1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Special Session
Monday, August 25, 2003
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge
H.A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4
~~
i.j
J1

a
1
..-.
2 ---
3 1.1
I N D E X
August 25, 2003
Visitors' Comments
Commissioners' Comments
PAGE
3
7
4 1.2
5 1.3
1.4
6 1.9
7 1.10
1.11
8
1.6
9
1.7
10	
	1.8
11	1.5
	1.12
12	
	1.13
~ 13	
	1.14
14	
	1.15
15	
	1.16
16	
	1.17
17	
	1.18
18 1.19
19
1.20
20
1.21
1.22
21
1.23
22
23 4.1
4.2
4.3
24 ~ 4.4
25
Allow Costco Wholesale to set up employee reception and offer	
discount membership rate o~ ,~ ~- ~'~	10
Renewal of Interlocal Cooperation,,Contract for DPS Fugitive	
Apprehension Program ;~ ~ ~ 2- ~ ~,.,~
^
*~	, 1 ,19
` ~~
et
Approve Interlocal Contract with Texas Dept. of Public Saf	~20
Amend NRCS Project No. 69-7442-3-549, authorize County Judge	
to sign same oc~ $ ~ ~~	24
Discuss qualifications for Constables as per Section 86.0021,	
Local Government Code /t,1cy !4C ~+~'-	27
Discuss recommendation of Texas Comptroller regarding	
budgetary matters in General Provisions tills r~i~'Z~"---	33
}sed longevity and educational pay increase
Proposed rev	
~
policy ~ ?~ ~ ~ ~	37
PUBLIC HEARING - election to approve Mt. Home Emergency	
Service District with taxing authority	53
Set election for November 4, 2003, for creation of Mountain	
Home Emergency Service District ~ ~ ~ ~ `~	58
Open proposals for Electrical, Plumbing and HVAC, as	
advertised ~ ~ t ~' ~ ~ ~ ~	66, 682
Press conference for 9-1-1 address change ~-	
Discuss moving Flgpd Control fund balance to Road & Bridge	
budget ~ ~ Z -~-~	70
Reestablish Justice Court Technology Fund which comes from	
ee on defendants convicted cf misdemeanor
$4 technology f	
_
offenses •~ ~ Z- ~ W'	71
Discuss proposed new OSSF Rules and Regulations as~ ~ ~~~/	
recommended by joint committee, set public hearing	75, 130
Discuss elimination of position/removal of County Road	
Engineer, issuance of notice to him of su h action, and	
set public hearing if necessary /(~(..~ `~.~iG~"1.--'"	86
Contract with Presser, Thompson and Company for outside	
audit services tjf ~ Z j.~	87
Discuss drainage easement requested by thg City of Kerrville
~	
to prevent damage along Quinlan Creek ~ ~ ~ ~	88
Approval cf contract with Hunt Volunteer Firs Department,	
authorize the County Judge to sign same ~ ~ 1 ~ ~,	93
Adoption and approval of Records Archive Fee of $5, adopt	
such fee as part of FY 2003-04 budget~nd subsequent years,	
set public hearing on same „~~ S ~ ~ i.~	98
P~}blic Officials Salary, set public
Approve proposed FY 03l04	
~
hearing on same /~,/ C' ~ ~ ~~ ~	101
Approve proposed FY 03/04 Budget, set public hearing on same	106
Approve proposed FY 03/04 Tax Rate, set public /1. r1 {I~'9~~',;i.v~	
hearing on same	106
n concerning vacant County
Discussion with Cheryl Mapsto	
>
Extension Position.
~~~ .~ j;~"i~`~	107
,l
Pay Bills aZ .~~ Y ~'. ~	132
Budget Amendments ~ ~~ ~3 ' ~ ~ ~ _~ ~	133
Late Bills	156
Approve and accept monthly reports ~ ~~ o~ ~ ~	160
Adjourned 164
Reporter's Certificate 165
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 25, 2003, at 9:00 a.m., a special
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: I will call the meeting to
order of the special Commissioners Court meeting scheduled
for today, Monday, August the 25th, at 9 a.m. It appears to
be about a minute after 9:00. Commissioner Baldwin.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: I believe you have the honors
this morning.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do. If you'll stand
and pray with we, please, and then join me in the pledge of
allegiance.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. At this time, any
citizen who has anything that they want to bring to our
attention or say to us on a matter that is not on the agenda
is privileged to speak at this time. And we would ask, if
you have any matters that you wish to speak on that are
matters that are on the agenda, that you wait until those
agenda items are called. We would also ask, though it's not
required, that you fill out a participation form. Those
8-25-G3
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
forms are at the back of the room. Like I say, it's not
required, but it helps us in planning and making sure that
we don't miss you when that agenda items comes up. But, at
this time, any citizen desiring to speak on matters not on
the agenda are privileged to come forward, give their name
to the reporter, and say what's on their mind. Ms. Fox?
MS. FOX: Yes. Good morning. Thank you for
hearing me. You know who I am. My name is Catherine Fox.
I'm here to share with you. I'm not here to chastise, nor
am I asking for your opinion. You may give it if you so
choose; I'm just simply here to share. Thankfully, God gave
us rain last night, two and a quarter inches where we live
in two hours and 10 minutes. The berm behind my parents'
home failed. Nature did test it, and Stablewood did not
pass the test. The water's being channeled directly onto my
parents' property, along with caliche. Stablewood has been
informed. I know what I have to do next. I know it
involves the State of Texas, myself, and Stablewood.
However, I would like you gentlemen to know -- I am reading
directly out of the Kerrville Mountain Sun, and as I was not
here at that meeting due to a doctor's appointment that I
had had for over a month last time, I welcome anyone on the
Court who was mentioned in this article to please correct me
if what I am stating is incorrect.
Precinct 1 Commissioner Buster Baldwin said
B-25-G3
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
that Domingues was the engineer of record, and that his
signature on the project was sufficient for him. "You're
asking the County to inspect. That's not our job." Then
Precinct 3 Commissioner Jonathan Letz said that the issue
is -- quote, is not whether the engineer did a good job.
It's beyond the scope of our Court's rules and authority,
unquote, to challenge the expertise, adding that if the
State of Texas deems the engineer to be qualified for a
license, he did not think it was the Court's business to
question it. He then goes on to say -- meaning Commissioner
Letz, respectively -- for the thousands of dollars in fees
that it would cost, he said, it was not the intent of the
rules to redo the work of the engineer who signed off on it,
and that the Court could be liable if they did not sign.
I'm confused. And I mean this respectfully, not
sarcastically, gentlemen. Is it that you couldn't do
anything, Commissioner Letz? Or is it that you chose not to
because it would cost thousands of dollars? I'm confused.
JUDGE TINLEY: If you'll allow me to
interject, on this particular segment of the -- of the
agenda, for the visitors' input on subjects not on the
agenda, --
MS. FOX: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- we're not permitted under
the rules that we play by to get into a discourse or
£3-~5-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
6
discussion.
MS.'FOX: Okay, fine.
JUDGE TINLEY: Certainly, you're privileged
to tell us anything or to say what you desire, but since it
is not an agenda item, this Court is not legally permitted
to get into a discussion of those items.
MS. FOX: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: I hope you'll understand that.
MS. FOX: Yes, I do understand. Thank you.
It's my naivete of the rules, because they're so complex,
and I am simply a lay person. However, nonetheless, I
wanted to express this to you for one reason, and one reason
only; not my displeasure at the Court, but that I believe
that the Court needs to understand that when we stated
before that the engineers were not qualified in hydrology
issues, we were not simply blowing smoke, and now Mother
Nature has proved ou.r_ point. Thank you, sirs.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Is there any other
member of the publir_ that has anything they wish to tell us
about or talk to us about that is not on the agenda? There
being none, we'll go on to the next agenda item,
Commissioners' Comments. Number 1, Commissioner Baldwin.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Thank you.
The only -- the only comment I had to make this morning is
the -- the Associated Press football polls are out. Tivy
8-~5-03
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
Antlers are Number 9 in the entire state. Not bad. Not
bad. Good place to start. That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, they're Number
6 on the KSAT's top 10, so you just advanced three places.
That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, since we're talking
about football, I'll let everyone know that the first, I
guess, home football game, which is a JV and a freshman
game, will be this Thursday, the 28th. And this is a
comment to Ms. Fox. I'll be glad to visit with you. If
you, you know, are here during -- up to the break, or to the
break, I'll be glad to visit with you. You know, I think
the paper had my quotes accurate, but I'll be glad to
further explain.
MS. FOX: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I pass.
JUDGE TINLEY: You pass? The only -- only a
couple items that I have that 1'd like to bring to your
attention. The -- the Clerk advised me this morning that
early voting on the constitutional amendments begins this
coming Thursday?
MS. PIEPER: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: And it'll be going on for a
8-~5 03
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
period of --
MS. PIEPER: Two weeks.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- two weeks. I encourage any
of you that will not be able to vote on Election Day, or if
you just prefer to vote early to have it out of the way, and
another item you can line off on your schedule, to please --
please take advantage of it. That early voting will be
taking place here in the courthouse?
MS. PIEPER: Yes, in the lower section.
JUDGE TINLEY: Down in the lower level or
basement annex, I suppose it could be called. We've
utilized that before, and it seems to work out pretty good.
One other item. I was privileged, along with Commissioners
Baldwin and Williams, to attend a function over the weekend.
It was the 4-H awards dinner and -- and ceremonies. And I
was impressed with the -- with the entire program and the
wonderful types of programs that these 4-H individuals
participate in. I learned that we have a number of Kerr
County youth involved in those programs. There are a number
of clubs, some on the west end, some on the east end, and
several in between, and we're not just talking about raising
hogs or growing hay. We're talking about a whole lot of
different things; among them, leadership skills,
citizenship, things of that nature, that are involved in
those programs. And I want to take a minute or two this
a-~s-o~
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
morning to thank them for allowing all of us to be there and
to participate. They -- they permitted us to participate in
the program. As a matter of fact, there are two different
awards, one to one of the 4-H youth participants, and
another one to the -- to the leaders, that this Court
presents. We sponsor those two awards. The -- the youth
award went to a fine young man by the name of Sam McKee, who
I see great things on the horizon for, and the adult
leadership award went to a longtime resident of this county
who's been involved in youth activities and programs for --
well, I don't know how many years. She might be offended if
I were to take a -- take a guess, because it would be a
goodly number of years. Ms. Hazelle Calcote.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: About 50.
JUDGE TINLEY: As I'm sure all of you know,
she's been a wonderful asset to this county and this
community, and particularly to the youth. But I wanted to
express my thanks for our being able to participate.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One thing, Judge,
that I noted out there -- I'm sure you and Commissioner
Baldwin did, too -- was the level of maturity and confidence
and self-esteem these young people have which belies, in
most instances, their age, and that's a credit to not only
their parents, but the program in which they've been
involved all these years.
8-25-03
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
10
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. And, as you
said before, Judge, I doubt it very seriously if we will see
any of those kids come through your juvenile court system.
JUDGE TINLEY: If any of them have been in my
juvenile court, I'm not aware of it. I doubt seriously
whether I'll see any of them. The law of averages says I
probably will see one or two along the way, but I'm not
aware of, in the eight months that I've been juvenile judge
of this county, seeing one individual that was involved in
the 4-H programs or the FFA or other programs that are
involved out there at that Youth Activity and Exhibit
Center. So, you know, you get what you pay for. We can
spend the money out there, or we can spend it putting them
in the Youth Detention Facility. Some of you that may not
realize it, every time we put one in the Youth Detention
Facility, it costs us $83 a day to do that. It's your
money. You figure out where you want to spend it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's get on with the business
at hand. First item on the agenda, we have here a
representative from Costco Wholesale who desires to obtain
the Court's permission to set up a complimentary reception
table accessible to all of the employees of Kerr County for
a discount membership rate to that organization. Good
morning.
~-?5-0~
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2 2_
23
24
„-..
25
MS. SMITH: Good morning. I'm Nancy. I'm
with Costco, and that is exactly what I'm requesting, is
what you've stated there, that Costco would like to have a
complimentary reception held in the courthouse that would be
open to all of the County employees so that they could
receive a $10 gift card, which essentially would be taking
$10 off the membership, which is $45 a year for two cards.
And I have with me some examples of posters that we would be
able to send. We can put a packet together, and we have
posters that you could put in different offices. This is
something we did in Boerne for the court system there, for
the county. They had posters in several of the offices that
enabled the employees to know exactly the date that we were
coming so that they could take advantage of that
opportunity. And then we also have -- I have an example of
the application that would be used to explain a little bit
about Costco, and has the application side for the employees
to use. And on the date that we come, we would be here for
about an hour or two, and we would bring something from the
bakery or pizza or whatever your preference is, and we can
provide that during the time that we're here. And so, I was
requesting to find specifically a date that you would like
to have us.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are we talking about
during the business hours?
~-~s-~~
12
1
~-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
MS. SMITH: Yes. What seems to work best is
if we do it on a date that is near a payday for the
employees, because that works best for them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Lunch hour? Lunch
hour? Or --
MS. SMITH: When it would be most accessible
for the employees, whatever time frame would allow them to
be able to come by the table and say hi and drop off their
application and -- and pick up their gift card and some of
their goodies that we bring.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You have to forgive
me, I don't know what Costco is. Do you sell something? Is
it a membership that they can go grocery shopping, get
discounts? Or --
MS. SMITH: We're a membership wholesale
club. I'm sorry, I didn't -- I just assume everybody knows
who we are now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I don't.
MS. SMITH: We are actually the originator of
the wholesale club. We started in 1976, and actually Sam
Walton came out to the west coast and saw Costco and
thought, "Hey, this is a great idea," and he started Sam's
six years later on that concept. Are you familiar with
,.-~
25
8-_5-03
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, ma'am.
Sam's?
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. SMITH: Okay. We're like that. Little
more upscale, carry more name brands, and normally we offer
the lowest price on quality items. And the membership is
$45 a year for two cards, but what we're offering is to
offer the $10 gift card that essentially is taking $10 off
the membership to all the employees here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is it a mail-order --
I mean --
MS. SMITH: Well, you can actually go online,
you can purchase online, but we have a warehouse -- we have
two warehouses in San Antonio.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
MS. SMITH: And the closest to Kerrville is
on I-10 and U.T.S.A. And, actually, we have a lot of people
coming down to the warehouse from Kerrville, from this area.
They love Costco.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good. I'm sorry, I
didn't know.
MS. SMITH: That's okay. We have over 4,000
different items. We have a bakery. We have a pharmacy. We
have an optical department. We have an optometrist on the
premises. We have a tire center. We have -- you can
purchase tires, even tires we don't carry, and a lot of
people are able to purchase something in one -- in one
purchase -- like, for example, a set of tires. As somebody
8-~5-G3
14
1
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 was talking to before this meeting began said, that more
than pays for the membership in one -- one event. Gas
prices, you're probably all aware of gas prices have been on
the rise the past week. Our regular gasoline is $1.49 a
gallon, which is lower -- about 10 cents lower than
everyone. I could keep going, so you better shut me up.
'Cause --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Say that again about
the gas prices.
MS. SMITH: We tend to be 6 cents to 10 cents
less than anybody else per gallon in the area. We're $1.49
today, and everybody's going up to about $1.56 or more right
now. You want some behind-the-scenes information on
gasoline?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: What's the Court's pleasure?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the only thing
I'd have to say is I have no problem with doing this, but we
have to be open to anyone else who wants to do it once we do
it one time. And I <~on't recall us doing something like
this before, but I don't know that it's a problem doing it.
You know, we certainly should try it out, but if it becomes
an issue, I think we have to do it -- you know, we may have
to discontinue at some point.
~3-"~S-U3
15
1
,.-. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or we'd have to -- if
Sam's or some other wholesale club wanted to do it, we'd
probably let them do it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My thought would be
if they wanted to set up, bring pizzas and so forth, set up
for lunch underneath the magnolia tree out there, which is
delightful, let people come get their lunch.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was thinking more in
the line of Cowboy Steakhouse, but --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That'll work.
MS. SMITH: They are members of Costco, too.
They're probably purchasing their steaks from us.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See? There it is.
What a deal. What a plan. I like it.
MS. SMITH: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't have any
problem with it. September the 15th is a Monday. That is a
payday. I'm --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioners Court day,
too, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Probably.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. It would be.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That means we get
8-_'5-C3
16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
some free pizza too.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do it on the 15th?
That's fine. Doesn't make any difference to me.
MS. SMITH: How many pizzas do you need me to
bring?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One, two, three, four,
five. (Laughter.)
MS. NEMEC: Judge? Judge, may I make a
suggestion? If the Court would like, I could put a notice
in the September 15th paycheck that they'll be here
September 16th, and with the time and the place. And we
currently do have applications in my office for Sam's.
There are some employees that are members of Sam's. This
happened quite some time ago, and so they haven't come in to
promote it any more, so, you know, I don't promote it. If
they want to come in and promote it, that's fine. And we
carry the applications, so I'll be glad to keep some
applications in my office also.
JUDGE TINLEY: But if I understand you
correctly, Ms. Nemec, there was an occasion where Sam's came
and did a similar kind of --
MS. NEMEC: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- presentation that this lady
is speaking of?
MS. NEMEC: Yes, sir, and there are some
a-25-n_~
17
1
..-. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
employees that are members. And then there's some employees
that find out about it and will come in and ask for an
application, and we go ahead and get that to them, and I
would be glad to do the same for Costco.
MS. SMITH: Thank you. We have done that on
several occasions, too, where they'll just do fliers or
inserts with the employee payroll checks to let them know
too, in addition to the posters.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And what about the
lower level where we do that early voting? That's where we
have all of our luncheons and parties.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Be the best location.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, just in case
there's bad weather.
24 be.
25
8-~5-03
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I2 o'clock?
JUDGE TINLEY: And that will be after the
voting has concluded'?
MS. PIEPER: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: If we do it either the 15th,
Monday, or the 16th, Tuesday.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would imagine the
16th would be better.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: I suspect it probably would
18
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: 12 o'clock, September
the 16th, Tuesday, downstairs. There is no free meal.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe 11:30 or -- 11:30
to 1:30, something like that.
MS. SMITH: Okay. And if it requires us to
stay longer, that's fine, we'll stay longer. Whatever works
best for you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, would you like
to have a court order?
JUDGE TINLEY: I think we've -- if we get a
matter -- if we're going to get a motion to that effect.
Have you made such a motion, by your action?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, I have.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Is that a second?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Any further
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. That will
solve it, shouldn't it, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Thank you very much.
8-?5-03
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
We appreciate you being here.
MS. SMITH: Thank you very much.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item will be consider and
discuss renewal of an Interlocal Cooperation Contract
between Kerr County and Department of Public Safety for the
purpose of administering Fugitive Apprehension Program. Our
Sheriff.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: lt's exactly what you
said; it's just a renewal of that program. We've had it for
a number of years. It's where, on parole violators of
certain offenses and that, the County gets reimbursed for
those that we house. It's $200 for certain ones. Ones on
the higher -- like Texas Top 10 or the high sexual assault
fugitives and that, :it's $400. It has brought the County in
about $1,500 in the last couple of years, and it's just a
small program, but we have to have that contract to be able
to do it.
JUDGE TINLEY: If you run across these guys,
you're going to arrest them anyway, aren't you?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Going to arrest them
anyhow.
JUDGE TINLEY: Might as well get a little
dough for it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move to approve.
a-2s-n~
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-.
25
20
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second -- third.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fourth.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded that the County approve the interlocal -- renewal
of the Interlocal Cooperation Contract between Kerr County
and Texas Department of Public Safety for the purpose of
administering the Fugitive Apprehension Program. I assume
that includes authorizing the County Judge to sign same. Is
there 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. Thank you
Sheriff. Next item is another item placed at the request of
the Sheriff. Consider and discuss the approval of an
interlocal contract between Kerr County and Texas Department
of Public Safety.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And this one is
apparently a new one. I couldn't see where we had ever
signed anything before, but I guess it's Department of
Public Safety's way of charging us for certain items now.
What this amounts to, there's a little bit -- and the main
one that we use are the little plastic breathing tubes that
E-25-03
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
go in the intoxilizer machine that gets changed out. It's a
mouthpiece that any suspected DWI person breathes into.
They've always been furnished, okay? We've never had to pay
for them, that I know of. But now, evidently, D.P.S. is
going to start charging us for them, so now they have -- you
have to have a contract or an agreement signed to pay for
them. And some of their other forms, like the accident
reporting forms and things like that, there's a lot of that
in here. That's now going to start costing us.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What kind of dollars
are we talking about, Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's not that much.
Like, the -- the mouthpieces, I think there's -- it's $16.50
a carton, and it says in here where the carton is, it's 100
of them in it, so that's going to cost us about a -- about
$16.50 for 100 mouthpieces. But I would assume each
agency -- and I don't know how it's going to work. We've
always just gotten these things from D.P.S., including
accident report forms. I don't know if that is still
continued. Nothing was really said anything about this;
just something D.P.S. has slipped in.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is this an extensive list of
items? Because the -- the information I've been furnished
does not have the attached document which has the revised
price sheet on it.
8-25-G3
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-~,
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Here is my copy of some
of the different items that it does take care of, the costs
of those items.
JUDGE TINLEX: I assume you have gone over
that -- that schedule of items and reviewed it and found the
prices that they've designated to be reasonable under the
circumstances?
SHERIFF HIERHOLIER: Oh, yeah, they're less
than what we could buy those items for and do buy these
items for anywhere else. And there's some things we have to
use. The blood tubes, if you're going to send in blood
specimens, or the syringe tubes to send in used needles and
syringes and drugs, D.P.S. has their requirements -- the lab
does, on exactly what -- how it has to be packaged, which is
those items. So, you'r_e not going to have a choice but to
purchase those items.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move to approve and
authorize County Judge to sign same.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded that the Court approve the interlocal contract
between Kerr County and Texas Department of Public Safety
concerning the mentioned items, and authorize County Judge
to sign the same. Any further questions or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a comment. And I
8-25-03
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
will vote for this; however, any -- and I look back at our
D.P.S, funding in our budget, and I think we should reduce
any funding we give them by this estimate -- by an estimated
amount. I think it's a little bit absurd for us to be
funding D.P.S. and then they start charging us for things
that we never have paid for before. Unfortunately, I think
we only have one item, which is salary, left in that D.P.S.
budget, which we really can't take off.
JUDGE TINLEY: There's an Operating Supplies
item in that budget, and I, in fact, reduced that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: By this amount?
JUDGE TINLEY: I -- I wasn't looking at this,
so I don't -- but I reduced it considerably based upon
historical use. So, their budget for those items -- I
believe it's Operating Supplies -- was reduced. There's a
copy of the budget there. You're free to --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I'll try to
remember.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item
8-25-03
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
is consider amendment to NRCS Project Number 69-7442-3-549,
and approval of the County Judge to sign the same.
Mr. Odom. Thank you.
MR. ODOM: Thank you, Judge. I would ask
that -- this amendment is to ask the Court for authorization
for the County Judge to sign this. Previously -- this
completes the NRCS projects, whicYi we have completed a while
back. They sent us Amendment 550, which was a smaller
payment, and this is for over $81,000, I believe --
$81,345.16. So, what we need to do is have the County Judge
sign it, then we send it back in and we reimburse them, then
we will give it to the Auditor to place back into reserves,
I would assume.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded that the Court approve the amendment for NRCS
Project Number 69-7442-3-549, and authorize County Judge to
sign the same. Mr. Odom, is this our $110,000 in, quote,
participating projects, I believe is the term that was
utilized in connection with --
MR. ODOM: That is correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- the prior agreement?
MR. ODOM: Prior.' agreement, that was our
75 percent reimbursement back.
8-~5-u3
25
1
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: But these are the two projects
that make up that $110,000 --
MR. ODOM: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- that we're obligated to
perform anyway under prior agreement?
MR. ODOM: That's correct. And what they --
they had forgot to send us this 549. They sent us the 550.
We called back, said, "Where's the remaining amount of
$81,000?" They said, "We forgot to send it to you." So
that's -- we're trying to comp]_ete it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any further questions
or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, just -- just a
question. This is the second amendment under this contract?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. What we had -- this is
the second amendment. The first one would include the
gabions up there at the swing area, and we had such a delay
from trying to get this together that we went with concrete.
It was amended, and was a little bit less money, but that
was the amendment on the thing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess my reason for
asking, this says Amendment Number 1 on it, on the
attachment. And I think maybe, just so we can in the future
figure out what we did, rather than just refer to an
amendment, maybe even refer to the amount in the motion.
8-^5-03
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
26
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because, I mean, just --
'cause it seems odd it's the second amendment and it's
titled Amendment Number 1.
MR. ODOM: We had an original. Then he
modified it and sent this back to us. We said, "That's
fine."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, this one is
$81,345.16?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. And this will complete
what they owe us.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move that we
approve the amendment which provides reimbursement to Kerr
County in the amount of $81,345.16.
MR. ODOM: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And authorize the
County Judge to sign the same.
JUDGE TINLEY: Now, is that in lieu of the
original motion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, it is.
JUDGE TINLEY: Now, who made the original
motion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I did.
JUDGE TINLEY: Did you? Okay. All right.
And who made the second?
S-"~5-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
27
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I did.
MS. PIEPER: Commissioner Letz.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. That is --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's satisfactory to
me.
JUDGE TINLEY: Very good. All right. We`ve
got a substituted motion on the table. Is there any further
question or discussion? All in favor of the substituted
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.}
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much.
MR. ODOM: Thank you, Judge. Thank the
Court.
JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate it. The next
item on the agenda, we'll go to 1.9, I think would be
appropriate, in view of the hours that we're dealing under
here. Consider and discuss qualification for constables as
per Section 86.0021 of the Local Government Code.
Commissioner Baldwin.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Thank you.
I wanted to -- what I'm doing here is simply a reminder to
the constables that -- that come under this program that
they -- if they swore in January 1 of this year, there is
8-~5-C3
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
just a couple of weeks left before they are required to
comply with the law. And I want to read the first sentence
out of Section (b) from this law. It says, "On or before
the 270th day after the date a constable takes office, the
constable shall provide to the Commissioners Court of the
county in which the constable serves evidence that the
constable has been issued a permanent peace officer license
under Chapter 1701, Occupations Code." Again, I'm not a
lawyer, but I know one. And that says to me that on or
before the 270th day from the day that they swore in, that
they are to come to this Commissioners Court and show
evidence of a permanent peace officer's license. And,
again, I think that that is September the --
something-something. Pretty soon. And that needs to
happen. So, that's all. Just -- and all I'm doing is
saying -- reminding you guys that haven't done this to, you
know, get it done. Come on in. That's all.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question. Constable
Precinct 2 gave me a printout from TCLEDDS, Texas Commission
on Law Enforcement Data Distribution, in which it lists all
of his various courses and hours and what he has been
awarded. Is that sufficient documentation, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It says a permanent
peace officer's license. Now, we can ask our attorney,
which is a holder of one of these, if -- if some kind of
8-25-03
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
29
school transcript is the same thing as a license or not.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Evidence that the
constable has been issued a permanent peace officer. So,
if --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It may be.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If, in this case,
I've got in front of me this printout from Texas Commission
on Law Enforcement which indicates he's been awarded a peace
officer license, among other things, is that sufficient, do
you think?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Probably so. My first
question would be, why don't you just show the license? You
know, but -- but whatever.
MR. FEARY: There is a license, but if that
transcript has listed on it that he has been issued a
permanent peace officer license, then that would -- would be
evidence.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You take a look and
you tell me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, personally --
MR. FEARY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Personally, I just
think it would be wise and -- and good order for them to
come in, either present this thing or their little license
8-~5-03
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
30
or whatever, and the Court accept them -- officially accept
them, just for future records. And, you know, that`s all.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are we going to set a
date for that to happen, or is today the day?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, no, today's not
the date. I'm not sure when the 270 days is up. When is
the 270 days up?
MR. PICKENS: Would be September 28th.
That's what I was told by TCLEOSE Friday -- Thursday.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: September 28th.
Sometime after that, y'all need to get on the agenda and
present them.
MR. PICKENS: If it please the Court, I have
my documentation for my Commissioner to present it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's do it in the
Commissioners Court agenda item so we can accept --
officially accept them, please. Thank you. I know you have
yours.
MR. PICKENS: I'm in total compliance.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good. Oh, I don't
doubt anybody's out of compliance. I just think it would be
good for this Court to officially accept them, like the law
says here, just to make everything clean, up-to-date.
That's all I'm doing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think it's a
5-~5-G3
31
1
~- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
matter of cleaning up. I think it says we have to.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, it does to me,
too.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It says "shall." We
shall do this. Therefore, we shall do it. I don't think we
have a whole lot of choice.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, there's some
debate over that, but that's exactly the way I read it, and
that's what this chair's going to do, I can tell you that.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, it's your -- it's your
preference that we should have a separate agenda item,
either one of the next two meetings prior to the -- whatever
that 270th day is, a specific agenda item to -- to receive
and accept the evidence under this particular provision?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. I would
think maybe it would be after that 270th day, though,
because it could be on the 270th day that they received it.
And, I think it's up to them to get -- do the agenda item.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, the statutory
provision that you're referring to says, "On or before the
270th day, the constable shall provide to the Commissioners
Court..."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: You know, if they're all in a
position to do it by a given -- by, you know, the first
8-~5-03
32
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
meeting in September, for example, it would seem appropriate
if they were to submit that agenda item, we'll handle it
then.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fine with me.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further on this?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir, thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A comment, 'cause we
have, I guess, two constables in the courtroom right now.
Will y'all take it among yourselves to notify the other two
constables?
MR. PICKENS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would appreciate it.
Just so, I mean, we do it one time.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know. I
don't want to belabor this, but isn't the 270th day
different for each constable?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: From the day they took
office. I would -- only two them took office January 1.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: January 1 of this
year?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought they all did.
MR. PICKENS: Only one; that was me. That
was for the special election that was held back in November.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct.
fi-25-03
33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. PICKENS: All four run at the same time
as the Sheriff runs.
COMMISSIONER
same time the Sheriff does?
MR. PICKENS:
COMMISSIONER
time -- I think I've said t
COMMISSIONER
BALDWIN: All four run at the
Yes, sir.
BALDWIN: All four runs the same
gat.
LETZ: Twice.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So you don't run in
cycles?
MR. PICKENS: It's the J.P.'s that run on
different terms.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And everyone else.
And everyone else. You're the only ones that don't? I
didn't know that.
MR. PICKENS: Same time as the Sheriff. As
the presidential election, as well.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bobby, will you be
sure to take care of this, please?
MR. PICKENS: Yes, sir, I will. I will set
it for September the 8th.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thanks.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Next item, consider and
discuss recommendation of the Honorable Carole Keeton
Strayhorn, Texas Comptroller, regarding budgetary matters in
8-~5-03
34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
connection with our general provisions, as we include them
in our annual budget.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. Thank you,
Judge. We have walked down this road before, and we have
adopted a statement for our -- our budget in the general
provisions, and I ran across this the other day, and it's --
I think it's nothing more than a recommendation from Carole
Keeton Strayhorn, the Comptroller of Public Accounts, of how
to -- the proper way to do budgets. And this particular one
is dealing with line item transfers, and basically what it
says that you need to do is, when you're -- when you're
doing budget amendments, like we have some in here this
morning, that it -- that the person that wants to transfer
the money should come to the Commissioners Court prior to an
expenditure is made. We -- several years ago, we did our
own with very, very similar language that has been in our
budget for some time, and we simply don't -- we don't live
by that. And, again, it's recommended by the Comptroller,
and it's been in our budget for a number of years -- our
general provisions in the budget for a number of years now.
I don't -- I'm not looking for any kind of a court order
today to adopt anything. To me, it's already there. But I
really think that we need to enforce it. I think it's good
business. It would be just good business for -- for this to
happen.
8-~5-03
35
1
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: I think, as part of our
budget, we actually adopt as an overall part of the budget
the general provisions, or a set of general provisions as a
part of the budget, do we not, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, that is
true.
JUDGE TINLEY: And whether we continue with
the general provisions that we've utilized in the past, or
modify those in some way, shape, form, or fashion, or
whether we adopt this particular language, that's a matter
of -- of figuring that out during the course of the budget
process.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: In connection with the
adoption of the final budget.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, if I might just
add to that, I mean, I totally agree with doing that. We
should do what our general provisions say. But I think it
would be probably a good idea, during one of our workshops
scheduled prior to formal budget adoption, just to make sure
that -- you know, to -- let's go over these general
provisions. Let's go over them one time, make sure that
they are accurate and that we are going to put a little bit
8-25-03
36
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
more emphasis on them, spend a little bit of time going over
all the general provisions.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's not a
bad idea, because as I read the -- I knew the Commissioner
was thinking about this, 'cause he mentioned to it me once,
but this seems to deal with by purchase order. Expenditure
of funds by purchase order. And, so, if there are other
ways that funds are expended, like reimbursement of
expenses, for example, are we talking -- 'cause is that the
same thing? I think we need to hear from our Auditor and
get his point of view and so forth, 'cause this does
specifically mention expenditure of funds by purchase order
from a budget line.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It does.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You go out and buy a
printer and got the bill in your hand, but you hadn't --
hadn't asked for permission to buy the printer beforehand,
just by way of example.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe we can get the
Honorable Carole Keeton Strayhorn down here to present --
discuss it with us, or one of her assistants.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know if we're
ready for her or not.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It would be a lively
8-25-G3
37
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
presentation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, it would.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, it does -- it
does specifically say purchase order in there. But the one
that we have adopted with our budget does not.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is not it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, this is the -- her
recommendation. We have one in our budget that we have
adopted that is -- to me, is official, and it doesn't -- it
doesn't say anything about purchase order. It simply says
that if you're going to purchase something that needs to --
needs a transfer of funds from one line to the other, you
get -- you have to get permission. And I -- I think what
that is, is just so everybody can really keep an eye nn this
budget, instead of going outside the lines all the time.
All the time. Like today. That's all. I don't -- not
requiring any action.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. If there's nothing
further on that item, we'll move on to the next one,
consider and discuss proposed revised longevity and
educational pay increase policy. Ms. Nemec? Good morning.
MS. NEMEC: Good morning, Judge,
Commissioners.
JUDGE TINLEY: I hope I didn't send an
8-~'S-G3
38
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. NEMEC: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- via one of your employees.
MS. NEMEC: It took --
JUDGE TINLEY: She said, "I understand she
was going to talk about budgetary matters." I said, "Well,
that's not on the agenda this morning. The budget workshops
are tomorrow and Wednesday." But --
MS. NEMEC: Right. I thought I had a
deadline today, so it took a lot of stress off of me. There
is a revised longevity, if you don't mind passing them, from
the ones that were handed in with that agenda item. I had
to add something to it. If the Court pleases, I'll just go
number by number to let you know what changed on the policy.
All Number 2 does --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Barbara, do you have
another copy?
MS. NEMEC: The change on Number 2, again,
that is for the step increases. And what it does is, it
just changes the -- whatever is in bold is the change that's
being proposed. And it just changes the effective date to
become effective on the payroll following the anniversary
date, rather than on the -- to become effective on that
following budget year. So, that's what that does. The same
with Number 3. The Step increases will become effective the
payroll following your anniversary date. Number 5, on the
8-25-03
39
1
,.-,. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
previous policy, we did not have dispatchers in that policy,
and they did get educational certificates, and so that's to
add the dispatchers into that. And Number 6 just talks
about new dispatchers that are hired and how they will be
hired if they have a certificate already. Number 7 and
Number 8, again, Road and Bridge also receives educational
certificates, and on the previous policy, they were not
included in there.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Barbara, besides
these changes, I -- I think it was also the intent of the
Court to eliminate the rule preventing increases in three
successive years.
MS. NEMEC: Yes, I just took that completely
out of the policy.
JUDGE TINLEY: Couple of questions, if I
might. When we're going from advanced to master, it appears
that you've provided for a two-step increase?
MS. NEMEC: That's the way the previous
policy read. I'm not sure who wrote the policy on that, but
that is the way it's been. That's what's in place now.
JUDGE TINLEY: My understanding was that the
policy was intended to be as you attain each successive
level, there will be a one-step increase.
MS. NEMEC: Except for the -- for the last --
for the master's. Except for the last certificate that they
8-''S-03
1
~.. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~--
25
40
can obtain; that gave them a two-step increase.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. NEMEC: And that hasn't changed. That's
the same language as the previous policy.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, it's possible
that may have been a second step increase, rather than two
new steps. That's something that the Court can decide as a
matter of policy. The other step -- the other question that
I have is on these educational increases. It was -- it's my
recollection that what we talked about is that all increases
would become effective on the anniversary date for
longevity, but for educational increases, because of the
impossibility of being able to budget for it and predict
when these would occur, that those steps would commence
effective upon the -- the beginning of the next ensuing
fiscal year. That -- that was my understanding of what was
discussed, because we're unable to budget when somebody's
going to get an educational increase.
MS. NEMEC: That is true, you wouldn't be
able to budget. Therefore, you might be having to do budget
amendments with this policy. That's strictly up to the
Court, and I can change it. And the other departments that
are affected by this might want to say something on that; I
don't know.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm just speaking of my
S-?5-03
41
1
,., 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
recollection of what was discussed earlier when we were
talking about it in the budget workshop, a change for -- for
this particular policy.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: My intent on that
was that we would -- the educational increases would be
effective in the same manner as the longevity increases.
Budgeting is a complication, but I believe the -- the
reinforcement and motivational aspect of the -- granting the
increases shortly after the certificate is obtained is --
outweighs the budgeting difficulty.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just following up on
that, it seems logical that the department head or elected
official would know who and how many people he has in
edur_at-ional classes who are likely to complete them within a
particular budget year, I would think.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sheriff's nodding his
head.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That is correct. At
least in law enforcement. Now, Road and Bridge, I don't
know, brit in law enforcement, it takes so many years, so
many hours of training, and you can pretty well predict that
in a coming year, who's going to be able to get that. So
you can -- you know, we can, you know, figure that into the
budget, and that's what we -- we even did in this year's
8-~5-03
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
proposed. The other thing, the -- on the Judge's previous
comments on the master's, it was drawn up originally to two
steps because to get your master's and peace officer -- in
fact, I got mine two years ago; took me 21 years to get it,
okay? And unless you have a master's degree from college or
a bachelor's degree from college in something, it's going to
take you 20 years to get your master's, and that was drawn
up in the original deal that it would go two steps when you
got your master's, 'cause it's so long.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, when you look at the
progression, the basic to intermediate and the amount of
effort and training and hours, and then intermediate to
advanced in that same amount, the difference between
advanced and master's --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER:
JUDGE TINLEY: -- is
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER:
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
you're saying. There's a rational
as opposed to the one.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER:
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
Is humungous.
a wide gap?
That's correct.
I'm understanding what
basis for the two steps
That's correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question I have, is there
a way to combine 3 and -- 3 and 4, and also 5 and 6? I
don't see why we need to specify it different for a new
8-~5-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
43
dispatcher versus a current dispatcher.
MS. NEMEC: Well, there are some times when
new employees are hired; if they don't have a certificate,
then they're just -- then they're just hired at entry level.
But this gives us the authority that if they are -- that if
they do have a certificate, that we can move them up to
another step. Otherwise, we wouldn't have that authority.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's a good bit of
redundancy in this.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, it's -- to me,
the simpler we keep it, the better. And it just seems --
and I guess, going back --
MS. NEMEC: And -- excuse me. On 5,
dispatchers do not get a master's; are not eligible to
receive a master certificate, so that's why they were put
separate.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can see that, just --
why 5 and 6 are both needed. And my other question,
dispatchers, they don't have to have a certificate?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They get one if they
stay with it and stay with it enough years. And they've
been getting the increases. That just wasn't actually
worded that way in the old deal, but they're part of law
enforcement and were getting it. But what Barbara's talking
about, the two paragraphs, the difference is, if -- and in
e-~s-o~
44
1
~-.. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Paragraph 5, it just says when they get them, they can get a
bump up, okay? When they get them. In Paragraph 6, what
you're talking about, I may hire somebody that's already got
an advanced, so instead of that person having to start as a
19-1, or 14-1, whatever it is, you figure in the advanced,
and they actually start at a 14-2 or -3. It gives Barbara
that --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It could just as
easily be the last sentence of Number 5, as opposed to a
whole brand-new paragraph.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It could. It's just
spelling it out a lot better than what it was in the old
policy that caused so much confusion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It just -- you know, I
mean, I understand it. I guess that's the main thing, is
that it's understandable. And the other thing I have on
Road and Bridge, the -- it says, you know, Road and Bridge
personnel are required to hold a special license. It seems
it would benefit everyone if we could -- if we knew what
those licenses -- I mean, if we kind of listed -- we get
with Leonard; maybe Leonard has a list of types of licenses.
Because it seems -- I'm not sure what we're talking about.
MS. NEMEC: It might specify in the job
description if -- if those positions require a special
license. I think what this sentence does here, it says if
8 ~5-03
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
..--~
25
it's already in the job description that in order to -- to
be eligible to -- for that job, they have to have this
certain license, well, therefore, the salary is already
figured into that position.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MS. NEMEC: Is that correct?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But under 7, I guess I'm
wondering, you know, what we're talking about.
MR. ODOM: Special license?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
MR. ODOM: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Are any of your personnel --
for example, I know there's some that are required to have a
CDL.
MR. ODOM: CDL, Class A, is a requirement now
to drive anything over 26,000. The other thing is, to do
any roadside herbiciding, anything like that, requires a
permit, which takes continual 5 -- 5 CEU's a year just to
maintain it. That comes back up; we don't have a choice.
Either that, or we can't do any herbicide.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. ODOM: So we have that. To me, that's
Number ~ --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. ODOM: -- specifies that. And there's
8-^_5-03
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
three people that have that at this time, that --
JUDGE TINLEY: Are those individuals required
to maintain that license?
MR. ODOM: No, not through the job
description.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Then, what I'm
concerned about is, if we're getting the benefits of the
special license which they have, but if they're not required
to hold that license --
MR. ODOM: Well, they're --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- they wouldn't fall under
MR. ODOM: But they are required to do it, as
far as this department's concerned right here, because it
gets down to using that license. You have to put your name
on the line. And -- and I get a little bit queasy when I
put mine on the line and I'm not out there all the time.
What it's designed for is that the supervisors are
responsible for their areas. They put their name on that --
on that list. Mine is there, and has been used too in some
of those areas, but there's only three of us that have that.
So, yeah, there's a lot of education, a lot of testing to
even pass that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I don't have a
problem. I mean, I'm just --
8-?5-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
47
MR. ODOM: When we did the job description,
it wasn't set up. It was a requirement by the State of
Texas later on that everybody would have one. When I first
came, you could go out and you could herbicide even with
Roundup.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, what other -- I
guess what I'm saying is, I understand the pesticide
license. What other licenses would fall under this policy?
MR. ODOM: The other one would be the -- I
forgot what it is I sent Barbara, but it -- there is a
requirement of three -- three educational deals for up to a
master's in this thing for heavy equipment operators and
all, so that has just been passed down. Basically, I would
imagine it's probably going to be -- in the future, be
mandatory. But A & M just come down with it, and it's
something that it's out there, and it's very good for
insurance and for workman's comp and for educating people
that we have that are 12-1 and 14-1, that have less
experience. It is a -- it is a tool in which to enhance
their -- their awareness of what's going on, how to do
equipment, how to do workplace barricading and signage and a
lot of things that we go over in safety meetings, but it's
-- it is a program to educate everybody, and you step up to
a master's program on this thing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Those -- I guess what I'm
8-~5-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
48
getting at, can we specifically list those we're talking
about? Or is there a reason --
MR. ODOM: Personnel, you mean?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, licenses.
MR. ODOM: Oh, sure.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Pesticide license.
You're talking about heavy equipment license. I mean, it
just -- rather than just say "special license," which is --
MR. ODOM: It is a road maintenance --
there's a degree in there of their expertise in educating
them. So, I can do that. I did send that to Barbara, I
thought, but I have it in the office. It's something we've
got and we've looked at, and we need to follow through on.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. If you can just
get the specific ones you're talking about --
MR. ODOM: It's specific, and it tells all
the different -- you have to have so many hours out of each
one. So, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move that we
approve the proposed, revised longevity and educational pay
increase policy.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: With suggested
24 changes?
...-.
25
(Commissioner Nicholson nodded.)
R-_5-03
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
49
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the Court approve the proposed, revised longevity and
educational pay increase policy with the suggested changes.
And I assume those are for Road and Bridge only at this
point?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think so. That's
all you called attention to.
JUDGE TINLEY: To identify the particular
licenses that qualify under -- under those provisions. Is
there any further question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. My preference would
be to wait until we get the actual one, because by voting on
something that we hadn't approved before is how we got in
the mess we're in this year. So, I won't vote for it until
we have the actual one, even though these changes are pretty
minor. The other question I have is, this policy will --
I'm just making a note here that we will require all
departments to have a new budget item or budget line item
for ed -- I guess for educational. I don't see how you put
it in salaries. We're going to have to go back to the
budget and put in an education line item. That's going to
be -- or maybe we can put it in salaries. Somehow we have
to get it in the proper budget process for both of these
items.
8-~5-G3
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
50
JUDGE TINLEY: Good point.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If they're not --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you saying -- are
you saying that you won't vote for it because we haven't run
the numbers yet? We don't know how much it costs, and --
and we don't know how much income we have and all that?
Or --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I won't vote for it
because this isn't the policy that I'm voting on. We're
talking about a policy that's still floating around, in my
mind, with some changes. That's why I won't vote for it.
But I'm just saying, we just need to know -- I support the
concept, but I want to look at the actual verbiage before I
vote for it. But I'm saying this has a budget impact now,
and the entire budget -- every department budget now has to
be relooked at.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me ask Tommy,
the budget that we received this morning, that we're going
to be working on tomorrow, did it anticipate these changes
in policy?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, it did. Yes, it did.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the educational one,
as well as being --
MR. TOMLINSON: Mm-hmm.
8-25-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
51
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion?
MS. NEMEC: The -- it had the educational
that is effective this next budget year, but if there are
any employees who are going to receive an educational
increase or certificate from October 1 through September,
then we don't have those figures. Is that correct, Sheriff?
I mean, I didn't get them.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay, we do have -- most
of those are figured in there. We may end up with one or
two that get them that we're not counting on, but most of
mine have got them at this point. They're looking at
masters now; that's going to take years. I can see one or
two, possibly.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That are built in the
budget numbers that we're looking at today?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: All the ones that I was
aware of or that we anticipated are built in the budget
numbers you already have, okay? I won't sit here and tell
you that there may be one or two that may come up during the
budget year that I haven't looked at, but normally in our
budget, there's plenty of space there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And they're budgeted
based on when they would receive them during the year?
8-~5-03
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
52
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: For the educational?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We gave our educational
and longevity -- the way we figured it and the way we gave
it to Barbara is, it is figured on their anniversary dates
and when we expect them to get those, and then we show
Barbara proof and send her a letter that they got it this
day, or they're -- they do it this way, and it`s all figured
in our budget.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That clears it up for
me. If those numbers have already been run and the numbers
that we're dealing with are in the budget, I'm going to vote
for it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm cool.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion on the motion?
COMMI:~SIONER LETZ: Are Road and Bridge's
numbers in the budget?
MR. ODOM: Yes, they are.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: For both?
MR. ODOM: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(Commissioners Baldwin, Williams, and
Nicholson voted in favor of the motion.)
8-25-03
53
1
'... 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(Comm.issioner Letz voted against the motion.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry.
MS. NEMEC: I'll revise Number 7 and 8 and
provide each of you with a copy of it, as well as the County
Clerk's office.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much,
Ms. Nemec. At this time, the Court will recess the
Commissioners Court meeting scheduled for this date, and
will convene a publi~~ hearing nn the request to hold an
election to approve a Mountain Home Emergency Service
District, that being -- I believe that the exact title of
the proposed district is Kerr County Emergency Services
District Number 1.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was
closed at 10:04 a.m., and a public hearing
was held in open court, as follows:)
P U B L I C H E A x 1 N CU
JUDGE TINLEY: Am I -- am I correct in that
nomenclature?
MR. SYFAN: Yes, you are.
JUDGE 'TINLEY: Thank you very much. Is there
any member of the public that wishes to be heard in
connection with the request to hold an election to approve
the Kerr County Emergency Services District Number 1 that's
been filed with the Court? Thank you. Mr. Wheeler, as long
8-25-03
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
as you're up, feel free to come forward and give your name
to the reporter, if you would, please.
MR. WHEELER: My name is Jerry Wheeler; I
live in Mountain Home and am Assistant Chief of Mountain
Home volunteer Fire Department, and I wish to express the
fire department's appreciation for the consideration of this
district. The firefighting apparatus and equipment --
protection equipment that we need for our individual
firefighters is very expensive, hard to come by, and without
having some taxable income, we haven't the ability to
improve. I thank Mr. Syfan for the work that he's put into
it, the Court for considering it, and we, the members of
Mountain Home Fire Department, look favorably upon this
district. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Wheeler.
Mr. Henson?
MR. H}~NSON: Yes, sir. Good morning. I'm
F.C. Henson. I'm a member of the volunteer fire department
as well, although I'm not here speaking for the volunteer
fire department. I live in Mountain Home, and in my
opinion, gentlemen, there's -- there's several driving
forces behind the need for a predictable funding for that
fire department. One of those reasons is that the types of
fires that we need t~~ be prepared to address are increasing
in complexity. If wF; look back 20, 25 years in the county
8-25-03
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and in that area, then the majority of -- of fires that we
needed to address were brush fires. And, quite frankly,
they're pretty simple to deal with. Today we've got many
more structures to deal with in the area. We`ve got up to
about 450 landowners, and well over twice as many structures
as we had 20 years ago. We have about 14 miles of
interstate that runs through our area, and we, from time to
time, get called out on car fires or to assist the local
authorities in dealing with accidents. So, we've got an
increase in -- in then amount of complexity. That requires
an increase in the amount and the types of equipment that we
need to have on-hand and need to be properly trained to deal
with.
At the same time, even though we're
successful from time to time in getting grants to help us
purchase some of that more expensive equipment, we have to
come up with matching funds, and we need to have the ability
to predict the amount of income that we're having;
mortgageable income, in fact, :~o that we can -- so that we
can invest over several years in additional -- additional
equipment. I'd also like to point out that another change
that's occurring in that area is that, although the
population growth is pretty significant in that area, the
numbers of people who are available to volunteer in that
fire department is not growing fast -- as fast, in my
8-~5-03
56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1g
20
21
22
23
24
25
opinion. And one of the reasons is, there's a lot of people
that are moving in the area that don't work on the land;
they work in town. Well, they can't respond to -- to a
call. Well, again, that shifts back to having equipment
that is more reliable, takes less -- less maintenance, and
also equipment that can be handled by fewer numbers of
people safely. So, T'm here speaking in behalf of putting
that -- that item on the ballot, because I think the people
in the area need the opportunity to make a judgment as to
how they want to address fires, either by paying for them
when they rebuild their barn, or paying for them in the way
of modest increases in taxes. Thank you very much.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Henson. We
appreciate it. Mr. Bernard Syf.an?
MR. SYFAN: I'll wear the other hat. The
emergency service district is really not what we started out
for, but it's what's we ended up with because of the
Legislature's action. We are getting an emergency service
district rather than a fire district, because fire districts
will no longer be after the 1st of September. They're going
to all have to convert to service districts, and the taxing
ability is going up. So, my intention, if I have anything
to do with it, will be to hold our taxes at the old fire
district level of 3 cents. Un]_ess people somewhere down the
line decide to expand into other fields, I think that's
8-25-03
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
57
where we ought to st<~y. The income that we're going to get
off of this is not large; it will be something like $11,000
or $12,000 a year. But, at the present rate, it is not
much, but it is for sure, and I can go to the bank -- or the
fire department can go to the bank and say, "Yes, we do have
this much income," and so they can get a loan. Going to the
bank and getting a loan for a ;>100,000 piece of equipment
over 10 years is possible now, where -- with this, where
it's impossible with~~ut it. You can't go to the bank and
say, "Maybe I'm going to get a donation," and -- and get a
loan. They just won't give it to you. So, we can dedicate
moneys to fire equipment. And the -- the district is a
completely separate entity from the fire department, and it
will be just a sugar daddy for the fire department. And if
you have any questions, I'll try to answer them. Other than
that, I think we're all on the right track to do something
good for the community.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much,
Mr. Syfan. We appreciate you being here today. Is there
anyone else who wishes to speak in connection with the
public hearing for the request to hold an election to that
approve emergency services district? Being no one else
coming forward, I'll close the public hearing.
(The public hearing was concluded at 10:11
a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court
meeting was reopened.}
8-~5-G3
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
JUDGE TINLEY: And we will move to Item
Number 1.7, which is to consider and take action to set an
election for November 4, 2003, to allow the election to
decide on the creati~~n of -- this states Mountain Home
Emergency Service District. Actually, what we're speaking
about, as I mentioned previously, is Kerr County Emergency
Services District Number 1, I believe it is. What`s the
pleasure of the Court, gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, question. How is
it governed? Dave or Mr. Syfan may know more.
MR. SYFAN: The district is governed by a
board of five who arE~ appointed by you, and they are
appointed annually by you. If the district is formed prior
to the lst of the ye<~r, you appoint them, and that
appointment lasts till the 1st of the year, and then you'll
have to reappoint them. But we won`t be getting any money
for a while. It has to be set up and then put into next
year's taxing process.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I do have one
question for Mr. Syfan. You referenced 3 cents as the tax
rate. Was that a cap of 3, or was that so that you could go
up to 3, or that would be your initial rate?
MR. S'~FAN: No, that initial rate will have
8-~5-03
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
to be set by the board that you -- it will be set by a
request from the fire department to the board, the board you
set up, and then that is set by the board, actually. But my
comment on the 3 cents, the -- the fire district that we
have in the county there in Ingram has somewhat less than 3
cents. And it might be somewhat less than 3 cents, but that
will have to be determined by the board that you appoint.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But you have the
ability to go up to L0, do you not?
MR. SYFAN: Well, I'm not positive about
that. I have been told that for fire service only, you have
the ability to go up to 3.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
MR. SYFAN: But if you added on an ambulance
or other service district items, then you can go beyond.
But I don't think, as for pure fire, from what I
understand -- and I haven`t heard evidence -- haven't read
it in the law, but I've been told by the people who are
interpreting the law that that is the limit.
COMMI:~SIONER LETZ: There's no provision to
this -- for this to be an elected board?
MR. SYFAN: No. It's a straight-out -- I
have the law here.
COMMISSIONER	LETZ:	Well,	it's -	- I'	m just --
MR. SYFAN:	It's --	this	is the	way	they go.
8-~5-03
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. SYFAN: They're appointed by the --
COMMI:~SIONER LETZ: Commissioners.
MR. S'rFAN: -- Commissioners Court annually,
in January.
COMMI:~SIONER NICHOLSON: My admiration for
our volunteer fire departments throughout Kerr County is
well known, so I won't make that speech again. I have seen
that the Ingram Fire Department, in part because they have a
taxing authority, has been able to make significant
progress; it's even been able to get grants that they might
not and loans that they night riot otherwise be able to get.
I also have talked Pxtensively to people in the Mountain
Home community, and :L sense that there's strong support for
this. I don't recal_1 -- I've haven't talked to anyone who
doesn't support it. And, based on that, I'm going to move
that we take action to set an election for November 4th,
2003, to allow the electorate at Mountain Home to decide on
the creation of the Mountain Home Emergency Service District
and authorize the Judge to sign it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that
motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
8-~5-03
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
the Court set an election for November 4, 2003, to allow the
voters to decide on the creation of what's referred to as
the "Mountain Home Emergency Services District," but which
is legally titled "Kerr County Emergency Services District
Number 1."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That takes care of my
question, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: And to authorize the Judge to
issue an order -- or_ sign an order in connection with the
calling of such election.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I have a couple
of questions. This is the Kerr County Emergency Service
District Number 1, and then we have the Kerr County Fire
District Number 1 at Ingram. Is that not -- isn't that
correct? It also has that Number 1. Isn't that --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's Number 1, but I
was thinking it was t=he Ingram --
JUDGE 'TINLEY: Fire district.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- Fire District
Number 1.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I could be wrong. Be
the first time this year, but I could be.
MR. SYFAN: No, Ingram is a fire district.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Kerr County or Ingram?
MR. SYFAN: It's a Kerr County Fire District
8-''S-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
Number 1. I talked with Charlie Stone at the State when we
started this, and I said, "Hey, this question is in my mind.
Which way is it?" He said, "You will be a completely
different thing. Yoi~ are Number 1 in that completely
different thing." Even though -- if they fold Fire District
Number 1 into a service district, it will become Number 2,
3, or 4, depending on if somebody else has come in. But
it'll be a completely different thing, according to Charlie
Stone.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You and I -- you and I
see that clearly. I understand that. Mr. Jones out there
on the street making a donation to one or the other may not
see that very clearly. That's fine, as long as everybody
understands.
MR. SYFAN: Nothing I can do about it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that's probably
true as well. My other question is the same question I had
for you last time, the boundary lines. Are there clearly
defined boundary lines?
MR. SYFAN: Yes. We -- the fire department
itself defined the boundaries. They went in to the
Appraisal District avid -- and drew a map, and that map we've
got copies of. I don't have the big one here with me, but
it is not only clearly defined on the map; by law, it had to
be given what they call metes and bounds. Rather loosely
5-~5-03
63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~. 2 4
25
given as metes and bounds. But a surveyor prepared and I
paid for the metes and bounds description, which was
reviewed by the State and deemed to be sufficient.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wonderful.
MR. SYFAN: And there might be additions to
this district somewhf~re down the line, but it's defined
very, very succinctly right now.
COMMISSIONER NIC:HOLSON: I need to amend my
motion to strike the term "Mountain Home Emergency Service
District Number 1," and replace it with "Kerr County
Emergency Service District Number 1."
MR. SYFAN: That would be correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question I have is -- and
it's going probably more to Jannett. What has to be done --
and my concern is that there was a statement in there to
authorize the County Judge to sign everything to do with
this. To me, I have a problem with that. If the
Commissioners Court's going to be making appointments and
doing the stuff, what do you have to do -- what does the
Judge -- what is the process to get this thing on the ballot
that you have to do?
MS. PIEPER: I will submit the order for the
Judge for his signature, and I'll hold the election. I'll
hold the early voting, we'll do mail ballots, whatever we're
required to do.
8-~5-G3
64
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll vote for it, but I
really do not like that. I don't -- I would -- I really
want to look at these things. I want to look at the
boundary myself. I want to know, you know, what we're
calling the election for when the paperwork finally gets
prepared, mainly because I'm going to be responsible for
making appointments to it. And if there's a mistake, I can
say it's his fault, but the responsibility still goes back
to me for letting him have that decision. So, I really wish
that this thing would come bac}: to the Court when it's
actually called for the election and Jannett does the actual
paperwork. But, you know, I won't vote against it.
MS. RI~CTOR: Jonathan, Bernard and I have
defined those lines and defined all of the property owners
within those boundaries. We've worked pretty closely with
that. So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I trust everyone. It's
just that I -- if I have to vote on it, make adjustments to
it later, I would rather look at the items myself. Just the
way I am. I mean, 'cause I'm responsible.
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.
e-~s-o~
65
1
~. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
......
25
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Thank you
very much, Mr. Syfan. We appreciate it.
MR. SYFAN: Would you like a copy?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, at some point.
Really, what I want is a copy of what Jannett has, and if I
find a problem or something that I don't like, I'll get it
back on the agenda.
MR. SYFAN: I'll guarantee you, you can't
read it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm more concerned about
the order for calling -- the official order that goes to
call the election is what I'm concerned about.
MR. S~~'FAN: Okay.
COMMIT=SIONER LETZ: Not the boundary. The
boundary, I'll leave that to you and Paula and the residents
out there. But I ju:~t -- you }:now, that's just the way I
am. I mean, I'm responsible, so I'd like to be involved in
the process a little bit more.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's from Comfort.
Hard-headed.
MR. SYFAN: He wants to look at it even
though he won't know what it says.
COMMISSIUNER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know. I imagine
8-~5-03
66
1
,.... 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I'll know what it says when I'm looking at it.
JUDGE TINLEY: The Court will now move on to
Item 1.8, consider and discuss opening proposals for
electrical, plumbing, and HVAC, as advertised. This was a
publicly advertised item, with the bid submission to the
Court to be done at 10 a.m. this date. It was timed for
that. We're running a little bit behind, but at a minimum,
we need to accept and receive those bids now. Mr. Auditor,
I believe that -- have we got t=hem all here?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, that's what I have.
(Comm.issioner Baldwin left the courtroom.)
MR. TOMLINSON: I think there's one -- one
proposal in each one.
JUDGE TINLEY: What do we have first?
Electrical? Hold on to those for me, would you?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Make myself useful.
JUDGE TINLEY: It appears that we have been
submitted one bid fo:r_ the electrical service for the ensuing
fiscal year. That b:i_d was submitted by Guadalupe Electric.
It appears to be in proper form and in compliance with the
bid requirements. At this point, I'll not belabor the
record with all of the details of it. It would seem that
the appropriate disposition at this point would be to refer
them to possibly our Maintenance Department for review and
bring it back to us?
fi-25-03
67
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.--. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You might just, for the
record, mention -- did you say who it's from?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, I did.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which one do we have now?
JUDGE TINLEY: The next one will be the
plumbing. Again, it appears that we received one bid, that
being from Whelan Plumbing. It also appears to be in proper
form, at least from a preliminary review, and in compliance
with the bid requirements and requests. Next is HVAC.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which I don't see any in
there. Looks like Hardin.
JUDGE TINLEY: There's a notation on the
sign-in sheet that an individual representing Hardin Heating
and Cooling had signed the sign-in sheet, but were there any
bids submitted from ]~ar_din or ~~nyone else within the time as
required pursuant to the advertisement?
MR. HOLEKAMP: The sign-in sheet just meant
that they picked up a --
JUDGE TINLEY: A bid request form?
MR. HOLEKAMP: -- bid package; that is
correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: We had no responses for the
HVAC. Do I hear a motion that we refer these bids to our
supervisor of Maintenance for review, and report back to the
Court at the next regular scheduled meeting?
8-~5-03
68
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded that the bids as received be submitted to the
Maintenance Supervisor for review and report back to the
Court as to his thoughts on them. Any further questions or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. These are
effective October 1? Or immediately?
JUDGE TINLEY: No, the bids are effective for
the ensuing fiscal year beginning October 1. That's what
they went out for. 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. That
brings us to the last t_i.med itE~m, dealing with 911. Where
is Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: He's already gone to
the press conference.
JUDGE TINLEY: He went to the press
conference, I see. That item is a press conference for 911
address changes. Presumably, that's being held at some
location other than in this room.
8-~~-03
69
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~-.
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's outside.
JUDGE TINLEY: Why it's on our agenda, I
don't know. But --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe
JUDGF. TINLEY: We are where we are, and
that's what it is. So, at -- I don't think it would be
appropriate at this point to call a recess, since it's in
the middle of an agenda item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Your Honor, I believe the
purpose, based on the fact --
AUDIENCE: There he is.
COMMI:~SIONER LE']'Z: The reason for the agenda
item was to get publicity and press for these mailouts going
out, so I would -- I do think it's appropriate to not
recess, but to go to the press conference, whatever it may
be.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm concerned about dragging
the reporter around, and if we're going to have her doing
all this, if we're going to handle it as an agenda item, we
need to have her there so that we being have our record
complete of these proceedings. So --
COMMI:~SIONER LETZ: Can we have no action on
the agenda item and .recess for the press conference?
JUDGE TINLEY: That would be satisfactory.
Do I -- do I hear a motion to that effect?
8-?5-03
~o
1
2
3
4
5 that --
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What's --
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What's the motion?
JUDGE TINLEY: That we take no action on the
Item 1.5, but recess the meeting to the press conference
itself. Any further questions or discuss? 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: We'll stand in recess and
we'll attend the press conference.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Press conference is
upstairs in District. Court Number 1. I didn't know that
till just this moment.
(Recess taken from 10:29 a.m. to 11:08 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: I will reconvene the
Commissioners Court meeting scheduled for this day, having
gone into recess a short while ago. It's now approximately
8 minutes after 11 a.m. Next item on the agenda is
consideration and di:~cussion oi~ moving Flood Control fund
t3-~5-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
71
balance to Road and Bridge budget. Commissioner Baldwin, do
you need to make any further explanation of that item?
COMMI:~SIONER BALDWIN: I really don't --
don't -- what number is that?
JUDGE TINLEY: Number 12.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I really don't think
so. It's something that we, in our budget discussions,
agreed that Road and Bridge is where the Flood Control fund
balance needs to be, so I move that we move it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the Flood Control fund balance be moved over to the Road and
Bridge budget. Any Further questions or discussion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item
is consideration, discussion and appropriate action on
re-establishing the ~7ustice Cotzrt Technology Fund, which
derived from the imposition of a $4 technology fee on
defendants convicted of misdemeanor offenses. Commissioner
Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge.
This will be our second go at this. We did enact this at
8-25-03
1
._._ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
r--.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.--.
25
72
one time. The purpose of it is the Legislature enabled the
justice courts to put on a $4 technology fee of defendants
convicted of misdemeanor offenses. Subsequent to our
putting it on, we learned from communications from Texas
Association of Counties' General Counsel that there was a
court challenge to -- that he thought might have some --
some bearing on the establishment of this particular fund.
That -- that particular incident or -- or court challenge
actually had to do with a -- a County Court at Law
challenge, but nonetheless, it went to trial. The suit was
dismissed. The litigation created questions about other
numerous court fees collected by counties, including this
fund, and so we were advised probably to be cautious about
it. So, as a result of that word of caution, we rescinded
the J.P. technology :Fund, because we didn't want to get
caught in a situation of escrowing dollars that subsequently
might have been ruler illegal, and have to give them back,
track down those people and so forth. So, we rescinded it.
We have a letter now from the Texas
Association of Counties' General Counsel, who said that the
District Court in the Caldwell case recently ruled that the
fees collected in that particular lawsuit, with respect to
the Texas Government Code section, is constitutional, and
dismissed all claims of that particular class. And he goes
on to say that since there is rio appeal of this judgment,
R-~5-03
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
73
and no other parallel cases, there is no legal impediment to
prevent counties from budgetinq and spending the fees
collected in the J.P. Technology Fund as allowed by law,
through the section of law. It goes into a fund that's used
for technology purposes only. And that's the background of
it, and I would move the re-establishment of the Justice
Court Technology Fund for Kerr County.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second that motion.
I've got a question, though.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
reestablish the J.P. Court Technology Fund and impose the
fee of $4 -- technology fee of $4 on defendants convicted of
misdemeanor offenses, as provided in the enabling
legislation for the J.P. Court Technology Fund. Any further
questions or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You said in your
statement a minute ago that we decided to -- to change it in
case there was an es~~row sitting over there and we found it
illegal, who knows what might happen to it. Is that escrow
still sitting over there?
COMMI:~SIONER WII~LIAMS : I don' t think we ever
collected anything, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, we never did get
it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When we rescinded it,
9-~5-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
74
I think we never did collect it, to my knowledge. Am I
correct, Tommy?
MR. TOMLINSON: I think we collected it for a
short time, and -- and then -- and during that period is
when the -- the question of the constitutionality of the --
of the fee came about, and that's when we -- I think
there's a small amount of money in the fund balance.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Cool.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do we have an
estimate of how much collecting this fee would bring in
every year?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Honestly, I don't,
Commissioner. I wish I did. 7.t can't be a large amount,
but --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- whatever it is, it
helps.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Is the definition of
a justice court -- that's the same as the J.P. court?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. J.P. court, yes.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Whatever it is, we
can -- we can consume that amount of money on these things,
computer systems and et cetera.
COMMI:~SIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
COMMI:~SIONER LETZ: I would -- I bet this is
8-25-03
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
75
a pretty big sum of money.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It might be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe it's all
traffic tickets.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, it would apply to all
traffic tickets.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, it would.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, you know, there's --
I bet we're going to -- I bet this will be a source to fund
a lot of upgrades and technology changes in those offices.
I mean, I think this will be a big help to future budgets.
JUDGE TINLEY: I agree with you. 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 rf~sponse. )
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item
is consideration and discussion of proposed, new On-Site
Septic Facility Rules and Regu]_ations for Kerr County, as
recommended by the joint committee, and setting a public
hearing on the same. Commissioners Letz and Nicholson.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll get it started.
This is very similar to the recommended rules that we
brought last time, that we got twisted off in some other
8-25-03
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
76
discussions. Basically, it is the -- the purpose of this
item is to set the public hearing to do that. I think this
Court needs to approve the rules for the public hearing. It
does not mean we're adopting them. It's just a way that we
can get feedback from the residents. I will note that
the -- there is a significant change from the current order
for O.S.S.F., and that change is the real estate transfer
provisions that currently exist are totally deleted, and
there is another change that relates to the -- what's
commonly called the 10-acre exemption. I'll just read the
language; it's under Section 10. "Regardless of acreage
involved, any new construction, alteration, or extension of
an O.S.S.F. located within Kerr County, Texas are required
to be permitted and licensed."
This is -- the requirement here really is
only a licensing. The systems -- there's no change in what
needs to be put in under state law, how it's installed, who
can install it and everything else. It just says that these
systems have to be inspected. And it's pretty simple.
The -- these rules are -- or these recommended rules are
slightly different in verbiage than -- than U.G.R.A. had at
their public hearing. There was a requirement under theirs
that any repair also would require it to be licensed and
permitted. Commissioner Nicholson and myself felt that
"repair" is an ambiguous term, even though it is defined
8-25-03
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
~~
under Chapter 285, so that was omitted from ours. The joint
committee is aware of this; they just set their public
hearing prior to our last meeting. I don't think -- there's
a note, there are some other issues pending related to
U.G.R.A. and other things that were bought up at their
public hearing, and in my mind, and I believe Commissioner
Nicholson's also -- he can speak for himself -- those issues
do not affect this in any way.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. And I think
it's time to set the public hearing and move the process
along.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I'll make a motion
that we set a public hearing -- and I'm pausing, because I'm
thinking of a date, and I don't have a calendar in front of
me.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I do not believe there is
a 30-day requirement for this; I believe there's only a
72-hour requirement. I think we need to give as much time
as possible, but at the same time, this does have some
budget implications, so it needs to be done.
JUDGE TINLEY: Probably first meeting in --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: First meeting in
September, which would be the --
JUDGE TINLEY: 8th.
a-~s-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
78
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- 8th. I'd say 10 a.m.,
September 8th.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second the motion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
a public hearing be set for September 8th, 2003, at 10 a.m.
on the proposed, new O.S.S.F. Rules and Regulations for Kerr
County, as presented. Questions or discussion? You had a
question?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have two questions.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
hearing; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second, will you
accept a change?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, maybe to make
it grammatically correct?
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
"are" should be changed to
COMMISSIONER
out following "Texas."
LETZ: Okay, maybe.
WILLIAMS: On (A), second line,
"is." That's it for today.
NICHOLSON: And take the period
8-25-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
,--,
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
79
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There you go -- make
a comma out of it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I do have a
question about (A), commonly known as the 10-acre rule.
Now, the 10-acre rule is a part of the state rules; is that
right?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And, so, if --
if this is passed, then it has to go to Austin for approval
of whoever's in charge of all this stuff these days?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it has to go,
either way, to Austin. Regardless -- whatever our new order
is, it has to be approved by T.C.E.Q.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Probably so. But this
-- this would be a change to their rules, so you
definitely -- I'm assuming you definitely would have to.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is a more stringent
requirement than state law requires, so yes, this has to be
approved by T.C.E.Q.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct. Okay. Now,
in my visiting -- see, I'm a 10-acre rule fan. I like the
10-acre rule. I'm not going to fight you over it, but I
just want to let you know I like the 10-acre rule. So, I
have been out kind of visiting around, trying to find out
8-25-03
80
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
what's -- what's driving this boat, and I was told -- I was
told that every county around us has dropped the 10-acre
rule. And then I go to someone else and ask them what's
going on. They said no, nobody's dropped it; everybody
still has it. I was just wondering if there -- you know,
what are -- I'm going to get to you. I mean, this question
is to you. What are -- what are other counties doing? And
-- go ahead.
MR. LOVELAND: According to T.C.E.Q. -- I'm
Scott Loveland with U.G.R.A. According to T.C.E.Q., Ken
Graber, the most common rule change across the state is to
permit everything, or elimination of the 10-acre rule. I've
called about 20 surrounding counties, and all of them have
done that, have dropped the 10-acre. They license -- excuse
me -- they license everything. So, that includes Gillespie,
Kendall, Bandera, Atascosa, Menard, Mason. I've got a
list --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
MR. LOVELAND: -- I've started to compile.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's just so
interesting. I can't -- I just can't get my mind there. I
just think that, you know, if I had -- if I had a
10,000-acre ranch -- and I know we've all heard this
argument before, but I'm -- that's where I'm at. If you had
a 10,000-acre ranch, and I'm going to build a new home and
8-25-03
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
I'm going to put in a new septic system, I don't want you
out there licensing my system. First of all, if I can
afford a 10,000-acre ranch with a nice place, you can rest
assured it's going to be a top-quality, number one, best
septic system you can buy. So, I just don't want you out
there. I mean, what am I going to pollute? So, you know,
I'm not asking you those questions, but that's just kind of
-- that's kind of where I'm at, and that's why I like the --
like the 10-acre rule, to exempt those over 10 acres. Or
20, whatever number.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. One comment
I'll make; I think I had this conversation with Commissioner
Baldwin before. I don't disagree with him. I think that
the -- my main purpose for proceeding to where we are right
now, I want to hear from the public on this issue, and the
way you hear from them is you put it in here that we make --
we may make it more stringent here. I see -- I can argue
for hours on both sides of the fence here. I see reasons
that are good to eliminate the 10-acre exemption, and I can
see other reasons that are equally good to keep it where it
is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think it's -- you
know, I'll leave it at that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well --
8-25-^v3
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
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Our -- our committee
report represented a consensus of the committee, and any
deliberations there were give-and-take throughout the
process. We're also talking about cost and budgeting issues
as well as rules. And I think Commissioner Letz would --
would agree that I was consistent in my position, that I did
not want to drop the 10-acre exemption. I do want to hear
from the public, and -- and hear the arguments from both
sides.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have one other
question, Judge. Is this proposed set of rules upon which
there will be a public hearing conducted identical to the
same -- to the set of rules that U.G.R.A. conducted a public
hearing on?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. The word -- as I
mentioned, the word "repair" was in theirs. And it's -- the
language that U.G.R.A. used was "regardless of acreage
involved, any new construction, repair, alteration, or
extension." We have deleted the word "repair." And the
joint committee is aware of that. Their public hearing was
set before we -- our last meeting, and it was agreed by the
joint committee that that word "repair" should come out.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Have they taken final
action on what they took out of the public hearing?
~-zs-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
83
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: If I might, gentlemen, a
couple of grammatical changes that I would propose to Page
2, under Section 13, third line, "administer the Court's,"
that should have an apostrophe there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where are you?
JUDGE TINLEY: 13, Appeals, Page 2.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second paragraph?
JUDGE TINLEY: First paragraph, third line.
Court's, apostrophe S, O.S.S.F. program. Next line, General
Manager, apostrophe S, add. Next line, General Manager,
apostrophe S, office. Immediately following that, again,
apostrophe S. At the end of the parenthetical, change that
period to a comma, and lowercase the T on "the" immediately
following. Second paragraph of 13, "chooses to administer
the O.S.S.F. program," change semicolon to comma. Next
line, action or decision of "its," as opposed to "their"
Designated Representative.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge? On the second
paragraph, first line, "Kerr County" --
JUDGE TINLEY: "Chooses to administer the
O.S.S.F. program."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You want to take out
"o-w-n," do you not?
5-~5-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
84
JUDGE TINLEY: I want to take out "there,"
t-h-e-r-e, and "own," and substitute "the."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: And change that semicolon to a
comma immediately following the program.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I would -- I see
you have those marked there. I would suggest that we delay
a vote on this until after lunch, and see if U.G.R.A. can
get these changes put back in, because I think it's very
important to have this exactly so we can give it to the
public. I don't -- I mean, I'm not comfortable voting on it
and won't vote for it with these. And I agree with your
changes.
JUDGE TINLEY: They're grammatical changes,
significant.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Quite a few of them.
And my comments were just -- I just wanted to take a stand
and make a statement in case, when we get to the public
hearing -- when you see me with chicken wire up here to keep
the beer bottles from being thrown at me, that's the only --
I just want to let you know where I'm at. 'Cause there will
be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I would guess,
8-''S-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-~
25
85
based on U.G.R.A.'s public hearing, which was very
well-attended, from my conversations with Commissioner
Nicholson and Mr. Etter, we will hear all sides of this
issue.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And other issues.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me see if I understand
where we are at this particular point in time. We had a
motion and a second to set a public hearing, and then we got
sidetracked by the specific language that the public hearing
was going to be upon. Am I correct in that analysis?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Then I heard a suggestion that
we defer a vote on this until after lunch, until we have the
opportunity to make the specific changes on the specific
order that we're going to request a public hearing on. Who
offered the motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Me.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Are you withdrawing the
motion to approve?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I -- and the reason I
say that is I think it's important, and I -- I believe
U.G.R.A. has kept track of it here, and they prepared the
8-?5-03
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
86
draft. They ought to be able to make these changes quickly,
get them back by 1:30, when we're meeting again anyway.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're talking only
about grammatical changes in Section 10 and 13?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's what I perceived them
to be, but if there's no further motion to be offered on
this agenda item, we'll move on to the next item. Next item
is consideration and discussion of elimination of position
and removal of Kerr County -- excuse me.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can I have your copy?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Here, Stuart, take
it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You might want to
take the Judge's also.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
MR. BARRON: Do you want me to hand-deliver
or just e-mail it over to you?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hand-deliver.
MR. BARRON: All right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consider and
discuss elimination of position of Road -- Kerr County Road
Engineer and issuance of notice to Road Engineer of such
action, set public hearing on such action if necessary.
8-ZS-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
87
This matter came up in connection with the budgetary
process, and the possibility that that position -- or the
function of that position would be outsourced on a contract
basis to -- to engineers. If my sense of -- of where we are
in the budgetary process and the direction we're going there
is correct, we may -- may be talking about something we
don't need to be talking about at this point.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's my guess.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My understanding.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not making a motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. No one having a motion
to offer on that setting a public hearing on it, we'll move
on to the next item. That's consideration and discussion of
a contract between Kerr County and Pressler, Thompson and
Company for outside audit services. Mr. Auditor?
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't have anything to say
about it. Just -- I'd like to have the contract signed.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't have that.
Oh, it's under 19, Buster, in my book.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. I -- I reshuffled mine.
Apparently, it -- when the agenda was originally put
together, why, there were some items that got put in later,
and so where you find it may not be exactly where you're
looking for it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
8-~5-03
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
88
JUDGE TINLEY: Essentially, they are offering
to do the audit based upon their standard fees, with an
estimate, or a -- that their fee will not exceed $26,850.
That -- that's a cap, is my understanding, correct?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My recollection is that
we -- because of the GASB situation, we chose not to go out
for proposals on a new audit at this time, and we're going
to approve this -- or not necessarily approve it; that we're
going to stick with the current firm. So, I would make a
motion that we approve the contract with Pressler, Thompson
and --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- Company as presented.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made that the audit
proposal contract between Kerr County and Pressler Thompson
Company for outside audit service be approved. Any further
questions or discussion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item
is the consideration and discussion of a drainage easement
8-^5-03
89
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
as requested by the City of Kerrville, to prevent damage
from occurring along Quinlan Creek. This item -- it's kind
of hard to tell exactly where this property is. I believe
it's somewhere off of Fourth Street?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Third.
JUDGE TINLEY: Third Street?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay. Third, yeah.
Okay. It's some property that Kerr County ended up with in
trust as the result of a tax foreclosure. We actually hold
title to it for the benefit of all taxing agencies, having
jurisdiction to impose taxes on that property in the
respective proportions of their taxes that were foreclosed
on that project. But we hold title to it, so we're in a
position to -- to grant the permission, I assume.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, we have the
authority to speak for -- even though there's other
government entities that are owed money on the thing?
JUDGE TINLEY: City and school -- city,
school, U.G.R.A.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we have --
JUDGE TINLEY: Headwaters.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So we have that
authority to make this kind of decision? I -- if we do, I
want to participate in this program.
8-~5-03
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
~o
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It would be foolish
for us not to, and I'll hold that particular program up.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you think it might be wise
that we either, one, get an opinion from the County Attorney
that we do, in fact, have the authority to do this? And/or
maybe give each of those taxing agencies the -- the
opportunity to -- if they've got anything they want to tell
us about it, speak now or forever hold their peace, as it
goes?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, certainly.
Certainly. I misunderstood. I thought you said that we had
the authority.
JUDGE TINLEY: It's my understanding. It`s
been indicated to me that I do. Maybe --
MS. RECTOR: Since it is in trust to the
County, that's where the beginning of it starts. Upon
approval from the other taxing jurisdictions; that`s the way
we've always handled any type of -- of tax foreclosure
property. If it's in trust to the County, we decide what we
want to do with it, and then go to the other entities for
their approval,
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. Okay. That
makes sense to me.
8-25-03
91
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. So, what might be
appropriate at this point, if the Court has no -- if the
Court is in favor of doing that, that they approve that
subject to the approval. of all the other taxing agencies who
have a stake in this matter.
MS. RECTOR:
COMMISSIONER
having authority is really
any more. We have the auth
MS. RECTOR:
COMMISSIONER
Right. Yeah.
BALDWIN: So, the question of
-- I mean, that's not a question
~rity to do that.
To start the ball rolling, yes.
BALDWIN: Okay. I move we start
the ball rolling.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded that -- that the Court grant the drainage easement
subject to the approval of all taxing agencies having a
stake in this particular property, and for whom we hold the
same in trust. Any further questions or discussion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. Is holding it
in trust the same as having title to it?
JUDGE TINLEY: I think we actually have title
to it. That's how it got put in --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So we could choose
to dispose of it if we desire?
8-~5-OS
92
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. But I think, based upon
what the Tax Assessor said, our normal course of action is,
prior to doing that, we would clear -- clear it with
everybody that's --
MS. RECTOR: I have already tried sealed
bid -- the sealed bid process, and it's totally in the
floodplain.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Nobody wants it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which is why we have it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But if we lumped it in
with the airport and the library... (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Hey.
AUDIENCE: And the Ag Barn.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I was just
wondering, it's in the floodplain. Is there -- is there a
way to get rid of it or give it to the City as a park? Or
just something -- something else we can do with this thing?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nice try.
JUDGE TINLEY: I've -- I've got a system that
I've used in the past. I'll talk to you about that
privately, maybe. Any further questions or discussion? All
in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
8-~5-03
93
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item
is consider and discuss approval of contract between Kerr
County and the Hunt Volunteer Fire Department, authorize
County Judge to sign the same.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What number would
that be?
JUDGE TINLEY: That would be --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 21.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I find it under 18,
because I moved mine around.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I find it under 21,
thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. The contract was
submitted to us by the Hunt Volunteer Fire Department. I
believe the differences in the standard contract are noted
there on the cover letter. The mutual aid assistance, as
required by Texas statutes and Texas Forest Service, and
then, of course, they've opted out of the worker's comp
insurance coverage, because they provide their own.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question for
you, Judge. Can we approve a contract that sets out
consideration for $11,000 before we approve that in the
8-25-03
94
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-,
25
budget, even though it probably is clearly our intention to
do that?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's -- this
contract is for the year that we're currently in.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Current year? Not
the ensuing?
signed it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They just hadn't
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh. No question.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think that's been
a common practice.
right. Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is $11,000, that's
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My question would be
the response areas and mutual aid assistance and those kinds
of things. Is it -- is there a requirement -- I mean, the
present contract says that -- provide fire protection to
their primary fire response area. Now, in order for them to
go out of their primary area into someone else's primary
area, do they have interlocal agreements? Or do they have
an interlocal agreement with us, and then that allows them
to -- I mean, just kind of a technical question there. It's
not a great big thing in my mind, but I'm just wondering
about that, because they're asking to change that verbiage.
JUDGE TINLEY: It's the Services Provided
8-~5-03
95
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
paragraph that you're referring to?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, mm-hmm.
Personally, I like what they're talking -- what they're
saying there, to provide mutual aid assistance to anybody
upon -- upon request. That's what volunteer fire
departments are all about.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, this
is one of the several issues that the Hunt volunteer Fire
Department has had with this contract for the last several
years. This -- the contract is the one approved in form by
the Court this time last year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And they believe
that it's necessary to include this exception to it, or
whatever you want to call it, to point out that they're
required by the Texas Forest Service to provide mutual aid
assistance. I don't think it's -- I don't think there's a
substantial issue here in our new -- the new contract that
we've recently reviewed including language such as this.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I mean -- go
ahead.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: For all departments?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. In the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is the old form,
then?
8-25-03
96
1
.... 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.-,
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Old form.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And they're making
these two exceptions or clarifications.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I really think
that the -- probably, for clarification, I don't have a
problem, but the way it's worded now says, "in accordance
with the rules of the State of Texas," and presumably that's
the rules of the Texas Forest Service, which is part of the
State of Texas, so it's covered that way. I mean, it's
covered right now because it's part of the state law.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And in the second one,
the present verbiage in there says, "Kerr County shall
provide worker's compensation coverage," and they want to
decline that offer, and -- for reasons unknown. And that's
fine; I don't care anything about that. Any my only request
is, wherever -- whoever maintains this contract, to maintain
this letter from the Hunt Volunteer Fire Department right
along with it, because two years down the road, they're
going to come back screaming and whining and moaning and all
over the floor of why the County does not provide them with
worker's comp just like we do everybody else. This letter
has to join --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I agree.
25 I COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- this contract,
8-25-03
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
97
because that is going to happen.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. The -- I think
the -- you're exactly right, the letter should accompany the
contract. The facts are that they buy an insurance package
that includes all the various insurances they need,
including worker's comp, and by doing that, they get a lower
rate than they would if they excluded the worker's comp.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. Sure.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: In fact, through
KARFA, we've encouraged the other fire departments to look
at such arrangements. I believe it could result in savings
to the County by not having to insure firefighters.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah, absolutely.
Fantastic.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move that we
approve the contract between Kerr County and Hunt Volunteer
Fire Department, authorize the County Judge to sign same.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the tendered contract between Kerr County and Hunt Volunteer
Fire Department be approved, and County Judge be authorized
to sign the same. 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.
8-25-03
98
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. The next
item is consideration and discussion of the adoption and
approval of a Records Archive Fee of $5, adopting such fee
as part of the Kerr County budget for Fiscal Year '03-'04
and subsequent years, and setting a public hearing on the
same. This was placed on -- this was as a result of some
recent legislation of the Texas Legislature that allowed not
just border counties to impose a $5 Records Archive Fee, but
all counties. And, in order to do that, if we're going to
impose -- adopt and impose that fee, we've got to adopt it
as part of the budget process, and in doing so, we've got to
set a public hearing on it. I think we can set a public
hearing the same date that we've got the other public
hearings set for on the first meeting in September, could we
not?
MS. PIEPER: September the 8th.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Pieper? Will that be
satisfactory?
MS. PIEPER: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 10:15?
MS. PIEPER: What time did you say?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 10:15. I move we set the
public hearing -- or I move we approve a Records Archive Fee
8-~5-v3
1
r-. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
99
of $5, set a public hearing regarding same for September 8th
at 10:15.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Does that also include
adopting that fee as part of the budget for the ensuing
fiscal year and subsequent years?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded to adopt and approve Records Archive Fee of $5,
adopt it as part of the Kerr County budget for Fiscal Year
'03-'04 and subsequent years, and set a public hearing for
the same at September 8th, 2003, at 10:15 a.m. Any further
question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I have a question.
What is a records archive fee?
JUDGE TINLEY: That's a fee in order to allow
you to handle the preservation of your older records.
Ms. Pieper could probably give you some more elaboration on
that.
MS. PIEPER: That is for any records prior to
1990. A records archival is all the old records that I have
that are maybe handwritten back in the 1800's that we are
not allowed to destroy or microfilm or -- it's just another
-- a records preservation.
8-25-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
100
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Who pays the fee?
MS. PIEPER: The general public. That fee
would be assessed on any document that is filed for record,
and that fee is only for five years. After five years, it
drops automatically by law.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, someone that
comes in and files a quitclaim deed would pay an extra $5?
MS. PIEPER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. Do you have
any idea how much money that will generate?
MS. PIEPER: $60,000, $70,000 a year.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And there's no
restriction on how the County can use that? That goes into
general funds?
MS. PIEPER: No. No, that goes strictly for
that records archival. That's all it can be used for.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it frees up --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It backs out --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It frees up money in the
General Fund to be used for something else.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. That's all.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Kind of like E.I.C.
Kind of, sort of.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Really.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
8-25-03
101
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
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. Next item,
consider and discuss approval of the proposed Fiscal Year
'03-'04 public officials' salary and set public hearing on
the same.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's see. Where are
we?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're not off Tab 20 now.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 16.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tab 16?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 16.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Have we even discussed
this yet?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I didn't think so. I
thought maybe I --
JUDGE TINLEY: No, but there's a requirement
that there be a public hearing set, and we've got to give
notice of a public hearing not later than the 10th day
before the date of the meeting at which it'll be held.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Public hearing on
8-25-G3
102
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
what? That the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On elected officials'
salaries.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, we don't know,
see, what -- what my point is, seems like to me, you have
a -- a public hearing on something that -- that is a
document that's laid out before the public to let them look
over; you know, here's some -- you know, "They're giving the
elected officials a $40,000 salary increase this year," and
that specific number is there, and then kind of mull it over
and think about it, and then come to the public hearing
and -- and talk about it. We -- we haven't -- that's the
way I see it. Is that not correct?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, the -- the statement
about a public hearing is more of a public notice of the
setting of -- of those salaries and so forth. That -- that
may be somewhat in error, or not clear as to the exact
nature, but the law says that -- that when those matters are
to be considered, that we must give published notice not --
not later than 10 days before the date that those matters
are set to be considered. And if there are any increases,
that they -- that they be noted in that notice.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: It may well be that this may
be premature. You may want to wait until the next meeting
8-25-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.~-.
25
103
to do that, but we've only got a certain time frame window
to give that notice, and I think we've -- at a minimum, we
need to authorize it, whether or not we're in a position to
cause it to be published right now. Obviously, we're not,
but I think we have to address that issue.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Have we posted the
Wednesday meeting yet?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 'Cause it could have
been included in that posting, could it not have?
JUDGE TINLEY: That's a workshop agenda, and
traditionally we don't take any -- any formal action in a
workshop environment. I think --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's too late.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, it's already posted
anyway. Both Tuesday and the Wednesday workshops have been
posted. It's a good possibility we're going to have to be
doing some more down the pike.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't see how we can
take action. T mean, based on what you read, plus the way
it's written, "Consider and discuss approval of proposed
public officials' salary." Well, we don't have anything to
approve.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's exactly right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we can't.
8-~5-03
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
104
MR. TOMLINSON: You do have one, the
Constable, Precinct 4. Because in -- in budget discussions,
you --
MS. PIEPER: I can't hear him.
MR. TOMLINSON: It's in the proposed budget
to make his salary the same as all other constables.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Except we may change all
the constables' salaries.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, yeah, but that -- but
that one, I do remember that that was the consensus of the
Court.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, gentlemen, for whatever
it's worth, that's a heads-up. We got to give notice of any
of these increases, and -- and whatever date that it`s
considered, there's got to be a public notice not later than
10 days --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- that that matter's going to
be considered at that hearing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think this can be done
at our first meeting in September.
JUDGE TINLEY: Better early than late.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, Judge, can we
change -- could we authorize a public hearing -- I'm just
asking a question. Could we authorize a public hearing
8-25-03
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
105
on -- on the public officials' salary, if any, for this
specific date -- for a specific date? And "if any," 'cause
we don't have any yet except the one that Tommy noted.
JUDGE TINLEY: I -- I'm not certain that we
are required to -- like I said, I think the -- the verbiage
may be in error, because I don't think we're required to
hold a public hearing, but rather publish notice that a
matter will be considered at a specific meeting; that the
matter of salaries of the elected officials will be
considered at a given meeting. So, the verbiage stating
public hearing, I think, is -- is inappropriate.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- I disagree.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know. I don't
know. I think we have to have a public hearing. You have
to -- don't you have to have a public hearing if elected
officials' salaries change?
MS. RECTOR: Whether they change or not, I
think you still have to have a public hearing. You have to
set the salaries.
JUDGE TINLEY: On the budget --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My whole point is, is
that we -- we establish what that is going to be. I mean,
if we're giving -- you know, if we're giving the elected
officials what we'd promised to give them a couple of years
ago, you know, if there`s going to be a change -- a change,
8-25-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
106
we probably need specific numbers in order for the public to
have a meeting about.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. The notice requires that
if there are any increases, that they be identified under
the section of the law that --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Before we do this
thing. Before we have a public hearing.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's my point.
JUDGE TINLEY: Maybe I'm premature. If not,
we'll move forward. Next item, consider and discuss
approval of proposed budget for '03-'04, set a public
hearing. Same place there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Same place.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Next item, same
thing, for the tax rate. I don't think we're there yet
either, are we?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not there yet.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. The last item?
Commissioner Letz? Discussion with Cheryl Mapston
concerning vacant County Extension position, the process of
hiring, issues relative to the County Extension Office.
That's not set until 1:30. That being the case, we'll stand
in recess until 1:30, and we`ll reconvene and take up that
and the remaining items, and retook at the O.S.S.F. proposed
8-25-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
107
rules.
(Recess taken from 11:54 a.m, to 1:30 p.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's come back to
order. It's 130. We -- we been in recess shortly before
lunch, after having gotten to item 1.22 -- or 1.23, rather,
that being a timed item, discussion with Ms. Cheryl Mapston
concerning the vacant County Extension position, the process
in the hiring and issues relative to that office.
Commissioner Letz, I think this is a matter that you
requested.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, I asked this to be
put on the agenda because, one, I wasn't sure of the process
to hire the new Extension Agent. And also, I received
questions from the public on that same issue, and thought it
would be good, probably, to have Cheryl Mapston come in and
explain to us what the process is, and at the same time --
Commissioner Nicholson's looking -- at the same time,
explain how that office is supposed to operate from the
standpoint of different personnel out there and, you know,
who is our lead contact and how the whole office should be
working. And I believe you also want to talk a little bit
about reorganization at the state level, so I'll turn it
over to you.
MS. MAPSTON: Okay.
8-25-G3
108
1
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: Thank you for coming.
MS. MAPSTON: Thank you, Commissioner Letz.
We really appreciate the opportunity to be here to tell you
a little bit about the restructuring and extension, and then
also roles and responsibilities there at the Kerr County
Extension Office, as well as the procedure they have for
filling the position. But I'd like to thank you for your
continued support of the Extension program. It's very vital
to our citizens here in the state of Texas, and I just want
to go over it very quickly. I think that many times we
forget our mission, and I just want to review with you our
mission of Extension. It's to provide the quality, relevant
outreach, and continuing education programs and services to
the people of Texas. It's very simple. It's very short.
It's real learning for real life for Texans.
And the way we do that is to identify the
issues, and then once the issues are identified, our staff
works on setting program priorities, mobilizing volunteers,
and then actually looking at educational programs where they
plan, implement, evaluate, market, and interpret those
programs to the public. And we work in terms of outcomes;
savings, economically, environmentally, or sometimes perhaps
socially, as through our youth program. And recently, we
have gone through major restructuring, and this was not as a
result of budget cuts that we received on the state level.
8-~5-03
109
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
This has been going on for about two years. Two years of
studies and committees and task forces have been looking at
Extension very carefully, and we realize that we can't
continue doing things the way we are now and still be
effective.
So, effective September 1, we're going
through some major changes. And there are three different
parts to those changes I'd like to just review briefly. One
is, the structure is changing. The processes are changing,
and the personnel are changing. And speaking of the
structure, my job, as I am right here today, has been
eliminated. The District Extension Directors for Family and
Consumer Sciences, as well as District Extension Directors
for Agriculture, those 24 positions across the state were
eliminated, and we have established different positions. We
have established one District Extension Administrator in
each of our 12 districts, and then we have -- looking at
subject matter, we're looking at an Ag Program Director that
will serve the region.
And, by the way, our region goes from
Gonzales to El Paso now, so we have the west region of the
state. Also, the north, south, and east and west regions
are divided up among the state, and within each one of those
regions we'll have what we call a Regional Program Director,
and it will be the duty of these people to look very
8-^5-03
110
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
carefully at agriculture across the entire region. And then
another person will be looking at family and consumer
sciences across the entire region, while the third person
will be dealing with 4-H and youth development across the
region. So, what that does, it frees up what I'm currently
doing now, those two -- you know, supervision and
programmatic. It's going to divide those out where I will
have one line supervision for all the agents in District 10,
as District Extension Administrator, which is a little bit
different than we've had in the past.
Many of you are familiar with my coworker,
Darrell Dromgoole, who was the District Extension Director
for Ag. He was appointed District Extension Administrator
for District 11 in Corpus Christi, so he has moved. And he
moved, I guess, the end of July to get his kiddoes in school
and get everything settled there. Effective September 1, we
will be in completely different roles. So, I know that some
of you probably have dealt with Darrell in the -- in working
with agriculture, and so now I'll have that responsibility
for the entire district as District Administrator. And
we've also changed some processes. We've decentralized some
of our management functions. We've established budget
centers throughout the state for each one of those program
areas, and we've also changed our process in filling
positions, as well as promotions for County Extension Agents
8-25-03
111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
through a career level system. So, those are the major
changes that we have through processes.
And personnel is another area that I'm here
to talk about today, and that's -- our goal is to have
high-quality employees in every single county in the state
of Texas. And that's one thing that's very unique about
Extension, is our delivery system. We do have a mechanism
out there in every single county to disseminate information,
which many groups, organizations, or agencies do not have,
so we're very proud of that. We also have placed priority
on diversity throughout the state. Our workforce needs to
reflect the population of our state, and then also develop
resources that will reward those outstanding employees for
their outstanding performance in Extension. We want to
continue to provide quality, relevant, professional
development for those employees as -- as they're placed out
there in those counties to work with those people on the
needs.
And then we want to also cultivate some
positive work environments and positive work teams, because
we're deemphasizing the individual parts of our program, and
we're putting a big emphasis on teamwork on the regional,
the district, and the state level. So, these changes will
bring about an increase in need for communication all across
the state. An increased, I guess, emphasis, you might call
8-25-03
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
112
it, on softening of district and county lines, where we'll
be looking at multi-county programs and, in effect, regions
rather than just what happens within that county. Also, the
coordination of teamwork is going to be of utmost
importance, and then there will be a very high level of
accountability for the outcomes of those programs. So,
that's just a -- in a nutshell, what's been going on for the
past two years and some of the changes that would be in
effect on September 1. We have recently gone through some
reduction in force. Fortunately, Kerr County was not a
county that was targeted for reduction, but we did have
three positions that were lost within this district. And
so, across the state, we have lost positions, both at the
county level, the district level, and then the
administrative level also, so it's across-the-board.
And I'd like to review a little bit about --
and stop me if you have any questions, please; please do
feel free to -- a little bit about our structure here in
Kerr County. We've been very fortunate to have fine support
from the County, excellent facilities, and we've been able
to build a good staff, and I'd like to thank you formally
for that, because you've helped make that possible. We have
one position, which is County Extension Agent-Agriculture,
that was recently vacated July 31st by Eddie Holland, and
that position is currently available. And I'll talk a
a-25-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
113
little bit more about the process after I've reviewed the
staff. And then the County Extension Agent for Family and
Consumer Sciences is Amy Chapman. And then we have a 4-H
Program Assistant, which is funded by the County, and it's
supervised by the County Extension Agent, and that's
Laurinda Boyd, who works with the Youth Development Program.
We also -- yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Supervised by which
County Extension Agent?
MS. MAPSTON: Well, in the past, it has been
the Ag Extension Agent.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does it have to be? Or
can it be either one?
MS. MAPSTON: It can be either one, because
it's not an agriculturally-specific position. That position
is more youth development, everything from working with the
schools to working with the -- you know, animal science
projects to working with different groups and councils and
that kind of thing. So, it's not position-specific. During
Eddie Holland's work with the Ag Agents' Association -- the
National Ag Agents' Association, the Southern Region and
also the State, he was tied up for about three years when he
was president-elect one year, then president of our national
association -- we were very proud that Texas did have the
president at that high level -- and then his last year was
fi-?5-03
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
114
past president. So, during that time, in order for us to
support Eddie and to support -- continue to support the Kerr
County program, Extension funded a part-time position to
handle -- it was basically horticulture questions that
really just kind of can eat your time away, being leaves and
plants, bugs, critters and spiders and all those kinds of
home horticulture needs.
And so Extension funded, part-time, Mr. John
Coleman, who was -- came in on a part-time basis to work
that program, and Mr. Coleman has really taken that program
to a high level. He has coordinated Master Gardener courses
and trainings and the Pesticide Applicator training, and
done a really good job. And I was hating to lose
Mr. Coleman after about -- I think he was with us about 20
months or so during this time that Eddie was in this
leadership position, and his position ended officially
July 31st. However, Mr. Coleman is volunteering for our
staff, and he wants to continue to provide his services on a
volunteer basis to the County. That is a big benefit, and
all the homeowners in the county should be very pleased with
-- that Mr. Coleman is willing to do that. And he really
loves his job. He loves his -- loves the staff out there
and working on that.
We -- and then also, of course, our full-time
secretary, Susan Wright, and then the part-time support
8-?5-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
115
staff that I understand that will be coordinated along with
the person who books the barns. I learned a little bit
about y'all's plans for that, and I think that's a great
plan, to have someone on-site. That will save travel back
and forth, and then it will provide us with the part-time
assistance that we need to keep our program rolling. And of
those agents there, the Agriculture Agent and the FCS Agent,
those are funded, you know, jointly by the County and
Extension, and then the Program Assistant is funded only --
and it's not considered a State employee, but a County
employee.
And, of those two positions for Ag and Family
Consumer Sciences, there are roles that those -- those folks
play. One is, one agent in every county is considered or
named or appointed September 1 as County Coordinator, and
the role of that County Coordinator is to serve as a liaison
between the County and Extension, and the County and
District. And the reason we do that is, one letter goes out
to all the County Coordinators in each, you know, county.
It's very efficient, and that way we have one person that's
the liaison between the Court, and then that person -- not
that the other people do not have input into the budget
process and some of those administrative functions, but it
does give us a key person that we need to go to.
And there is no financial incentive to be
8-25-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
116
named County Coordinator. It's extra work. Some people
enjoy that role; others do not. It is a very important
role, and it's the person who would sign off timesheets on
the secretary, you know, work with utilities on the county
level, making sure bills are paid, you know, all those
administrative kinds of things that are done in the County
Extension Office. And then an agent is also named 4-H
Coordinator, and the 4-H Coordinator is the person -- the
one person that's designated within that county staff that
receives all information regarding the 4-H and Youth
Development Program. That would mean, you know, entries. and
validations and, you know, all those kinds of information,
that would come to that person. It's not that person's job
to handle all that, but it's that person's job to maintain
communication with the staff, and they're go-to person that
we go to for youth development.
In the past, Eddie Holland has served in both
of those roles. Right now, Amy Chapman is serving as County
Coordinator and also 4-H Coordinator, because she's
technically our only Extension employee in there. Once
positions are filled, then we look at who those people are,
you know, and who would do which role the best. And, so,
then those are appointed annually, or we -- we send in
recommendations, actually, to Chester Fehlis, our Director,
and then those positions are appointed by the Director based
8-~5-03
1
2
J
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
117
on our recommendations. So, that's how that works. And
there is no extra money or extra anything. Little bit of
extra work, but some people really enjoy -- you know, each
one of those roles takes a different type of person, so
that's why we have those -- each of those, and they are the
person we go to. Any questions on anything? I know I'm
going rather quickly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is -- maybe you're going
to get to this. Is one of the agents appointed as the lead
-- I mean, or one of those coordinators, is that the one --
well, I guess, okay, the County Coordinator is, then, the
one that we have to work with?
MS. MAPSTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we have input into
that?
MS. MAPSTON: Sure, through me. You know, I
look for -- you know, when we do that, we try to look for
the person that can do the best -- you know, the best job --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MS. MAPSTON: -- in representing our
Extension Office.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You had mentioned
Chester Fehlis. What is his title? He's the State Director
of the Extension Service? Is that --
MS. MAPSTON: Yes, he is.
8-~5-03
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
118
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And his mother lives
in your precinct, so be careful what you say about Chester.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Got a good
upbringing.
MS. MAPSTON: Good deal.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If your job is being
eliminated, Cheryl, where -- what's for you in the future?
MS. MAPSTON: I've been appointed the
District Extension Administrator in Uvalde, so I will stay
there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And we are in the
Uvalde district?
MS. MAPSTON: Yes, 21 counties, which goes
over to Gonzales, includes Bexar and Travis County, up to
Blanco, Fredericksburg, all the way over to Kendall,
Edwards, Kinney, and on over. So, 21-county district. And
we'll be in the region with District 6 and 7, which includes
Fort Stockton area, as well as the San Angelo area.
As far as filling the position, I'll go on to
that. The position, as it was vacated by Eddie's
announcement for retirement, was announced. It was
announced as Master's degree preferred, and Bachelor's
degree, of course, required. And we're looking for, you
know, at least a Master's degree to come in here. Our
positions now require that if we hire someone with a
8-25-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
119
Bachelor's degree, they will have seven years upon
appointment to receive that Master's degree or their
position will be terminated. So, that is our encouragement
for agents to continue on their education to receive a
Master's degree. But the Master's is preferred here, and
hopefully we'll be able to do that. The position also
requires a degree related to agriculture, natural resources,
with experience in horticulture and also livestock
production, crops, that kind of thing, economic development
work, and work with committees and task forces, you know, a
couple of the basic requirements for that position.
The positions are now being announced
internally. Because of our RIF and our internal movement of
employees, we want to make sure that all of our current
employees that are experienced have the opportunity to move
-- move around the state, so the position was announced
initially internally, and we do have applicants for that,
and I'd be happy to review those with you. Our applicants
have been screened, and I have done a preliminary interview
with those applicants. What we would like to do is to have
the top few applicants come to the County, to visit with the
staff, to ask questions about committees and programming and
some of the issues that are going on right here in the
county, and then if you would be interested in visiting with
any of those -- those applicants, I'd certainly be glad to
8-25-03
120
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
ZZ
23
24
25
set that up.
We currently have -- as of yesterday
afternoon, we had three applicants that had applied for the
position, so we will be meeting with -- or I will be meeting
with our Regional Program Director for Ag, who's located in
San Angelo, on Thursday and Friday to take a look at each
one of the applications, to take a look at their curriculum
vitaes and the resource materials that they have submitted
along with their application, and select, you know, one,
two, or three applicants to bring forward. So, we'll be
looking at that on Friday.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Has it been closed?
MS. MAPSTON: Yeah -- well, it really doesn't
close. We would accept applicants up to the time it's
filled. There is -- there used to be, when that one came
out, a 10-day period where we would not hire until at least
10 days, and that is going back to only five days from when
the positions are announced, because we are looking at an
online application that will make the application process
much more efficient and quick, very quick to do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you don't anticipate
any more than the three?
MS. MAPSTON: No, I don't. But there may be.
But not that -- you know, not that I know of. So, that's
where we are on the position.
5-25-03
121
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.^..
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-.
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Do all of these three have --
have the Master's degree requirement?
MS. MAPSTON: Yes, they do.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: At what point -- I mean,
I guess, what's the timeline on getting the person into that
position?
MS. MAPSTON: Just as soon as we can move
forward.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, if you meet this
Thursday with -- and after that, --
MS. MAPSTON: Thursday and Friday.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- those applicants will
be available to come to Kerr County and meet with us?
MS. MAPSTON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we chose.
MS. MAPSTON: And if you have some potential
dates that you might like to do that, I'd be glad to take
those with me, because I would like to coordinate those with
-- I'd like for our staff to begin to meet with them also at
that time, and just have one trip over. So, I'd be glad to
take some possible dates.
JUDGE TINLEY: Would it be possible for you
to share the resumes of those individuals that you presently
have?
8-^5-03
122
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-
25
MS. MAPSTON: Certainly, mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I personally would like
to, you know, look at the resumes and -- and have an
opportunity to meet with the applicants.
MS. MAPSTON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know how the rest
of the Court feels.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm sure Commissioner 4 has
seen the light and has decided that the Extension Service is
a much more important function --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe not.
JUDGE TINLEY: Am I making an unwarranted
assumption here, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I -- for your
benefit, I needed to better understand the value of the
services provided by the -- the Extension Services, and I
came to see that really quick. But what the rest of the
Court failed to understand, my real issue was whether or not
supporting that financially is a proper function of county
government, and that issue remains unresolved. But it
sounds like it's a little one-sided up here, so it probably
won't be a major stumbling block for you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would the next
Commissioners Court meeting -- is that time frame too long?
5-~5-03
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
123
Too short? That's the 8th.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: To me, that would be
fine. That's pretty quick. Meetings are -- just because of
the calendar, I mean, September 8th is right around the
corner.
MS. MAPSTON: That would work for me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would it? So, like --
like, in the afternoon, after -- after our meeting is over?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, I think --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Something like that?
Or do you want to do it in a formal meeting?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would rather, probably,
just do it informally, personally. I mean --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would too.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- if they're going to
come up, meet the staff, maybe we can just, you know, have,
like, a 2 o'clock -- or 2:00 to 3:00 or something like that,
we could come back by, and anyone else can come by too.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Get out under the
pecan tree, do a little spit and whittling kind of thing.
MS. MAPSTON: I'll work on scheduling that,
but that looks like it would work -- work for me.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. The -- I guess the
County Coordinator role, whoever that person is, between the
two, that's who is, I guess, quote, in charge of the office
8-~5-03
124
1
,,,~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
from our standpoint?
MS. MAPSTON: Some counties -- well, not
really as a supervisor of -- of, you know, the agents, but
of the support staff. They would be responsible for, you
know, signing timesheets and job descriptions and doing
performance appraisals. You know, not that they do just
that, you know, on their own; they would be charged with
coordinating that with the entire staff to make sure that
those functions are done, such as performance appraisals of
support staff, any requests for salary increases for support
staff members, but not over the other agents. The agents in
that county would be considered equal.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Our two agents are equal?
MS. MAPSTON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But will the County
Coordinator -- let me look at my notes here -- the 4-H
Program Director, Coordinator, whatever the term is for that
position, they will be assigned to one of the agents, and
that may or may not be the same one that is our liaison?
MS. MAPSTON: Right. It could be the same
one or different. And that's the person who would get, for
example, information from our office on due dates, things
that are due. You know, they would be responsible for
making sure that that coordination is taking place between
the clubs, the County, the District, and the State.
5-25-03
125
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Would that same individual be
the -- be the immediate supervisor of the actual 4-H Program
Coordinator in Kerr County?
MS. MAPSTON: That would probably be the
best -- yes, the best thing.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is the 4-H Program Coordinator
actually an Extension Agent?
MS. MAPSTON: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 'Cause I think there's
been some confusion about that.
MS. MAPSTON: No, they are not considered --
they're considered, like, County 4-H Program Assistants.
Their title is a little bit different among the counties,
but no, they're not considered an agent position.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So the Court -- the 4-H
Coordinator also reports to an agent?
MS. MAPSTON: Yes. Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any more questions of
Ms. Mapston?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- I don't mean
to dwell on the 4-H Coordinator. I'm just trying to figure
out how this works. I think, after six years, I probably
should have asked this maybe five, six years ago. But,
okay, you have the -- the Agent and the Coordinator. The
8-25-03
126
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Agent's kind of a County-slash-State employee, but the
Coordinator is a County employee?
MS. MAPSTON: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the 4-H person is
not a County employee?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 4-H Coordinator is a
County employee.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. And the Amy
Chapman person is a State employee?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And County employee.
JUDGE TINLEY: And County.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's joint.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Both of us make the
salary up.
MS. MAPSTON: And those 4-H Program
Coordinators are different, you know, from other -- other
counties. They might be specifically agriculture. They
might be specifically family, consumer science or urban
outreach or -- you know, they can have different types of
titles. This one has pretty much done, basically, animal
science, but there is room for schoolwork, for work with
formation of other clubs throughout the community. And I
think during the time that -- you know, that our 4-H
Coordinator was absent, I think that maybe our position may
8-25-03
127
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
have taken on a little bit higher responsibilities than
their job really required in some cases. So, once we get a
team in there, we need to really sit down as a group and
look at strengths of each one of those individuals and who
can best carry out those responsibilities.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do 4-H Coordinators
typically serve a single county, or in some instances, do
they serve multiple counties?
MS. MAPSTON: In District 10, they're all
single-county. There may be some across the state that go
across county lines, but we don't have any.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, you might want
to ask if there's a possibility that someone in the audience
might have a question or two.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think you just did.
MR. DITTMAR: I was curious, the three
applicants, these are only from the internal search? Has
the selection process been opened up outside the Extension
avenues, or does that -- how does that work? Or is that a
possibility?
MS. MAPSTON: There is if there are no
internal applicants; however, we have -- we do have a slate
of applicants internally.
MR. DITTMAR: Okay. I guess I -- in my mind,
that was I was expecting more than three applicants for the
8-~5-03
128
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
position.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would you like to
apply, doctor?
MR. DITTMAR: Seems like a plan. Working for
the County ought to be fun. (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: I need to talk to you after
this meeting's over, doctor.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. I'm not sure I
heard your answer. So, if there are applicants within the
system, then you don't open it up to the public?
MS. MAPSTON: I could if I felt those
applicants were not feasible applicants, but when you have
-- any time you can have some internal applicants that have
been successful in other county programs, it's much easier
to take those applicants rather than someone, many times,
off the street.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I was --
JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody have any other
questions?
MR. DITTMAR: Back to clarifying with the
issue on the -- and I may be getting 4-H Coordinator and
program -- Youth Program Leader confused, but -- but the --
and tell me if I'm wrong. The Program Leader is a County
employee. How -- what -- where do they fall in the
hierarchy of your Extension? I mean, are they under your
8-25-03
129
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~.-
25
jurisdiction, or are they under the County's jurisdiction
only? In other words, who's their boss?
MS. MAPSTON: Whoever is assigned to them on
the county level.
MR. DITTMAR: On the county level. So -- so,
the --
MS. MAPSTON: So I would not supervise that
person.
MR. DITTMAR: You would not supervise that
person.
MS. MAPSTON: I would be sure they -- they
are supervised and they do have -- you know, they're getting
performance appraisals.
MR. DITTMAR: So, their set of rules or
guidelines that they operated under would be through
Extension -- through the County Extension Agent, whether it
be the Ag, Consumer Science, and then, because they are dual
employees of the County and the State, they are actually --
that particular position is governed by the County, more or
less?
(Ms. Mapston nodded.)
MR. DITTMAR: But they are operating under
the guidelines of the --
MS. MAPSTON: Of the Extension Service,
right. That's a good explanation.
8-25-G3
130
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. DITTMAR: Well, okay. But that's --
that's -- you know, it's a little fuzzy in everybody's mind,
I think.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: As usual, Cheryl,
you're dynamic.
MS. MAPSTON: Thanks for having me today.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you for being here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. Appreciate
it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go back to Item 14 and
complete any action, if we're going to take any action, on
consideration and discussion of the proposed O.S.S.F. Rules
and Regulations for Kerr County, as recommended by joint
committee, and setting a public hearing on the same.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion to
approve the submitted rules for O.S.S.F. facilities for the
purpose of setting a public hearing regarding same for
September 8th at 10 a.m.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded that -- that the proposed O.S.S.F. Rules, as
revised and now presented, as recommended by the joint
committee, and that we set a public hearing for same on
8-25-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
131
September 8th of 2003 at 10 a.m. Any further questions or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just a comment. For
public hearing only at this point.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Section 13, as
amended, still has the error of not having the apostrophe in
the Commissioners Court.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, lord.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's two ways to read
that, I believe. Some think there should be an apostrophe S
and some don't.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which line are you
on?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's two places in
Section 13. The --
JUDGE TINLEY: Second sentence and the last
sentence -- I mean last line.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Our forms and
correspondence include the apostrophe.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Should be S,
apostrophe.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hell, we can't do this
without the apostrophe.
8-25-03
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
132
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We don't want to send
it back again?
back again.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Don't want to send it
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So you know what
you're voting on?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let's vote.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions?
Comments? 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. Okay. We
now go to the -- is there any need for us to go into any
executive or closed session for any of the matters listed?
Okay. Well, we'll forego that. Down to the approval
agenda. Payment of bills.
pay our bills.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move that we
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion`s been made and
seconded that we pay the bills as presented by the Auditor.
Any further questions? Discussion? Any particular item
that you want to be singled out? All in favor of the
8-25-03
133
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.~.
25
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.}
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Budget
amendments. We have a few here. Budget Amendment Number 1.
MR. TOMLINSON: Budget Amendment Number 1 is
for County Court at Law, 198th District Court. It's for
$6,353. Tt's actually to recognize the -- the quarterly
payment for Indigent Defense from the State, to increase
these two budgets for County Court at Law by $3,923.50 and
the 198th Court, Court-Appointed Attorney line item, by
$2,429.50.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move the budget
amendment.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
we approve Budget Amendment Number 1. 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 2.
8-25-03
134
1
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: Number 2 is from the County
Attorney. His request is to move $1,600 into Books,
Publications, and Dues, with $1,000 from Overtime, $300 from
Maintenance Contracts, and $300 from Lease Copier.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve Budget Amendment Request Number 2. Any discussion
or questions?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Can you
tell by your paperwork there, Tommy, what kind of
publications and dues and books?
MR. TOMLINSON: I have a bill from Westlaw
Group charges for $515.30. I think he anticipates another
invoice.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Isn't there Westlaw on
the computer program?
JUDGE TINLEY: I think that very well may be
what this --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that what this is?
Is this packets parts, or -- $1,600's a lot.
MR. TOMLINSON: All it says is Westlaw Group,
Westlaw charges, so I'm assuming that that's for the
subscription to --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: C.D.'s?
8-25-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
78
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
135
MR. TOMLINSON: C.D.'s.
JUDGE TINLEY: Computer -- yeah, computer. I
don't think that's hard-copy stuff -- hard-bound. 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.
Number 3.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Budget Amendment Request
MR. TOMLINSON: This is for the Tax Office.
The request is to transfer $127 to Bonds and Insurance from
Machine Repairs.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
we approve Budget Amendment Request Number 4. Any further
question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Three.
JUDGE TINLEY: Correct, it is Number 3. I've
already flipped the page. Budget Amendment Request Number
3. Any further question or discussion? All in favor of
Budget Amendment Request Number 3 being approved, signify by
raising your right hand.
8-~5-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
136
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 4.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 4 is from Justice of
the Peace, Precinct 3. The request is to transfer $88.71
into Conference line item out of Software Maintenance. I
have a -- a bill attached to that for a hand check payable
to -- to J.P. 3 for $166.80. It's for reimbursement for a
conference.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So -- so, the budget
amendment was -- she's already -- already gone to the
conference and already paid, and now we're reimbursing?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. It was August the 6th
and 7th, the Texas Justice Court Training Center in Corpus.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okey-dokey. I move we
pay the bill.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded that we pay the bill. Commissioner, would you
enlighten me on that? Do you mean the -- are you approving
the budget amendment and authorizing a hand check?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay, Budget Amendment
8-^5-03
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
137
Request Number 4 be approved and a hand check in the sum of
$166.80 to J.P. 3, Kari O'Dell, be issued. Any further
questions or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait just a second.
$166.80?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the hand check.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's for the check.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, very good. Very
good. I'm not questioning, Judge. I just want to make
sure.
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 5.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 5 is for the County
Jail and -- and the Sheriff's Department. The request is to
transfer $188.80 into the Jail Employee Medical Exam line
item, $169.61 to the Jail Vehicle Maintenance line item,
$740.36 rota the Sheriff's Office Investigation Expenses
line item, and $462.15 into Radio Repairs for the Sheriff's
Office, and $53.81 into Vehicle Repairs and Maintenance for
8-25-03
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
138
the Sheriff's Office.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What`s the
difference --
MR. TOMLINSON: From -- transfer from
Software Maintenance in the Sheriff's Office, for the total
amount of $1,614.73.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is the difference
between the two Vehicle Maintenance lines?
MR. TOMLINSON: One's for the jail, one's for
the Sheriff's Office.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, bingo. So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded that Budget Amendment Request Number 5 be approved.
Any questions or comments? Sheriff, the Radio Repair, are
these part of that new radio system that just came online
last year?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. The radio system
that came online, that 900-something thousand dollars did
not replace radios.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay? That's all the
infrastructure, the towers, the microwaves, all the -- the
dispatch consoles, okay? It did all that, but the actual --
either the hand-held radio or the car radio, it did not
8-~5-03
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
139
replace those.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. You got my point,
whether or not we had a bunch of brand-new radios going bad.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. No, what we had
is these radios, except for the hand-held ones -- the car
radios are replaced every time we get cars, okay,
automatically. That's part of the car budget, so we keep
good, updated radios. The only ones that we have problems
with some of them are some of the hand-held radios. You
still have to do some repairs on them.
JUDGE TINLEY: And that's the repair -- the
radios upon which the repair item is in question?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any further questions
or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Rusty, if
we only buy you one car, will you repair your own radios
from now on? That's a pretty good deal. I'm trying,
fellas.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He's going to give
the old, beat-up radios to the constables.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I got a box full of them
out there we can let them go through.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on Budget Amendment Request Number 5? All in
8-~5-03
140
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
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. Number 6.
MR. TOMLINSON: Budget Amendment Number 6 is
for the Jail. The request is to transfer $3,554.76 from
Prisoner Medical to Operating Supplies. I have with this
a -- the need for a hand check for $7,006 to Identix. It's
for the maintenance renewal on the Live Scan scanning --
fingerprint scanning system. It's -- the contract is from
August of '03 through July of '04.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What is it?
MR. TOMLINSON: It's the maintenance on the
scanning equipment for fingerprinting.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded to approve Budget Amendment Request Number 6 and
authorize issuance of a hand check in the sum of $7,006 to
Identix. Any questions or discussion? Sheriff, is this the
item that --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You and I talked --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- we were talking about,
where the oil on the hands -- that they failed to tell you
8-25-03
141
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
about up front?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And you and I had put it
in the budget for next year.
JUDGE TINLEY: Uh-huh.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But we've got to take
care of -- this is the first year we have to deal with it
ourselves. And it was -- the original contract they wanted
was a little over $11,000, right at $12,000, and we cut that
back by saying no, only give us 8:00 to 5:00 Monday through
Friday, so if we had -- we don't want 24-hour service. And
if it goes down, we'll do the ink part until they can get
somebody up here. But this benefits all the -- the
departments, you know, because all the CJIS, all the hand
forms we used to have to do, it takes away all that; it's
all done electronically right to Austin. It helps identify
unidentified people also, at the same time.
JUDGE TINLEY: And, if I understand -- excuse
me, were you through?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, go ahead.
JUDGE TINLEY: And if I understood you
correctly, as I recall our conversation about this item, as
a result of -- of this coming around, you've identified a
more particular way to deal with this equipment to try and
8-25-03
142
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
keep this from happening more frequently, if I recall
correctly?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, keeping the
repairs from happening.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, that's what I'm talking
about.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. Yeah, for
maintenance. Because we did -- when the system was first
installed, they recommended you use a corn oil on dry --
some people had very minute sweat glands, so their hands are
too dry, and they recommended a regular corn husk oil. And
the more you use it, we pointed out to them, the yellower it
turns the actual glass that you're rolling the prints on,
that are magnified and caught by the computer and sent off.
And once that starts turning yellow, then your print quality
goes down, DPS can't read them when they get them. So, you
know, Identix is changing their whole deal on what they
recommend to use, you know, to provide that moisture in some
people's fingers. But one of the main things -- and it
saved us having this this year -- was that there was a
scanner that went out in that computer, okay? In that
system. The main scanner, and that's a $25,000 piece of
equipment. And they came up and replaced -- replaced it the
next day at no charge.
JUDGE TINLEY: That was under warranty,
8-25-03
143
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
wasn't it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How long does the
warranty last?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's why we have this
maintenance deal. That will do the same thing. It also
pays for all those parts.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Whether it's under
warranty or not.
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. Budget
Amendment Request Number 7.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 7 is for Justice of
the Peace, Precinct 2.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh.
MR. TOMLINSON: The purchase of a monitor for
replacement for computer for $219.98. And her request is to
transfer the $219.98 from Capital Outlay out of
Nondepartmental into Operating Equipment in that budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
8-~5-03
144
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
r
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.--~
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
Budget Amendment Request Number 7 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. Budget
Amendment Request Number 8.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 8 is between the 198th
and 216th District Courts. The request is to transfer
$44.50 to Books, Publications, and Dues for the 216th Court,
$610.18 Court-Appointed Attorneys for the 216th Court, $100
for Books, Publications, and Dues for the 198th court,
$1,603.57 Court-Appointed Attorney line item in the 198th
Court, $452.30 to Special District Judge line item for the
198th Court, $1,350 for Special Court Reporter line item in
the 198th Court. The total of $4,209.55 from Court
Transcripts out of the 216th District Court. Along with
that, I have two -- I'm requesting two checks -- hand
checks, one to Paula Loetz for $1,300 for -- for court
reporting services, and the other to Murray -- Judge Murray
Jordan for $452.30 for judicial expenses.
8-25-03
145
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-,
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, I thought
Ms. Loetz was the -- was the permanent 198th --
MR. TOMLINSON: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, she's --
MR. TOMLINSON: Linton Tomlin is the
permanent, the court reporter.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve Budget Amendment Request Number 8 and authorize
issuance of hand checks to Paula Loetz for $1,300 and Murray
Jordan for 452.30. 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: Budget Amendment Request 9.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 9 is -- is for Justice
of the Peace, Precinct 4. The request is to transfer
$138.68 to Office Supplies, $55 to Machine Repairs, totaling
$193.68 from the Conference line item.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's made and seconded
that Budget Amendment Request Number 9 be approved. Any
8-~5-03
146
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
..~
25
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. Budget
Amendment Request 10.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 10 is for Justice of
the Peace, Precinct 2. This request is to transfer $113.70
to the Part-Time Salary line item, $50 from FICA expense,
$2.50 from Postage, $40.05 from Books, Publications, and
Dues, $21.15 from Lease Copier.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
Budget Amendment Request Number 10 be approved. Any
question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Tommy, the --
the FICA expense, is that on the -- this part-time salary?
MR. TOMLINSON: The -- in the budget, the
FICA expense was calculated on the amount budgeted, but I
think she -- when her clerk -- there was a problem with her
using -- having to need more part-time salary than was
budgeted.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
8-25-03
147
1
2
.-..
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TOMLINSON: And I -- am I close there?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct.
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 11.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 11 is for the
Sheriff's Department. This -- this budget amendment
actually increases the budget by $713.25, and it's to
reflect a receipt of that amount from the Bureau of Justice
Assistance, Bulletproof Vest Program. We increase the
Operating Equipment line item in the Sheriff's Department by
that same amount.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
Budget Amendment Request Number 11 be approved. Any
question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Rusty, will
we see this again next year?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. In fact, we --
8-25-03
148
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you buy new vests
every year?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We have already been
notified that we received this year in the grant program
$23,000, okay? Now, it's a matching fund deal, and it will
be about $7,000, a little bit more, each year. And we use
that over the next three years to help pay for new vests.
In the budget, I already put a matching $7,000 in there for
this next year.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's a fifty-fifty match.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's a fifty-fifty match
that we can get every year, but we got it this year. They
talked about only doing it once every three years, so we got
enough to cover three years.
JUDGE TINLEY: Bottom line is, we`re using
somebody else's money for an obligation we would be obliged
to honor anyway.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Very true.
JUDGE TINLEY: Bingo. Any questions -- any
further question or discussion? All in favor of Budget
Amendment Request No. 11, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
8-25-03
149
1
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: Motion carries. Budget
Amendment Request Number 12.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 12 is for Juvenile
Probation, for $481.17, and it actually is to increase the
Alternate Housing budget by -- by that amount, in relation
to a reimbursement of the $481 from CRC Health Corporation.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I didn`t understand
that.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, it`s funds that are
not -- that we didn't anticipate, and that we -- that we
received from -- from -- it's a comprehensive -- these
people run an addiction program. We had a payment from them
for $481.17, so we're increasing the revenues by that
amount, and correspondingly, we're increasing Alternate
Housing by that amount.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve Budget Amendment Request Number 12. 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 carries. Budget
8-25-03
150
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Amendment Request Number 13.
MR. TOMLINSON: This -- this request is -- is
for Juvenile Probation as a result of a Juvenile Board
meeting -- I forget the date now. It was August the 4th, I
believe. We need -- we have a need to increase the Attorney
Ad Litem Fee line item in the Juvenile Probation budget by
$8,780, and to increase the Alternate Housing line item for
the Juvenile Probation budget for $63,693.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where do the funds
come from?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, we have -- we need to
declare an emergency and increase the budget by these
amounts. I have -- along with that, I do -- I have a stack
of bills that are unpaid right now that -- that if this is
approved, we need to make payment on.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I`m going to have to
really stretch my mind here for just a couple of minutes to
see where -- see how this is an emergency. Y'all go ahead
and visit, and I'll work on that part.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, it's a big
number. Help me understand it. Does that mean we
miscalculated the budget by that much?
MR. TOMLINSON: The -- the Attorney Ad Litem
Fee line item is -- is simply a miscalculation in the budget
by not -- for '02-'03. Right now, there's -- the budget
8-25-03
151
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
balance is zero, and -- and I anticipate, judging on the
history of this year, per month, that we'll need the $8,780
to complete the year through September, and including any
bills that we get in October and November that were incurred
through September the 30th. The $63,693 is for -- for
housing for juvenile offenders, not only in Kerr County, but
in other facilities that -- that are prescribed by the
Court. There -- we have -- Kerr County has juvenile
offenders in various programs throughout the state that
have -- that I understand have capabilities that match the
needs of a child. And so there's -- in fact, in the -- we
have bills to Hays County, Tom Green County, to Gulf Coast
Trade Center, and a detention facility called Ever Change,
so we have total billings here of -- for juvenile housing
for $61,744, so that -- I mean, that's as good as I can do,
I think, for -- for why -- why we need it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Again, I heard what
you said, but is -- does this mean that a year ago, we
underestimated these costs by $65,000?
(Mr. Tomlinson nodded.)
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And, Judge, does "ad
litem" mean the same thing as "court-appointed"?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, it does.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, are these out of
8-2~-03
152
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
your court? Out of --
JUDGE TINLEY: I would say the vast majority
of them are out of my court. There may be -- I don't think
-- no, I don't think any of them are out of the 198th. I
think they're all out of my court.
MR. TOMLINSON: All out of the county
juvenile court.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm kind of searching for
why there's such a big difference, and I'm wondering if it
is a new judge coming in, if it's different dealings with
juveniles, possibly. I mean, is that part of the reason?
Or was it -- because, I mean, I would think that we'd budget
basically the same as the prior year.
MR. TOMLINSON: We did.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we're spending a lot
more. I wonder if it's because of --
MR. TOMLINSON: We're using all the state
money possible for -- for this purpose. In fact, all the --
all of the state aid money that's -- I think it totals
approximately $116,000. Almost 80 percent of that is for
alternate housing. There's no salaries or anything taken
out of that state money. And so, I mean, this is only a
part of it. And we have -- we have other money from the
state that we also use for -- for alternate housing. I
mean, I look at this as somewhat like court-appointed
8-25-03
153
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
attorneys in -- in the District Court. It's one of those
things that's hard to put your finger on, and -- and at
budget time, it's -- it's really an educated estimate of
what -- you know, what it's going to be. You know, we've
wrestled with this with District Court already, and -- and
in this budget process. So, essentially, I think -- I think
it's the same thing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm wondering whether
or not this will continue after the Juvenile Detention
Facility expansion is complete.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I think --
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, to the extent that
they're Kerr County juveniles, that's going to depend upon
the activity amongst those particular juveniles. The -- the
expansion hopefully will -- won't be all Kerr County money
being used to fill that up. But, as I said earlier today,
preadjudication -- when a child goes into detention, it's
costing Kerr County $83 a day. You know, Rusty can hold his
prisoners at $37 a day, but because of -- because of some
requirements of T.J.P.C., you've got to have certain other
kinds of programs and -- and things available, so the cost
there is $83 a day currently, and that's preadjudication.
Post-adjudication is higher than that. But merely placing a
child in -- in detention -- and you've got to hear those
cases within 10 business days in order to keep them
8-~5-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
154
detained. It's not a matter of just putting them out there
and -- and walking off and leaving them. A lot of that
expense is incurred where you find what we call placement
for these young people that -- that need to be placed
outside the home, and they're placed in a boot camp
environment or they're placed in some specialized facility
to address particular needs.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Like the drug
rehab-type thing?
JUDGE TINLEY: There's some that -- some that
are drug and alcohol-related. There are some that deal
with -- some that have other special needs or requirements.
And when -- when you send one off there, boot camps run
about -- what, about $2,800 a month, I believe?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's approximate, yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: You get a few in boot camp and
a few in detention, and you can see how that will get away
from you in a hurry. The bad news is, it adds up. The
worst news is.that when I'm considering what to do with
juveniles and the Probation Department is making
recommendations and making placements, that I approve, into
a facility that's going to cost Kerr County some money, I
got to build a Chinese wall. My consideration at that point
in time needs to be what's in the best interests of that
child, not what the cost to Kerr County is. And if you
8-25-G3
155
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
think that's not tough, come sit in this chair for a while.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, do you have
an opinion about whether this -- whether or not this
additional cost is related to you taking a different
approach than Judge Henneke took?
JUDGE TINLEY: It's hard to say. It's
possible that some of it may be, but a lot of this
placement, I work off of the efforts that the Probation
Department makes in -- in ascertaining these various places
that they can be placed outside the home, and that hasn't --
that hasn't really changed.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or it could be just
simply an increase in numbers.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, as soon as we get
through here, gentlemen, I -- I've got some of those to do
this afternoon.
23 will.
24
25 to --
8 ~5-03
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And approving hand checks
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move we approve --
declare an emergency and approve Budget Amendment --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- 13.
MR. TOMLINSON: Along with that, I want you
to approve these checks to the -- to these places, if you
156
1
-- 2 to --
3
4 Tommy.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TOMLINSON: Hand checks to -- well, it's
JUDGE TINLEY: If you'll give me that list,
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded that Budget Amendment Request Number 13 be approved
on the basis of an emergency, and that hand checks be
approved to Ever Change in the sum of $18,312, Gulf Coast
Trade Center in the sum of $3,375, Hays County Treasurer in
the sum of $5,429, Tom Green County Treasurer, $3,355, and
Kerr County Juvenile Facility for $31,273.16. Any further
questions or discussion?
MR. TOMLINSON: And that's for the attorneys.
JUDGE TINLEY: The hand checks in connection
with the attorney's fees in Budget Amendment Request Number
13: Amos Barton, $50; Philip Jacobs, $275; Edward Toll,
$150; Rex Emerson, $100; Fred Henneke, $150; Charles King,
$462.50. 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: The motion does carry. Do we
have any late bills, Mr. Auditor?
8-25-03
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
157
MR. TOMLINSON: I have one. I have a bill
from -- actually, it's a letter requesting funds from City
of Kerrville by -- it's referencing Kerr County matching
funds for the Community Recycle Center for $4,500 -- $4,500
for the 2002-2003 budget year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is it budgeted in the
budget?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, it's in our budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: The item that -- I have a
motion and a second to approve the late bill to City of
Kerrville in the sum of $4,500 for the Recycle Facility
matter. Any questions or discussion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes.
our discussions in the budget hearings where
that we have a contract, and that any -- any
needs under that contract be paid for by the
Kerrville. Even though this is budgeted, it
would be a -- a deviation or a violation of
pay for it.
I'm recalling
we concluded
additional
City of
appears that it
the contract to
JUDGE TINLEY: I think, without modifying the
contract, we might be in violation of the law if we were to
approve it. That's my personal opinion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Have we spent before
8-25-v3
158
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
like this? I don't recall.
MR. TOMLINSON: I think we did. And I'm not
sure what year. Don't hold me to that, 'cause I --
sometimes I don't remember yesterday, so --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, either way, I mean,
I think --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I'm in
agreement. The contract's pretty clear. And, you know,
until you recently brought it up at our -- our visit with
the City, I didn't -- I wasn't aware that it was worded that
way. But now that I'm aware of it, I really think that we
need to live by the contract.
JUDGE TINLEY: The -- that particular item
that they're referring to, they'd indicated in our budget
workshop materials that they had not yet asked for that
money, but they would be, and my clear recollection was it
was for an improvement. It was something that was, in my
opinion, covered by the lease as clearly the obligation of
the lessee, which is the City.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does -- does our
County Attorney have an opinion on that? Or have we -- have
we approached them on that? Should we hold this bill until
he has time to review that?
JUDGE TINLEY: I have not obtained an opinion
Attorney. I've not requested one, very
8-~5-03
159
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
frankly. It was so clear to me, I didn't think we needed
to, but if you think we ought to submit it over there, we'll
be happy to do it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I think it would
be kind of -- kind of wise, so we can all be clear. I mean,
like I said early this morning, I met a lawyer one time.
That's about the extent of my deal. But -- and then when
that -- when our lawyer comes in and says, "Your contract
reads this and this and this," then it's on him.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know what impact
the fact that we, you know, budgeted for it has, but I
think -- I mean, I think I support your idea to defer to the
County Attorney, because historically we've not relied on
the County Judge for legal opinions. But it's certainly
given frequently --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I was
trying to say.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll withdraw my
second. Refer it to the County Attorney.
MR. TOMLINSON: You really can't -- from the
letter, it doesn't spell out --
JUDGE TINLEY: What it's for.
MR. TOMLINSON: -- what it's for exactly.
So, Judge, you know, based on my memory of our budget
workshops is the reason I brought it to -- to the Court.
8-^5-03
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
160
JUDGE TINLEY: So, we take no action on this
item, gentlemen? The motion's been withdrawn, and refer it
to the County Attorney for his review and -- and advice?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Works for me.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We'll be back in
session in five minutes? No, just -- I'm just joking.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other late bills?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I mean, it is that
clear, I think. It is that clear. You can sit in that
chair and read that thing and decide right -- right this
moment. I'm not asking you to do that, but I think it's
that clear.
MR. FEARY: I appreciate that. We will do
it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He doesn't often
practice law, but --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's right. But I
am today, buddy, and you're all guilty. That's a judge,
isn't it?
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Monthly reports. I
have presented to me monthly reports from Justice of the
Peace, Precinct 1, Justice of the Peace, Precinct 3, and the
District Clerk. Do I have a motion to accept these monthly
reports as presented?
8-25-03
161
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~.., 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded,
monthly reports as indicated and as presented 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. Do we have
any reports from any of you gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll see you tomorrow.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's a report, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As the Govern-nator
says, "Hasta la vista, baby."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We have something --
we have something in the back of the room.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Do you want to do these now?
Or do you want to wait till next meeting?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is that? Those
are on the --
MR. HOLEKAMP: The two bid proposals that
came in this morning.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we get them out
8-25-03
162
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
s-,
25
of the way?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Do you want to go ahead and
get them out of the way?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, we'll go back to Item
Number 8 on the agenda, to consider and discuss proposals
for electrical, plumbing, HVAC -- I think the only bids we
got were for electrical and -- and plumbing. Those were
referred earlier to the Maintenance Supervisor for his
review and -- and report back to the Court. What is your
report?
MR. HCLEKAMP: Well, I've reviewed them, and
they're both within the acceptable range of the -- as far as
costs. I visited with both entities, and they've assured me
that the response time would be acceptable. And if not,
well, they understand I have to call someone else.
JUDGE TINLEY: And any excess costs under the
contract there, we require --
MR. HOLEKAMP: He signed it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
MR. HOLEKAMP: So, I -- I recommend that we
accept both of those.
JUDGE TINLEY: The plumbing bid is from
Whelan, and the electrical --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes. Whelan Plumbing and
Guadalupe Electric.
8-~5-03
163
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion that we
accept the bids for electrical and plumbing contractors as
submitted -- select all bids.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded that the -- that the bids as submitted by Guadalupe
Electric for electrical service and Whelan Plumbing for
plumbing service, both bids being for Fiscal Year '03-'04
commencing October 1, 2003, through September 30, 2004, 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. Any
further business, gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a comment now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a comment that
maybe by -- I mean, I'm disappointed at the few number of
proposals we received, but maybe by us accepting them and
using them, others will understand that if they want to do
business with the County, they'll submit --
MR. HOLEKAMP: In the future. Well, in the
competitive places we've done that -- in the case of Road
8-~5-03
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
164
and Bridge, when I first got on the Court, very few were
submitted. Now we get stacks of submittals.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. I was pleased when the
Maintenance Supervisor reported that they were within --
within the range of what we've been paying, or maybe even
slightly less, I don't know, but they were certainly not
over that. So --
MR. HOLEKAMP: No, they were not over that.
They were pretty much all the same. And, as I indicated,
response time is real important to me on an emergency basis.
But I think we can work through those.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think both of these
successful bidders have the capability, certainly --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir, they do.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- of honoring that.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Very much so.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further business,
gentlemen? We'll stand adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 2:46 p.m.)
e-zs-a3
165
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF KERR I
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as
County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County,
Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this lst day of September,
2003.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
BY• __ __ _ ____ __________ __
Kathy nik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
13
.~-~
14
15
16
17
23
24
,---,
25
8-~5-03
18
19
20
21
22
ORDER NO. 28227
COSTCO WHOLESALE RECEPTION
On this the 25th 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 approve Costco Wholesale to set up a reception table accessible to all
employees and offer a discount membership rate to the employees of Kerr County.
ORDER NO. 28228
FUGITIVE APPREHENSION PROGRAM
On this the 25th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson
Seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to approve the renewal of Interlocal cooperation Contract between Kerr County
and the Texas Department of Public Safety for the purpose of administering the Fugitive
Apprehension Program and have Judge Tinley sign the same.
ORDER NO. 28229
1NTERLOCAL COOPERATON CONTRACT WITH DEPARTEMENT OF PUBLIC
SAFETY
On this the 25th 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 approve the Interlocal Cooperation contract between Kerr County Texas
Department of Public Safety to provide Breath Testing Program and Laboratory Alcohol
and Drug Testing Program and have Judge Tinley sign the same.
ORDER NO.28230
AMENDMENT NO. 1
NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE AGREEMENT NO. 69-7442-3-549
On this the 25th 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 approve Amendment #1 for NRCS Project No. 69-7442-3-549 and approve
the County Judge to sign the same.
ORDER NO. 28231
LONGEVITY AND EDUCATIONAL PAY INCREASE POLICY
On this the 25th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson
Seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court approved by a vote of 3-0-1, with
Commissioner Letz opposing to approve the Revised Longevity and Educational Pay
increase policy.
ORDER NO. 28232
KERB COUNTY EMERGENCY SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 1
On this the 25th 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 approve an Order to set an election for November 4, 2003 for the Kerr
County Emergency Service District No. 1 Election.
ORDER NO. 28233
REFER BIDS
On this the 25th 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 refer bids for Electrical Plumbing and HVAC (Air condition, Heating) to the
maintenance department for inspection and to bring back to the Court at a later date.
ORDER N0.28234
911 PRESS CONFERENCES
On this the 25th 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 approve that no action will be taken on the 911 Press Conference and it was
called to help get out the public awareness.
ORDER NO. 28235
FLOOD CONTROL FUND
On this the 25th 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 approve to move the Flood Control Fund Balance to Road and Bridge
Budget.
ORDER NO.28236
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE TECHNOLOGY FUND
On this the 25th 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 approve the re-establishing of the Justice Court Technology fund, which
comes from imposition of a $4.00 technology fee on defendants, convicted of
misdemeanor offenses.
ORDER NO. 28237
ANNUAL AUDIT
On this the 25th 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 the Contract with Pressler, Thompson and Company for the Annual
Audit.
ORDER N. 28238
QUINLAN CREEK DRAINAGE EASEMENT
On this the 25th 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 grant the drainage easement to the City of Kerrville subject to the approval of
the other taxing authorities.
ORDER N0.28239
HUNT VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT
On this the 25th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson
Seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to approve the contract between Kerr County and the Hunt Volunteer Fire
Department and authorize the County Judge to sign it.
ORDER NO. 28240
PUBLIC HEARING ON RECORDS ARCHIVE FEE
On this the 25th 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 set the Public Hearing for September 8, 2003 at 10:15 A.M. to consider the
adoption and approval of the Records Archive Fee and adopt such fee as part of the Kerr
County budget for FY 2003/04 and subsequent years.
ORDER NO. 28241
PUBLIC HEARING FOR OSSF RULES
On this the 25th 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 set a Public Hearing for September 8, 2003 at 10:00 A.M. for the proposed
new OSSF Rules and Regulations for Kerr County.
ORDER NO. 28242
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
On this the 25th day of August 2003 came to be considered by the Court various
Commissioners precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are:
10-General for $61448.98, 15-Road and Bridge for $22,292.58, 31-Parks for $170.00,
50- Indigent Health Care for $21,467.10
TOTAL CASH REQUIRED FOR ALL FUNDS: $ 107,014.02.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to pay said Accounts.
ORDER NO. 28243
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
COUNTY COURT AT LAW 198TH DISTRICT COURT
GENERAL FUND REVENUES
On this the 25th 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 State received funds of $12,708.00 for indigent defense with
$3,923.50 going to line item 10-427-402 for Court Appointed Attorney, $2,429.50 going
to line item 10-436-402 for Court Appointed Attorney, $6353.00 going to line item 10-
370-630 for Other Revenue-SB7.
ORDER NO.28244
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
COUNTY ATTORNEY
On this the 25th 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 move $300.00 from line item 10-475-461 Lease copier, $300.00 from line
item 10-475-457 maintenance contracts, $1,000 from line item 10-475-112 over time to
line item 10-475-315 books-publication-dues for a total of $1,600.00
ORDER NO. 28245
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
TAX OFFICER
On this the 25th 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 move $127.00 from line item 10-499-456 machine repairs into line item 10-
499-206 bonds & insurance.
ORDER NO. 28246
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE #3
On this the 25th day of August, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin,
seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to move $88.71 from line item 10-457-563 software maintenance into line item
10-457-485 conferences and request a hand check in the amount of $166.80 to Judge
O'Dell.
ORDER NO. 28247
BUDGET AMENDMENT
COUNTY JAIL
SHERRIFF'S DEPARTMENT'
On this the 25th 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 move $1614.73 from line item 10-560-563 software maintenance and put
$188.80 into line 10-512-220 employee medical exams $169.61 into line item 10-512-
454 vehicle maintenance $740.36 into line item 10-560-208 investigation expense,
$462.15 into line item 10-560-453 radio repair $53.81 into line item 10-560-454 vehicle
repair & maintenance.
ORDER NO. 28248
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
COUNTY JAIL
On this the 25th 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 move $3,554.76 from prisoner medical line item 10-512-333 into line item
10-512-331 operating supplies and issue a hand check in the amount of $7006.00 to
Identix LiveScan Fingerprinting System.
ORDER NO. 28249
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE #2
NON-DEPARTMENTAL
On this the 25th 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, move $219.98 from non-departmental capital outlay into line item 10-456-569
operating equipment.
ORDER NO. 28250
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
198TH DISTRICT COURT
216 DISTRICT COURT
On this the 25th 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, move $4,209.55 from court transcripts line item 10-453-497 and put $44.50 into
line item 10-435-315 for books-publication-dues and put $610.18 into line item 10-435-
402 for court appointed attorney and put $100.00 into line item 10-436-315 for court
books-publication-due and put $1,652.57 into line item 10-436-402 for court appointed
attorney and put $452.30 into line item 10-436-415 for special district judge and
,~ $1,350.00 into line item 10-436-494 for special court reporter and issue two hand checks,
one in the amount of $1,300.00 payable to Paula Richards Loetz and one in the amount of
$452.30 payable to V. Murray Jordan.
ORDER NO. 28251
BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR JUSTICE OF THE PEACE # 4
On this the 25th 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 move $193.68 from conferences line item 10-458-485 and put $138.68 into
line item 10-458-310 for office supplies and put $55.00 into line item 10-458-456 for
machine repairs.
ORDER N0.28252
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
NSTICE OF THE PEACE #2
On this the 25th 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 move $21.15 from line item 10-456-461 lease copier and move $40.04 from
line item 10-456-315 books-publication-due and move $2.50 from line item 10-456-309
postage and move $50.00 from line item 10-456-201 FICA expense and put $113.70 into
line item 10-456-108 for part-time salary.
ORDER NO. 28253
BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
GENERAL -REVENUES
On this the 25th 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 receive money from Bureau of Justice Assistance for Bulletproof Vest
Program and put $713.25 into line item 10-560-569 Operating Equipment and put
$713.25 into line item 10-370-665 Bulletproof Vests Donations.
ORDER NO. 28254
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
JiJNEVILE PROBATION
GENERAL REVENUES
On this the 25th 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 recognize funds received as reimbursement for Alternate Housing from 5'02
and put $481.17 into line item 10-570-482 Alternate Housing and put $481.17 into
various refunds 10-370-300.
ORDER NO.28255
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
JUVENILE PROBATION
On this the 25th 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 declare an emergency and take $72,473.00 and put $8,780.00 into line item
10-570-402 for attorney ad litem fees and $63,693.00 into line item 10-570-482 for
alternate housing and issue hand check to the following for each line item:
Attorney ad Litem
Amos Barton $50.00
Philip Jacobs $275.00
Edward Toll $150.00
Rex Emerson $100.00
Fred Henneke $150.00
Alternate Housing
Ever Change $18,312.00
Gulf Coast Trade Ctr. $3,375.00
Hays County $5,429.00
Tom Green County $3,355.00
Kerr County Juvenile Facility $31,273.16
Charles King $462.50
.- Order No. 28256
ACCEPT AND APPROVE
MONTHLY REPORTS
On this the 25th 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 accept the following reports and direct that they be filed with the County Clerk for
future audit:
Vance Elliot, J.P. #1
August 2003
Kari O'Dell, J.P. #3
August 2003
.._, Linda Uecker, District clerk
August 2003
ORDER NO. 28257
ACCEPT ALL BIDS FOR MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT
On this the 25th 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 accept all bids for the Maintenance Department as submitted.