1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Regular Session
Monday, August 11, 2003
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge
H.A."BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "B[LL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN Ll~'I'Z, Commissioner Pct. 3
DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4
~~
b
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
I N D E X
August 11, 2003
--- Commissioners Comments
1.1 Presentation by Costco Marke ing, request per-
mission to hold reception fo~ County employees
I
1.2 Approve FY 2003 Entitlement Grant & amendment
~~i of airport budget to fund FY'03 Entitlement
Grant and accomplish airport improvement
1.3 Request by HCADRC to renew contract to provide
~Zv~ mediation services and funding of same
1.6 Amended plat for Stablewood Springs Ranch
(~~~~J Condominium, adding note showing volume & page
0~! of related easements for roads/detention ponds
1.7 Release Letter of Credit for drainage structures
~~~ for Stablewood Springs Ranch Condominium
1.4 PUBLIC HEARING - proposed Rabies and Animal
Control Order and Fee Schedule
1.5 Adopt proposed Rabies and Animal Control Order
Z~~ and Fee Schedule
1.8 Contract with newspaper of general circulation
Z`)Z1~ to publish not less than 100 column inches of
33 advertising, authorize County Judge to sign
1.9 Resolution in support of County participation in
~~~ Alamo Regional Transportation
1.10 Proclaim fourth Monday in September as Family-
{~'Zf2..A Day to Eat Dinner with your Children
v1 . 11 Burn ban ~7i1-3
4.1 Pay Billso2 Oa1`~' a L~
4.2 Budget Amendmentsv~ 0~~~'"' a ~ ~~ /
4.3 Late Bills
4.4 Read and Approve Minutesa ~aa,''
4.5 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports ~ ~ Z (~
5.1 Reports from Commissioners
--- Adjourned
PAGE
4
6
11
21
27
48
49
62
66
69
71
75
76
91
91
91
92
97
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, August 11, 2003, at 9:00 a.m., a regular meeting
of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the
Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville,
Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: T'll call to order the meeting
of the regular Commissioners Court scheduled for this date,
Monday, August the 11th, at 9 a.m. If you would, if you'd
stand with me and join me in a moment of prayer?
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Please be seated.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: At this point in the agenda,
if there is any member of the audience or the public who
wishes to speak on a matter that is not listed on the
agenda, you're privileged to come forward at this time. We
would welcome you to do so. If you want to speak on matters
that are on the agenda, we would ask that you fill out a
public participation form. It's not required that you do
so, but it helps us in planning for the purposes of
conducting the meeting and being able to recognize you and
make sure we don't miss you. But, at this time, if there's
any member of the public that wishes to be heard on any
matter that's not on the agenda, we would ask that you
please come forward and do so at this time.
8-1i-03
4
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
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: There being no indication,
we'll move on. The next item on the agenda. Commissioner
Baldwin, what have you got to tell us about this morning?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sir, I'm going to pass
today. I sure appreciate your offer and -- and allowing me
to speak, but I'm going to pass this morning. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I could talk about
Tivy football.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You could.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to let y'all
off.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm going to pass
too, Judge.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have some comments
later at the end of the meeting, but nothing at the moment.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The -- I was really
delighted to see in the newspapers that an organization
called Clear River Advocates, Inc., has been formed, a
not-for-profit organization to participate in helping to
keep the rivers clean. Mr. Marvin Willis of the Hill
Country Tile in Ingram is the founder of it. It's got a
number of members already, and you can -- you can help out
by being a volunteer or giving them money or sponsoring a
8-"~i-0?
5
1
,.-_ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
trash burn or spending $27 to join the organization. It
does -- it again occurs to me that that's one of the
strengths of Kerr County; we've got a lot of people with a
lot of talent, and they're willing to devote their time and
money to helping improve the community. In that same
respect, the volunteer fire departments got a lot of press
last week or so, and I -- even as close as I am to them, I'm
impressed with their capability when I read about it. I
didn't know that our volunteer fire departments had 12
operational vehicles to put on fires. That's a lot of -- a
lot of equipment and a lot of protection for us. The other
thing, I had the privilege last week of cooking at the
Cowboy Camp Meeting, the annual event that all of you are
aware of and know about. That's -- I've done that for
several years. That -- Buster, you probably know that that
thing's older than any of us; it goes way, way back.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: '20's.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. So, that's
over as of yesterday for this year, and I encourage
everybody to get out there and -- and participate in good
food and music and -- and preaching. That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Only comment I
have is that I'm sure we all remember that school is just
around the corner this next week, and so as you're out
driving, be mindful of that, so that we can keep our
8-11-G3
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
children safe and not expose them to any more danger than
they have in this world anyway. Let's move on to the
agenda. First item, we have a presentation by Costco
Marketing requesting permission to hold a complimentary
reception for the Kerr County employees.
MS. SOVIL: They're not here.
JUDGE TINLEY: They're not here, all right.
We'll move on to the next item, then. The next item is
consideration of Fiscal Year 2003 Entitlement Grant and
amendment of airport budget to fund Fiscal Year 2003
Entitlement Grant and accomplish airport improvements. Mr.
Pearce, good to see you here this morning.
MR. PEARCE: Good morning, Judge and
Commissioners. I'm Dave Pearce, the Airport Manager for the
Kerr County/Kerrville Municipal Airport. What you have
before you today is an opportunity to have a 90/10 grant
that is administered through TexDOT, the Block Grant Program
from the F.A.A. We have been awarded $150,000 for an
entitlement grant, and then our match on top of it would be
$16,667. That would give us the opportunity to tack onto an
existing grant and continue the fencing around the airport.
The fencing is for security, as well as for wildlife. It
includes four gates. It is my belief that when we bid this,
that we should have at least 85 percent, if not 100 percent,
of the fencing project completed. This was not forecasted
~-11-03
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in the budget; however, we do have fund balance to cover it.
We're not asking for additional funds, just the
authorization to spend the money that's in the fund. With
your concurrence, this will go to the City Council tomorrow
night, and then to TexDOT on Wednesday. Are there any
questions?
JUDGE TINLEY: This is one of the items, is
it not, that's in the proposed budget for the coming fiscal
year, if I'm not mistaken, isn't it, Mr. Pearce?
MR. PEARCE: No, sir. We do have an
Entitlement Grant that is forecasted for next year also.
This was not forecasted in the -- the next year's grant,
though, for the fencing. What has happened in the past is
there has not been a forecast of entitlement money, and it's
been -- a little bit of a reactionary type of an action has
been required on all of our parts. What I have done is sat
down with the finance director, forecasted out five to seven
years, and forecasted an Entitlement Grant which we will
probably get every year, and that way we have it in the fund
and we're not always reacting toward it.
JUDGE TINLEY: And, if I understand you
correctly, the -- the Entitlement Grant match of that same
amount, $16,667, that was projected and requested in the
next year's budget, is a total]_y separate Entitlement Grant?
Is that what you're telling me?
~-~i-o3
1
.-. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,,._ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
8
MR. PEARCE: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, essentially what
we've got is two of them that we're looking at; this one to
be paid matching funds out of airport operational balances,
and the other to be budgeted and provided for by joint
contributions?
MR. PEARCE: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I might add, Judge,
this ones comes on the heels of one which we obtained
similarly last year which got the fencing project underway.
Is that correct, Mr. Pearce?
MR. PEARCE: Yes, sir, and this will be
married up with the other one to give us approximately
$320,000, and that is why I believe that we'll be able to
complete or nearly complete the project.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Very good.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- can you
explain the fencing project? I mean, obviously, I know what
we're doing, but it just seems that $320,000, we could --
must be a pretty amazing fence; just seems like an awful lot
of money.
MR. PEARCE: It is quite expensive. We've
got 503 acres we're trying to fence off. With that, we're
going to 10-foot -- or 10-foot fencing with three strands of
~-11-G3
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
.,-. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
barbed wire on the top; runs about $24.97 a square foot, is
what our -- or linear foot, is what we're estimating. When
we roll it around the airport, that's going to be right
around $300,000 -- $2.90,000 to $300,000. We also have four
gates that are estimated in there. Those type of gates will
have keypads, electric, where individuals will get their own
key code and be able to -- similar to apartments, where you
can enter into the airport on the aircraft side. Those
gates run between $30,000 and $45,000, is what we're
estimating, apiece so, when we add all that together, we're
hoping that we'll come very, very close to the $320,000
mark. And this is for both wildlife and for security.
Normally, you would see an 8-foot fence with barbed wire,
but here, recommended with the deer and what-have-you, is
going up to a higher fence.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Dave, when you talk
about fences and gates, are you talking about fencing off
the -- like, Kerrville Aviation area right there?
MR. PEARCE: The entire airport will be
fenced off, but as we go into where Kerrville Aviation is,
Dugosh Aviation, the fence will actually take a 90-degree
cut and go all the way to where the ramp area is. So,
people will have access to the facilities, but not to the
area where aircraft are parking.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good.
-11-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
25
10
MR. PEARCE: Currently, right now, anybody
can drive onto the airport, the runways or whatever, and
that's not --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And animals can run
onto the runway.
MR. PEARCE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As they have done.
Judge, I would move the approval of the Fiscal Year 2003
Entitlement Grant and amendment of the airport budget in the
amount of $16,667 to fund Fiscal Year 2003 Entitlement Grant
for the completion of fencing at the airport.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded
that -- to approve the agenda item. Any further questions
or discussion? If not, 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. Pearce. I appreciate it.
MR. PEARCE: Judge, if I could be so bold,
could I ask if you possibly could sign that so I can run
that through? Sorry.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me get it in hand first.
~-11-03
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
11
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: City Council takes
this up tomorrow night?
MR. PEARCE: Yes, it is. It's on the agenda
right now. And then, with their concurrence, I'll fax it to
TexDOT's district in the morning; I already talked about
Wednesday morning.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: While we're waiting,
the -- I see we have a special guest in the courtroom this
morning, commonly known as Judge Spencer Brown, but I know
him as a former Tivy Antler great. Judge Brown, welcome to
our courtroom.
JUDGE BROWN: TPlank you very much.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item will be
consideration of request by Hill Country Alternate Dispute
Resolution Center to renew contract with Kerr County to
provide mediation services in Kerr County, and the funding
of the same, and to authorize County Judge to sign the
contract. Mrs. Bailey?
MS. BAILEY: Thank you, Your Honor. Good
morning. For the record, my name is Ilse Bailey, and I'm
the president of the board of directors for the Hill Country
Alternative Dispute Resolution Center; that's the Mediation
Center for short. I am here today asking that the Court
renew the contract that we initiated last year about this
time. As you will recall. -- it's my opportunity to kind of
8-11-03
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
12
brag on the center a little bit. We started up in October
of last year, so we have not yet even been in operation for
a year. Kerr County was kind enough to allow us to utilize
some of the funds that have been set aside specifically for
use in mediation processes for the beginning of our center,
and as y'all see frcm the documents that I provided to you,
we have made some really significant progress. As you can
see from the chart on the first page of the document that
I've provided to you, we started out in October with no
mediations, and as you can see, we've steadily grown, and
we've not only been providing mediation services here in
Kerr County, but in, so far, three of the eight counties in
the judicial districts that we serve, and we're working hard
at moving on into the other five counties.
What we're asking Kerr County for as part of
this contract is $33,000. My understanding is that there is
$34,000 left in the fund. As you will recall, that fund is
made up of amounts from court costs. The Legislature
authorized the Commissioners Court to dedicate -- I believe
it's $10 from every civil case filed in district court to
this fund, which is to be used solely for mediation
services. There was about 70-some thousand dollars in it
last year. We got $48,000 from you to start this up. That
was used almost exclusively for salaries for our Executive
Director, who's here today, Scooter Brown, and we also have
a-il-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
an assistant to her, so that she can get out in the
community and -- and solicit more activity. We get not only
court-ordered mediations, but we also resolve disputes
between people that come voluntarily to the center, so we
keep those cases out of the court, and we're hopefully
helping people to resolve law disputes without expensive
litigation.
We've had a lot of support in the community
from individuals, as well as from lawyers who provided --
have sent cases to us, and also provided volunteer services
to do the mediations. We also have had one class, and we're
scheduling another class. The brochure, I think, was
provided to you in the packet. This document shows the next
class that we're going to be offering, training people to
become mediators so that they can help other people resolve
their disputes in the community. If you would be interested
in hearing a little bit of the progress report, Scooter
Brown has got a little summary of progress to-date. And if
you have any other questions, I'd be glad to answer them for
you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Bailey,
big advocate of mediation, because I know
that it works. It's very effective. My
sure you're aware, we've only got so much
fund. We can use it for no other reason,
I'm, of course, a
from experience
concern is, as I'm
money in that
but we only have
8-11-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
14
so much. Do we have an indication that, by this additional
one-year funding -- I think you had a partial year last
year, wasn't it?
MS. BAILEY: Well --
JUDGE TINLEY: Or was it. a full year?
MS. BAILEY: It was a full year, yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. With the additional --
this one additional year, that the activity of the Mediation
Center will be such that it will be able to kind of carry
its own weight?
MS. BAILEY: Well, that's certainly our
intention. And we gave some thought to how much to request
this year, because if we requested a smaller amount, of
course, we could assume that there would possibly be more
left over for the next year. But it only -- the fund only
increases by about $5,000 to $10,000 a year. The reason
there was so much in the fund to begin with is that it
started up in the mid-90's and no one had ever withdrawn
from it. We sort of feel like if -- if the center is going
to be able to become self-sufficient, the best way to do
that is to really fully fund it from the outset, and -- and
work really hard this year on finding alternative sources.
Certainly, this year we -- we have done fairly well. We've
made some -- some income from t:he class that we've -- we've
offered. We'll probably make more money from this next
8-~1-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.~..
25
15
class. We're going to offer another family mediation class
in November -- is that right, Scooter? Which is -- that's
the additional 24-hour education requirement that the State
establishes to qualify people to call themselves family
mediators. And we've also gotten some small grants, and
because of the fact that now Scooter has some more time to
work on grant applications, we're hoping -- the idea is that
we would be able to become enough self-sufficient that we'd
be able to continue on past this next year.
We also are working hard at -- in the other
counties. Some of the counties, we're -- Bandera County,
for instance, has been collecting the fee, and we were able
to get some funding from them. Of course, their fund is
smaller than Kerr County's. We will be going back to
Bandera asking for funding. The other counties have not yet
been collecting the tee. A part of our outreach is to go to
the counties to -- to convince them that collecting the fee
is going to be important, which would then allow us the next
year to come in and -- and solicit those funds from those
counties. But, again, those are going to be smaller
amounts, because the population is smaller in those counties
and the number of cases that they file is smaller. So, it
is incumbent upon us to find sources to -- to stay fully
funded.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I want to see you be
8-"~1-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
-~--
25
16
successful; I don't want you to outrun your resources. And
that's my only concern.
MS. BAILEY: Well, it's --
JUDGE TINLEY: But if you've got adjoining
counties that are going to be part of this activity, why --
MS. BAILEY: That's our intention.
JUDGE TINLEY: You've got resources there
that you haven't drawn on yet; is that correct?
MS. BAILEY: Exactly.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
MS. BAILEY: Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just one quick one,
Ilse. What is -- what is the fee structure on mediation
training classes? 'Cause I see you've got $20,000 in your
budget which would come from training.
MS. BAILEY: From training, yeah. Yes, sir.
We did a survey around the state, and have ascertained that
most of the time, the training classes -- it's a week-long
class, so it's a pretty substantial commitment of time from
the trainers and the people being trained. They usually run
between $800 to $1,000 for a class. We're charging --
MS. BROWN: $795.
MS. BAILEY: -- $795 for our class, so we're
hoping that by being on the low end of how much those
classes cost, the people will come here even from out of
8-11-03
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
town to take the classes. And since we are planning on
having 20 to 30 people in each class, we sort of figure
that, after we take out expenses, that we can expect to
maybe make that much.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Ms. Bailey, the --
the item, Mediation Income, $15,000? What --
MS. BAILEY: We charge $50 per participant,
per side, for the mediation.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Are the -- are the
parties to the dispute represented by counsel?
MS. BAILEY: Sometimes they are and sometimes
they aren't. If they are, counsel is welcome to attend the
session, but the intent is that it's really an exchange
between the actual parties.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, the two parties
to a dispute could get by with only $50 each cost?
MS. BAILEY: Exactly. Yeah, they can
complete the whole process for $100 total.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I -- I really like
what you're doing, and in my view, this is really good
progress.
MS. BAILEY: Well, I think it is. You know,
the -- the sort of down side to it is that it's certainly
not enough to keep us going without additional income from
a-ii-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
18
other sources. But, for less than a year's progress, I
think that it really shows that: it's becoming something that
the community is aware of and is wanting to participate in.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I share Judge
Tinley's views on the funding of it. It's desirable if it
could be self-funding from the $10 fee and from other
sources.
MS. BAILEY: That's certainly what we're
intending to do. Don't really have an option.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the approach that
they're taking is kind of the way this was presented
originally, that they wanted to go ahead and use most of the
money, basically, up front to get the program running, and
give it the best shot that way, rather than trying to
piecemeal it. And it appears to be working. Hopefully --
MS. BAILEY: So far, I think it is. And we
provided a -- a form contract there. If -- I think it's
pretty much the same as last year's, but I have not run it
by the County Attorney for his approval. If you'd like to
do that prior to signing it, that would be fine. I can make
any changes that you think are necessary. But, at this
time, what we're asking you to do is at least approve the
concept of the contract and the amount, and authorize the
Judge to sign whatever contract is approved by the County
Attorney.
5-11-r,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
19
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move that we approve
the new contract with Hill Country Alternative Dispute
Resolution Center, subject to that contract being
form-approved by the County Attorney, and authorize County
Judge to sign the same, and approve the funding from Kerr
County in the amount of $33,000 to come from -- do you
happen to know what fund that is?
MS. BAILEY: I think I -- I would just call
it the Alternate Dispute Resolution Fund.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: From the Alternate
Dispute Resolution Fund.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve the agreement and funding with Hill Country
Alternate Dispute Resolution Center. Any further questions
or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just want to make a
comment. I'm -- I'm also a huge fan of -- of this
particular program, but I'm really a big fan of the spirit
of the program. This is the way things need to be -- have
come to resolution, is people sit down and visit about
things. And instead of -- what's amazing about -- about it
is that they're -- they're cutting lawyers out of work, and
I absolutely love that. That's great. (Laughter.) That's
all.
8-11-03
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
20
JUDGE TINLEY: I knew you'd be pleased at
that, Commissioner Baldwin.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I mean, I saw one poke
his head around the corner. He saw some money here
somewhere; he poked his head in and took off.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion?
MS. BROWN: May I say one thing?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, Ms. Brown.
MS. BROWN: Every time we settle a case in
mediation instead of sending it to a jury, we save the
taxpayers a lot of money. It's expensive to seat juries.
So, when these cases come to mediation that are settled
there, it saves all the taxpayers money.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, even if you don't have a
jury trial -- granted, if they file a lawsuit, they're going
to pay a court cost deposit, but I think Ms. Uecker can --
can affirm that the amount of work that goes into a single
case in her office is not enough to offset what's paid in
court costs. It's a losing proposition. So, you're
certainly performing a very valuable function, and -- and
you're getting these people back to where they need to be at
the earliest possible opportunity, and I think that's what's
good about it. And you don't drive a wedge between
s-ii-o~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
21
neighbors or relatives or -- and that's -- oftentimes,
that's what it is; the people that ought to be the closest
is the ones that are driven apart by matters of this type.
Any further questions or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify bay raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
8
9
10 very much.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Thank you
MS. BAILEY: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: The next item on the agenda is
to consider the amended plat for Stablewood Springs Ranch
Condominium, adding a note showing the volume and page of
related easements for roads and detention ponds outside the
boundary of the subdivision.
MR. JOHNSTON: Good morning.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning. Good morning,
Franklin.
MR. JOHNSTON: This item was on the agenda, I
think, last -- two weeks ago, last meeting. I was out of
town. I thought it was all up-to-date, but I guess there
was a question about cross-referencing some easement notes
that we have that are filed under easements, but they're not
referenced on the subdivision plat. Is that correct? I
~-11-0~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.~-,
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.._.
25
22
believe that the -- in order to change the file plat needs a
court order for the person who made the plat to go in and
change it. Should be Domingues and Associates.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't have any backup
on this one. At least I don't have any backup on this. I
have backup on the Letter of Credit, but not backup on --
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. JOHNSTON: I think that's something
different; that's the next item.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's not this one?
MR. JOHNSTON: David Jackson probably has
some comments, or at least get the wording that he wants or
whatever.
MR. JACKSON: David Jackson, 820 Main, on
behalf of Stablewood. We have no objections if y'all want
to make a cross-reference. To explain the history of this
matter, you heard the plat presentations; we discussed at
length about what would be on the plat. We submitted all
the language. That was approved, it was signed, the plat
was recorded. And it makes a reference to the condominium,
the drainage easement, and the -- what's it called? --
dedication of the road or right-of-way. I have copies here.
Both were recorded in the same form that I'd submitted. We
did correct one legal description; it's been rerecorded.
So, we're done as far as we're concerned. But if you still
8-11-U3
1
._.. 2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
23
want to make a reference on the plat, so long as we don't
have to go back through the platting process -- that's the
only reason I'm standing here -- it's fine with us. But I
talked to Charles, and he said, "Well, I can't just go over
to the plat records and pull the plat and write something on
it." And Frank suggested we get an order, so if that's what
we're talking about, then that's great, as long as the clerk
is okay with that process. Now that we have the recording
information on the dedication and the drainage easement,
it's an easy matter, so we don't object to that at all.
We're going -- we've always been in favor of the
cross-referencing, only I think we just want to be sure what
the methodology is. So, if you have any questions, that's
great, or if you need copies of these documents, I think
I -- I've given them to you, or I'll give them to you today.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- the only reason
they weren't put on the plat originally is that they weren't
available yet?
MR. JACKSON: No, they weren't requested.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Weren't requested?
MR. JACKSON: We went through the process,
had a lengthy discussion that what you wanted on the plat
was a cross-reference to the condominium. We did that. You
approved it, everybody signed. Excuse me. We just didn't
know you wanted that cross-reference. And then Frank was
8-~1-03
1
.- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-,
25
24
out of town some, and we're just a little -- the summer kind
of got away from us before we got back to you on the issue.
So, yeah, if you -- if we'd been standing here back then and
you said, "And, by the way, I want the reference to the
dedication and the drainage," I'd say sure, 'cause what we
did is we recorded the condominium drainage and dedication,
one, two, three, and then the plat, 'cause that's what I'm
told to do. We've corrected orie legal description, but that
-- the substantive document's exactly the same.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Frank, do we normally put
this information on plats? Reporting references of
easements on the plat?
MR. JOHNSTON: I don't think we necessarily
normally do. This -- this one is a little unique, because
the entrance road, I think, is the issue, and there's some
detention ponds that are outside the actual limit of the
subdivision. That's what the easements are for. And so
just -- it would tie it all together. It's just so if
someone looked at the plat without looking up all the --
doing a search of the title, I think they would see all that
on there. I think, under normal circumstances, they'd run
across all that in the Property Records anyway, wouldn't
they?
MR. JACKSON: Sure, those easements are
pertinent to each of the condominiums. And to refresh your
a-ii-o3
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
25
memory, we're all kind of feeling our way along here; we've
never actually gone through this process; at least I
haven't, of condominium. So, however you guys would like to
do it, that's great with us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you keeping notes on
how we're doing this so we can --
MR. JACKSON: Actually, Frank and I did
discuss that. You put together a regulation, and it
probably does help somebody going along behind us. That's a
good thought.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, if recording
it takes a court order, I'll move that we -- that we approve
an amended plat for Stablewood Springs Ranch Condominium,
adding note showing volume and page of related easements for
roads and detention ponds.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the Court approve an amended plat for Stablewood Springs
Ranch, adding a note showing the volume and page of related
easements for road and detention ponds which lie outside the
boundary of the subdivision. Any further discussion or
questions?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. I don't know -- I'm
anticipating a question Jannett is going to have on fees for
doing a plat. I presume fees are being waived by the
8 - 1 1 - G
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
._-_ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
County? Because, I mean, to me, it's our request.
MR. JACKSON: What kind of fees?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, the --
MS. PIEPER: Recording fees.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Recording fees and all
that.
MR. JACKSON: We're talking how much to -- to
record?
JUDGE TINLEY: Refiling the plat is all.
MR. JACKSON: Yeah.
MS. PIEPER: Well, there's a $50 recording
fee, plus records management, courthouse security.
MR. JACKSON: Are we talking under $100?
That's fine.
MS. PIEPER: $100 to $150 possibly.
MR. ~7ACKSON: I don't want you to have to
waive anything. That's fine with us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. All right.
MS. RAMSEY: Thank you for the thought,
though. Thank you for the thought.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I have a
question. Do we need to address this -- this letter from
Catherine Fox, or not?
MR. JOHNSTON: I think that's the next item.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's on the -- I think
8-11-03
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
•--
25
that's on the drainage issues.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, it is.
JUDGE TINLEY: The inspections and the Letter
of Credit in connection with it, if I'm not mistaken.
MR. JOHNSTON: I think that's Number 7, yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any further questions?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir.
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. Now we got
to the item where we've got some -- some public interest
that's been expressed. Next agenda item is consider release
of Letter of Credit Number 7037450 for drainage structures
for Stablewood Springs Ranch Condominium. Franklin?
MR. JOHNSTON: Yes. I made a second
inspection on those. First time out, we looked at all of
them. They were in place. They did not at that time have
some silt screening up and some trash catchers over the
inlets for the drainage outlets, but those have all
subsequently been installed, and berms have been seeded.
The seeds are not up very much, but they have been seeded.
~3-1_-U3
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,---
25
I think all that part of the project is complete. I think
over the weekend they had a test on it; I think they had
some rain up there, and I think it -- water accumulated in
the proper places.
JUDGE TINLEY: How much rain did they get out
there? Do you know?
MS. RAMSEY: We got a little under an inch.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good for you.
MS. RAMSEY: It just came right down. I
know, I didn't get any in Utopia, but I got it there.
MR. JOHNSTON: The design for the detention
ponds, you recall, was to hold back a 100-year frequency
event, and then -- so they release it at a prescribed rate
so it would not cause damage downstream.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I mean, the retention
ponds are complete? That's what the Letter of Credit was
for.
MR. JOHNSTON: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't see a reason not
to release the Letter of Credit.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else, Franklin?
MR. JOHNSTON: No. I think that --
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Frost, you filed a
participation request asking to be heard?
MS. FROST: I did. Thank you. Good morning,
8-"il-U3
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
Commissioner Nicholson, Commissioner Letz, Judge Tinley,
Commissioner Williams, and Commissioner Baldwin. My name is
Mary Hart Frost. I own property with my husband in Bumble
Bee Hills, and I share property with my cousins on Pleasure
Hill. I'm here this morning to ask that the Court not
release Letter of Credit Number 7037450 for drainage
structures for Stablewood Springs Ranch Condominium
Subdivision until the Court and those property owners with
property either bordering Stablewood property lines or in
close proximity receive a written, detailed explanation of
the County Engineer's inspection of each of these drainage
structures. That detailed explanation was requested in a
letter dated August 5th, 2003, and I believe you all have
copies of that, to Mr. Franklin Johnston. As there have
always been grave concerns about these drainage structures,
referred to as detention ponds, and our properties will
forever be next to them, we must be provided with -- excuse
me -- with mare information concerning this inspection.
Referring to Mr. Douglas Hearn's -- Hearn
Engineering, Incorporated overview of Domingues and
Associates' hydrologic study for Stablewood dated
March 21st, 2003, and having conferred with our engineer
further, we must have assurances that these drainage
structures are of Sound integrity. If, for any reason, they
are built improperly or are not large enough or are not
8-1i-o3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
30
placed in the proper locations to accomplish the purpose for
which they were intended, they could make stormwater runoff
flooding of our properties worse in the future. Kerr County
Subdivision Rules and Regulations 5.06.A states, "Drainage
facilities shall be provided and constructed in accordance
with approved plans as required in these regulations.
Drainage plans shall be prepared by a Registered
Professional Engineer experienced in hydrology analysis."
Therefore, to verify that the drainage facilities for
Stablewood have been constructed in accordance with the
approved plan, as required in these regulations, a
Registered Professional Engineer experienced in hydrology
analysis should inspect and certify these drainage
structures before the Court releases the Letter of Credit.
Some of our concerns about the drainage
structures and detention ponds are: Were proper soil types
used to construct these ponds? Has the soil been packed
properly? I believe Mr. Johnston answered our next
question; when will vegetation be planted to help hold the
soil in place? He indicates that the berms have been
seeded. Are culverts in the ponds of proper size? And,
most importantly, are the pond dimensions correct, as far as
depth and size, to retain the water from a 100-year event
and release it slowly? Are the ponds placed in the proper
locations to control stormwater runoff onto downhill
a-11-r,~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
31
property? We think all these questions should be answered
in a written report from the County Engineer after those
structures have been inspected by him and an engineer
experienced in hydrology analysis, such as Hearn
Engineering, where they sent the original hydrology report
to be analyzed, and they came back with some suggestions.
There are 11 drainage structures, detention ponds in the
Stablewood development. I would like to ask the Court how
many other developments have come before you or Mr. Johnston
that have had as many drainage structures/detention ponds as
Stablewood that were uphill and where the ponds were in such
close proximity to existing structures or homes on others'
properties? I don't know if you can answer that for me
today, or you -- if you'd have to research that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I cannot answer
that.
24 have.
25
8-11-U3
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't have any
MS. FROST: Okay. Anybody else? Okay. The
unique topography of this development makes it imperative
that the downhill established property owners and this Court
receive a detailed, written explanation of the inspection of
these structures. I thank you for your attention and
consideration of this serious issue that is before the Court
today, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you might
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
32
questions, but I have some comments.
MS. FROST: All right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's my understanding
that Frank Domingues is the engineer of record. Is -- is
that right?
MR. JACKSON: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or anybody --
MR. JACKSON: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And he is a Registered
Professional Engineer with a license in engineering, number,
et cetera.
MR. JACKSON: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That should be
satisfactory. The point one of your points is asking the
County to do the inspection, Ms. Hart. I couldn't disagree
more with that. That's not our job. If it was a road, I
can see how our County employee would go there and do the
inspection, but on this issue, that's not -- I don't see it
that way at all.
MS. FROST: Well, the County employee's
already gone and done an inspection.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. I
understand that.
MS. FROST: And all we're requesting is that
you pay attention to your own rules and regulations, which
e-~i-o~
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
33
state that drainage plans shall be prepared by a Registered
Professional Engineer experienced in hydrology analysis.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you saying that
Mr. Domingues is not? Or --
MS. FROST: I'm saying that we have looked up
his qualifications on the Internet, and we have not found
that he has any certification or any kind of expertise in
hydrology analysis. Yes, that's what we're saying.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If I may just, you know,
explain a little bit from what Commissioner Baldwin -- first
of all, on the experience, if you're challenging his
professional credentials, that's done at the state level,
not at the county level. So, if you're going to challenge
Mr. Domingues -- we have to assume that if an engineer is
willing to put his seal and license on the line, that we're
going to believe that seal. If you want to challenge his,
you're welcome to go to the State. We have no authority
over that. But a little -- just a -- you know, they have,
in my opinion, met the requirements or of our Subdivision
Rules. And it's -- I mean, this is -- we customarily do not
go out and inspect -- I mean, you know, Frank -- well,
Frank -- I don't see how we can ask him to give a certified
letter on something. If he goes through that, then he'd
have to do -- we'd have to spend untold thousands of dollars
on basically getting the whole thing re-engineered again.
8-11-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
34
That's the only way that we can determine if it's in the --
built in the exact place or compaction is the same. We'd
probably spend $100,000 in engineering fees to verify what
was done, and that's not the intent of our rules. I mean,
we have to rely on the licensing provided by the state, and
that's what we're doing here. If there's a problem with
that, it's beyond our, you know, authority. So, I mean, I
think they have met the rules and the requirements of our
Subdivision Rules.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
comments relative to Ms. Frost? I have another
participation form here. Carolyn Bachofen?
MS. BACHOVEN: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. Please
come forward. Give your name to the reporter.
MS. BACHOVEN: My name is Carolyn Bachofen.
I'm a property owner at Bear Paw Ranch, but my husband and I
have been property owners at Pleasure Hill for 30 years. We
have a small cabin that's right on the property line.
There's a berm behind us and a detention pond right there.
This last weekend, we had about an inch of rain. At that
time, the water, which is just an inch now, has come over
this, has made a -- 5-inch ditch on the corner of our cabin,
which is undermining the foundation. I think, with just
1 inch of rain, this is -- you know, shows that this
8-11-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
35
detention pond or berm or whatever has not helped. And I
just wanted to say that I really feel like that we need to
have somebody relook at this and see what's happening with
just a small amount of rain. And I don't know whether that
falls in your parameter, but I sure would like to have some
help on this. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Just a minute. Excuse me,
please, ma'am. Does anybody have any questions for
Ms. Bachofen?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a comment; again,
it's similar to what I told Ms. Hart, is that, you know, the
issue appears to be whether the engineer who sealed this did
a good job. And, you know, he has sealed it to us that he
has, and it's beyond the scope of our rules and our
authority, in my opinion, to challenge it. If you all want
to challenge that as an association, a group, an individual,
I think you can. But, you know, we're relying on the
licensing authority of State of Texas, and I don't see how
we can do anything other than what we're doing.
MS. BACHOVEN: Well, I just foresee that this
is going to be a continuing problem for anybody that lives
downhill from the development. And, you know, it will be a
problem for our county, too. And this might be a place that
we can, you know, stop some of the problems that we're
having, because I just see that our county's foreseeing a
8-11-03
1
--- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
36
lot of -- a lot of development on the hills above
established property.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. And I think
that's why we're requiring the drainage plans to be done by
a licensed engineer. And, you know, I trust that the State
of Texas is -- you know, their licensing program for
engineers is adequate.
MR. JOHNSTON: I have a question. Is that
where the drain -- there's a ditch down at the edge of the
property that drains across the highway. Is that where --
MS. BACHOVEN: The ditch.
MR. JOHNSTON: That's where the water drains,
right?
MS. BACHOVEN: Yes, the water that's coming
over my piece of property, which is here, and the berm is
right behind with the detention ponds right there.
MR. JOHNSTON: Mm-hmm.
MS. BACHOVEN: There's water that's coming
around this little -- my little cabin.
MS. FROST: Around the berm or around the
detention --
MS. BACHOVEN: Around the berm. Around the
berm itself. So it -- you know, there's some problem with
24 the berm.
.-,.
25
MS. RAMSEY: May I ask a question? On that
8-11-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,_ 2 4
25
37
berm, there was a berm there before we ever did anything.
Did the water come then?
MS. BACHOVEN: No, the little berm -- there
was not a problem with the little berm.
MS. RAMSEY: But the little berm's still
there; we just added another berm above it.
MS. BACHOVEN: Above it, right. But it's --
now, l guess, it's coming between them or over them or -- I
don't know what the problem is.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, what we have
here, I think, is -- is a bigger issue than a Letter of
Credit. We've got a neighborhood -- actually two
neighborhoods, Bumble Bee and -- and Pleasure Hill, who've
suffered serious adverse impact from the construction
activity at Stablew~od Springs. And now -- now we have some
pretty complex structures up there that are designed to hold
and release water, and the residents there don't see --
don't believe that they're being adequately protected. They
don't trust that -- that the design and the construction is
adequate to prevent an additional disaster. They're looking
to the County -- whether that's our job or not, they're
looking to the County and the County Engineer to give them
some assurances that what's been constructed there will
prevent a reoccurrence of the disaster that they've had in
the past. The -- on a much smaller scale, the County has
8-11-03
38
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~^ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,,.., 2 4
25
recently been involved in a situation where -- where we
approved plans, subdivision plans, and conducted an
inspection, and then there was damage done to a -- to a
neighbor of that new subdivision, and the County became
involved in litigation on it. I want -- I would like to do
two things. I would like to help protect these two
neighborhoods, and I would like to do whatever we can to
protect the County from further involvement in a dispute
between these neighbors. We've -- this recent information
is -- in fact, I just -- I got the letter from Catherine Fox
via fax a day or two ago, and I just got Franklin Johnston's
response today, this morning, 15 minutes before the meeting.
I've learned that there's additional requirements for
inspection that I didn't know about. For example, the
stormwater controls are required to have inspection once
every 14 days, or within 24 hours of a storm event of
greater than one-half inch. I'd be surprised if an
additional inspection occurred after the 1-inch rain that we
-- that occurred this weekend, we just heard about. Again,
the Letter of Credit's a minor issue. I think we should not
release the Letter of Credit until we've gotten a fuller
explanation from -- from the County Engineer and had more
time to -- to study the issues that have been raised.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I -- my opinion is that
they have followed our Subdivision Rules and Regulations,
R-11-d3
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
._ 2 4
25
39
and I think we're open to a liability lawsuit if we don't
release the Letter of Credit. I don't think we can, without
reason, not release one. And, I mean, it's just my opinion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner, what is
it that you read that requires another inspection?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Franklin?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: After this last
rainfall?
MR. JOHNSTON: That -- yeah, I think it was
brought up, but they filed back in March of 2000 -- 2001?
2002, a year ago, NVDES, which is a national pollution
prevention project by the EPA, that says that they'll
construct controls -- I mean -- let me refer to my letter,
That would prevent any pollution downstream, and they -- you
know, that was part of the -- the original plan, and that's
what the -- the plan by Charles Domingues was -- was a
follow-up to that. And it was a rather extensive stormwater
pollution prevention plan that they filed with us, and it's
also filed with the EPA. And part of that is, there are
14-day inspections of the detention areas. There's a
checklist in there, and they -- they qo out and look at
them. If there's a rain event, they go out within 24 hours,
and there's a detailed list of questions they answer yes,
no, or N/A on. They keep these on file so they know
practically any time what the history of all these are, not
8-11-v3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
40
just a one-time thing and forget about them. It's a
follow-up, and it's not a County follow-up; it's a federal
program.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's my question.
Franklin, you keep saying "they" are supposed to go out,
and --
MR. JOHNSTON: That would be the owners of
Stablewood Springs.
MS. RAMSEY: May I -- it says that
environmental -- we got our stormwater pollution plan
through, and when we were doing all our construction, they'd
come out and check us. And now that we've finished
construction, all we're doing is paving the roads, we have
been somewhat released from them. But that also says tech
engineering. After this last drainage issue, there's also
been an extensive report following Franklin Domingues -- his
report, and they also approved our drainage and said we did
a very good job on it, whoever the engineer was. And also,
I think Mr. Hearn checked it out and said we did what we
needed to do.
MR. JOHNSTON: That's a good point. It was
checked out more than any we ever had before, and everyone
agreed that it would solve the problems.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Franklin, Mrs. Hart
asked some five or six questions that had to do with whether
5-11-^3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
--~ 1 3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
41
or not the -- these retention ponds were built according to
specs.
MR. JOHNSTON: Well, the way I read that, you
know, I do the inspection, which is not a -- a detailed
inspection like she was talking about; it's a visual
inspection that they were actually in place. And we already
have the drainage report on file that there -- it was signed
by an engineer, that she was talking about. There's nothing
in our rules that says we have to go back and do physical
testing on all the drainage structures, like it does roads.
We have a detailed section in the appendix on what's
required on roads, but there's nothing on detention ponds.
I don't know if there is a test on those. They're designed
to let water through them. It's not like something you --
has to be a certain density and all, and they're designed to
leak slowly, slow things down. That's what they're for.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Franklin, you say you
do a visual inspection. What you mean -- correct me if I'm
-- if I'm wrong. What you mean is, you look to see that
it's -- that the detention basin is constructed as per the
plan?
22
23
24 the --
.-,
25
MR. JOHNSTON: By the plans.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The size, the depth,
MR. JOHNSTON: They are in the right place.
8-11-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
._-. 2 4
25
42
They are -- in fact, they're all built a little larger than
what the plan called for. At least, I think, you know, to
detain the 100-year frequency. But that's according to the
engineer who designed it, estimated that they would more
than rate that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, thank you.
MR. JOHNSTON: There's a provision in the
Engineering Registration Act that, if it's a public work,
the engineer that designed it has to be out there -- have a
representative out there to do day-to-day inspections of the
work. But I don't think this is -- would be considered a
public work. It's not -- it's not dealing with tax money.
It's not initiated by the County. And, even if it was a
public work, I think there's a -- there's a whole series of
exemptions from an engineer having to be inspecting it
on-site day-to-day, and I think at least one of the
exemptions would apply. So, I don't think that would be a
requirement from our point of view or the State point of
view.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is somewhat
reminiscent, to me, and probably you too, of the series of
events in queries about The Homestead with respect to
hydrology studies and the way it was engineered, so forth,
so on, and what happened after that.
MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah. We changed our rules
8-11-03
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
43
substantially since that point.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just kind of a general
comment -- and I understand the neighbors' concern, but the
other side of the issue is that the owners of Stablewood
Springs have a right to do what they want with their
property. And they're -- and they're doing that, and
they're doing it within the County rules and regulations.
And, you know, that's all that we can vote on. It sounds
like they're following the EPA, the other federal/state
rules as well, but that has nothing to do with us, you know.
There's lots of -- there may be lots of questions, but it's
beyond our authority. Our rule and our job is to see if
they've met and followed our Subdivision Rules and
Regulations, and they have. I mean, the engineer -- our
County Engineer has said they have.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I -- I would
like to see us protect the people. You know, that's one of
our jobs, I think, is to protect the neighbors and protect
the people. My question is, legally, on what grounds do we
have the authority to hold up a letter -- releasing a Letter
of Credit? I'm not sure that -- I mean, I just -- I simply
don't know, but it seems to me if we don't have some kind of
legal grounds to hold them up, how could we? If they have
met all the -- I'm through.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Jackson filed a
~ - 1 1 - ~ j
1
,,~... 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
participation form, and I don't want to pass over him here.
Mr. Jackson?
MR. JACKSON: I don't want to belabor the
discussion. You've all said just how you feel, and I pretty
well said what I would say. It would be nice if you can
make everybody happy all the time. It would even be better
if there were no development in Kerr County, from that
perspective.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Amen.
MR. JACKSON: I respect that. I understand
that. But that's not the way the world works. That's not
the way the law works. That's not the way the regulations
at the city or at the county or at the federal level are.
What those regulations are designed to do is to come up with
a specific criteria that, if followed, is a compliance.
What I think the law says is that if you comply with those
rules, you're done. If you want more stringent rules, then
you have to pass them. You have to pay the costs and
expense to administrate them, and you have to follow them.
That's not where my client is at this moment. It's always a
balancing of the fairness of the regulation versus the
fairness of the use of property. You know, half of our
world and our population wants no control of any land use.
The other half wants an extreme control of land use. And
the Legislature, city councils, commissioners courts have
8-11-03
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
45
struggled with this forever, and will continue to do so.
With all respect to all the comments that have been made and
all the parties, I think we're done. I think we have
complied. I don't see the basis to deny the release of the
Letter of Credit. This argument was extensively considered
at the time of the plat submission. As Judy Ramsey just
pointed out, I forgot that we actually had another
engineering firm to be sure that we were correct on Franklin
Domingues' position. They continued to monitor -- they did,
the EPA. That's a federal rule. My client's done, by my
estimation, much more than what most are doing now,
certainly more than what used to be done. If you want a
highly regulated land use plan in Kerr County, then you need
to pass one, detail it, and put it out there so that
everybody understands where you're going. It would be
unfair if you would deny this client this particular request
under these circumstances without that forewarning. Thanks.
MS. FROST: Could I make one more statement?
This is -- we've looked at this in a broader picture, other
than just Stablewood, and this is what we recommend. Kerr
County does not have a Registered Professional Engineer
experienced in hydrology analysis. Many of the developments
in Kerr County, such as Stablewood Springs Ranch
Condominium, are not -- excuse me -- are not being built on
flat parcels of land, but on hillsides. These types of
8-11-03
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
46
developments require and must have professional planning
with emphasis on hydrology and stormwater runoff damage to
existing downhill properties. As you all know, I've been
coming for two years; I've been trying to educate myself on
what ways I could protect Bumblebee Creek, the river, and
our property at Pleasure Hill and our properties in Bumble
Bee Hills from damage to -- from stormwater runoff, and I
have run into the same frustrations that you all have run
into. So, I'm just putting this up as something that I
would like for you to consider. Kerr County must start
paying more attention to stormwater runoff from
developments, especially those uphill of existing properties
and close to creeks and the Guadalupe River. As our county
generally tends to have very little topsoil, stormwater
runoff rates are often extremely rapid, and therefore can
and do cause damage, from destruction of property to
destruction of creeks and the Guadalupe River, with vast
silt deposits and bank erosion. We believe our county has
not been giving this issue enough attention, and hope that
the Kerr County Commissioners Court will start taking
drainage plans more seriously. Kerr County residents and
our lands are at stake.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you saying that we
have not taken this seriously? Is that what you just said?
MS. FROST: I am saying that --
a-ii-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
47
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What did you just say?
MS. FROST: I did say that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is a terrible,
terrible statement. Very offensive.
MS. FROST: Well, what I think that -- I
think what we need is more --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. I agree, but
that's very offensive, the way you just did that.
MS. FROST: Well, I'm sorry. I --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Apology is accepted.
But I think that we have a set of rules here that we have
complied with, and we're doing our best. If we -- and I
agree, I think that we need an engineer on staff that has
hydrology background. I also think that we need one with
structural background and so forth and so on and so on and
so on. But you can't do all of it all at one time. Okay.
We've done our deal here, and I think we need to release the
Letter of Credit, and I'll make a motion to do so.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the Court release the Letter of Credit Number 7037450, the
drainage structures for Stablewood Springs Ranch
Condominium. Any further questions or discussion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(Commissioners Baldwin, Williams, and Letz
voted in favor of the motion.)
8- i i-'J 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
48
JUDGE TINLEY:
(Commissioner
motion.)
JUDGE TINLEY:
one. It's after 10 o'clock,
Commissioners Court meeting,
order a public hearing on pr
Order and Fee Schedule.
All opposed, same sign.
Nicholson voted against the
Motion does carry, three to
so I will recess the
and I will open and call to
aposed Rabies and Animal Control
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was
closed at 10:05 a.m., and a public hearing
was held in open court, as follows:)
P U B L I C H E A R I N G
JUDGE TINLEY: Public hearing was set for
this date at 10 a.m. It's a few minutes after 10:00 now.
Commissioner Nicholson, do you have any opening comments
about this, or should I just call for the public comments
and go from there?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What we've done is
rewrite the order, and including the changes of -- changing
the cycle for rabies vaccinations from one year to three
years, by administrative law and recommended by the vets and
the Humane Society and our Animal Control group, and
updating the -- the fee schedule to reflect the changes we
made in our discussion in an earlier Commissioners Court
meeting, including adding a multi-animal, one-owner fee.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Is there any
8-11-03
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
49
member of the public that wishes to be heard relative to the
proposed Rabies and Animal Control Order and Fee Schedule?
Any member of the public wishing to be heard?
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: There being no one indicating
a desire to be heard on this issue, I will close the public
hearing.
(The public hearing was concluded at 10:06
a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court
meeting was reopened.)
JUDGE TINLEY: I will reconvene and call to
order from recess the Commissioners Court meeting scheduled
for this date. And the next item on the agenda is
consideration and discussion, adopting the proposed Rabies
and Animal Control Order and Fee Schedule. Commissioner
Nicholson, do you have any further comments you wish to make
at this time?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just one other
thing; that the Animal Control department, in cooperation
with the Humane Society and the vets, plan on embarking on a
campaign to get -- to get our rate of registration
significantly higher. That will improve protection of the
community and control of the animals, and will also
contribute to our -- the revenues that we receive off that
function. We have our Animal Control manager here. Is
8-11-03
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
there anything you'd like to say?
MR. ALLEN: Well, if we can get the City to
go along with us, we're going to be in good shape. So --
they're in the process of doing the exact same thing we're
doing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fee -- fees, as well?
MR. ALLEN: Fee schedule, yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a couple of
questions, if I may. Page 13 of the rules -- by the way, I
think they look really good, overall. I mean, I -- I think
we're going in the right direction. But on Page 13, it says
in order to register a dog or cat under this section, the
owner must -- and first thing is file the official rabies
vaccination certificate. Okay. Then I look at the fee
schedule, and I'm very happy to see a multi-animal,
one-owner category. But my question comes in, how does that
mesh with that, if you have -- and especially if you go to
the lifetime membership. Do you just -- I mean, as I read
it, you would give, I guess, the rabies certificate for each
animal when you first sign up, but what if you change the
number of animals? What if you -- and then what if -- in
three years, are you -- is there a requirement that you have
to refile all your rabies certificates? I just -- I thought
it was ambiguous in this area.
MR. ALLEN: Yes, after the rabies
8-11-~3
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~-.
25
certificates expire, you're going to have to refile them.
'Cause then your registration -- I mean, you'd still be
registered, but your rabies vaccination would be no good, so
you're going to be in violation.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do you get those --
those rabies records electronically?
MR. ALLEN: No, we go -- physically go to the
vets and pick them up.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. But, anyhow,
if somebody goes down and registers a cat today, or dog,
soon you will have that in your database?
MR. ALLEN: Yeah, it will be on computer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess the other part of
the question, it says the -- the owner must do it. But if
you -- but if you're doing it electronically or you're going
to be doing it electronically -- I'm just trying to make
sure that the rules are consistent with what's going to
happen.
MR. ALLEN: You'll physically have to do it,
either mail it in to us or come into the shelter. I mean,
you couldn't do it by electronic filing; you couldn't do
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, the -- if
the vets are going to be set up to automatically forward all
a-il-o~
52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the rabies to you --
MR. ALLEN: No, it will be the owner's
responsibility.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So why have vets do it at
all, then?
MR. ALLEN: That's what's we're trying to
change.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. So -- well,
then -- but didn't you just say that all the vets are going
to work on getting all the certificates to the Animal
Control?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think I misspoke.
That's the way we've been doing it.
MR. ALLEN: That's the way we're doing it
now. We're wanting to change that, I mean, to take it away
from the vets. Vets have no enforcement ability, anyway.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. ALLEN: Make it the responsibility of the
pet owner, which it should be anyways.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think under, possibly,
(c) -- either (b) or (c) under that on Page 13, under this
category, it probably ought to be specified that -- I mean,
clearly specified that, on lifetime memberships -- or
8-11-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
basically lifetime memberships, that updated rabies
certificates are required, because I don't -- I don't see
that that's in here right now. Anyway, that's not a --
really, I think it should be real clear, if you go with
lifetime, that you're supposed to do that every... And the
other question -- and I don't want to hear any snickers from
anyone on the Court when I ask this question, but it's on
Page 14. It says that if your dog is not restrained, and
"restrained" is defined by a leash or fence or pen, that
you're in violation. And I've thought about that, and being
one individual that is, I guess, going to become or may be
currently under violation of that frequently, but I also
think as I drive around the county parks and other things, I
think almost every dog I see is unrestrained under that
definition. And, to me, "restrained" -- if you can control
your dog without it being on a leash, I don't see that
that's unrestrained.
MR. ALLEN: Let me clarify this. Restrained,
it says for the purposes of this section, "restrained" shall
mean that this dog or cat is physically restrained by a
leash, fence, pen, or other device, -- then you go down to
Paragraph (2) -- physically located on the property of the
owner or custodian or supervised by and under the direct
control of the owner or custodian. And the way our
prosecutor reads that, it doesn't say and/or; it just says
8-1i-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
physically located. So, as long as your pet -- you live in
the county and your pet is on your property and stays on
your property, you're okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. ALLEN: So you're not in violation. If
your dog stays in your yard, the way it -- the prosecutor
reads it, you're okay. Now, in the city, that's different.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But if my dog's
in the back of my truck, I mean, I'm -- you know --
MS. BAILEY: That's one of those technical --
technically --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We try to make the rules
so that you can enforce them and are able to, and I think
that it's -- you know, and if that's the rule, I guess, you
know, you could -- you could -- there's a way you can figure
out how to do it. I just want to make sure we don't have
rules passed that are not practical to enforce.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No, but I would
argue if your lab's in the back of your truck, that it's
restrained and it's under your direct control.
JUDGE TINLEY: It's also on your property.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We sure don't want
to get in the business of telling people that they can't
have labs in the back of their pickup truck.
MR. ALLEN: There's a lot of cities going to
8-ii-03
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~-.
25
the tether law, you know, saying your animal has to be
tethered.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We talked about the
tether law, and nobody wanted anything to do with it, by the
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just think that -- I
mean, I'll vote for these, but you're going to start getting
a lot of citations for unleashed dogs, and I think that's
asking for a lot of headaches for this county.
MR. ALLEN: Well, this is not going to affect
us. We're not asking to change this, and it's been this
way --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know, but we're trying
to get to the point where we're going to start, you know,
more down the enforcing road and get registration up, and
we're -- I mean, we're changing our -- may not be changing
the rules, but we're changing our approach to the rules.
MR. ALLEN: We need to be more aggressive,
you know. There's times we really need to be more
aggressive. Under this restraint law, there's times we'll
stay back down at the end of the street. When we see a dog
in a yard and it's not leaving, but the complainants are
saying he's out of the yard all the time, so we're going to
sit back and wait, see if he crosses the property line.
Once he crosses the property line, then he's fair game; we
8-11-03
56
1
.-.. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
can go and -- you know, we have a reason to go pick him up
then. It makes it hard on us. In the city, you can just --
it says it has to be restrained in your yard, and if it's
sitting on your front porch, we can go take him off your
front porch. But the county, we -- you know, it's a little
bit different, the way it's written. We've got to sit back
and kind of wait. You know, when your neighbor's dog is
coming over, getting in your trash, and you know it's him,
but you just haven't seen it, and he's not restrained to his
yard, you know, and you're telling us we're not doing our
job, then we're, like, well, we're going to have to sit and
wait and do a little undercover or whatever and catch this
dog coming off of his property.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Go ahead, Bill.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Marc, I just became
aware this morning, as you know, of a complaint by one of my
constituents who says that he has -- he knows of a neighbor,
I guess next door to him, with 65 dogs, by count, on one
piece of property. And he calls this a puppy farm, and
that's probably a -- not an exaggeration. One of my
questions is, can this multi-animal one owner register 65
dogs fir 25 bucks?
MR. ALLEN: Yes, he can.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wow.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Would that be an
a-ii-o~
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
establishment?
MR. ALLEN: Probably. I mean, she's not
saying she's a kennel. She's just saying she's a person --
and, actually, she has 72 dogs of various breeds. They're
very well kept-up. She's working on making sure every
animal has a rabies vaccination. I told her I'd work with
her; I can't just go out and write her a whole bunch of
violations. The dogs are very well-fed, all watered, they
all have shelter, the environment's pretty clean. It
doesn't smell too bad at all. I was impressed, for that
many animals.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're not talking
about the one that I'm referring to, are you?
MR. ALLEN: Mm-hmm, I'm talking about the
same one.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We have -- it's all
really, really nice and rosy and good?
MR. ALLEN: I've got pictures.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah? I want to see
them.
MR. ALLEN: I'll bring them to you, and I'm
going to show you my case file.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I sure want to see
your case file. Okay.
MR. ALLEN: I was impressed. I was expecting
e-il-o~
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
a lot worse. She's more of a -- I don't know if she's
selling the puppies. I didn't see a lot of puppies, but I
saw a lot of different breed dogs in pairs.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what I'm told,
yes. Okay, we'll deal with that later.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is it -- I hate to
mention exemptions on these. Is there an agricultural
exemption for working dogs?
MR. ALLEN: Not that I know of.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I see a real
problem here. We have still a lot of sheep and goats in
this county; we have a lot of sheep and cattle, and we have
sheep, goat, and cattle dogs, and they may not be on their
property. They're hired. I mean, people move them around
and -- and use them when they're working for gathering -- it
may be a leased property; they may go out for hire. I know
one guy who takes his animals out for hire. And I -- you
know, if we're going to have -- we just have got to have
rules that work.
MR. ALLEN: That would fall under -- under
the supervised by or under the direct control of the owner
or custodian.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe I'm misreading that
paragraph. So, really, that "or" is a (3) -- should be a
new paragraph.
~-11-03
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which paragraph are
you talking about?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Page 14.
MR. ALLEN: Under Paragraph (2), under the
Restraint --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, really, we should --
there should be -- or it should be just a number (3) as a
different category.
MR. ALLEN: Probably.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That makes it clearer to
me.
MR. ALLEN: Yeah. You're all right if you
want to take your dog out, work sheep on somebody else's
property. That's -- there's no problem there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't get the coon
hunters.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Don't get the coon
hunters, hog dogs.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hog dogs.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. That -- I'm happy.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion? Questions for Mr. Allen?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The changes -- comments I
8-11-03
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
made are going to be noted in the --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do you want to get
that in the record? Do you want to change the wording on
that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just think that on Page
14, under (c) under Section 4(c), number (2) should read
"physically located on the property of the owner or
custodian," period -- or comma.
JUDGE TINLEY: Or (3).
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or (3) as a new --
MR. ALLEN: Paragraph.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- paragraph, "supervised
by and under the direct control of owner or custodian." And
I think, on Page 13, under (c), I -- we need to have a
sentence that addresses lifetime registration fees; that
every three years, they're required -- or they're required
to keep a current rabies certificate on file.
MR. ALLEN: On file.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: "... responsibility
of the owner to ensure that a current official..." Will
that do it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. I'm going to
move that the Court adopt the Rabies and Animal Control
~-ii-o~
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
Order and Fee Schedule, with the two changes proposed by
Commissioner Letz. Do you want me to restate those? Change
on Page 13, Section (3), Paragraph 3.1, Registration
Required, Part (c), change to read, "It is the
responsibility of the owner to ensure that a current
official rabies vaccination certificate has been filed and
the registration fee is paid." And then, on Page 14, 4.1,
(c)(2) -- Subparagraph (2) after "custodian" -- or after
"or," and establish a new Subparagraph (3) that says,
"supervised by and under the direct control of the owner or
custodian."
JUDGE TINLEY: Everybody understand that?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion?
MS. SOVIL: Need a second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, we got a motion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's made and seconded.
Any further questions question 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. The next
8-11-03
62
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
item on the agenda is the consideration and discussion of a
contract with a newspaper of general circulation in Kerr
County to publish not less than 100 column inches of
advertising to receive better rates for public notices for
Kerr County, and authorize County Judge to sign the same.
MS. PIEPER: Gentlemen, the last time that
the newspaper subject had came up, I found a court order
back in 1988, but it did not discuss any kind of fees. It
basically just set out what newspaper we were going to
publish in. And I have talked with both the Daily Times and
the Mountain Sun, and they have proposed different rates for
us to advertise to receive better rates. Right now, we're
currently paying -- I believe it's 8.45 a column inch.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, the question I
raised last time may be answered because of the purchase of
the Mountain Sun by the Kerrville Daily Times parent
corporation, so it's all under the same banner now.
MS. PIEPER: Right. And, from what I can
understand from reading in the Local Government Code, it
basically just says a newspaper of general circulation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MS. PIEPER: So, I Yiave two different -- what
is it called? Amounts or bids, or -- and I'll let y'all
choose which one you want to go with. The Daily Times, on
daily, it's $6.15. On Sundays, it's $6.40 -- I'm sorry,
8-11-u3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
63
$6.40. And then the Mountain Sun is $5.50. The only thing
with the Mountain Sun is, they come out once a week.
Therefore, if we chose them, then we'd have to be careful as
far as our public notices at our public hearings.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: To what extent does
that pose a problem for you?
MS. PIEPER: As long as we do our scheduling
in accordance with it, it would be fine.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What -- I don't know if
you know this, Jannett, or Bill does. What's the
circulation daily -- or, I mean, a day for the Daily Times
versus --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's been reported
here in the recent stories about the purchase of The
Mountain Sun that the Kerrville Daily Times has something in
the range of 8,000 or 8,500 daily, and about 11,000 Sunday,
and the Mountain Sun reports that they're somewhere in the
range of 36 -- 3,600 to 4,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I guess my -- I mean,
my gut feeling would be to go with the low bid on this one,
but the other point is that the purpose of the public
notice, and also our feel is to get public information out
to the public. And I don't know, you know, which -- in my
mind, the difference as to which one outweighs the other. I
know we go out for -- I guess -- I guess I'm indifferent,
5-11-U3
1
--~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
64
but I think it's a point we need to consider, 'cause
circulation and public information is important.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Valid point. That's
a valid point. But I think sharing it or splitting it or
going back and forth is now academic, since they're both
under the same banner. Take the one who does the best job
for you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think going back and
forth is confusing to Jannett's office. Maybe not.
JUDGE TINLEY: What's the current regular
rate for the Mountain Sun? Do we know what that is?
MS. PIEPER: No, I don't.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Van Winkle?
MS. VAN WINKLE: I'm not in advertising; I
don't want to swear to any figures, I'm sorry.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think it's $6.50 a
column inch, so they're giving you a dollar break on --
don't hold me to that, Judge.
MS. SOVIL: Accept both bids and let her use
her discretion as to which paper to utilize.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure, that's what you
do.
MS. PIEPER: But this is for -- to sign a
contract for not less than 100 column inches a year.
8-11-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
65
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you know the number of
column inches that you end up utilizing in the year? And I
realize some of it comes out of your office, some of it
comes elsewhere.
MS. PIEPER: I really don't.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm going to guess
it's a lot more than 100 column inches.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would too.
MS. SOVIL: The District Clerk puts all her
divorce notices and stuff in the Mountain Sun.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does this -- is this a
county-wide --
county-wide.
MS. PIEPER: Yes, I'm asking for this to be
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So this is all Road and
Bridge, District Court? I'm sure we're way over 100 for
each. I mean, we could accept both and --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's a
point to consider. Really, accept them both, and place --
place them judiciously as you see the need. I think you
could execute a 100-inch contract for both of them and be
safe.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move we accept both --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
8-11-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
66
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- proposals.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the contract submitted for not less than 100 column inches
from both publications be accepted and approved by the
Court, and the Judge be authorized to sign the contract.
Any further question 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. Next item
is consider and discuss and take appropriate action on
resolution in support of Kerr County participation in the
Alamo Regional Transportation Program, that being an adjunct
of the AACOG. Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. I
think the resolution, as -- as it's drafted, which gives the
historical progression of this issue, pretty well tells the
story, in that for years we have supported Dietert in its
efforts to provide regional transportation, and Dietert
Senior no longer wishes to do that, and it has turned back
regional transportation and seniors transportation back to
AACOG. AACOG now has folded it into its Alamo Regional
Transportation program, and it is now serving Kerr County
for both seniors and other rural transportation needs. The
R-11-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
..~
25
67
resolution before you today does not -- does not deal with
the economics of the issue, which will come up later in our
budget discussions, I'm sure, but it does deal with our
willingness to participate in the Regional Transportation
Program. It is officially housed now in the inter-modal
transportation facility on Schreiner Street, and is
operational, and the transfer of the responsibilities from
Dietert to AACOG have now taken place. So, what this
does -- the resolution does, it says Kerr County will
participate in the Alamo Regional Transportation Program
from this point forward. Then later, I noted in both my
memo to the Judge and with the letter that came from AACOG,
and -- and the formula for financial participation -- I'm
sure we're going to take that up under the budget, but not
today. So, with that background, I would move the
resolution that Kerr County Commissioners Court support Kerr
County's participation in Alamo Regional Transportation
Program, which is a program of Alamo Area Council of
Governments.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the resolution, as presented, be approved. Any further
question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, I do have a
comment to make. When the funding part of it does come to
a-~1-o3
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
l~
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
68
us, I noticed in the AACOG letter, it says each county has a
suggested base contribution amount of $3,000, along with an
amount based on the formula. I understand the formula part
of it is kind of a user fee. We use it "X" amount, so we
should pay for that. I understand that, but I -- you're
going to have to stand here a long time to convince me that
we need to cough up $3,000 just for fun to AACOG, or to
pay -- no. I'm serious.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is really
serious, and it's getting to be a thorn under my saddle a
little bit that, you know, these COG -- that COG, in this
arena, as well as law enforcement training, they get federal
money to do those things and then turn around and charge us
again, charge the local counties for those kinds of issues.
And that's just way, completely out of line, and has to
stop. It has to stop. I don't know if you can recognize
the anger in me or not.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm getting the
message. It's coming across.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that's what that
is; 3,000 bucks is for their administrative fees or
something that they already get once. So, I'm not willing
to play that game with them any more. Same thing with TAC,
and on and on and on.
a-li-os
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
69
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right, I'm off my
soapbox.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion? All in favor
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Only one other note,
Judge, that this does provide for us to send a signed copy
to not only AACOG for its records, but to the Dietert Senior
Board of Directors thanking them for their participation.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely. They've
done a great job.
JUDGE TINLEY: They have done an excellent
job, and we're most grateful for their efforts. So, any
further question or discussion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item
on the agenda is consider and discuss proclaiming the fourth
Monday in September as a Family Day to Eat Dinner with your
Children. This was forwarded to me by the -- the National
Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse. They've done some
studies that indicate that -- that family dinners have been
materially helpful in reducing the number of especially
a-ii-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
70
teenagers and young people that get involved in substance
abuse. Some of you gentlemen don't have children quite that
young, but I see them several times a week in my juvenile
court, and for no cost except a little time this morning, if
it helps one individual, I think it's worth the effort.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move the resolution.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the Court --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Proclamation.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- approve the proclamation
designating the fourth Monday in September as Family Day - a
Day to Eat Dinner with your Children. Any further question
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.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That doesn't mean I
have to drive d~ Dallas or Fort Worth to eat with my kid,
does it?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it means that you can
ask them to come here, and tell them that there's been an
8-11-03
1
,.-. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,-. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-,
25
71
official request that they be here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think the law allows
to you meet in Austin, but I don't know about outside of
Austin.
JUDGE TINLEY: I can get you the name of a
fine establishment there to eat dinner with them, if you
would like. Last item on the consideration agenda is
consider and discuss burn ban status. Where are we,
gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I haven't had any
calls from fire departments, so I assume we're okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was thinking we were
getting close to maybe needing to implement it, just so we
could have the flexibility, but I really don't think we need
to with the little bit of rain we've had recently. I think
most people got a little bit, anyway, over the weekend, and
hopefully well get a little bit more.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think that we're on
the edge out there, though. If -- you know, if it -- I see
that there may be a little rain coming through possibly on
Wednesday, that kind of thing. If we don't get that, I'm
going to have to look at it pretty close, 'cause it's --
it's on the edge out there, and I have been contacted by
fire departments.
8-11-03
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
72
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We could implement it and
just then, individually, not enforce it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think that,
personally, I -- that's what we need to do, is to have it
available out there. It's not going to be abused or
anything, but just in case it really dries out. They're --
I'm beginning to -- beginning to hear some sounds from the
firefighters.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have any problem
at all with implementing it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If you implemented
it, would any of you suspend it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would this week,
probably.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Give us the
flexibility to -- later on, to -- that's what we talked
about.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we're back in here
on Friday.
MS. SOVIL: It's a workshop.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're still back in
here. But -- and we could take a look at it then.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Take a look at it to
~-1~-03
73
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
do? Or --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Take a look at it and
say, hey, are you going to do yours? Yes, I'm doing mine,
so we can all do them at the same time kind of thing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that
we implement a burn ban.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're talking about the
implementation 90 days, with the authority of each
Commissioner to -- to suspend or to reimpose it in his own
precinct?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: And that second -- who made
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Dave.
JUDGE TINLEY: And with that modification?
(Commissioner Nicholson nodded.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 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.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Present standpoint, we're
going to suspend Precinct 3 until next Sunday.
e-11-~~
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
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Suspend --
MS. SOVIL: Until when?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sunday.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Precinct 2, the same.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Same for 4.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Dang. Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sunday at 7 p.m.
JUDGE TINLEY: You on board, Commissioner 1?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
MS. SOVIL: Why don't you do it till Monday
morning at 7 a.m.?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, we always have to
change everything.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Monday. You're not
going to change it on Sunday.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, that's fine.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I wanted to. We going
to work on Sundays? Is that the deal?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what we want,
to come in just to do that. Didn't you?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go ahead and finish on
up. I'm not aware of anything that needs to be on the
Executive Session portion of the agenda. If not, we'll move
~-11-~3
75
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,,.., 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
on to the approval agenda. First item is payment of the
bills.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, before we do
that, didn't we just pass a proclamation that needs
signatures?
JUDGE TINLEY: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All of us, I mean?
That's service, isn't it? I don't have any questions on the
bills.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, related to
fees on Page 6, in your comments about AACOG a minute ago,
were you referring to that $200 fee to AACOG for Sheriff
training? Is that one of the things you were talking about?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I hadn't seen
this, but yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just wanted to make
sure I understood what you were talking about.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll tell you later.
I didn't -- didn't know that we -- our Sheriff and police
people were using AACOG.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, yeah. They're
there all the time. I see them there on occasion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wow.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Various trainings and
s-~1-o3
76
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
so forth.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That they charge us
for, and other COG's come in here and do it for free. I
don't get it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know. I'll
have to look into it for you, but they're there. They use
it. I bumped into the Sheriff himself.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They get paid twice.
I'm telling you, that's true.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval of the
bills.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
we pay the bills as presented. Any question 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: Next item is budget
amendments. Budget Amendment Request Number 1.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 1 is for Courthouse
Maintenance, request from Glenn Holekamp to transfer $700
from Major Repairs to his Telephone line item to make the
remainder of the year.
a-ii-o~
77
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.., 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,^-.
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
Budget Amendment Request Number 1 be approved. Any further
question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. So, once
again, three -- four years in a row now, we're not going to
make any major repairs? I know there's no one here to
answer that question, so go on.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question 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. Budget
Amendment Request Number 2.
MR. TOMLINSON: For Road and Bridge, request
is to transfer $23.61 from Miscellaneous, $100 from Office
Repairs, $124.10 from Books, Publications, and Dues, into
the Office Supply line item, totaling $247.71.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
Budget Amendment Request Number 2 be approved. Any further
8-11-03
78
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
question or comment? All in favor of the motion, signify by
raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 3.
MR. TOMLINSON: This is for the Sheriff's
Department. Transfer is for $10.64 from Software
Maintenance to Investigation Expenses.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
Budget Amendment Request Number 3 be approved. Any
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. Budget
Amendment Request Number 5.
Precinct 4.
MR. TOMLINSON: This is for --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 4.
MR. TOMLINSON: -- Justice of the Peace,
8-11-03
79
1
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: Excuse me, 4.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. To transfer $51.50 from
Conferences to Machine Repair.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
Budget Amendment Request Number 4 be approved. Any question
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. Budget
Amendment Request Number 5.
MR. TOMLINSON: For Commissioners Court, to
transfer $316.76 from Professional Services to Conferences.
I have a -- with this, a need for a hand check payable to
Texas Association of Counties for $225, for the
Post-Legislative Conference registration.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's for my
registration.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is this -- I hate to ask.
MR. TOMLINSON: Wait a minute, I have another
one. I didn't see it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are these --
E-11-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
80
MR. TOMLINSON: One to Commissioner Williams
for $91.76, travel to AACOG.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, are these
required to get your hours?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Somebody needs to make a
motion. Make a motion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Make a motion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
Budget Amendment Request Number 5 be approved, and authorize
the issuance of hand checks to Texas Association of Counties
for $225, and to Commissioner Williams for reimbursement for
travel in the sum of $91.76. Any question 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. Budget
Amendment Request Number 6.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 6 is for the County
Court at Law, 198th District Court, and 216th District
8-11-03
81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Court. The request is to transfer $3,914.43 from
Court-Appointed Attorney line item in the 216th Court, $300
to Special Court Reporter for 198th Court, $2,032.43 to
Court-Appointed Attorneys in 198th Court, and $1,582 in
Court-Appointed Attorney line item for County Court at Law.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
Budget Amendment Request Number 6 be approved. Any further
question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just a question,
sophomore question. Are these all criminal matters, or --
or sometimes attorneys are appointed and paid far by the
County for civil matters?
JUDGE TINLEY: There are some instances where
they might be appointed in civil matters. For example, in
termination cases, Child Protective Service cases, where a
parent's rights are going to be terminated, and they're
indigent and unable to afford the attorney, the law provides
that they be provided counsel in those cases. Isolated
instances, but that's generally the instances where civil
cases are provided for.
MR. TOMLINSON: As a sidelight to that, I
received a -- a letter from what used to be Southwest Texas
in San Marcos. They're -- the university's doing a survey
8-11-03
82
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
among all the counties in the state as to the impact of
Senate Bill 7 on -- on, well, the financial impact from all
the counties in the state for that Senate Bill, so that
might be of some interest when it's done.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It will be. Are you
going to -- are we going to participate?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, I plan to participate.
The letter came to me, and so I plan to do it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, that was going to
save us money; that's what the Legislature told us.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Is it a student
study, or -- or is it a --
MR. TOMLINSON: Apparently, it is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's cool.
MR. TOMLINSON: It was -- I thought it was
interesting that they were -- would pick that subject to
do -- to do the work on. I'm sure that there's been some --
some suggestions from some commissioners courts throughout
the state for them to do that.
JUDGE TINLEY: To further answer your
question, Commissioner Nicholson, juvenile cases are
technically classified as civil cases. They arise because
of criminal or quasi-criminal conduct, but they're
technically handled as civil cases. So, while none of them
were included within these -- this particular budget
8-11-G3
83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,,_.. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
amendment, that is another area where civil cases have
court-appointed attorneys, a major area. Any further
questions or discussion on Budget Amendment Request Number
6? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your
right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 7.
MR. TOMLINSON: This -- this amendment is to
correct the budget for group insurance for the fiscal year
2002-2003. Total -- first of all, let me -- the amount of
the difference, my calculation of -- of funds necessary for
each department to finish the -- the fiscal year, so where
you see the negative amounts is the amount that will be
required for each one of those departments. Total is
$150,585. And on -- on the bottom part, where it says
Transfer From, I went through the -- through the entire
budget and found amounts in -- in these line items to
transfer from those areas into the individual department
budgets for group insurance. If you want me to read them
all off, I will.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy, what's that on the
very bottom? General Transfer Out, and then a Courthouse
8-11-03
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
Security --
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, part of the difference
-- the negative difference was in a special revenue fund,
which was Courthouse Security. So, we actually have to
transfer cash from -- from Fund 10 into 29 to be able to --
to make those insurance payments. In other words, there
were no funds available in -- in Fund 29. No -- no accounts
that would -- that had enough money in it. So, since --
since the transfers are from -- from General Fund accounts,
then we're transferring the -- the $698 to that fund.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval of Budget
Amendment Number ~, as presented.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
Budget Amendment Request Number 7 be approved. Any further
question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Tommy, is this
transaction unique, or is this something that occurs
periodically?
MR. TOMLINSON: This is
this year. It's never happened before,
There's been some isolated cases where
was, you know, an oversight in one depa
but never a wholesale amendment of this
say that's something that's rare. I've
-- this is unique for
that I recall.
-- that we just -- it
rtment or the other,
size, no. I would
not experienced it
~-i ~-r,~
85
,.-.
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
before.
JUDGE TINLEY: What this has occurred as a
result of is budgeting in August or September for a coming
year, when the policy is not going to be renewed until
January, and you don't know what the premium is going to be.
Is that correct?
MR. TOMLINSON: Essentially, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're rectifying that in
the process.
JUDGE TINLEY: We're going to try. Any
further question 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. Budget
Amendment Request Number 8.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 8 is for the District
Clerk. Her request is to transfer $500 from Telephone line
item to Microfilm Records.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
MR. TOMLINSON: I have two more. I don't --
I just have the copy of that one from the County Attorney's
office.
8-11-03
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 LETZ: Did we move on the other
one yet? Did we vote on 8?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
MR. TOMLINSON: This is 9.
here.
Bill.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We haven't voted on 8.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay, I'm sorry. I'm asleep
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I moved it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Moved and seconded?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You were the second,
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whichever.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on Number 8? 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: Budget Amendment Request
Number 9.
MR. TOMLINSON: 9 is a request from the
County Attorney's office to transfer $500 from Telephone
line item to Books, Publications, and Dues.
8-11-G3
87
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: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
Budget Amendment Request Number 9 be approved. Any further
question 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.
JUDGE TINLEY: Budget Amendment Request
Number --
MR. TOMLINSON: 10.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- 10.
MR. TOMLINSON: 10 is for Justice of the
Peace, Precinct 1. His request is to transfer $65 from
Miscellaneous and $150 from Machine Repair, totaling $215,
into Conferences, and then transfer $160 from Telephone and
$123 from Postage line item into Part-Time Salaries. The
total's $283.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What happened? What
happened?
MR. TOMLINSON: I suppose that for -- for his
part-time, he's filling in for vacation for his clerk.
There was a -- there was a period of time at the beginning
fl-71-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
88
of this year that he used some of his part-time when -- when
he changed clerks, so he used the part-time person while he
was trying to hire a full-time. That's what I'm
remembering.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I think -- I
think you're correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: When Judge O'Dell was still
his clerk, before taking office January 1, his current clerk
was probably being paid from Part-Time moneys to get her
trained up while Judge O'Dell was still there as the clerk
on the payroll, and that's probably what was --
MR. TOMLINSON: I think that's right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, I guess my real
question is, why would we need a part-time -- an employee?
Has this employee been here a full year?
MR. TOMLINSON: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what it sounded
like. Why do we need a part-time -- whatever?
MS. SOVIL: There's been $3,000 spent in
part-time moneys this year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $3,000. And that was
in the -- that shift from her going downstairs and all that,
I guess.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The question I have is
the Conference additional that he is requesting.
8-11-03
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
89
MR. TOMLINSON: Commissioner, I don't have
any documentation here with me. He just gave us this this
morning, so I -- I don't know -- I don't know what it's for.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is he in today? Do you
know?
MR. TOMLINSON: His clerk is. I can go ask
real quick.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, probably won't
keep it from passing one way or the other, but I won't vote
for it unless I know where the Conference money is going.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay, I -- hold on.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not going to mess
with it. No motions from here.
(Discussion off the record.)
MS. SOVIL: During your budget process, you
might consider having all the elected officials turn in
their education hours so that you know that they have gotten
all their education hours or they haven't gotten all their
education hours, or they're carrying some over from last
year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I trust them. I
mean, I --
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. It's a registration
for October conference.
JUDGE TINLEY: October conference?
8-11-03
90
1
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: Yes, it's a pre-registration.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is in
anticipation of an October --
MR. TOMLINSON: Right. It's due -- he'll be
going in October, so he -- he wanted to go ahead and pay it
now so he --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Pay it now when he
doesn't have any money.
MR. TOMLINSON: I mean, I'm going to have to
do that, too.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to, but I'm
going to wait.
MR. TOMLINSON: But my conference is in
October, too.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So is mine. I'm going
to wait till October to pay mine in the new budget, 'cause I
don't have budgeted money for it today. I move we approve.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
Budget Amendment Request Number 10 be approved. Any further
question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify
by raising your right hand.
(Commissioners Baldwin, Williams, and
Nicholson voted in favor of the motion.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(Commissioner Letz voted against the motion.)
3-11-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
91
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Is that
all of them?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have any late bills?
MR. TOMLINSON: None, no.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have before me the
transcript of the regular session of Kerr County
Commissioners Court Monday, July 14th, the transcript of the
Kerr County Commissioners Court Special Session, Monday
July 28th, and the transcript of the Emergency Session of
the Kerr County Commissioners Court on Wednesday, July 16th.
Do I hear a motion that these transcripts and minutes be
presented as -- be approved as presented?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the designated transcripts and minutes be approved as
presented. Any further question 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. I also
have before me monthly reports from the Sheriff, Justice of
the Peace Precinct 2, Justice of the Peace Precinct 4, and
a-ii-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
92
the County Clerk. Do I hear a motion that these monthly
reports be approved as presented?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the monthly reports for the Sheriff, Justice of the Peace
Precinct 2, Justice of the Peace Precinct 4, and the County
Clerk be approved as presented. Any further question 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. We'll now
move to the information agenda. Reports from Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: None.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Brief report -- question.
As we all know, we are without a County Extension Agent at
the present time, and I've had some communications from the
public on that. And since Eddie Holland was here for so
long, it's been a long time since, you know, one came to the
County. I'm kind of looking for -- as I understand it, the
Extension Service recommends to the County that replacement.
And my question is -- and I think, from what I hear from the
~-11-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
93
community, that they would like this Court to be a little
bit involved in that process, and I think -- which is
appropriate; I don't think we should be expected to
rubber-stamp an approval without having input into the
selection process. So, I'm just bringing that up just to
kind of toss it on the table, and I'll probably put on it
the agenda for a -- for discussion at the next item -- next
meeting.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Sovil, you have some
information relative to this?
MS. SOVIL: Yes, I do. They don't recommend
one person. They will send -- because of Kerr County, and
we're the cause of this, we get a certain number of
recommendations, and we will get their resumes and stuff, if
it's done like it was with Amy. I don't remember if you
were on the Court when she came.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MS. SOVIL: We had that big furor about we
needed more input. They were recommending someone else, and
because of Kerr County's involvement, we got to help pick
who we wanted.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think maybe all
we need, we want to make sure that they follow the same
process. Which I don't -- you know, which probably would
take a letter from the Judge, or we can discuss it at our
8- 1 1- C 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
94
next meeting. I don't think they're imminently getting
ready to recommend somebody.
MS. SOVIL: They are interviewing. In fact,
interviews have stopped, I think.
JUDGE TINLEY: They had the job posted, and I
think the posting is closed for applications. Now, exactly
where they are after all the time has expired for the
receiving of applications, I'm not -- I'm not certain. I
did have an inquiry from the -- from the lady in Uvalde in
whose district Kerr County falls, whether or not we were --
we were proposing to fund it for the coming year. I told
her that I didn't, obviously, have the authority to approve
the budget, but I suspected, based upon the historical
aspect of that particular office, that I felt like the Court
probably would approve an agent for Kerr County, as they've
done for many, many years in the past. So, she's proceeding
on that assumption, I assume.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is it your
understanding, Judge, that it was posted as a single-county
job, not a multiple-county job?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, a single-county. It was
posted as a single-county.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't have an
appreciation for the value of the Extension Office to the
County. I'm hoping maybe I'll gain one in our budget
8-11-03
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
95
meetings. When I ask myself the question, what would be
different if we didn't have one, I can't come up with
anything.
JUDGE TINLEY: You obviously went to some
foreign school, like Baylor.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They don't teach that
at Baylor. Do they? They don't teach basketball rules
there either.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody else?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm sure you're going to,
in your comments, discuss workshops a little bit and budget
status?
(Judge Tinley nodded.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Then I don't have any
more comments.
JUDGE TINLEY: You have nothing?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't have
anything.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. As Commissioner Letz
indicated, he's hoping I'll have some enlightenment
concerning the budget and the workshops. All of the
workshops, of course, have been scheduled for -- first one's
this Friday, the 15th, I believe, beginning at 10:00 or
10:30? Which is it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 10:30.
8-11-03
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
96
MS. SOVIL: 10:30, I think.
JUDGE TINLEY: They're generally going to be
10:00, 10:30, and they'll be continuing through the
following Tuesday and Wednesday and Friday. That's the
19th, 20th, and 22nd, if necessary, until conclusion. We've
currently got a budget workshop scheduled, thanks to
Commissioner Letz, who was kind enough to work up a draft of
that, and that was approved, and we're going to proceed on
that basis. With respect to the proposed budget, I carried
that to the Auditor this morning. The Auditor was on
vacation for, I think, the last four days of last week, and
I carried it to him first thing this morning. So, we should
be seeing some product or result of that in the next day or
two, and he's first going to bring it to me to make sure
it's in conformity with what I submitted to him. And once
that's been verified, it will be -- it'll be distributed to
all -- all concerned, and a copy of that will be on file for
the public review, be a copy for each of the Commissioners.
Who else, Ms. Sovil?
MS. SOVIL: Copy -- each department will get
a copy of their department.
JUDGE TINLEY: Of their particular portion of
it, certainly. And I believe that's pretty much the -- the
scoop on the budget at this point. Any further -- any
further reports? Comments? Discussions? Enlightenment?
8-11-03
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
There being none, I'll declare the meeting adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 11:05 a.m.)
STATE OF TEXAS ~
COUNTY OF KERR ~
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as
County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County,
Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 14th day of August,
2003.
JANNETT PIEPER,~ Kerr County Clerk
Kathy Ba ik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
8-11-03
COURT ORDER N0.28205
APPROVAL OF AIRPORT BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2003
On this the 1 lth day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Williams
seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to approve the Fiscal Year 2003 Entitlement Grant and Amendment of Airport
budget of $16,667.00 to fund fiscal Year 2003 Entitlement Grant and accomplish airport
improvements.
COURT ORDER N0.28206
APPROVAL TO RENEW CONTRACT WITH HILL COUNTRY ALTERNATE
DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTER
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz
seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to renew the contract with the Hill Country Alternate Dispute Resolution Center
to provide mediation service and for funding of $32,000.00 for such.
COURT ORDER NO. 28207
APPROVAL TO AMEND STABLEWOOD SPRINGS RANCH CONDOMINIUM PLAT
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to Amend the plat for Stablewood Springs Ranch Condominium, adding a note
showing the volume and page of related easements for the roads and detention ponds
outside the boundary of the subdivision.
COURT ORDER NO. 28208
APPROVAL TO RELEASE LETTER OF CREDIT NO. 7037450 FOR STABLEWOOD
SPRINGS RANCH CONDOMINIUM
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin
seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court approved by a vote of 4-0-1, with
Commissioner Nicholson voting against, to release the Letter of Credit No. 7037450 for
Drainage Structures for Stablewood Springs Ranch Condominium.
COURT ORDER NO. 28209
ADOPT THE RABIES AND ANIMAL CONTROL ORDER AND FEE SCHEDULE
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to adopt the proposed Rabies and Animal Control Order and Fees Schedule as
amended.
COURT ORDER NO. 28210
APPROVAL TO CONTRACT WITH THE KERRVILLE DAILY TIMES AND
MOUNTAIN SUN TO PUBLISH ADVERTISING
On this the 1 lth day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to approve a contract with the Kerrville Daily Times and Mountain Sun to
-- publish not less than 100 column inches of advertising to receive better rates for public
notices for Kerr County and authorize Judge Tinley to sign the contracts.
COURT ORDER NO. 28211
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF KERB COUNTY'S PARTICIPATION IN THE
ALAMO REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION
On this the 1 lth day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Williams
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to issue a Resolution in support of Kerr County's participation in the Alamo
Regional Transportation (ART), a program of Alamo Area Council of Governments
(AACOG).
ORDER NO. 28212
FAMILY DAY
On this the 1 lth day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Williams
seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to proclaim the fourth Monday in September as Family Day - A Day to Eat
Dinner with our Children.
ORDER NO. 28213
BURN BAN -REINSTATED IMMEDIATELY
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz
seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to Reinstate the BURN BAN in Kerr County.
ORDER NO. 28214
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
On this the 11th day of August 2003 came to be considered by the Court various
Commissioners precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are:
10-General for $71,503.86, 14-Fire Protection for $8,333.33, 15-Road and Bridge for
$25,619.29, 18-County Law Library for $160.62, 19-Public Library for $33,098.33, 22-
Flood Control for $7,500.00, 50-Indigent Health Care for $55,006.21,
TOTAL CASH REQUIRED FOR ALL FUNDS: $ 201,101.49.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the
_.._ Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to pay said Accounts.
ORDER NO. 28215
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
THE COURTHOUSE AND RELATED BUILDINGS
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Williams,
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to transfer $700.00 from line item 10-510-550 Major Repairs; to Line Item No.
10-510-420 Telephone for the Courthouse and Related Buildings.
ORDER NO. 28216
BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR ROAD & BRIDGE DEPARTEMENT
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-
0-0, to Transfer $23.61 from Miscellaneous Line Item 15-600-499, $100.00 from Office
Repairs Line item 15-600-450, $124.10 from line item 15-600-315 Books/Publications &
Dues to Line item 15-600-310 for Office Supplies for a total of $247.71 for the Road and
Bridge Department.
ORDER NO. 28217
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN
THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin
seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0,
to Transfer $10.64 from Software Maintenance Line Item 10-560-563 to Line Item 10-
560-208 for investigation expenses in the Sheriffs Department.
ORDER NO. 28218
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE # 4
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz
seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-
0-0, to Transfer $51.50 from Conference Line Item 10-458-485 to Machine Repairs Line
Item 10-458-456 in the Justice of the Peace # 4.
ORDER NO. 28219
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN
COMMISSIONERS' COURT
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Williams
seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0,
to Transfer $316.76 from Professional Services Line Item 10-401-486 to Conference Line
item 10-401-485 and a hand check be issued to Texas Association of Counties for
$225.00 for the Post Legislation Conference registration and to issue a hand check to
Commissioner Williams for $91.76 for mileage to the AACOG meetings.
ORDER NO. 28220
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN
COUNTY COURT AT LAW, 198TH DISTRICT COURT & 216TH DISTRICT COURT
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-
0-0, to transfer $3914.43 from court appointed attorney line item 10-435-402 using
$300.00 in line item 10-436-494 for special court reporter, $2,032.43 for court appointed
attorney line item 10-436-402 and $1582.00 for court appointed attorney line item 10-
427-402.
ORDER NO. 28221
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR GROUP INSURANCE
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz
seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-
0-0, to Transfer $698.00 from the General Fund 10-700-015 and $698.00 from
Courthouse Security line item 29-390-015 and $150,585.00
from various departments as follows:
Non -Departmental Workers Comp	10-409-204	54,433
Non-Dapartment -Mainframe Maint	10-409-564	3,117
Non-Department -Autopsies	10-409-401	15,100
County Clerk Software Maint	10-403-563	9,167
County Clerk FICA	10-403-201	700
Tax Collector -FICA	10-499-201	600
Jail -FICA	10-512-201	3,600
Jail -jailers Salaries	10-512-104	22,000
Sheriff -FICA	10-560-201	7,800
Sheriff -Retirement	10-560-203	11,600
Road & Birdge -Workers Comp	15-611-204	19,568
Animal Control -Software	10-642-562	500
Exhibition Center -Security Guard	10-666-108	2400
Transfer To as follows:		
Comm. Crt	401	3,886
Co. Clerk	403	10,190
Records Mgt.	404	1,390
Information Tech.	408	698.
Co. Court	426	1898.
Co. Court at Law	427	2095
Collections	429	1389
Dist. Clerk	450	886
JP-2	456	1192
JP-4	458	197
Co. Attorney	475	4373
Auditor	495	2362
Treasurer	497	1356
Tax Collector	499	7452
.-_ Jail Maint	511	698
Jail	512	36,542
Park Maint	513	698
Const. 1	551	364
Const.2	552	632
Const.3	553	698
Const.4	554	698
Sheriff	560	32,327
Juvenile Probation	570	3482
DPS	580	698
Animal Control	642	8744
Extension Service	665	1762
Exhibit Center	666	2412
Road & Bridge Admin	15-600	964
Road & Birdge	15-611	18604
CH Security	29-636	698
ORDER NO. 28222
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN
THE DISTRICT CLERKS OFFICE
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Williams
seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0,
to Transfer $500.00 from Line Item No. 10-450-420 Telephone to Line Item No. 10-450-
412 Microfilm records for the District Clerks Office.
ORDER NO. 28223
BUDGET AMENDMENT 1N
THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin,
seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-
0-0, to Transfer $500.00 from Telephone Line Item 10-475-420 to Line Item 10-475-315
Books, Publication and Due for the County Attorneys Office.
ORDER NO.28224
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE # 1
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin
seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court approved by a vote of 3-0-1, with
Commissioner Letz opposing, to Transfer $123.00 from Line Item 10-455-309 Postage
and $160.00 from line item 10-455-420 Telephone TO Line Item No. 10-455-108 Part
Time Salary and Transfer $ 65.00 from Line Item 10-455-499 Miscellaneous and $150.00
from Machine Repair 10-455-456 TO Line Item 10-455-485 for Conference for The
Justice of the Peace # 1 Office.
ORDER NO.28225
APPROVE AND ACCEPT MINUTES
AND WAIVE READING
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson,
seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-1-0, to waive reading and approve the minutes of Regular Session of July 14, 2003,
Special Emergency Session on July 16, 2003, and Special Session of July 28, 2003 of the
Kerr County Commissioners' Court.
ORDER N0.28226
APPROVE MONTHLY REPORTS
On this the 11th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Williams
seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0,
to accept the following reports and direct that they be filed with the County Clerk for
future audit:
W.R. Hierholzer, Sheriff
July 2003
Dawn Wright, J.P. #2
July 2003
_,._ William Ragsdale, J.P. #4
July 2003
Jannett Pieper, County Clerk
July 2003