.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, you're rolling some
late bills in here on u:~ too?
MR. TOMLINSON: We wouldn't pay the bills,
because this money wasn't there, but they're due, and so we
want to have a -- do a nand check before the next court date
to actually make the payment. The budget amendment puts the
c-~3-03
146
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
money in the account to pay it. Typically, we'll hold these
to the next court date to pay them if -- if there's not
other circumstances that we feel like that they need to be
paid immediately. Like -- like, for instance, for the
Chevron bill, it would be past due next court date if we
held it to pay next court date.
COMMISSIONEF< BALDWIN: I've got a question.
I got lost in a little bit of that, Tommy, and I apologize.
The top one, the original amendment here, I can see where
the $1,770 comes out of the Software Maintenance and covers
those issues that are there. But what's paying for these
new -- about $2,000 deal? Where's that money coming from?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, that -- they're coming
out of the line items that; -- like, for instance --
COMMISSIONF~R BALDWIN: Oh, it's a late bill.
It's a late bill. These are late bills.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Some of these
accounts got money in them.
MR. TOMLINSON: Some of the accounts have
money in them. This --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR.. TOMLINSON: If we get a bill that we had
had to charge to an account and it doesn't totally satisfy
the bill --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
h-23-03
147
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: -- we don't pay that until --
until the Court approves a transfer to put funds in that
account.
in them.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure.
MR. TOMLINSOPI: Some of them have some money
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
MR. TCMLINSON: And so this -- this amendment
is to bring those accounts up to an amount that will satisfy
these bills. Typically, we won't include those bills in the
regular bills that you juste approve, because we want to get
the amendment done before we actually make the payment.
JUDGE TINLE'~: So, you`re requesting --
MR. TOMLINSON: In these cases, we did not
want to hold them until the next court date.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure, and I appreciate
that.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, what you're requesting is
approval of budget amendment request and the issuance of
these hand checks, these four hand checks in the amounts
indicated?
MR. TOMLIESON: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second that motion,
but I still have another question.
E-~3-C3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
148
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know who made the
motion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Letz did.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He seconded it already.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. Oh, that end of
the table must do everything.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got a question.
May I ask my question?
JUDGE TINLEY: You certainly may. I'm
curious.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sheriff Hierholzer.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: For the last two or
three pay periods, we have spent money similar to this right
here, the $350 an radio repairs.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we just spent a
million bucks on new radios. What are we repairing?
SHERIFF HIF~RHOLZER: Hand-held.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What could we possibly
be repairing?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The million dollars
spent was on the radio system, it was not on any radios at
all.
r-~3-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
149
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We didn't get any
radios in the car?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We did not replace a
single radio in a car or a :>ingle portable with that
million-dollar system. That was the system. Now, we did
add -- we did make -- and that was all explained back then.
We did make one --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought there was
some radios involved in --
SHERIFF HIER~:OLZER: We made one amendment to
that system here -- how many months ago?
MR. TOMLINSON: For the recorder?
SHERIFF HIE:RHOLZER: For the recorder. But
that was it. There's no actual car radios or portables. We
purchased thase. One is in the six cars a year that we've
been getting, we're buyinc{ those equipped, okay, so all the
equipment in those, being the car radios, is new when we get
our six cars every year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
SHERIFF HIL,RHOLZER: So we have those, all
right. So we stilt have a few of the old ones, 'cause we
haven't replaced every single car in the department yet, so
we`re gradually having to repair or find ways of getting rid
of those. We purchased a few, and then the first year I
took office, we replaced -- with the Court's permission, we
h-~3-03
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
150
replaced all of the hand-held radios for the deputies, so we
already had new portables. The car ones we're getting
replaced yearly. So, no, there were no radios -- actual
radios in that million-dollar system.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's encouraging, isn't it?
JUDGE TINLEY: You got something more than
blue sky, didn't you?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Further questions?
All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLE`': All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, Budget Amendment
Request Number 3.
MR. TOMLINSON: This -- this is for the 198th
District Court. We need to transfer $60 from the
Court-Appointed Attorney line item to Books, Publications,
and Dues.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are these, like,
pocket parts? Or what are you -- fish and game magazines?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, this one -- particular
one is to American Judiciary Society.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh.
6-23-~~?
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
Budget Amendment Request Number 3. Any further questions or
discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLE`~~: All opposed, same sign.
(No responsE°. )
JUDGE TINLES': Motion carries. Next item,
Budget Amendment Request Number 4.
MR. TOMLINSON: This is for Information
Technology Department, transfer $100 out of Miscellaneous to
Office Supplies.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve Budget Amendment F.equest Number 4. Any further
questions or 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. Do we have
any late bills?
e'-~'3-03
1
--~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~-. 1 3
14
15
16
li
18
19
20
2 1
22
23
24
25
152
MR. TOMLINSOPI: I have one other amendment
that I didn't get until late.
JUDGE TINLEY: Budget Amendment Request
Number 5.
MR. TOMI,INSON: This is from the County
Attorney's office. His request is to transfer $600 from
Telephone line item, $600 from Postage, for a total of
$1,200 to go in Books, Publications, and Dues.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are these, like,
pocket parts, or is it like fish and game commission
membership?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, he -- I mean, his
explanation was that he anticipated additional books for his
library, or for -- as a result of the hegislature session,
or -- I don't -- I don't have a bill. This is an
anticipatory --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
MR. TOMLINS~ON: -- amendment.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy, that's a pretty
big variance from the current budget. My first question, I
mean, usually I can see us having a $60 book or one extra
book come in, but $1,200, that's 20 percent of his budget.
That's pretty big off the mark. And then, under Postage and
Telephone, he's nowhere -- I mean, he's -- well, especially
on telephone, he's way beriind. He budgeted a lot more than
c'-~3-03
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
153
he seems to be spending there. Is there a reason that we`re
not -- the variances are so great in these line items from
the budget, that you're aware of?
MR. TOMLINSON: I think the telephone line
items, on the average, for every department has been down
somewhat below what we anticipated. Some of it -- some of
that had to do with -- with the year before last, we had
some extraordinary expenses for telephone, and it had
something to do with something governmental, federal
government tax on telephones. And our total bills --
telephone bills were really more than they usually were, and
we budgeted based on what ure actually were looking at the
year before last. And I trunk, from what I'm seeing,
every -- you know, every department's telephone line item
is -- is actually lower than what we thought. I can't
answer on the postage.
COMMISSIONE~~ LETZ: Okay. All right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you hired the
attorneys that he really would like to have, that money
would be spent; you wouldn't be asking these questions.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good point.
MR. TOMLINSON: I mean, as I said, this is
anticipating -- this is anticipation of what he thinks will
come, so I don't -- I don't really have a need for this.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
E-~3-03
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
154
MS. SOVIL: PJobody's made the first yet.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, see? Y'all are
awake. I move that we pay the bill.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: You mean budget amendment?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm sorry, yes, the
budget amendment.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
Budget Amendment Request Number 5 be approved. Any further
questions or discussion? All in favor, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: A11 opposed, same sign.
(No responsf=. )
JUDGE TINLE'~: Motion does carry. Other than
what we've discussed, any .late bills?
MR. TOMLINSON: I have one from the -- for
the County Clerk, $2,000 for postage to U.S. Postal Service.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought that was in
the regular bills. No?
MR. TOMLINSON: No, that's right here.
JUDGE TINLEY: Check that out.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Somebody's got that --
Treasurer, I believer it was.
6-^3-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
155
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, ten rolls of stamps.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, what's the
question? I didn't follow all that. To do what?
MR. TOMLINSON: A late -- a hand check for
$2,000 to U.S. Postal Service.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the Court approve a bill and authorize a hand check for
payment of $2,000 for postage to United States Post Office
on behalf of the County C:Lerk. 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. Don't have
any minutes before me. I have been presented with monthly
reports from Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, Justice of
the Peace, Precinct 2, and the District Clerk. Do I hear a
motion that the reports as presented be approved?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I make a motion they
be -- as presented, be approved.
JUDGE T IN=FEY : Okay .
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
6-~3-03
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
156
the monthly reports as presented from J.P. 1, J.P. 2, and
District Clerk be approveda 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. Okay.
Information. Anybody have any more information?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do, but I'm not
going to tell you.
11
COMMISSIONER LETZ: None.
JUDGE TINLEY: Being nothing further, I'll
declare the meeting adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 12:41 p.m.)
16
17
18
19
20
21
	22	
	23	
	2 4	
,,1		
	25	
6-~3-03
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
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, Te:~as, this 27th day of June, 2003.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
-- - --- --------------------
Kathy B ik, Deputy County Clerk
Certif,~ed Shorthand Reporter
h-~3-03
ORDER NO. 28132
APPROVAL FOR HILL COUNTRY AUTOMOBILE CLUB TO USE COUNTY PARK
ON NOVEMBER 1, 2003 F'OR FUNDRAISER
On this the 23rd day of June, 2003, upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin,
seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0,
the request by the Hill Country Automobile Club to use the Flat Rock county park on
Riverside Drive Saturday, November lst, 2003, from 7a.m. till 9p.m. for a car show and
chili cook-off.
ORDER NO.28133
APPROVAL OF ABANDONING, DISCONTINUING, AND VACATING THE END
OF DICKEY ROAD
On this the 23rd of June, 2003, upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson,
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-
0-0, that we abandon, discontinue, and vacate 545.16 feet at the end of Dickey Road in
Precinct 4, contingent upon a cul-de-sac there being constructed upon specifications and
in the manner as approved by the Road and Bridge Department.
ORDER NO.28134
APPROVAL TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM WORKERS COMPENSATION TO
CONTRACT FEES
On this the 23rd day of June, 2003, upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded
by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, the
transferring of $20, 000 from Line Item No. 15-611-204, Worker's Compensation, to
Line Item No. 15-611-553, Contract Fees.
ORDER NO. 28135
APPROVAL OF KERR COUNTY'S BURN BAN
On this the 23rd day of June, 2003, upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded
by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, to
cancel the current county burn ban.
ORDER NO. 28136
APPROVAL OF TEMPORARY DISPLAY BY THE
WATER EDUCATION TASK FORCE
On this the 23rd day of June, 2003, upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded
by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, the
authorization of Charles Napper of the Water Education Task Force to work with Thea
Sovil to find a place in the courthouse for the display for the month of August, 2003.
ORDER NO.28137
KERB COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE ON THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF HILL
COUNTRY COMMUNITY MHMR CENTER
On this the 23rd day of June, 2003, upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin,
seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0,
the reappointment of Sam M. Junkin as Kerr County representative on the Board of
Trustees of Hill Country Community MHMR Center.
ORDER N0.28138
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH AACOG FOR DOMESTIC
PREPAREDNESS FUNDING
On this the 23rd day of June, 2003, upon motion by Commissioner Nicholson, seconded
by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court approved unanimously by a vote of 3-0-0, the
Memorandum of Understanding for Domestic Preparedness Funding be approved, and
the County Judge's to sign same.
ORDER NO. 28139
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
On this the 23rd day of June, 2003, came to be considered by the Court various
Commissioners precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are:
10-General for $112,575.07; 15-Road and Bridge for $90,997.72; 18-County Law
Library for $86.94; 50-Indigent Health Care for $11,513.63; 70-Permanent Improvement
for $45,366.57
TOTAL CASH REQUIlZED FOR ALL FUNDS: $260,539.93
Upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, to pay said accounts.
ORDER NO.28140
BUDGET AMMENDMENT IN THE COUNTY TREASURER'S OFFICE
On this the 23rd day of June, 2003, upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin,
seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0,
to transfer $306.95 from Line Item No. 10-497-310, Office Supplies, to Line Item No.
10-497-309, Postage.
ORDER NO. 28141
BUDGET AMMENDMENT FOR SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
On this the 23rd day of June, 2003, upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded
by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, to
transfer $1,770.60 from Line Item No. 10-560-563, Software Maintenance with $573.45
to Line Item No. 10-560-455, Vehicle Equipment; with $357.97 to Line Item No. 10-560-
453, Radio Repairs; and with $839.18 to Line Item No. 10-560-208, Investigation
Expenses. The County Treasurer and County Auditor are hereby authorized to write a
hand check in the amount of $817.11 to Rusty Hierholzer for reimbursement for
'-' expenses, and to write a hand check in the amount of $1,700.00 to Robert Weissinger for
installing cameras and camera strips, and to write a hand check in the amount of $116.59
to H-E-B for investigation exp. 5/03,and to write a hand check in the amount of $115.83
to Chevron for fuel.
ORDER NO. 2 $142
BUDGET AMMENDMENT FOR THE 198TH DISTRICT COURT
On this the 23rd day of June, 2003, upon motion by Commissioner Letz, seconded by
Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, to transfer
$60.00 from Line Item No. 10-436-402, Court Appointed Attorney, to Line Item No. 10-
436-315, Books-Publications-Dues.
ORDER NO. 28143
BUDGET AMMENDMENT FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
On this the 23rd day of June, 2003, upon motion by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by
Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, to transfer
$100.00 from Line Item No. 10-408-499, Miscellaneous, to Line Item No. 10-408-310,
Office Supplies.
ORDER NO. 28144
BUDGET AMMENDMENT FOR COUNTY ATTORNEY
On this the 23rd day of June, 2003, upon motion t>y Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by
Commissioner Nicholson, the Court approved unanimously by a vote of 3-0-0, to
transfer $600.00 from Line Item No. 10-475-420, Telephone, to Line Item No. 10-475-
315, Books-Publications-Dues, and to transfer $600.00 from Line Item No. 10-475-309,
Postage, to Line Item No. 10-475-315, Books-Publications-Dues.
ORDER NO. 28145
APPROVAL OF LATE BILL TO UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
On this the 23rd day of June, 2003, upon motion by Commissioner Letz, seconded by
Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, to pay
$2,000.00, Line Item No. 10-403-309, Postage. The County Treasurer and County
Auditor are hereby authorized to write a hand check for the amount of $2,000.00 to the
United States Postal Service for Postage For Meter.
ORDER NO. 28146
APPROVE AND ACCEPT MONTHLY REPORTS
On this the 23rd day of June, 2003, upon motion by Commissioner Nicholson, seconded
by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, to accept
the following reports and direct that they be filed with the County Clerk for future audit:
Linda Eucker, District Clerk
May 2003
Vance Elliott, JP #1
May 2003
'- Dawn Wright, JP #2
May 2003