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

rJ
r~
~J
.~
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~-
25
2
T T1 P z' Y
October 14, 2003 PAGE
--- Visitors' Input 4
--- Commissioners Comments 13
1.1 Request to fill County Extension Agent positi ~ ~~ ~
1.2 Request by First Responders to pay for injections 17
1.3 Approval of use of HCYEC for flu vaccinations,~b's~/~ 22
1 . 4 Approval for use of HCYEC in event of disaster.2 b'~y/(~
or biowarfare f~vent 25
1 . 5 Set Public Hea rinc_is for Alternate Plat Revisions ~ / 26
1.6 Release Letter of Credit for road construe ion
in Stablewood Springs Subdivision .~ bt~~ ~ ~~ 29
1.7 Amend court order to change number of district
from 1 to 2 for Emergency S~rvice District in
Mountain Home area ~ ~~3 ~ 1 34
1.8 Appoint Misty Smith as Judge, Jane Alley as~~.3 j~
Alternate Judge for the 11-4-2003 election 36
1.9 Adopt order from TCDRS for participation in
supplemental death benefits fund program
effective January 1, 2004 .~ ~~~ -~ ~ 37
1.10 Clarification of Commissioners Court intent for
mravel Allowance (mileage, lodging, meals, etc.) 38
1.11 Adoption of current State Rules and Guidelines, ~~,,~~,
for OSSF, set public hearing on adoption of said
rules and guidelines, or eliminate Section 10 52
1.12 Establish new department or realign/reorganize
existing department to handle responsibility as
authorized agent for OSSF/Floodplain a --
1.13 Discuss organization, office location, and. d ~•~~3
staffing of new Kerr County OSSF Program ,j~ t~-~ ~ ~ 56
1.14 Discuss administration of Kerr County Flood, lain_
Program ~ ~3 ~ ~_ 82
1.15 Authorize and approve new positions and job;~~.a->~L'
descriptions f;~r OSSF Program 88
1 . 16 Approve budget for new Kerr County OSSF Program~~ ~%,j.j"~
and approve budget amendments concerning same 89
1.17 Authorize Kerr County OSSF Committee to negotiate
acquisition. of property to,facilitate setup of
new OSSF Program ~ ~.~ ~~ ~ 98
1.18 Approval of Fourteenth Amendment and extension
of City/County Firefighting Agreement, authorize
County Judge to sign same ~ ~3 , ~ 99
1.19 Rescission of Commissioners Court order relating
to status of City/County Joint Airport Board 104
1.20 Approval of contract between Office of Court
Administration and Kerr County !D~~ i~, ~? 114
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
i4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I N D E X (Continued)
October 14, 2003
PAGE
1.21	Approval of Agreement between City/County	
>
	for use of Hotel Occupancy Tax revenues for .~~1	>
	improvement of Convention Center Facilities	
	(Hill Country ''outh Exposition Center),	
	authorize County Judge to sign same	115
1.22	Adoption of policy regarding use of Courthouse	
	or Courthouse facilities and Courthouse grounds	119
1.23	Authorize Request for Proposals for health ~ ~~5	~ Z
	insurance coverage plans for County employees	148
4.1	
-7~1''_>
Pay Bills ~ ~ ~7	
167
4 . 2	Budget Amendments ,~ ~ ~' (~^ ~ - ~ ~ _:~ ~' "~	172
4.3	Late Bi11s ,x,~%!~ (,
~ }
'	177
4 . 4	iC~
Read and Approve Minutes ~ ,~
`{	177
4.5	Approve and Accept Monthly Reports.
~~ ~ )	178
	~	
---	Adjourned	179
4
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
On Tuesday, October 14, 2003, at 9:00 a.m., a regular
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the
Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville,
Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me call the meeting to
order. It's a few minutes after 9 a.m. on the 14th of
October, 2003, the posted time for the regular Commissioners
Court meeting of Kerr County. At this time, I would like to
call on Mr. Bill Blackburn with Partners in Ministry to lead
us in a moment of pryer. If you'd all rise, please?
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Please be seated.
At this time, any person whc has any business or matter to
bring before us which does not relate to a listed agenda
item is privileged to come forward. If you wish to speak on
an agenda item, we would ask that you fill out a
participation form. They're available at the back of the
room. And it's not absolutely essential or required that
you do that; it just makes me be sure that I don't miss you
when that agenda item comes up. But if -- if you wish to
speak on anything that's not on the agenda, you're
privileged to come forth at this time, and I understand that
Ms. Clarabelle Snodgrass is with us this morning and has
something for us. M:~. Snodgrass, welcome.
io-l~-03
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1i
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. SNODGRASS: First, I have a paper for
each one of you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
MS. SNODGRASS: And I'll just pass this
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Thank you,
Clarabelle. This one has my name on it here.
MS. SNODGRASS: All right. I'll bill you.
(Laughter.) Thank y~~u, gentlemen, for allowing me to be
here for a few minutes. Most of you know, I think, that I
have worked with Kerr County historical markers for 27
years, and I know where they all are and I've been to each
or.e of them many times. The hardest one to find was out at
Camp Verde, the little one that was put there many, many
years ago, and it's -- isn't standing up. It's standing
flat on the top of the little post, and so you always miss
it, but it's in there also. I have done this booklet --
book for the Kerr County markers. There's 60 in Kerr County
that are in this book, and I'm working on four more at the
present time. One is at the foundry right now, and the
other one has been approved, and so the others will be later
on, I'm sure.
This became -- I became aware of this when I
was working on the brochures that we've done for years, and
last year we published a new amount -- a new brochure, but
1G-14-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~..
25
6
we had 13 new ones to put on the one -- on the brochure
because it hadn't been published in 10 years, so it took me
quite a while to get those together. And the Convention
Bureau's secretaries typed it all for me, since I can't see
tc type ar_y more. So -- and Rosa helped me out over here.
And we got those published, 5,000 of them, and so they
turned out beautifully. Doing that, it gave me the idea
that we should have a booklet on it, because I have been to
conver.tior.s several times and bought books from the other
counties in the state when they were at convention for the
Texas Historical Commission, so I became interested in
seeing the book. Most of those that I have seen have the
inscriptions of the markers, and maybe a little bit more, so
I decided I would wr.i_te a little extra paragraph on each
marker, and that way it would give it something besides what
is on the inscription, because there are always few things
that happened at those marker dedications or in getting them
prepared that you don't see on the marker inscription. So,
I think that's helping sell the book, because the people
that have been buying the book have been telling me that
they enjoyed what I had put in there extra.
So, I'm very proud of it, and I'm -- was so
surprised that so many people have been inquiring about it,
and I've shipped several out of town. So, I'm really proud
of it. So, T just wanted to present it, so I brought you
10-14-03

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1 ;'
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the little sheet along that tells you part of the things
that are in the book itself. Of course, there are more
things than that. But I'm very proud of it, and I just
wanted you to see it and know that we have done it, and I
feel like it will be of use to many, many people. Are there
any questions?
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you for being here, Ms.
Snodgrass.
MS. SNODGRASS: Thank you very much. I
appreciate your time.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. Thank you for
all your work you do.
MS. SNODGRASS: I'll take my book back.
(Laughter.) They're $20.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're $20 apiece?
MS. SNODGRASS: They`re $20. That includes
the tax. And, Mr. Letz, if you could take one to
Mr. Storey?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, I'll be glad to.
MS. SNODGRASS: I have it ready. I have a
ticket on it,
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate your efforts.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where -- one more
question. Where do we buy them?
10-14-U3
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
i6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. SNODGRASS: Me.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: From you? Contact you?
Give you a call?
MS. SNODGRASS: Uh-huh. I'm in the phone
book. Ross Snodgras:~, my husband right here, in the -- in
the paper -- in the directory, telephone directory. So,
just give me a call.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is Ross doing all the
delivery, Ms. Snodgrass?
MS. SNODGRASS: He carries me around while I
go get it -- deliver it.
MR. SNODGRASS: Taxi driver.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would just like to
make a comment. Of course, they live in Precinct 1, you
know, the number one. But Clarabelle celebrated her 90th
birthday this last Saturday.
MS. SiJODGRASS: Yesterday.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right, yesterday.
What's a day?
MS. SNODGRASS: 13th.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And a month or so ago,
we all celebrated Ross' 100th birthday. So, these are great
citizens that have been here many generations. So, we
appreciate everything that you've done.
MS. SNODGRASS: Six for me.
io-~~-n;
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
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Six generations.
Wasn't yesterday. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any other member of
the public that wishes to come fcrward? General Schellhase?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank, you sir.
MR. SCHELLHASE: Walter Schellhase, 529 Water
Street. This is a public information presentation to the
Court, reference V.A. Hospital. Y'all have seen a lot of
newspaper articles, a lot of things passed around. I'd like
to bring you up to date and tell you where we need help.
The hospital is not going to be closed; there are not going
to be any beds closed. Not now. The CARES Commission,
which is the Capital Assets Realignment Enhancement Service,
of which the V.A. has taken off on to reevaluate our assets
and determine what's best for the veterans in this area, the
issue is to provide improved care to our veterans. They're
going to improve our care to our veterans here by closing 20
of our acute beds and transferring them to San Antonio. Ta
us, that's not an improvement. That's a degradation of the
services that are now being provided.
This is going to take place over a period of
time, in conjunction with construction in San Antonio. New,
the plan is this: We're going to open more clinics, and
it's a historical fact that 20 to 40 patients seen in an
outpatient clinic adds at least one patient to an acute bed.
,n-_ .-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
i1
12
.~ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2.0
21
22
23
24
,-~
25
10
Kerrville is going to lose 20 acute beds; they're going to
San Antonio. We're going to open at least five more
clinics, adding at least 25 or 30 more beds, so San Antonio
wants to build 3G more acute beds at a cost of $11 million
to the taxpayers. The Veterans Council strongly opposes
this, because we know we have the facilities here in
Kerrville, and we want to keep them like they are. The San
Antonio district, which is headed by Mr. Coronado, through
their CARES Committee, of which I sit on, made the
recommendation that we make no changes in Kerrville
whatsoever. A lot of other changes throughout the district
that needed to be made, but this was one that they felt was
not needed to be made.
VISN 17, the regional V.A. district, came
back and said no, we want to transfer these beds to San
Antonio. So, their proposal that went forward to Secretary
Princippi says that we will transfer these beds to San
Antonio. That recommendation has now gone to the CARES
Commission. The CARTS Commission is a 15-man, appointed --
15-man committee appointed by the president. That
commission will provide a final presentation and submit it
to the secretary, which he will then review and approve
either up or down for the whole package, just like the
Brackett Committee does for the Department of Defense. And
then those changes will be implemented. Here, we stand to
10-19-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
11
lose those beds over a period of 5, 10, 15 years, as the
time it takes them to get something built in San Antonio.
The issue with the whole program is this: 17 says -- the
VISN 17 region says that it will take them at least five to
six, maybe eight years to get this facility built in San
Antonio. The veteran count, based on their own numbers, is
going to continue to increase until 2012, and at that time,
they will start to fall off, of which the facilities will no
longer be needed. So it makes no sense, from the veterans'
standpoint, why would we spend $11 million of taxpayers'
money ir. San Antonio to build 30 beds when we have the
capability of doing the same thing here in Kerrville?
So, the recommendation from the Veterans
Council is we want them to transfer beds to San Antonio,
open up at least 4U Reds here in Kerrville, not just the 20,
transfer patients from San Antonio over to Kerrville,
increase our specialty care here by using some of the assets
within the community for those doctors that are willing to
do -- contract with the V.A. That's our recommendation.
What we need right now is a lot of input from the public,
the Commissioners, the City Council people, this area and
around the area. We have contact -- we have this fact sheet
that we've prepared to give you all the data we need. We
don't want to do a farm letter this time; I think those have
been worked on it on this program already. We want a letter
10-14-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
12
from each of you to go to the contact in the back, which is
Mr. Lawrence, who is collecting the data. He will prepare
all that information put into a packet as of November the
30th, which that final program will go to the V.A. CARES
Committee.
We have had one criticism in Kerrville, from
the two hearings that I've attended, and that was the fact
that we have a transportation problem with EMS. It seems
that the V.A. -- I understand we have a city ordinance that
says if they transfer patients from Kerrville, they must be
-- they must go on an EMS vehicle. They cannot use their
own contract. They can't use their contract person carrying
out of San Antonio. I wasn't aware of that. But out of all
the hearings and all the things that have been said and
done, that's the only issue. So, we will address the City
with regards to that and make sure it's not a major issue.
But -- so, what we need from you is public input. We need
people to contact thF~ contact that we have listed in here,
to put that input stating the value that these 20 beds
provide for Kerrville. What would happen if these Kerr --
these beds recently transferred? It would affect
employment, although they say it won't, but you're not going
to occupy the same positions of employment when you no
longer have 20 acute beds. So, we need that input and we
need it very quickly. Thank you. Any questions?
1G-19-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
13
COMMISSIONER LETZ: General, the date on
here, the letters need to be received by November lst?
MR. SCHELLHASE: Yes.
COMMI:~SIONER LETZ: So, Mr. Larson --
MR. SCHELLHASE: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would a -- and I presume
a resolution to the Court in addition to individual letters?
MR. SCHELLHASE: That would be nice. It
certainly wouldn't hurt anything at all. I think all the
community support we can get at this time will be valuable.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Have you visited with the
other county commissioners courts?
MR. SCHELLHASE: No, we have not. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, general.
Appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: General, one more
question. Do you plan to talk to them? I'll be glad to
talk to Kendall County and Bandera, where I know --
MR. SCHELLHASE: Yeah, talking to anyone will
be great, certainly would be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Are there any other members of
the public: that -- would like t~ briny any matter to the
Court's attention on matters not listed on the Court's
agenda? All right, we'll move on. I'm sorry to report the
1G-14-03
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
._.., 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
14
passing of a former judge of Kerr County, Bob Denson, passed
away yesterday. He served this county honorably in this
position, and our thoughts and prayers and condolences go
out to his family. Commissioner Baldwin, do you have
anything you need to report?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. It's a sad
day in Kerr County that our good friend, Bob Denson -- he's
a good friend of all of us. Bob and I were friends for
about 20 years. When he first came here, we became good
friends and neighbors, and we went on horseback trips, we
served on the Hunt S~~hool Board together and this
Commissioners Court together, and just a great friend, and
sad, ar:d I'd call on the community to pray for his family's
strength to get some kind of understanding of all of it.
That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz?
COMMI:~SIONER LETZ: I don't believe I have
anything to add to that. I share the sentiment.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Nicholson? Let's
move on with the agenda, then, and the first item on the
agenda is the consideration. and discussion of a request for
court action in filling the Kerr County Extension Agent
Agricultural/Natural Resources position. Ms. Chapman, good
morning.
MS. CHAPMAN: Good morning. I want to
1a-14-c3
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
,,._ 2 4
25
15
apologize for Ms. Mapston not being here; she had a personal
family emergency that she had to attend to, so I'm here on
her behalf. But I'm here today to ask you all to -- to
consider the approval of Mr. Roy Walston as -- and appoint
him as County Extension Agent for Agriculture for Kerr
County. I've gotten to know him a little bit in the last
couple weeks. We've been talking a little bit about just
Kerr County needs in the area of ag and/or natural
resources. We've talked about things; about how we can
build up a team and do teamwork together.
Mr. Walston received his Bachelor's degree in
animal science with a business option in 1986 from Angelo
State University. He also earned a Master's degree at
Tarleton State in 1994. He has worked in four different
counties since 1987. He's worked in Wise County, Ha11
County, San Saba County, and mcst recently Crockett County.
And what's neat about all of that is that when you work in
so many different counties, there's no way that -- you can't
help but be a diverse person, 'cause each county has
different needs. He's got a lct of experience in the areas
of livestock and wildlife management. He has a lot of
experience and expertise in horticulture and in range
management as well. So, that is something that I've heard
from the citizens of Kerr County a lot when we were looking
to fill this position, is that they wanted someone who's
to-l~-o~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.,._._ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
"16
very diverse, and Mr. Walston seems to fit the bill for
that. He's also had a lot of management experience. He has
served as County Coordinator for two of his counties, and he
has had a media presence, writing weekly news articles and
having radio programs. He's done a lot at the district
level, serving on various district level committees, as well
as chairing some of these committees, ar.d I know what a
large responsibility that is. So, I just ask for approval
from the Court, and to accept N1r. Walston for employment
starting November 1st.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good. Judge, I
move that we accept, I guess, the appointment -- is that
good encugh? -- appointment of Roy Walston to the County
Extension Agent/Agricultural and Natural Resource position
for Kerr County.
22				
23				
24				
25				
	~0-	14-	03
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Thank you
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the appointment and employment of Roy Walston be accepted
and approved by the Court. Any further question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
17
very much, Ms. Chapman. We appreciate you being here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's take a look at
Stand up, Roy.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hey, Roy, go Rams.
(Laughter.)
MR. WALSTON: They need the help.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item is consideration and
discussion of the bu~~get request for the First Responders to
cover the cost of requiring infections to become volunteer
certified First Responders. You're on this item,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, this is my
item. I'd received a phone call from a local First
Responder last week that is in training -- do you want to
come up to the microphone while I'm saying this? Phone call
from a First Responder that is taking a First Responder
class taught by our coordinator. And one of the -- the way
I understood it, the way -- one of the items is that he's
required to get some shots, and I believe he said to the
tune of about $180 worth, and warted to know if the County
somehow could reimburse him for those shots. And so I've
asked the coordinator to come in and maybe tell us about
that, what -- what all that entails. I'm probably going to
balk at the issue of actually paying the thing, because I --

1
,- 2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
18
I think if you start paying for shots, then you're going to
start paying for gas and you're going to start -- you know,
you're heading on down the road there of -- of issues that
are not budgeted. And -- but give us some insight on -- on
the request.
MR. YOLNG: This request was only for one
First Responder. To give you a little background on it, for
the training class that we're having for E.M.T.'s -- and, of
course, this is the only current First Responder we have
that's not an E.M.T., and he's going through class right
now. When you go through the class, you have to do clinical
rotations, be it on the ambulance or in the emergency room
at the hospital. One of the requirements is that you have
current shot records, and we check that with everybody that
goes through our class. The people that are already
certified as E.M.T.'s have already been through this and
they're current on their shots. This one individual went
ahead and got his, because we require it in the class, and
then he decided he wanted to see if the County would
reimburse him for that. The other First Responders, as I
say, are already current on all their shots. It's this one
that was r.ot. And that's -- that's kind of the background
on this.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are there other
expenses that relate to the training, like shots or gas or
1C-14-C3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
19
books or --
MR. YOUNG: We -- when we approached y'all
for money for the class, that was all included, the books
~ar.d everything. And several of the people we allowed to
take the class, you know, on their -- on the premises that
they were going to he county First Responders when they got
out of it, and so we didn't require them to pay tuition.
I
i Others that were not going to be First Responders that we
allowed in the class had to pay the tuition for the class,
which was put back into the fund to help get the equipment
and things that we needed to complete the class to a better
degree.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I just think if
-- if we were going to pay something like that, the only
place I -- I mean, triere's not a First Responders shot line
item in the budget. The only place I could see to take it
from would be Kyle's First Responder budget. And --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Salary, you mean?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, his salary line,
absolutely. But I was requested to look into it, and I'm
now asking you guys if y'all have any special, wonderful
feelings about what to do about this.
JUDGE TINLEY: This particular individual
that reimbursement is being sought for, is that going to be
25 ~ a county First Responder?
10-14-03
20
1
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. YOUNG: Yes, it is. He's currently a
county First Responder at the ECA level, the emergency care
attendant level, and he's a very active First Responder.
JUDGE TINLEY: And will continue as such as
an advanced level when the training is completed, on a
vclunteer basis at nc compensation?
MR. YOUNG: Yes, sir. It's not necessarily
an advanced level; it's still a basic level, but it's a
little higher training than what he has now.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I'm sympathetic
from the standpoint that, you know, I'd like to encourage
mere First Responders, but the -- I see it opening up a
whole list of things that we're going to be responsible for
down the road. And I -- you know, and unless we're going to
make budget adjustments to allow other expenditures of this
type, I don't think we can do -- just pick one out and do
it. That's my opinion.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I have had occasion,
over the last two or three years, to see the First
Responders in action several times, and I really appreciate
them. They do a -- a good and valuable service to the
citizens of Kerr County. On this item, I'll defer to the
judgment of the other Commissior:ers.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actually, I think the
_0-_4-03
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
~6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
way to deal with it, if -- if we're even going to consider
doing these kinds of things, it needs to be dealt with in
next year's budget, and be specific with line items outside
of his salary and -- and those other issues that he's
dealing with. To me, T mean, I -- he's a good friend. He's
a great leader, a great leader in our community, not only
fire service and ambulance service, but a good guy, and
deserves it. But it's just -- to me, it's a budget issue.
So, I mean, if you're willing to cough up money out of your
owr. budget, I might consider it, but I don't think you're
going to do that.
MR. YOUNG: Well, I -- I don't see a large
need for this occurring in the future, you know. As these
people take the E.M.T. class, it's pretty much a given that
they take care of all the prerequisites to do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We can go to Item 3,
as far as I'm concerned.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anyone else have anything
further to offer on this? Thank you, Mr. Young. We
appreciate you being here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Kyle.
MR. YOiJNG: Could I give you a quick update
on our E.M.T. class?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know if
that's -- the agenda item I don't think would lend to that,
1~- 1 4- U 3
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2C
21
22
23
24
,.-.
25
maybe, huh?
think so.
JUDGE TINLEY: Probably not. I wouldn't
MR. YOUNG: Okay, I'll come back to the next
one, give you an update.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Next item is
consider and discuss the approval of the use of the Youth
Exhibit Center for a clinic to provide flu vaccinations to
the citizens of Kerr County as requested by the Texas
Department of Health Infection Control/Employee Health
Coordinator. This item was forwarded to me by the Infection
Control/Employee Health Coordinator for the flu clinic out
at the Exhibit Center either in October or November, subject
to availability. Two primary reasons for it would be,
number one, it's a known location; everybody knows where to
go. Secondly, there's -- there's reasonable access, and --
and there's enough space there for that to be conducted.
But it would be subject to availability, so I -- I indicated
I would bring this matter to the Court.
COMMTSSIONER NICHOLSON: I mcve that we
approve use of the Hill Country Youth Exhibition Center for
a clinic to provide flu vaccinations to the citizens of Kerr
County.
COMMI;~SIONER BALDWIN: I second that motion.
.0-14-03
L
`' 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve the agenda item. Any further questions or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Couple of comments.
First, I can't remember exactly our policy. Is there any --
I presume the intent is to waive any kind of use fees out
there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. I'm sure that's the
case, yes.
COMMI:~SIONER BALDWIN: I'm sure that's what
this whole thing's a~~out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, but, I mean, it
doesn't say that. And if we're going to waive a fee, we
need to --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Say that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- we need to waive the
fee. And the other part is, kind of a general comment on
this one and the next one. I think that, at some point, the
Court needs to look at our liaison positions. And the
reason is, I'm a liaison to the Ag Barn, and I didn't know
this was going to be on the agenda. It's not that big a
deal; I certainly would have put it on the agenda as well,
but if we're going to use liaisons, we ought to use
liaisons. If we're not going to use liaisons, we need to
get rid of all our appointments. I mean, I think -- you
10-19-U3
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
i9
20
21
22
23
24
.-
25
know, to me, a liaison -- if it's related to Ag Barn,
Commissioner Williams and I should be involved with it. If
it's going to be related to the airport, Commissioner
Nicholson -- you know, so it's just kind of -- I just think
that if we're going to use them -- and I certainly have no
problem. It's just a matter of people doing what we've been
asked to do earlier in the year. But I think that, on the
waiver issue, if we're waiving fees on this one and the next
one, it looks like we probably ought to specifically waive
those fees. And I can't remember our policy. Maybe -- I
don't know if Glenn's here -- the governmental entities may
be waived automatically. I can't remember what that
schedule is, but -- okay, we don't automatically waive them.
So, my question -- I can't remember, so -- but we are -- I
think it should be part of the motion.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I amend the notion
to waive the fees, and I agree with the need for closer
coordination.
JUDGE TINLEY: Second okay with that?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, absolutely.
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.
io-19-03
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
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: I apologize for not referring
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't let him off that
easy, Jon. You're letting him off too easy.
JUDGE TINLEY: Consideration and discussion
of the approval fcr use of the Hill Country Youth Exhibit
Center in the event of a disaster or biowarfare event.
Texas Department of Health again requesting that. Also, I'm
sure, waiver of fees. That, of course, is an emergency
item. Applicability would certainly not come into play
there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that
we approve the use of the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center
in the event of a disaster or biowarfare event as requested
by the Texas Department of Health.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE 'TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve the agenda item. Any further questions or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you think it will help
pay for any renovations so we can make it a better facility
for them to use?
1U-19-03
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1G
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~-.
25
JUDGE TINLEY: I thought we'd let the
liaisons from the Court discuss that with them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. (Laughter.)
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. The next
item on the agenda is setting public hearings for alternate
plat revisions. Mr. Johnston.
MR. JOHNSTON: Good morning.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, sir.
MR. JOHNSTON: We have several plat
revisions, and they are all qualified as alternate plat
revision, being that they're only one or two lots. I have a
list; let me go through them. (A) Revision of plat in
Falling Water, Lot 138A and 139A. That is a combination of
lots. (B) Revision of plat in Falling Water, Lot 124A and
125, combination of lots. (C) Revision of plat for
Greenwood Forest, Lot 8 and Lot 16, which is combining three
lots and making two out of them, so that would be a
combination. And revision of plat for Riverpark Estates,
Lot 27; that's dividing a lot. (E) should be eliminated;
10-14-03
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that was already -- we already have a public hearing date
set for that cne. I'd recommend -- we have to wait 30 days,
so next -- I think the next regular meeting will be
November 24th. And Plats (A), (B), and (C) would not
require notice by mail, since they are combining lots.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, do we need a
specific public hearing for each one, or can we combine them
all into one?
JUDGE TINLEY: I would think we would need a
specific hearing --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: For each?
JUDGE TINLEY: -- for each one, but I don't
see any harm in setting them all for the same time, as
opposed inform 10 o'clock, 10:05, 10:10, that kind of
business, 10:15 or whatever.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll move we set a public
hearing November 24th at 10 a.m. for public hearing
regarding the revisi~~n of plat -- or of Falling Water -- let
me back up there.
MS. SOVIL: You might want to change that to
10:30. We have the electrical RFP's coming in.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: At 10:OG? Okay. Let me
start over, Kathy. Sorry about that. I'll move that we set
a public hearing for the plat revisions as presented for
November 24th at 10:30 a.m.
io-i~-c~
28
1
.- 2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second the motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve the agenda item for 10:30 a.m. on November 24, 2003,
public hearing. Any questions?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, thank you.
Franklin, (D)? Where is Riverpark Estates?
MR. JOHNSTON: That's on Hermann Sons Road.
It's one that you granted a variance to for lot size here a
while back.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We`ve already granted
a variance?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
MR. JOHNSTON: For the lot size.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So we're granting
another variance?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, we granted -- we
approved the variance. Now we have to do the public hearing
for the dividing of the lots.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Same one?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Same lot, but -- yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions cr
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
to-~~-o?
29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.}
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Thank you,
Mr. Johnston. Next item on the agenda is the request for
release of Letter of Credit Number 7036775 for road
construction in Stablewood Springs Subdivision.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move that we
approve the release of credit -- Letter of Credit Number
7036775 for road construction in Stablewood Springs
Subdivision.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve the release of Letter of Credit Number 7036775 for
road construction, Stablewood Springs Subdivision.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is this --
JUDGE TIIILEY: Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is this a one-year --
a one-year deal? Has it been a year?
MR. JOHNSTON: This was a Letter of Credit
that just guaranteed the roads would be built according to
the final plat. It's private roads, so it's not a
maintenance bond or maintenance letter of credit.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, yeah. Okay.
?0-14-03
1
2
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
i7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
30
MR. JOHNSTON: Roads have been completed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two questions. One, the
roads were inspected or we have that data?
(Mr. Johnston nodded.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They were built to County
specifications?
MR. JOHNSTON: Yes, they are.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other question
is, there are some photos included.
MR. JOHNSTON: Mm-hmm.
COMMI:~SIONER LETZ: And the
MR. JOHNSTON: All those weren't of the
roads. Some of them were the detention areas. That's just
for your information. They are being seeded. They all --
grass is growing on the berms and the ponds.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess my -- what I was
looking at were things I thought were problems with the
roads.
MR. JOHNSTON: Oh I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Terrible condition.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it just looks like
there's some -- on this particular one, it looks like
there's a lot of the road eroded away next to the culvert.
Anyway, my question -- I misunderstood why they were in
In-1~-o~
31
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
I7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
here, I guess. But -- so, I guess that goes under the
maintenance portion. They were built to specifications?
MR. JOHNSTON: The roads were.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe being in bad shape
right now is not an issue with the -- from the release of
the Letter of Credit.
(Mr. Johnston nodded.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion? A11 in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: A11 opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item,
consideration and discussion of amending Court Order Number
28232 --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, excuse me. On
Item 4, I see a perp~exed look by someone who is here for
the public hearing item; we went over that pretty quick
regarding setting those public hearings, and i.t's the
property owner of (D) on that list, the one in Riverpark
Estates. And I see the -- I was wondering if they have a
question related to the public hearing.
MS. BOHNERT: Well, yes, sir. Mr. Letz,

32
i
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
•--
25
we're -- you know, I'm going to let Mrs. Lovett -- we're
just -- I guess the time factor's --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Identify yourself.
MS. BOHNERT: Excuse me. I'm -- I'm Paula
Bohnert; I'm a real estate broker. T know y'all hate people
like me, but I'm quite perplexed at the procedure here.
Ms. Lovett came to Commissioners Court last session. Y'al1
were gracious, granted her a variance, so we're trying to
expedite this sale for Ms. Lovett. I'm talking to U.G.R.A.
and I notice on your agenda that it's all coming to pass,
that the change, et ~~etera. And we're just perplexed at --
that's going to be how many days?
MS. LOVETT: Fifty days.
MS. BOHNERT: Before the hearing. I'm
perplexed also. We need to route -- we're trying to do as
much for Ms. Lovett as we can to keep the costs down because
of her position. We're -- we're being told we need to go to
the utility companies, route this survey. The house is
there intact, utilities are there. I just -- I'm having a
little bit of a hard time understanding the whole procedure,
and -- help me out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This part of the process
is state law.
MS. BOHNERT: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Now, the notification,
io-l9-os
33
1
--- 2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
i4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the routing slip and some of the other things are County,
and we -- the County has adopted the state law. Whenever
you revise an existing subdivision plat, it has to go to
public r.otir_e because it affects the other interests or
property owners in that specific- subdivision. So, I mean, I
wouldn't anticipate it, but it's possible that some of the
other owners in the River Park Estates may object, and we
would listen to that. So, we -- I mean, we can't just, by
law, change a subdivision plat without doing a public
hearing. That public hearing, by law, is a 30-day period.
And, based on our meetings, I mean, it can be anywhere up
almost to probably 45 days to -- you know, something like
that, just depending. The other portion of it is -- is it's
just part of the Subdivision Rules, and, you know, anyone
that does a -- a revision, you know, has to go through the
process. I think it will be a little bit simpler when we
change the G.S.S.F. around a little bit, but that's neither
here nor there now, related tc utility companies and others.
I mean, they're required to provide a service to homes, and
even thougY'i there may be homes already built here, if we
were to try to write stiibdivision rules for every, you know,
specific situation, we'd be so --
MS. BOHNERT: I understand that. And -- I
understand it is state law, which I do understand. And
Mr. Johnston was very gracious on the phone, and we will
1C.-14-~3
34
1
'^~ L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1G
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
2G
21
22
23
24
25
just go through whatever process, and we'll do it. And I
apologize, and I do appreciate what y'all have done, and
just -- help us out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. JOHNSTON: I want to say one more thing.
The -- the plat will have to all -- all the signatures will
need to be signed and you need to submit those drawings to
our office, T think, two weeks before the date -- a couple
weeks before the datE: in order to have it done on that date.
Otherwise, if you don't have all that done, it may push it
even further out.
MS. BOHNERT: We will have it done. Thank
you.
CUMMISSIONER LETZ: Sorry, Judge, didn't mean
to interrupt you, but I saw a perplexed look. Gave them an
opportunity.
JLDGE TINLEY: Easier to get that resolved
now than have it come up later and inconvenience them. Next
item will be consideration and discussion of amending Court
Order 28232, as recommended by the Election Division,
Secretary of State's office, to change the number of the
district from "1" to "2" for the Emergency Service District
election in the Mountain Home area. Ms. Pieper.
MS. PIEPER: Judge, that about sums it up. I
did speak with the Elections Division, and they suggested
l~-_4-n3
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
35
that it's always better to amend the order prior to the
election. That way we can change the ballots, and the
voters will know exactly what they're voting on.
JUDGE TINLEY: For the members of the Court
that may not be up to speed on this, the formation of this
Emergency Services District preceded the end of the
legislative session, the beginning of it. The petition was
presented, and it was denominated as Kerr County Emergency
Services District Number 1. At that time, we had a Kerr
County Fire District out in Ingram, which we commonly called
the Ingram Fire District, as Kerr County Fire District
Number 1. Subsequent to all the formative -- formative
activity, the petition, the court order and so forth, onto
the election, describing it by metes and bounds, the
Legislature automatically converted Fire District to
Emergency Services District, and proceeded to notify the
Ingram Fire District people that they were thenceforth known
as Kerr County Emergency Services District Number 1. So, we
had the possibility of two of them there. We could either
clean it up before or after. The Clerk is suggesting that
we amend the order calling for the election to denominate it
as Number 2, print the ballot as Number 2, and by virtue of
all this explanation on the record, hopefully nobody will be
confused.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move that we
io-i~-o3
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
36
approve the amending of Court Order Number 28232 to change
the number of the district -- of the Kerr County Emergency
Service District Number i to Number 2.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve the agenda item. Ariy further questions or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Thank you,
Ms. Pieper. Next item also is Ms. Pieper's. Consideration
and discussion of appointing Misty Smith as judge and Jane
Alley as alternate judge for the November 4, 2003 election.
MS. PIEPER: Gentlemen, this just deals with
finding a judge that lives in what they call that district.
And Misty Smith does live in that district, as well as Jane
A11ey, who is the alternate judge.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move that we
approve the appointments of Misty Smith as judge and Jane
Alley as alternate judge for the November 4, 2003 election.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
the approval of the agenda item. Any further question or
io-i~-o~
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
.-.. 2 4
25
37
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: Mction does carry. Next item
is consideration and discussion of the adoption of an order
from T.C.D.R.S., Texas County and District Retirement
System, for participation in the supplemental death benefits
fund program effective January 1, 2004. Ms. Nemec, our
Treasurer.
MS. N1;MEC: Yes, good morning. This was --
this death benefit was approved during the budget process,
and the figures were all put into each elected official's
department, and sc this is just to formalize that action,
and for the Commissioners and the Judge to sign the proper
paperwork.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
adopt the order from the T.C.D.R.S. for the participation in
the supplemental death henefit.s fund program, effective
January 1, 2004. Any further question or discussion? All
in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
io-l~-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
I9
20
21
22
23
24
25
38
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, do we have one
of these forms to sign?
JUDGE TINLEY: I suspect, if she doesn't have
one, the Clerk's got one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, we'll circulate that.
Next item is consider and discuss clarification of the
Commissioners Court intent for travel allowances, such as
mileage, lodging, meals, et cetera.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. This came
up a couple of weeks ago. One of our elected officials
traveled and -- and had to -- went to a location in Texas
where there wasn't ar~y kind of shuttle from the airport to
the -- his hotel or to the meeting, and had to rent a car,
and then it became unclear if we were going to pay car
rentals or not. And that kind of triggered all kinds of
little questions. And I visited with Tommy, and -- and if
you look -- if you look through the minutes of our
discussion about this, we really didn't come to -- we did
not come to a conclusion on this issue, and I wanted to
bring this -- bring this up. And what I'd like to see
done -- I have a couple of questions. What I'd like to see
10-14-03
39
1
2
3
4
J
7
8
9
10
11
12
^. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
done is us come to a conclusion on it, and not only come to
that conclusion, but put it in some kind of writing form and
stash it in the courthouse system somehow, so -- in case
this thing comes back up and we're unsure what happened,
which I predict is going to happen many times.
So, one of the questions is, let's say that
-- sorry, my ears are stopped up; I can't even hear myself.
One of the questions is, let's say that I travel to South
Padre Island, and I fly down there as opposed to driving.
And the mileage woul~~ pay me -- these are just round
numbers; this is not carat it actually is. If I drove in my
car and was paid the mileage at the state rate, let's say
that I had -- it cost $150. But I can fly; my airplane
tickets would cost me $100. Do we collect -- does the
traveler collect the $150? Ur can I turn in my airplane
tickets for $100? That's one question.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you going to present
a whole bunch, or do you want to talk about them as we go?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It doesn't matter. I
mean, it's ust -- this is going to trigger some other
questions as we go through. But, yeah, there's one --
there's a question. You want to deal with it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: To me, I mean, if we're
-- I thought we -- I agree, after reading through the
minutes, we didn't agree to do anything, but we talked about
1 ~ - ~ 4 _ ~ ~
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
li
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-,.
25
having a per diem for food at cne point. To me, a per diem
for food is fine, and the rest of it is whatever it costs
you. I mean, if you drive, you should get paid the mileage
rate. If you fly, you should turn in your airplane ticket
and get reimbursed. I think it should be actual
expenditures. And then, except for the per diem, if it --
if we go the with per diem, whatever we decide that per diem
amount is, that's what the employee gets while they're on
the road. 'Cause, I mean, they're presumed to eat.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's -- that was the -- that
was the consensus that -- that I believe that we reached,
that rather than having a cap on the hotel/motel, that was
left as to actual-cost reimbursement. The meals, rather
than doing a bunch of reimbursement supper tickets, we
solved that with a per diem. With regard to some -- with
regard to the mileage, if you want to submit actual mileage,
that, of course, you could do. If you didn't want to be
bothered by that, you could just turn in the state rate off
the Comptroller's table, if you drove. You know, if you use
seine other mode of transportation, whatever your actual
costs were. And that's -- that was the sense that I got.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, the airplane
ticket plus the rental car?
JUDGE TINLEY: ~'es.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or --
10-14-03
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Taxi or --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Shuttle bus, taxi,
limousine, et cetera. Okay. "Actual expenditure," I heard
come out of your mouth, and those sound like good words.
JUDGE TINLEY: With the exception of meals,
and that would be on the basis --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a whole
different issue. That's a different issue fixing to come
up.
MS. NEMEC: Judge? Judge, on that -- I have
a question on that. I was told that -- you know, that what
we're doing is, starting October 1, that on the per diem,
that it was $30, that they could collect that before they
actually go on the trip. Is that correct?
JUDGE TINLEY: I think that was part of the
reason of going with per diem, that they could draw that
money and not have to be financing their own expense, at
least in part.
MS. NEMEC: That certainly will help
everybody.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, that was for the
employees' benefit, I think.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, of course,
there's some question about that. Seemed like someone had
io-ig-o~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
i0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.._..
25
42
-- some elected official, I think it was the Tax
Assessor/Collector, had a meeting pop up, like, you know,
we're having this big meeting in 10 days from now, and there
wasn't time for that person to come -- come through the
Commissioners Court to release that money up front-.. Now, do
they have -- do they have -- or does the Auditor have
authority to automatically release some funds for per diem
travel? Or do they have to come through here? Or did we
set up a separate fund to come out of, or what did we do?
None of the above?
JUDGE TINLEY: There was some discussion of
creating a separate kitty. I don't think there was any
intention that they come to the Court for specific approval,
but there was some discussion of setting up a separate fund
that the Treasurer could fund those out of when a request
was made by an employee, you know, in advance.
COMMISSIONER BALDG7IN: So, I'm going to South
Padre to a meeting in early December; all I have to do is go
to the Treasurer and say, "I'm going to be there four days.
Give me some money," and she writes me a check?
MS. NEMEC: ? would think it would come out
of the Conference litre item, though, for that department.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Obviously, it would have to be
charged against the line item. But there would have to be

1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
43
some sort of documentation for it, obviously.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Documentation is good.
JUDGE TINLEY: And, you know, the amount
requested and purpose and what the function was.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My -- I have a question
related to this thing.
COMMI:~SIONER BALDGIIN: We' ] 1 get there. Just
a second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This per diem thing
that we pay $30 a day, that's -- that's obviously for food.
For food. Again, if I go and I chose to eat sardines and
crackers, and I pocket the 20 bucks, I mean, that's the way
it works, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A lot of sardines,
though.
COMMI:.~SIONER BALDWIN: A lot of sardines. If
you like --
JUDGE TINLEY: Or good sardines.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or good sardines.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, here's the
question, though. What about if you have a meeting -- and
Commissioner Letz does this a lot -- a meeting in Hondo, a
meeting in Bracketville, one day. You go down there and you
1~-14-0~
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
drive back. Do we pay one day per diem?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think so.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, not for you, but
some -- some cf these other people may. What do you think,
Number 4?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think we pay one
day per diem.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One day per diem.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I look at it -- to me, if
you're here in the morning and you're here at night, maybe,
for lunch, a reduced -- you know, a -- you know, an amount,
but I don't -- I think you're almost compensating
employees -- I mean, you're going to eat at home and -- you
know, those two meals, whether you go on a trip or not.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You eat breakfast at
home, ycu go to Hondo for the meeting and you eat lunch, and
we're going to give you 30 bucks?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's too much.
I think you -- I think we need to have -- if you're gone all
day, 30 bucks. If you're gone part of a day, it's 10 bucks,
or something to that effect. I mean --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Well, we need
to reach that final figure. I see the -- our court lady
writing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And also, you have -- a'
io-1~-n~
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.-~ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
similar situation is that when you, you know, leave at noon
to go to Austin for a conference, registration's at
5 o'clock, something like that, and you kind of eat -- you
know, you're away that night, but you're here during the
day. I think, on part-day, we ought to have a separate
amount, whether it's $10 or $15 or $20 or whatever. I think
if it's a full day, it's one amount; part day, another
amount.
JUDGE TINLEY: The per diem -- the per diem
is broken down that the State has used at $?, $8, and $15,
breakfast-lunch-supper, and why wouldn't you use that?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Say it again? That
form?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's fine with me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is fine. And I
questioned -- Tommy put together this form here; this is
what he uses. And I questioned him, breaking out the
different meals, "Why would you break out the meals
specifically if we're paying a per diem?" And -- and he
says to me, he says -- he got this from the State, by the
way, and that there is an ongoing debate whether one meal is
a full day or not, kind of thing. So, I get -- I think he's
right about breaking it out this way. But what do you do?
Do you turn in that -- the $8? Or do you do $10 for a
10-19-~~3
46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,,^ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
partial day? How do you want to do it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd do it this way.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This way right here?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You have your lunch
and you turn in that meal ticket?
JUDGE TINLEY: No. You just -- you just
claim that you're entitled to be reimbursed for lunch, and
the standard rate's 8 bucks.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, I agree.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question --
JUDGE TINLEY: You got some hungry campers
back here.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, my question would
be -- and this is something our department does just about
daily, is if you have an officer that leaves 5:00 in the
morning, 5:3C, going to pick up prisoners somewhere else,
and he doesn't get back in until 8 o'clock at night, is that
a full day that gets all three, or is he supposed to eat
before he left at 5:00 and eat after he gets back in at
8:00? How are y'a11 going to divide that out?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If he's eating three
meals on the road and that's necessary, he gets paid for
three meals. If he eats -- I mean, I think you use
judgment. I don't --
to-l~-o~
47
1
--- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,_,, 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, I agree, but when
you're saying a full day or half day, that kind of --
there's some kinks in there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the department
head/elected official has to look at it and has to approve
these as they're coming tiir~ugh. I mean, look at the intent
of the policy. The intent of the policy is not to pay
employees, you know, when they're not using the funds. The
intent is for them -- if they need to eat, you know, three
meals, they should get reimbursed for those meals, you know.
I --
MS. NEMEC: I can do a form for them to sign
with breakfast, lunch, and dinner, $7, $8, and $15. And
then they can sign it, what time they're -- you know, what
they're going to use, and 'nave the elected official approve
it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MS. NEMEC: And then base --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I like the form. My
question was, where'd it come from? You answered that
question; it came from Tommy. I think it's a good idea, and
I also like the certification on the bottom.
SHERIr'F HIERHOLZER: Last question, Jonathan,
I would have is, a lot of our trips where it's one gender
having to go pick up another one, we use off-duty people to
10-14-G3
48
1
..-_ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,~ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2C
21
22
23
24
25
ride with them where you have to have two officers. One's
totally off duty, one's on duty. Is that gcing to make any
difference at all in the per diem for those people?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are they off duty and
being paid?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They're off duty, riding
on their own just to give us that second person, but they
just want to ride along as an off-duty -- we need another
person.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I understand. I mean --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But they're volunteering
their off time. They're not in uniform, just doing it on
their own; they're bored at the house or whatever.
Shouldn't we still pay them a per diem?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we need to
feed them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWI
the per diem thing, but I think we
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER:
COMMISSIONER LETZ:
that we have two people along, we
cover their expenses.
N: I'm not a big fan of
need to feed them.
Still need to feed them.
If it's a requirement
-- I think we need to
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about -- I don't
know about you, but I know previous Sheriffs have used folks
1U-19-u3
49
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
to ride along that are not County employees.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, I don't do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We, at times -- it's
going to be a certified officer. At times, if constables,
you know, are free, or if it's a city case and we can talk
one of the city officers into riding with us to go get this
person, we'll do that, okay? But not just civilians. But
then, if it's a city officer and city case, normally we try
and let them pay for their own meals. But --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Back on the travel
thing, Rusty, one of the thoughts that came to my mind --
this probably never happens, but one of the questions popped
up. Let's say that you have a deputy that flies out to Los
Angeles to get a prisoner, which recently you did, and
Californians may be -- you know, they don't like Texans, so
they're not going to come down to the airport and pick you
up and give you a ride over to -- to the jail to get the
guy. And so, do we pay the taxi or -- that was one of my
questions.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What we've had to do in
the past some, and it's getting harder and harder, is at one
time I used my personal credit card to go ahead and let them
get a rent-a-car, and put on it personal credit card. But
now the rent-a-car companies will not rent a car to anybody
1C-14-~3
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
if the credit card they have with them is not in their name.
But -- but -- so they put on it their personal credit card,
and then when they get back, we ask the Court, through our
Investigations Expense, to reimburse that cost. And that's
the way it's been working.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Yeah, that
one's solved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But do we need a -- I
mean, I really like this form a lot. I think it's a good --
it should assist the Auditor and the Treasurer as to what
they need, and also .it's a good follow-up, you know, just
paperwork, something for the file.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we need to
officially adopt it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's my question.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm wondering -- what
I wanted to do, though, Jon, is actually officially adopt
what she's writing down as well.
COMMI:~SIONER LETZ: Okay. So, at our next
meeting, we'll adopt this form?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Next meeting or the
next five minutes; depends on how long it takes her to get
it done. Yeah, next meeting.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I didn't want to spend
10-14-03
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
51
a lot of time on it, but it's just something that's not
cleared up, and the County Auditor was -- had some questions
about it. Ms. Treasurer, you said something about creating
a form?
MS. NEMEC: Yes, sir, unless you already have
one there. It sounds like you might have one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I think we do.
MS. NEMEC: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It will work. Looks good
to me.
MS. SOVIL: You might want to take a break.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have a -- do we have a
motion on the agenda item?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We've got about a half
a dozen items dealing with O.S.S.F.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's take a break and
come back with fresh legs.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. We'll stand in
recess, then, until 10:15.
(Recess taken from 10:03 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to
order.
MS. SOVIL: We don't have a clerk.
10-14-03
1
2
3
4
5
e
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,.-,. 2 4
25
52
JUDGE TINLEY: It's just a bit after 10:15;
we've been in recess for a few minutes. The next item on
the agenda is discuss and consider the adoption of the
current state rules and guidelines for on-site septic
facilities -- sewer facilities and set a public hearing on
the adoption of such rules and guidelines, or, in the
alternative, that the Court eliminate Section 10 from the
current Kerr County O.S.S.F. Rules presently in effect. I
put this on the agenda, I suppose as a springboard for the
O.S.S.F. total discussion that's before us. It seems like
the appropriate springboard item. Maybe it's not the
appropriate springboard item. Does anybody have anything to
offer on this item before we move on?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a comment.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I agree that -- I
hope this Court ends up adopting state rules only. But I
think that the -- we need to set up the department first,
and how we're going to do that, because part of the rules
that we have to adopt have an appeal process, and part of
that appeal process has to be how we're going to handle
appeals. And, until we have a department, we don't know. I
don't think -- we haven't crossed that bridge yet. And I
think, in concept, state rules are where I'd like to go, but
I don't know where the rest of the Court would like to go.
1G-19-05
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
But until we figure out, you know, how we're going tc handle
some of the structure, we can't fill out the -- whatever it
is, the three-page document that -- you know, the order that
we have to pass. And we can't -- and I think we need to
have that order available for us to look at, and then put it
on file immediately after the Court -- once we approve it.
So, I think we -- I think we need to postpone this till our
next meeting, but I agree totally with the concept of what
you -- what this agenda item is.
JUDGE TINLEY: What I hear ycu saying is that
it's r.ot the springboard item, but rather the clean-up item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll make a comment
on it also.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The next five items
have got to do with the organization, staffing and
budgeting, funding of a county O.S.S.F. and floodplain
program. And one thing you have to -- the kind of rules you
have and appeal process you have, principally the kind of
rules you have, have to do with the staffing requirements
and the budgeting requirements. So, on the one hand, I
agree with Commissioner Letz that it's appropriate that
we -- that we wait until we make some other determinations
before we decide on what the rules are going to be in the
10-19-03
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
appeal process. I'm going to proceed as if -- in terms of
making decisions about staff size and budget size, as if the
rules were the model state order. There wasn't -- that I'm
going to assume that eventually we'll approve the set of
rules with nothing in Section 10. That's an assumption. We
have to -- we have to do what we -- we have to follow the
process to do that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, under this -- to
kind of be a little bit firmer on this point, we could,
under this agenda item, you know, state that. And if
there's -- if there's an agreement and then we direct
somebody to prepare the actual document to put on our next
agenda, that kind of gives us a framework to work in under
the next agenda items, and also gets it on the next agenda,
so we'll have a formal document to approve and set the
public hearing with. So, I'll make a motion that the Court
proceed with adopting state rules and guidelines only,
without anything in Section 10, and that the order
proclaiming same will be on our next agenda item.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Next agenda.
JUDGE TTNLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the Court adopt the current state rules and guidelines for
on-site sewerage facilities, and that the full order
evidencing the adoption of the same be on the next agenda
10-19-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
O
10
11
12
,.~ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,.-. 2 4
25
55
item. Any further question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So -- well, yeah. I'm
a little bit confused. At this very moment, this -- this
order fixing to come out right now -- or this motion is that
we are adopting the state rules. We're eliminating Section
10, the whole deal right now?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. I think we can -- we
can't -- we don't have authority to do that, I don't think.
I think we are -- we are stating that we -- we're going to
put it on our next agenda item, or I guess we're authorizing
the preparation of the order to set it in place, state rules
only.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's how I -- that's
what my intent is with the motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Kind of like a letter of
intent in the contracting process, and we're serving notice
to that effect.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We will do that.
JUDGE TINLEY: But subject to the actual
order to be prepared and presented at the next meeting, and
any public hearing req~.iirements that may be required in
connection with it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Right, and we'll
set -- my intent would be that we will set the public
io-l~-r~
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
i7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
56
hearing at our next meeting.
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: A11 opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. I'm going
to skip Item 12, and we'll come back to that as may be
necessary, if there are any additional items that are not
included in 13, 14, 15, 16, and/or 17. Is that satisfactory
with everyone? We'll move to Item 13, consideration and
discussion of the organization, cffice location, and
staffing of the new Kerr County O.S.S.F. program.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I kind of -- Dave and I
kind of wcrked this somewhat together, somewhat apart. In
the backup, the last page in mine, it's probably best to
pull that out and kind of use that as the -- the guide.
It's Page -- and it's just kind of an overall of what we
need to -- what I -- you know, I think we need to get
through on this agenda item. And I started out saying that
Commissioner Nicholson and myself gathered this information
pursuant to the last Commissioners Court meeting, and just,
from a records standpoint, putting down who we have visited
with during that interim and helping develop the
io-l~-~~
1
--- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
57
recommendations and comments that were -- they were making
to-date.
The basic organization is that -- as we see
it, is to set up a -- or as I see it; I won't speak for
Commissioner Nicholson -- department -- to set up a
Department of Environmental Health. This department will
handle O.S.S.F. administration and Solid Waste
administration. Floodplain administration, I put a question
mark on there, and also under the other item. And these
become important when we look at staffing; I mean, how many
people you put in there, as to what this department is going
to actually be responsible for. But I think that O.S.S.F.
and floodplain -- and Solid Waste certainly fit together. I
personally think floodplain fits better in Road and Bridge
Department. And I say that because it's a -- really, it's
more involved with the platting process, very closely, and I
think it's something that the County Engineer, you know,
could review. As I understand it, under floodplain, pretty
much what we do is we look at the FEMA maps, as vague as
they are frequently, and determine if it's in the floodplain
or not and act accordingly, and I really think it's
something that could be done in another department. I don't
have any really strcng feelings. It can be done, you know,
in this new department. That's why I put a question mark
after it. Might want to stop there and kind of do them one
10-14-~3
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
..., 13
14
15
16
~~
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
58
at a time. Dave, do you have any other comments?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No, I concur with
what you said.
JUDGE TINLEY: Would it -- would it possibly
have some interplay if, in fact, this department were
located out at Road and Bridge?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think it makes
any difference. I mean, I don't think the location would
make that much difference. I mean, I think that the -- even
if they're, you know, officed -- if this new department is
officed outman the Road and Bridge building, still one
department or the other has to be responsible, and
responsible for signing off on it, and it is a County
responsibility under the FEMA rules, as I understand it.
JUDGE TINLEY: You think that falls more
under the County Engineer's auspices than under what you
anticipate staffing to be under Environmental Health?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it fits better,
just from a -- a work standpoint. I mean, the County
Er_gineer may disagree with me, but I think -- to me, I don't
see the relationship between floodplain, O.S.S.F., and solid
waste. I see a much closer relationship between floodplain
and subdivision -- or Road and Bridge Department,
specifically subdivision portion: of that department.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And I agree with
In-i~-os
,^. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-~
25
59
that, and I think the -- also bearing on the decision about
where it should be located and budget is, where it's
located, there may be some efficiencies in having all of
these functions located at the Road and Bridge building. Or
that may not be feasible; I don't know. But there's
probably some work-sharing in terms of reception, clerical
work, and thcse sort of things that could occur, and there's
probably -- if it were located there. And probably, from a
process standpoint, if -- if O.S.S.F., floodplain, and
subdivision administration is located at the same place, it
makes some sense.
JUDGE TINLEY: Functional efficiency.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Probably so. It's
not -- not a major issue, but it's an issue.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, I mean, to kind of
get everything out on the table, might as well just go
through the list, and we can -- 'cause some of these are
really -- they tie into later agenda items. Staffing. The
recommendation is from three to four. You can see we're
real specific on that one. It's hard to say how many we
need exactly. We clearly think that we need a department
head-slash-inspector. We definitely need a second
inspector. The Solid Waste inspector is currently a
part-time person. We don't recommend any changes at this
time, but that -- depending on what our current -- you know,
1 0- 1 4- 0 3
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Mr. North, who's our current person, we recommend that he
stay in his position. But I don't know how -- if he's going
to stay there forever, and at that point, I think we may
make some adjustments there. Administrative clerk,
definitely need one. And the second administrative clerk is
what we put a question mark on. And, you know, I still am
not certain how many we need, if we need a second
administrative clerk or not. And the last time I talked to
Mr. Nicholson, he wasn't certain one way or the other. We
don't want to overstaff and we don't want to understaff.
The -- the big problem on this clerking is
aerobic systems. Currently, a large portion, if not almost
all of the time of one of the clerks at U.G.R.A., is
administering the aerobic systems, monitoring it, kind of
keeping track as to who's in violation, who's not in
violation, all of that whole area. And it's a fair amount
of work, there's no question. In fact, I think it's too
much work to -- the way it's currently being done, to put
that with one administrative clerk. I don't think you can
get the work done. The question is, can we, through
technology, figure out a much better way to do that? And if
we can, then I think we may be able to get by with one
administrative clerk. If we cannot, I think we need two.
And that's just something that -- you know, that's just kind
of my feeling on it.
1 G- 1 4-~ 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1~
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
61
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Some -- some data
we've looked at suggests that -- that either aerobic systems
have been very much oversold ir. Kerr County, or there's
something very unique about Kerr County soils. For example,
I'm told that -- that we have more aerobic systems in Kerr
County than Bexar County has. That seems disproportional to
me. I also looked at one of our contiguous counties,
Gillespie -- and we've talked about this before in here --
and I see that we issue about twice as many permits as
Gillespie does. We have about twice the population, but the
administration of our O.S.S.F. programs cost four times as
much. If you use those same numbers, it ought to cost twice
as much, or it ought to cost something less than four times
as much. Probably Section 10, real estate transfer rule,
and the -- the large number of aerobic systems have
something to do with that.
JUDGE TINLEY: What about the -- the current
-- I know in years past, there were a considerably larger
number of -- a large proportion of aerobic systems. In the
last year or so, what -- what's been the proportion? My
sense is that the proportion of aerobic systems is on the
decline. Is that correct?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, from what we --
you know, in talking, yes, that is correct. The problem is,
by law, we have to monitor it, all the ones that are out
1 0- 1 4- 0 3
1
2
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
E2
there now. We have to keep track on a very regular basis,
and they -- and contracts on the maintenance, which is what
we're really talking about here, expire basically every day
of the year. And then, once they go noncompliant, we have
to have a -- you know, you have to notify them, or if they
do -- if they aren't -- well, if they're not in
noncompliance, we update the records, who's got the new
maintenance contract. If they go into noncompliance, then
we have to start sending out letters for noncompliance. It
just takes up time. And there's, you know, something over
100 or so in the county right r.ow, so it's a -- you know,
ycu're looking at, you know, three a year -- three a day or
so that need action, you know, every day of the year. And,
obviously, we don't work every day of the year, so you're
talking about, you know --
JUDGE TINLEY: Four -- four, probably.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Four or five a day are
coming -- action needs to be taken on. And then, as soon as
you have people that -- you know, that need a contract, you
have to start sendinq follow-up letters and all that stuff.
It just takes -- it does take time. P.nd we are required by
T.C.E.Q. to keep these records, so it's kind of a -- I mean,
we clearly have to do it. If we can figure gut a way to use
technology to do a whole lot more of this, or figure out a
different -- you know, something, I think we can do some
io-ig-os
63
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
savings in staffing. If we can't, I think, you know, we're
going to need -- then, in my opinion, we're going to need
more than two clerks -- more than one clerk. Maybe still
not two full clerks. mhat's why you get this where you put
other ties back up into the other organization setup as to
what you put in this department, to get the most efficient
and productive use of the number of employees that we hire.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It makes sense to me
to start out with one clerk and then add to that once we can
see some history. To me, it would be foolish to start out
with two and not need two. It would make things difficult.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think the other
thing is -- and depending on how we go as to -- on the
technology side, you know, I've been visiting with Shaun
some and figuring out how to do something. I was -- I had
the opportunity this past weekend to spend time with a
college roommate of mine who's a whole lot smarter than I
am; he's a partner in a software company in Austin, and I
felt like one of the stupidest people on earth after that
weekend. He was talking about all this new technology and
stuff, and I was clueless. And after talking to him, I have
a whole lot of questions for Shaun, because I think we can
eliminate -- I mean, like, on desk computers, I don't see
any reason for them. So much more of the technology now,
things -- the way things are being done, and I'm sure
~~-~.-U3
54
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Shaun's aware of it, but I just wasn't until this weekend.
So, I think there are some things that we can really do to
the technclogy side that may improve the productivity of the
department.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I agree, and I think
through cross-training and through creating an organization
that works like a team rather than a hierarchy organization,
using technology, I think we can get by with one fewer
person. And I'm absolutely certain that if we start out
with four, we won't get back to three.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that's --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If we start off with
three, we may find that we can't do as much as we thought
with technology and cross-training, but we can always add to
it easier than we can --
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, that's my concern. I'd
rather start small and see the need to get larger, rather
than start larger and then try and figure out how you -- how
you downsize, 'cause that's a difficult proposition. I'm
sure all of you gentlemen are aware of that, the aspect of
utilizing another person to perform some of these clerical
functions that's been mentioned. Tell me where we are
there.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I haven't talked to
Franklin or Len Odom specifically about this, but if this
10-19-03
65
1
,--~ 2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
function -- O.S.S.F. and Solid Waste and floodplain were
located in the Road and Bridge building, then I think
there's a possibility that the -- that the receptionist/
clerk there could assist with some of the duties that are
now being handled by the people in O.S.S.F. And, again, I
don't have any solid reason to believe that. It just occurs
to me that when you get the two things there located
together, that there's some synergy that occurs, and perhaps
some savings.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- you know, and
I -- what you're saying, I think, is true. But the other
side of that is, you have two department heads then with one
employee, and you end up with, who does the receptionist
work for, Road and Bridge or Environmental Health? And it
just it puts employees in a difficult situation, unless
we're gcing tc come in and, you know, kind of get a little
bit more involved in how that structure's going to work out
there than we have customarily been. The other option could
be -- we have a lot of other -- you know, I mean, I guess
county departments that slowly are growing over time, and if
we put the O.S.S.F. downstairs, you know, the annex on this
side, we have -- you know, you have Maintenance, you have
Collections, you have County Treasurer office is down there.
You have a bunch of offices downstairs, and maybe there's a
way to get some kind of -- you know, some way to help
.0-14-D3
66
1
-- 2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
overall in all those departments, a receptionist-type person
to help direct people and do filing/typing, something like
that may be a way to -- I don't know. I'm not sure. I see
Glenn sitting here, you '.snow. How much time is needed, you
know, if that would be a help or a hindrance to have an area
receptionist down there to kind of work. So, I mean,
there's a bunch of different options. I think we have a
great opportunity to kind of think about a little bit and
figure out the best way to do it. The unfortunate thing is,
we don't have the luxury of a whole lot of time. We do need
to get going on making some decisions today. Where they're
located, I think, probably has to almost be made, at least
from a startup standpoint, because Maintenance needs to --
or we need to start setting up phone lines and doing any
kind of changes we need pretty quickly.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Jon, just let me say
this. I see more problems with them being at Road and
Bridge than I do benefits. To me, I would make the cut
right there, and let's don't worry about getting into whose
office space is what and taking the sign-making room and all
that stuff that goes along with it. Just make a clean cut
right now and, I mean, start out with a new office and get
it over with.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I -- I see both
sides, and I have no problem --

67
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do too.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- I have no problem with
that approach either. We do have a lot of space downstairs
that, with a little bit of time -- and, obviously -- and,
unfortunately, money, which we're short of, you know, some
things can be done. And I really think there's almost a
need for a reception person to help deal with a lot of these
departments; maybe just answer phones, do some things.
JUDGE TINLEY: Wasn't -- wasn't the O.S.S.F.
function previously handled out of that same Road and Bridge
building?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: At a prior time?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, it was.
JUDGE TINLEY: And there was some space
specifically allocated for that at the time that that was
done?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: What -- what utilization is
being made of that space right now?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not sure. Frank may
23 I know.
24
25
MR. JOHNSTON: Well, I think the Court
authorized us to -- to move into that space. Before that,

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
the signs were made by a separate person in a separate
building, and since we -- Truby actually makes the -- Truby
and Barbara make the signs now. They do dual -- dual
purpose. The signs are in that -- sign room is in that
part. It was Environmental Health. And we also have a crew
space that we really didn't have before, that they have
lockers and they have, you know, a place to do their
paperwork, daily reports. And that's in the balance of that
-- that area that -- before they just did it sitting around
the reception area. Now they have a place that they can
actually go and have a desk and write their paperwork. So,
that's what we're using it for.
COMMISSIONER BP.LDWIN: In the beginning, I
think when you put the Environmental office out there, I
think that it was a two-man department, a secretary and a --
and so if you're talking about possibly -- you know, you're
talking about space out there, I'm not against it. I'm just
telling you that I -- I think there's more hurdles than we
want to jump by doing it that way. But the space issue out
there, if you car_ -- if you -- the possibility of going to
four, you're running out of room pretty quick.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, you've got more space
out there, based upon the different options that I've looked
at here. You've get 1,000 square feet out there.
i~-i4-~~
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 BALDWIN: Do you think that it
needs to be out there? If you do, say that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it is --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's move on.
JUDGE TINLEY: It appears to me that that's
what the space was originally designed for.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It was. I'm telling
-- I was here. I can te11 you that it was.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It was.
JUDGE TINLEY: You've got --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If we want to put it
out there, let's more forward and put it out there.
JUDGE TINLEY: You've got one area downstairs
of a little over 800, 816 according to this calculation, and
the other area that would require to be finished out is 770.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the issue,
though, is if you take the Road and Bridge, you got to do
something with Road and Bridge; you can't just take the
space and what they're using it for and not give them
someplace to do that work. I mean, that's -- you know,
it's -- yes, it's 1,000 square feet in that old area, but
what are you going to do with what they have? Just take it
away, not give them work space or lockers or sign machine?
I mean, that's the -- you know, it's -- so, I mean, there's
10-14-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2~
25
70
something less than 1,000 potential that's available, in my
mind, out there. I don't know if it's 700 or 500 or --
JUDGE TINLEY: I haven't -- I haven't been
out to the space. I'd -- you know, other than what
Franklin's reported here this morning -- Glenn, you made the
sketches for the benefit of the Court? You just went out
and measured, rather than checked utilization? Or --
MR. HOLEKAMP: No, I took the numbers off of
the origir_al plans. Originally when the building was built,
there was 1,000 square foot that said "future space" when it
was originally built, and then that was closed in for
Environmental Health, that 1,000 square foot. That's the
numbers I used.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Where it's located,
from my point of view, is on.e of the least important
decisions we're going to make. I see some advantages to
being out there, the process advantages and maybe
work-sharing advantages. But more important is how we staff
it, what kind of environment we create, technological
improvements we need to get. So, I'm completely open-minded
on where we locate.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See, I see the appeal
process as the most important issue. And -- I really do.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I hear you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think my choice
10-19-03
71
1
._.. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-- my preference would be what Commissioner -- basically
what. Commissioner Baldwin said, is that it's easier to put
it downstairs. Now, easy may not be the best, but I think
it's easier to put it downstairs. And I think that their --
I think -- 'cause if you do put it out at Road and Bridge,
then we have to address what we're going to do with the
utilization that they're using of that space now, and you
can't just, I don't think, eliminate it and just say, "Well,
you didn't used to use it, so you're not going to use it
now." By that logic, you know, we -- that kind of undoes
all that we've done for trying to make space better for our
employees.
JUDGE TINLEY: 6de11, if it's being utilized,
obviously, that's a concern, and that function needs to --
either provision needs to be made to relocate it, or it
needs to continue to utilize that space and we'll go
somewhere else. Tommy, you had a question or concern?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, it's just a comment;
that this department is -- will be a revenue collection
paint, and because of that, it would simplify that prccess
by it being in the courthouse. I mean, if we -- we
currently have on our accounting system a module that's
called -- for revenue collection. And, you know, it's
likely that we could utilize that module for the collections
of -- of revenue from that source. If -- if it's -- if it
io-19-n~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
72
is at Road and Bridge, I mean, it's not impossible for us to
do that, but it's more -- much more expensive. You know, we
would have to -- we would have to purchase some
communications equipment between, you know, Road and Bridge
and the courthouse to accomplish that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy, ~n the technology
area, is there any advantage -- I mean, 'cause we're not
sure exactly what software we're going to be using. I think
Shaun's looked to see if The Software Group even has
something that we can tie onto or some new software I think
he's looking at. Is there an advantage to being in the
courthouse or in Road and Bridge from a technology
standpoint? Hookup and just --
MR.. TOMLINSON: Well, if we utilize -- if we
utilize the mainframe, then there's definitely an advantage
to being here in the courthouse. I know that I just -- you
know, a dial-up modem for one user from there to the
courthouse is around $1,300, plus the cost of the line, and
that only allows for one person to use it at a time. If you
go to a multi-user communication, then -- then we're really
talking about high dollars.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Those two issues,
revenue collection and the technology connection issues, tip
it in favor of the courthouse for me.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Back on the
10-14-03
-- 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
staffing a little bit, what Dave and I did, we got -- or
received or got copies of the job descriptions for all of
the employees at Road -- at U.G.R.A., and also we
downloaded -- Thea downloaded for us some of the state-type
job descriptions that are similar. Then we gave all that to
Barbara and said, "Here, Barbara, create some job
descriptions for us." is -- do we have those, Barbara?
Were you able to make heads or tails out of what we gave
yo,a?
MS. NEMEC: Well, I compared both of them,
and I just really wasn't sure that everything that was in
either one of them was really going to work for Kerr County.
So, I really need to go over them, like who they report to
and stuff like that. I just didn't want to take it upon
myself to put -- I mean, there's just a lot that's going
to -- they're going to be different. So, I did get Shaun to
install some software for me Friday to where I can just go
in there and do them up real quick. But, no, I don't have
them now.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How long will it take, do
you think, to get something -- I guess what the reason is, I
mean, Z think in the -- on the staffing issue, which is one
of the more important, iil my mind -- and I just preface this
by saying, based on my conversations with Greg Etter, they
would like to -- "they" being U.G.R.A. -- would like to hand
10-19-03
74
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
.~.. 13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
„~,, 2 4
25
this off to the Coun~y as soon as possible. I think they --
actually, the deadline was the 18th of this month. I've
talked to him about the 1st of November as being the date
that makes sense to me, that I thought would work within the
Commissioners Court schedule and meetings and things of that
nature, and a certain amount of, you know, what we need to
get done. So, I was hoping to get, today, or maybe we can
do it -- if Barbara can get it done by tomorrow, we could
recess on some of these items -- on this particular item
till tomorrow, and approve the job descriptions, so then we
can advertise for these positions. All of the personnel at
U.G.R.A. have expressed interest to Dave and I, they would
like to come work for the Ceunty. And I think our comment
to them has been that, you know, they're certainly -- we
would, you know, hope they apply, but it will be -- these
jobs are open to the public.
MS. NEMEC: I can have it by the morning.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think we can
probably qet far enough along to give you the direction you
need as to what we reed. Does that make -- does that work
with the Court? Trying to --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This has to do with
a deadline we need to place on ourselves about when we
advertise these jobs?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, because we need to
l0-~4-0?
75
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
.r-. 2 4
25
approve the pcsitions and approve the advertising for the
positions. And I think -- I don't think we can do that
unless we have the actual job descriptions and know the
budget implications of those positions. We have talked --
Dave and I have talked a little abut it, and kind of -- our
recommendation was that an administrative clerk, if there is
just one, would be a -- a Step 17, and an inspector would be
a Step 19, and then the department head would be an at-will
employee. That's just -- that's -- and to come up with
those items, it's kind of looking at current salary levels
that are being paid, and -- and locking -- looking at that
on one side, also looking at responsibilities and how it
fits in with the other similar employees. Because -- well,
that's just how we kind of saw it. But it's really --
it's -- certainly, Barbara has a lot more experience on
setting those job descriptions, and the job descriptions
dictate the step and the grade -- or the step, anyway. So,
to get, you know, to this, I guess we ought to -- we need
to --
MS. SOVIL: Need to name your staff.
COMMISSIONER LFTZ: I was going to make a
motion -- well, how did we do these agenda items? I would
make a motion that we initially staff this position with a
department head/inspector, an O.S.S.F. inspector, and one
administrative clerk. The Solid Waste inspector is already
10-19-G3
.6
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
~..., 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2~
21
22
23
24
25
on staff.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I second the motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the Environmental Health Department be staffed by a
department head-slash-inspector, an O.S.S.F, inspector, and
administrative clerk, all three of those being new
positions, and including the Solid Waste inspector, who is a
present position, part-time. Does that correctly state your
motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. And authorize the
County Treasurer to create these jobs -- such job
descriptions.
JUDGE TINLEY: And authorize the County
Attorney (sic) to create the new ob descriptions.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Treasurer.
JUDGE TINLEY: Excuse me.
MS. NEMEC: He can do it if he wants to.
JUDGE TINLEY: County Treasurer. You don't
want to do that, do you, Motley?
MR. MOTLEY: Wi11 she give me the keys to the
safe? (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: I see. Any further question
or discussion? All ir. favor of the motion, signify by
raising your right hand.
(The motion. carried by unanimous vote.)
10-14-03
~~
1
,-,. 2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,--
25
JUDGE TINLEY: A11 opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: As to location, I think
we need to clear this up and give -- at least give
Maintenance a direction. There are two locations
downstairs. One is some existing office space in this
building, and second is some unused, unfinished space in the
basement of the annex. The, I guess, original estimate from
a cost standpoint of the annex was about $10,000?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Ten -- 10 to 12.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: $10,000 to $12,000 to
finish out that space. And I guess the cost for the
downstairs space is -- is none; it's ready to use. But it's
about whether the configuration works, as well. That's the
issue there. And there may be a way to move some of the
other offices around to make more of a suite for this new
department. I think they -- I mean, there certainly is a --
it needs to be a cohes~ve unit. You don't want one person
here, one person down there. I mean, it needs to be a --
they need to be next to each other, the whole department.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I much favor
building out the -- the space in the annex, for -- for a
number of reasons. I think the -- the other space, the old
space down here, is inadequate for this purpose. I think if
1 ~ - 1 4 - .. ~
1
--. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
78
you were going to make it an area where a work team can
perform this work, that you'd have to take some walls out
and do some things different. So, I'm going to support
building out the new space in the annex. Second issue
there -- I'm sorry. This -- this space that currently
exists is -- while it may be accessible, it's undesirable in
terms of the traffic coming in and out of the -- our
customers for permitting and -- and O.S.S.F. administration.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think there -- there is
a plus to making more utilization of that far-end wall. It
gives -- makes it fairly easy to find the O.S.S.F., and with
some signage down there, I think this new department can be
found pretty easily by the pub lic. We may have to look at
the parking plan a little bit -- one of our favorite
topics -- to make sure that there are some reserved spaces
for customers near that door downstairs, or one of the two
doors downstairs. And there may be enough already; I
haven't really done a check down there on that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You could take eight
or ten of the Sheriff's parking places. That should be
plenty. He's got a dozen or so down there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, that will work.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you remember, when
we -- when we built out the -- that was a joke, Rusty. We
built out the Probation offices, Glenn performed some
1n-19-0;
79
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,~, 2 4
25
miracles down there and he used prisoners -- some prisoners
to do that. We have an excellent facility, nice-looking
facility, and very cheap. I don't know if that's what you
had on your mind or not.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir. That's without
labor, those numbers that I gave.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's without labor?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir. There's a few trade
items that could not be done, but the rest can.
COMMISSIOI~?ER BALDWIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion that we
designate the unused portion of the basement of the annex
for the new Environmental Health Department.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the space that's currently not finished out be finished out
for utilization for the new Environmental Health Department,
that being the space immediately adjacent to the Treasurer,
the same side of the hall, which -- but at the very end of
the hall. Glenn?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Correct me if I'm wrong. I
heard earlier that -- r~ossibly November 1st?
MR. DAMS: 2004.
MR. HOLEKAMP: In the interim, what would be
done?
io-i4-c_
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
80
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If -- we haven't talked;
we don't have an alternative plan. My idea would be that we
may shift the responsibility and see if U.G.R.A. will allow
them to stay where -- you know, or use that space if we're
using some of those employees, cr maybe use the other space
downstairs in the interim.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know, I -- I
acknowledge that we have to do something there, and we don't
have a definite plan.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The General Manager
of the U.G.R.A. and the president of the board have both
assured us that they're going to help us make a smooth
transition and that nothing will drop through the cracks.
You know, I have every confidence that they'll work with us
on this.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We may have to delay the
date for, you know, two weeks or something.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just one other
observation on this motion about the space. Gve probably
have some 15 to 17 file cabinets that -- that contain
administrative materials and files. There's a possibility
that some of those will be located across the hall from
where the office space is, if that's administratively
feasible in terms of work process.
~G-~q-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
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why are you looking at
me?
JUDGE TINLEY: Make sure you're still there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would -- hopefully
that wouldn't have to happen, 'cause I see that across the
hall as a -- as really more of a storage area, that even --
ycu know, we're talking about these offices downstairs, a
little suite downstairs. Two of those offices are full of
storage-type stuff that really needs to be moved down there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWI
we've all kind of designated that
building as storage; we've already
screen wires and all that, and I'd
there. But if -- if it has to be,
V: Like, right now. And
-- that area of the
started the storage,
like to see that continue
it has to be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we can certainly
try to configure the space. I think we'll have -- actually,
there'll be another discussion at the end as to how we get
from that broad motion: -- or this broad motion to coming up
with a floor plan, or work with Glenn on, you know, some
other issues.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Gcd, what motion? Is
there really a motion?
~0-14-U3
1
..~. 2
3
4
F
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
82
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm sorry.
JUDGE TINLEY: See, that's why I checked to
see if you're still there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I appreciate it.
Appreciate it.
JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
the motion was?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Anybody remember what
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Space in the annex.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Space, okay.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: I think the remaining portion
of 13 ties ir. with 14 insofar as the organization.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Would that not be correct?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item is consideration and
discussion of the administration of the Kerr County
Floodplain Program.
10-14-~3
83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.~-,
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's just a matter of --
one, I think we need to pass an order for notifying the
Upper Guadalupe River Authority that we are taking
floodplain from their -- that's the first motion. I will
make a motion that we -- that Kerr County administer the
Kerr County Floodplain Program.
JUDGE TINLEY: And serve notice to that
effect on U.G.R.A.?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
this Ccurt resume administration of the Floodplain Program
and notify U.G.R.A. to that effect. Any further question or
discussion of the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Got a question. Are
you going to have the Judge write them an official letter or
let them read it in the newspaper or what? How are they
going to be notified?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would recommend that we
add to the order that the County Judge write a letter and
put a copy of the order -- or just write a letter.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion? All in favor of the mction, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
_0-14-G3
84
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
15
16
17
18
~9
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the second part of
that is where to put it in the County's organization. And,
you know, I think it fits in Road and Bridge. I don't know
what Road and Bridge thinks. I think we really need to talk
with them a little bit, at least get some input, but I think
that's ~he correct -- where it needs to go. And I see
Stuart's here; he's the current administrator of that
program. How -- how often does something come in -- I mean,
how -- is it, like, a daily occurrence?
MR. BARRON: Three or four times a week,
they'll come in, and then usually once a day you'll have a
call, something like that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think the -- I
mean, two options in my mind are to put it in the new
department or put it at Road and Bridge. And I think we can
put notice that we're going to take it back, and then I
think we need to discuss with Road and Bridge officially as
to -- you know, as to how it's going to work best.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The September '03
activity report from li.G.R.A. shows floodplain
determinations, year-to-date, 17. I think there are
probably multiple contacts with the administrator for each
10-19-03
85
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
determination, but it doesn't appear to be a whole lot of
work, a lot of time consumed on it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It seems to me that
the floodplain program, what would apply to it more would
be, are you going to allow a septic system to be in a
certain area? Is that area -- sit down, Zeke, I'm looking
at somebody. (Laughter.)
MR. McCORMACK: Sorry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you going to let a
septic system be put in a floodplain? Is this floodplain
area -- when they come in and apply for a septic system, is
it in the floodplain area? Seems like that that's the
important part of the floodplain program.
MR. BARRON: The actual floodplain program --
I guess I can tell you who I am. Stuart Barron. The actual
floodplain program is more concerned with building
structures in the floodplain than any septic systems.
They're more worried about life and limb than contaminating
flood waters.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And what I'm
getting at, would it -- would it fit better with the
O.S.S.F. program? Or would it fit better with Road and
Bridge?
MR. BARRON: Depending on who's reviewing the
applications. You do have a County Engineer; he is more
1G-14-03
86
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
qualified to review hydraulic studies than your average
layman. He would be able to see if it's a -- if it's
legitimate. That does take an engineer to perform that --
that review, or somebody with that background.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Franklin, you got
any views on it?
MR. JOHNSTON: Not -- it really doesn't
matter. I think, across the state, I think a lot of County
Engineers' offices do floodplain, so I think it's a
legitimate thing that cculd be done. It would just be a
matter of training to become certified in it. I think
that's what Stuart d~d when he started off.
MR. BAR.R_ON: Yes, sir.
MR. JOHNSTON: I think FEMA has some courses;
just have to take that and just go from there, get the
proper, you know, documentation that they have. So, it
doesn't really matter, I don't think, to me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you ask the County
Engineer to do it, you certainly have to compensate him for
it.
COMMTSSIONER LETZ: No.
you would.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, bingo. I think
24 MR. JOHNSTON: Probably more time or
25 something. We'd have to talk about it. If you're talking
10-19-03
87
1 about --
2
3 my opini
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~_ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm just giving them
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, I don't
disagree with that. The other option is, what do we do with
the Ccunty Surveyor? He's ver~° qualified at looking at this
data; we could contract with the County Surveyor. If the
County Surveyor is even -- you know, I have no idea if
that's even a viable option, but it's -- you know, there is
another position there of someone who is currently very
qualified to lcok at that data, seems to me. But I just --
I still think it fits better at Road and Bridge. As to
compensation involved, I mean, indirectly, you're going to
compensate no matter where you put the position.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And that's probably
a minor point. The reception function and scheduling,
coordinating might be able to be absorbed by the Road and
Bridge clerk there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do we have a motion?
COMI~4ISSIONER LETZ: Not yet.
JUDGE TINLEY: I haven't heard one.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll make that
motion, that we -- let's see. We've made a motion -- we've
already approved the motion to take it back, so I'm going to
1 ~i- 14 - 0 3
88
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
~6
17
18
19
20
21
22
2~
24
25
make a motion that we lccate the floodplain administration
with the Road and Bridge Department.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and
seconded that the floodplain administration occur as a
function at tree Road and Bridge Department. Any further
question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to vote with
you, because possibly -- I just don't think you've done
enough research on this one, but I'm going to go with you
anyway.
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: Ail opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And in response to
Commissicner Baldwin's statement, you know, if we need to
revisit that, we can revisit it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Living document.
JUDGE TINLEY: Item 15, consideration and
discussion of authorizing approving new positions and job
descriptions. The sense that I got a moment ago is we're
10-14-~
89
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
going to held that open for the present time until we have
the proposed job descriptions in front of us for discussion.
Is that --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that tomorrow
morning? That's the last I heard.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that hasn't been
established yet. It may be tomorrow afternoon, depending on
what time we quit here. But -- but that's something that my
sense is that we're going to hold open for right now, and
we'll reschedule that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: End of
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I
if the Treasurer is available, I mean, we
tomorrow morning's ideal, from my standpo
MS. NEMEC: I'll work late
get it done.
the meeting today.
mean, I would --
can do it --
int.
if I have to, to
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are we coming back in
the morning?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think so.
JUDGE TINLEY: Probably.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: It'll be late morning, if so.
I've got cases to hear in the morning; hopefully be through
about 11:00 or so. Next, Item 16, consider and discuss
l~-l~-n3
90
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2C
21
22
23
24
25
approving a budget for the new Kerr Cour:ty O.S.S.F. program
and approve budget amendments with respect to the same.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You have there in
your material a draft proposed 2003/2004 budget for the
Environmental Health Department, and these data were put
together locking at historical data from Kerr County, what
it costs for Kerr County to administer the program, and the
data -- that historical data up until -- to-date that it
costs the U.G.R.P.. And what you see there is a budget that
fits this scheme that was earlier approved -- staffing
scheme -- of a department manager-slash-inspector, an
inspector, a part-time solid waste inspector, and one
clerical person. The total amount -- total annual operating
expense is $130,000 for -- for that size budget for that
size staffing. When you -- then, from that $130,000, I've
subtracted the current Environmental Health budget, which is
Solid ~~'aste, of 15.8 thousand. I've subtracted the current
budget amount for Kerr County's share of O.S.S.F./floodplain
administration, $64,000, and I've subtracted the projected
fee revenue. This fee revenue assumed that there would be
no rules that are stricter than the state requires in
Section 10, and that's $77,000 a year in projected fee
revenue, which totals to a net operating expense savings of
$27,810. What that means is that -- that with this budget,
we would be able to operate the O.S.S.F./ Floodplain
-0-14-03
91
1
2
3
a
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
administration functions for some $28,000 a year less than
it would have cost had we not operated it. And I've
included startup costs. I estimated build-out of office
space of $13,500. It may come in less than that; it might
be $10,000 to 12,000. I roughly estimate the purchase of
vehicles from the U.G.R.A. at $10,000, and the purchase of
office and computer equipment of $6,500, and the total
startup costs would be $30,000. The net impact on our
2003/2004 budget wound be a minus $2,190.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the other thing
that Commissioner Nicholson didn't mention -- he spent more
time on this page than I did, but he also looked at --
Commissioner Williams previously did a -- a report and
compared other county -- I mean, a much bigger-scale report,
and I think this is basically in line with a lot of his
numbers as well.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I think it's -- it's
as good a going-in budget as I think we can come up with,
and I think that with the -- you know, where it is, we just
basically transfer that $64,000 into this budget. And --
well, I guess, on the revenue, I mean, how -- does the
revenue, Tommy, go intc the general fund? Or can we -- or
does it go into this --
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, it -- there are two
10-19-G3
92
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
options. Currently, the revenues for Solid Waste go into an
account for that purpose in the General Fund. We can do the
same thing with these revenues. I mean, we can -- can
define whatever revenues we want to define in the General
Fund revenue, or we can establish a separate fund for -- for
this program, either one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there any benefit
or -- or detriment to doing it one way or the other?
MR. TOMLINSON: No. All of the -- all those
numbers are going to come together in the same category when
-- once we do our financial statements. Under GASB-34, the
statement of activities consolidates programs that have to
do with environmental programs, so whatever -- whatever --
whatever program you nave that fits that category will
consolidate into that anyway. So, wherever we put it in the
County system really doesn't matter, as far as the final
outcome.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: If -- if -- you know, if you
want -- if you want to -- if it's not self-supporting and --
and we use tax revenues to offset. the balance -- the cost of
the program, then it could be that you want to show on our
budget that there is a specific tax revenue to support that
program. If you -- if you just -- if you form a department
like we have now for -- for Solid Waste, then you don't have
~o-iq-n3
93
1
^- 2
3
4
G
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that -- that definition. It's immaterial to me. I mean,
it's essentially -- we'll account for it essentially the
same way.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: In my opinion, I don't
see the need to set up a separate tax rate for this purpose,
but I do like the idea of being able to track very closely
and see hcw close we are to a pay-as-you-go department. So,
you know, whichever.
MR. TCMLINSON: We can set up revenue line
items in the General Fund, non-tax revenue, you know,
specifically for that purpose, and we can have as many
revenue line items as we wish to.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: And dedicate those revenues
back to the expense -- operating expenses of this
department?
MR. TOMLINSON: No, that would not happen.
If -- if it goes -- if those revenues get receipted into the
General Fund, non-tax revenue, it's just one -- one large
amount of funds for maintenance and operation.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that makes a difference
whether or r.ot we approve a budget on the basis of a 21 --
$2,200 deficit or whether or not we increase that by an
estimated $78,000 or $77,000.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, there's provision in
10-'4-03
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
the Government Code that allows you to increase the budget
by -- by revenues or future revenues that you don't
anticipate when the budget's finalized, so -- so when those
revenues come in -- excuse me -- we could increase the
budget by the anticipated amount nn the revenues that we're
going to receive. So -- and I'm thinking that -- that the
increase in the budget will be the sum of that, of -- of the
estimated revenues plus the $64,000 that's already there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It seems to me that, I
mean, we probably have enough -- we're very close to having
enough money budgeted for these items already, and I'd
rather -- rather than increasir_g the budget, I'd just rather
move the current money that we have on around, and then if
we end up with a -- in other words, take the $64,000
currently budgeted to go to U.G.R.A., put that -- use that
as the basis for most of this new budget.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: $2,000 on a $130,000
budget is -- could be $5,000 or could be $10,000 the other
way. So -- so, it's essentially zero.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: i think, sometime during
the year, we may have to do a budget amendment, increase the
budget, but we may not. We just don't know. And we're -- I
think we're pretty close -- if our projections are accurate,
we're close -- real close one way or the other.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: As a general
,~ - 1 4 - „ ?
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
principle, I see this as being an example of where we ought
to apply a principle of user-pay. I could make an argument
that all taxpayers ought to have to pay for a function that
protects the environment, but I think there's a better
argument that people who own or build septic systems ought
to be the cnes paying for it. And it would take -- that's
not something we can do now. I think we ought to consider
it at our next -- next budget deliberations. It would take
something on the order of a 20 or 25 percent increase in
fees to make this a fee-based administration.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do I hear a motion that the
$64,000 for environmental services -- contract services
that's in another budget account be transferred into the
Environmental Health budget, and that that sum, together
with antic -- that budget be increased by the $64,000 plus
the $?7,OOU-dollar projected fee revenue? Do I hear a
motion to that effect:
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I make that motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: Any questions yr discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. You're just
talking about dealing with the transfer of the money that's
10-19-03
96
1
--- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
...... 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
already in the budget right now? You're not talking about
adopting this budget on this page right here?
JUDGE TINLEY: Not specifically, no.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I mean, the
motion has to be specific. Are you talking about just
transferring the money that's already in the budget into
this department? That's -- that's what the order is.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. That's what the motion
is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The only increase would
be the -- or if he's increasing the budget by the revenue
side of $77,000, that's not in the current budget.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I had some
questions about these numbers -- Number 4 that you've --
those salary numbers. Are those present numbers? Is that
the salaries that they're presently making? Or --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, that's
an estimate of where these jobs would fit in our salary
schedule.
COT~~MISSIONER BALDWIN: So we're not adopting
an estimate today, are we?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Nc.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And an issue we need
to deal with there -- I think it's, perhaps, a detail -- is
1G 14-G3
97
1
,"' 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
--- ~ 3
1
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
whether or not we need a step increase schedule placement to
people who have experience. But I think we can deal with
that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that's what she's
going to do with us tomorrow. We'll see real numbers to
plug in. Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can't until we --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- until we almost
determine the people, as well, and if they're going to get
any additional grade increases for experience. We really
can't do a final budget. But I think we could direct --
give Tommy this and let him come up with a preliminary
budget so we can start having something to look at.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussions en 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. I gather
from the comments made towards the end of that discussion
that we don't want to move forward with any specific budget
items, but rather wait until we have the personnel issues a
io-l~-~~
98
1
2
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
little bit more refined? Would that be correct, gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be correct for me. I
won't vote for something that we don't know what it is.
JUDGE TIPILEY: Okay. We'11 move on to Item
1.17, consider and discuss authorizing the Kerr County
O.S.S.F. committee to negotiate acquisition of certain
property to facilitate the setting up of the new O.S.S.F.
program and department.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded
that -- to approve the agenda item. Any further question or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would like some
limitations put on it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You are the committee.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Two on the committee.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two on committee. The
idea was that the computers -- you know, basically the
things that were listed in Dave's projected budget; the
office equipment, the vehicles, computers, that type of
stuff. And also to get with, I guess -- I guess Maintenance
actually has authority, once we give him a budget, to expend
those funds for that -- you know, to start the renovation.
1o-19-n~.
99
1
-~ 2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
But that's what it is, you know, the kind of -- those are
the numbers that were basically used in the budget presented
to Commissioner Nicholson. I think he's ready to vote.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have one more comment.
On the vehicles, the two vehicles that they currently have
are a '99 and a 2000 Jeep Cherokee, and our recommendation
would be that we buy those vehicles from U.G.R.A. We don't
knew the exact amount, but it appears it's about $5,000
apiece, the value those vehicles would be worth.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion? A11 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 carried. Do we need to
come back under any O.S.S.F. items under Item 12?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think so. I
think we pretty much have it set. I think she -- but I
think we may want -- you know, we may want to leave that
open for when we come back to visit the --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, we can do that. Item
18, consider and discuss approval of the 14th amendment and
In-i~-o~
100
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
extensicn of the City/County Firefighting Agreement, and
authorize County Judge to sign the same.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, the only -- the
only change here in the amendment itself is in the numbers,
from the $100,000 to $125,000.
JUDGE TINLEY: Per vear. That's cc~rrar-t
That's my understanding.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the agenda item be approved. Any further question or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a question, and it
goes to a comment that I had related to this contract from
someone in the community, as to what we actually get for
that $125,000, and it's -- the issue was that it was a --
you know, my thought was that there's an area of
responsibility, a map that is attached to the contract, and
the Kerrville Fire Department's responsible for that area.
Well, what I was told was that they thought the
interpretation was that, in that area, Kerrv~lle was
required to send one and only one truck, and then the other
volunteer fire departments had to send trucks in for the
second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's basically it.
to-l~-n~
101
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- I mean, but
there's a big difference between that, 'cause I think there
was a situation not long ago when maybe a -- there was a
fire, I believe in your precinct, where only one truck went.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think that's what
they send, one pumper.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, one pumper. But
that's -- you know, that's really -- I mean, then that's a
little different than I thought in my mind. Maybe we've
talked about this. I mean, I thought they were giving us
fire coverage, and they're really not. They're sending one
pumper until -- and then waiting for Turtle Creek, Center
Point, Comfort, Hunt, someone else to get there with more.
So, I mean, the -- you know, we talk a lot about the
response time, that it's, you know, seven minutes to get to
Nimitz, or whatever it was -- five minutes. Well, it's to
get to that area with one truck. Doesn't mean they're going
to really, you know, substantially help with the fire.
JUDGE TINLEY: Are you suggesting that maybe
we should defer approval until we get clarification on that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know that we need
-- I think I'm bringing it up more not to defer approval;
it's just something that we need to look at. I think we're
probably too far glory tc -- to nct approve this contract,
whatever it says, but I think it's something we really need
io-~~-o~
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
to look at, and as the City continues to increase the amount
that we're paying, I really think that the service needs to
be looked at. I think if the service is like -- you know,
like I was told it i:~, I have a little bit of a problem with
that. I can see that there -- there may be a limitation. to
the amount of resources the City puts into a call, but I
don't think that one pumper, in my mind, is enough.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I agree. And I
think we've all kind of said that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Between now and the
next budget period, and early -- early in the next budget
period, I think we need input from the City and from the
Kerrville Area Rural Firefighters Association, and our own
intelligence about it, and take a hard look at how we
provide fire protection.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. However, I
saw -- I saw it in action last week, across from Nimitz
School, that mobile home park down there. I just happened
to be in the area when it happened, and went down there and
watched this thing unfold. The City got there first, and
because there's no fire department in the Kerrville South
area, they got there first and attacked the fire, and
therefore -- there's no fire hydrants down in there. There
is on Ranchero Road. So, what. happened is Turtle Creek got
in and Center Point came up and put their trucks -- filled

103
1
^ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.-. 13
14
15
~6
17
18
19
20
21
22
up from the fire hydrant up on Ranchero Road by the school
and just shuttled it down there, and kept feeding the city
truck that was -- you know, that actually pumps 1,500,
1,700 gallons of water per minute, kind of thing, and the
City guys stayed there and did all the -- did all the
mop-up, all the inspections and -- you know, we got our
money's worth there. But I don't see that very often. But
I was -- I was real :impressed with -- I mean, they didn't go
down there and knock the fire down and then leave and turn
it over tc somebody. It wasn't that at a11. Very, very
professionally done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good.
23		we	--	
,^ 2 4				
25				
	l U-	1 4	-!~ 3
MS. SOVIL: You already have a motion.
MS. PIEPER: You already have, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's a real good
example of how the two work together.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Probably neither one
of them, by their-self, could have been successful.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's exactly right.
Because of lack of water, more than anything.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move -- I move that
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 y
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
104
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've already done
that. I tell you, this is good medication for this head
cold. Good medication.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any -- any further question 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.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Ms. Clerk.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consideration and
discussion of the rescission of Commissioners Court Order
Number 17103 dated February 9, 1987, relating to the status
of the Kerrville/Kerr County Joint Airport Board. That
item, if you'll recall, deals with the status of whether or
not that board is or is not an advisory board. Our latest
information from the County Attorney is that, while he
thinks it's -- based upon the legal status of that board, he
thinks it's not necessarily required that we rescind that
order, but it would be advisable.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- certainly, I think
we need to do it, but I think we need to get on a fast track
as to how we're going to operate out there. You know, it's
one -- and if we're going to take proactive -- I guess, a
io-l~-o~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
l~
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
105
proactive motion to cancel that, that means that as of -- in
my mind, as of the minute we vote and cancel it, that that
board has all the authority, which is in conflict to the
City's current operation and their interpretation, as I
understand it. So, you know, I think, all of a sudden, that
we are -- I don't ha~,~e a problem with doing it. I'm just
saying, all of a sudder_, we're putting any operation at the
airport, any decision made out there, in limbo, in my mind,
as to how it's going to be handled, because we're saying
it's the Airport Board. And the City, I presume, says the
City, so --
MS. BAILEY: No, I think -- can I comment on
that?
I don't mean the City,
MS. Bi~ILEY: No, the City's position is that,
in 1987, there was an order passed that it was advisory.
Upon reflection, review, and consultation with the County
Attorney and the County Judge, it's our opinion that what
Judge Tinley just a~~~uded to is correct, which is that the
board is, in fact, not advisory just by the fact that we
thought that it was, because the Transportation Code says
that it is -- that the board is a managerial board that has
all the powers to operate the airport that either one of us
25 I entities have alone.
1(_~-14-~ 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
,..., i 3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,_-.
25
106
COMMI:~SIONER LETZ: That's good to hear. But
the -- I still think we need to be -- it is a change in the
way the operations have been handled out there, and I think
that -- and there's been talk of increasing the size of the
board and some other things. I just think that we need to
make sure that everyone's on the same page, and, all of a
sudden, that that board is about to be handed a whole bunch
of authority that they didn't think they had.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, your point is well-made,
Commissioner, that -- if the board is not, in fact, going to
actually handle the operations out there, that it's within
their legal authority to do, then there needs to be steps
taken affirmatively for that board to enter into interlocal
agreements or whatever, or appropriate arrangements may be
necessary for however these operations are going to be
conducted. Ycu're exactly right. But I think we need to
solidify where we are, and I think we now, for possibly the
first time in some period of time, all agree where we are
right now.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Which is a real good starting
point. If -- you know, we just got to figure out where we
want t~ ge. But we now Know where we are.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: May I ask a question?
10-14-~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
107
Back in my mind somewhere, down the hallways of my mind, I
remember that the people of Kerr County voted to create this
board. Is that true or not true?
JUDGE TINLEY: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN
JUDGE' TINLEY: No.
That is not true?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, that's out the
window. Court Order Number 171.03, which I voted on in 1987,
approved that the board is an advisory board only. To me,
that establishes where this county is with that board out
there, and I don't see any reason to change that. Why would
we want tc change treat?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: In general, I'm
uncomfortable wit'n -- with several arrangements we have
where, in particular, we jointly operate functions with the
City, and our sole role seems to be to providing funds once
a year to those things. I'm not singling out the airport as
an example of that; there are other examples, too. So, I'd
like to -- I'd like to know more about this before we give
up what little direct responsibility we have for it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy's waving his hand.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. I -- I want to make --
I wart to be clear on -- the decision is that this person or
our person is in an advisory capacity?
MS. BAILEY: No, not our person. The board.
10-14-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
108
MR. TOMLINSON: The board? Well, I mean --
well, it makes a difference for us for -- for liability
purposes. If -- if we -- under our coverage with TAC, if we
have a person that's on a board that's anything other than
an advisory capacity, we have to name that person on our
professional liability coverage in order for that person to
be covered.
MS. BAILEY: Then I think you probably would
have to name them, a~~r_ording to my understanding.
MR. TOMLINSON: So, if trey're something
other than advisory, then -- then we need to do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm all for that.
MR. TOMLINSON: Currently, as it stands, that
person is not named or_ -- on our public officials liability.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that -- I just
think that there's -- I would almost be, really, more in
favcr of -- we can have a joint meeting with City and do
these all at one time, figure out where we're going. I
mean, I -- clearly, I think the way it's been done is not
proper and not legal, probably, and -- from a technical
standpoint, but I think there's no intent. And I don't
know -- I mean, I think that -- I just want to make sure
nothing fads through the cracks in this whole process, and
that the -- you know, the City and the County are, you know,
working together in this to get, you know, this resolved.
1 G- 1 4- n 3
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
And I was afraid that if we take unilateral action, that,
all of a sudden, you know, the City may do something a
little bit different, and then it just seems like it's a
confusion thing. Anc~ if we know where we're going -- I
think, as the Judge said, it's the first time we all agree
as to where we are, and we car_ develop a plan ar.d the r. have
a joint meeting and vote -- both vote on them and pass them
at the same time. Seems a better way tc do it. Or at
least, you know, that's my understanding of everything.
JUDGE TINLEY: That may be a good approach.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you talking about
designatinq the board as an advisory board only?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, from what I
understand, that's -- we can't do that. That -- we don't
have any authority to designate that board as advisory. We
can designate them advisory, but they're not -- they are the
responsible board for that operation of that airport, and we
are not and the City is not.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And is that because
that -- of the law at that time when they were founded?
MS. BAILEY: Can I address that for a moment?
This -- this -- the real crux of the matter doesn't have to
do with either the City or the County, but has to do with
state law and the Attorney General. The Attorney General
has made a ruling at some point in the past -- I can't
10-14-03
110
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
'' 2
L
23
24
25
remember the year of the opinion; it was in the '80's, I
think -- that a county cannot lease airport land without
competitively bidding it. So, the only way that property at
the jointly-owned airport can be leased without going
through the competitive bidding process is either through
the operation under the auspices of an airport board, which
is what we're operating under now, through Chapter 22 of the
Transportation Code, or the airport authority, which is what
the election was about, which is what you were alluding to,
which we never -- well, that's not in existence, so I'll
only confuse the matter if I talk about that. But,
basically, the only way property can be leased without
competitive bid is going through the airport board that
we're operating under now, and then the board has that
authority to do the leasing. And that's how the County gets
out of having to do the competitive bid process, 'cause
you're saying, "We're not leasing it; we are joint owners
with the board doing our management, and the board is
leasing it."
The only other way we could do that is if we
undid that operation and said, "We're no longer operating
under the Transportation Code; we're going to operate it
under the interlocal agreement. And, under that agreement,
we have determined that this board is going to be advisory."
We could do that. The problem with that is that then you
1U-19-iii
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
2G
21
22
23
24
25
111
get back to the fact that then the County is a lessor and
has to go through competitive bidding. And it's pretty well
accepted by everybody that if we have to corr.petitively bid
land leasing out there, it's going to stifle development at
the airport so much that it really would be pointless to try
to continue to develop the airport. Does that make sense?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
MS. BAILEY: So that's why we're in this
bird, and we're trying to get the Attorney General -- I've
asked David if he'll write an opinion request to the
Attorney General asking them to reconsider that opinion
about counties not being able to lease airport land without
competitive bidding, but as~t stands right now, you are
requirod to competit:~ve~y bid the land if you're in an
interlocal agreement.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Weighing the
competitive bidding issue against giving a nonelective
group, possibly, the authority to raise taxes, I mean,
that's a no-brainer to me.
JUDGE TINLEY: They don't have the ability to
impose any taxes.
MS. BAILEY: They have none.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I'm not
convinced of that at all.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Perhaps not
iu-i~-n~
112
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
directly, but they -- they have the authority to increase --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're out there
flirting with that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- increase costs
out there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The -- thank you for
your explanation. The -- I don't want to -- this may sound
ugly, and I really don't mean it ugly. I'm going to quote
score of your stuff early on in the year. There is politics,
and then there's business. This is strictly business. We
tried to meet with our board members, and I haven't heard
another word from them. If our board people that we've
appointed can't seem to get in here within a couple of
months and meet with this board, we need to remove them and
put people on there that will respond to us. Simple as
that. If that's ugly, I apologize, but it needs to be done.
We're not -- those people need to be in here talking to us
about this stuff, and if they're not going to come, we need
to remove them and put ?people in there that will. Simple.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree.
JUDGL TINLEY: I gather the sense is no -- no
motion is to be offered cn this item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, we don't want to
let it die, either.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't think it's
is-ly-o~
113
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
gcing to.
JUDGE TINLEY: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I like Letz' idea
about us getting together and having a visit with the City.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I do too.
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: I think that would be
good.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think that may be the
solution to this -- this whole concept and problem that
we're -- we're all faced with the same problem.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: The City's in the same boat
that we are, with the exceptior_ that they are the de facto
operators of that facility out there, and that's
considerably different from where we are.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is it their turn to
buy dinner?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I want to meet
with them pretty quick.
MS. Bi?ILEY: I'll pass that on.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do we need to meet
some of the board meTnbers before we meet with the City? Or
do we know enough about the issue?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know how you
1u-19-03
114
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
to
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
do that. We've tried that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We tried.
JUDGE TINLEY: Send the Sheriff out after
MS. SOVIL. It's not the board members'
fault. I mean, we j~zst didn't get it all put together to
call that one meeting, but they've not been contacted since
then, unless Mr. Williams or Mr. Nicholson has done so. I
have not done sc since the meeting did not come together
before.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's exactly the
point. The meeting did not come together before, when we
asked them to come in and meet with us.
MS. SOVIL: They weren't available.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consideration and
discussion, approval of the contract between the Office of
Court Administration and Kerr County. This item has to do
with the administrative judge. As all of you know, Judge
Abler is the administrative judge for the 6th Administrative
Judicial District, and the Office of Court Administration
provides certain reimbursements to Kerr County for that
purpose; in this case, not to exceed $39,864. Actually,
that is over a two-year period, beginning September 1 of
this year through August 31, '05. That's the state fiscal
for that biannually.
_~~~-14-03
115
1
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 mcve apprcval,
authorize County Judge to sign same.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve the contract between the Office of Court
Administration and Kerr County and authorize the County
Judge to sign the same. Ar_y further question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, is -- this is
routine? This is not a change -- or this is not new? It's
the same way we've done this ir. the past?
JUDGE TINLEY: Correct. Any further
questions or discussion? A11 in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item
is consider and disc~.zss approval of the agreement between
City and County for use of Hotel Occupancy Tax revenue for
the improvement of r_.,~nvention center facilities. That
translates to the Hi11 Country Youth Exposition Center, as
it's titled, and authorize --
about this.
COMMISSIONER BALD"WIN: We're going to talk
JUDGE TINLEY: -- authorize the County Judge
10-i9-!~3
116
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
1C
11
12
_ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to sign the same.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm just so thankful
that someone -- I don't know where this came from. Does
this come from the City?
MS. BAILEY: What, the contract?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
MS. BAILEY: Probably.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The City is finally --
are the only ones that have the guts to call this thing a
convention center. Finally. I've been begging Mr. T~Iilliams
here to call it what it is for -- or what he's wanting it to
be for years, and someone has finally come out and said the
imbrovement of convention center faci~ities. I'm thankful
for the City doing that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was going to be
thankful for the very generous contribution --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm also thankful for
the money.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- of the $3,859 out of
the hotel/motel tax.
JUDGE TINLEY: I would point out to you
gentlemen, you don't get it al in one fell swoop. Such a
large sum is -- is a:Llocated to you in -- in four payments
ever a one-year period, it appears. And, in order to
receive that funding, there must be a written request
io-i~-os
117
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
accompanied by a copy of the invoice requesting payment.
So, we got to spend the money in advance, and then, when we
request payment, apparently we've got to do it at four
different times of the year, is the way I read that contract
at the paragraph beginning on the bottom of Page 1 and
continuing on Page 2.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, also, didn't I
read here somewhere that it's earmarked for some specific --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Concession stand.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Concession stand? I
thought --
JUDGE TINLEY: I believe the -- it was
earmarked for bleachers and -- and ice machine.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ice machine.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, that was -- that was the
approved purpose
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Great. I got sc
excited about somebcc~y te1l~ng the truth that I couldn't get
past it to find out what the money was really for.
JUDGE TINLEY: i.e., convention center?
COMM L~SIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, the convention
center.
JUDGE TINLEY: I see.
MR. TOMLINSON: Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes?
.0-14-03
118
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TO°~ILINSON: We'll need tc increase the
budget by -- by the amcunt of those funds. That amount is
not in the budget.
JUDGE TIP~~LEY: I would also note that you're
required to create a separate account.
MR. TOMLINSON: Right. We've done this
before.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR.. TOMLINSON: Yes, with these funds. So --
but we do need to increase the budget by the amount of
the -- of the donation.
JUDGE TINLEY: The -- the Youth Exhibit
Center budget?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: I want to permit Commissioner
Baldwin to :Hake the motion so that he can use the magic
term.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, yeah. Judge, I
approve Item Number -- or move to approve Item Number 21,
the agreement between the City of Kerrville and the County
of Kerr fcr use of Hotel Occupancy Tax revenues for
improvement of the convention center facilities, and
authorize the Judge to Sian the same, and -- and increase
the budget by $3,859.
1G-14-~~
119
1
2
3
4
5
i
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
emergency to --
MS. SOVIL: Don't you have to declare an
JUDGE TINLEY: Hmm?
MS. SOVIL: -- increase the budget?
JUDGE TINLEY: Nct to increase, I don't
think. That's not an emergency. It's only if we spend.
MR. TOMLINSON: We care -- we can increase it
because we have offsF~tting revenues that we didn't
anticipate when the budget was made.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
CCMM LSSIONER BALDWIN: That's my emotion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve Item 21 and to increase the Youth Exhibition Center
budget by the amount stated in the agreement, that being
$3,859. Any further question or discussion? All in favor
of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The rnoti.on carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Mcticn does carry. Next item
is consider and discuss adoption of policy regarding use of
courthouse, courthouse facilities, and courthouse grounds.
This item was up last time, and the -- the coordinator was
requested to prepare a draft of proposed guidelines. That
10-19-03
~20
1
2
3
4
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-
25
has been done, and i~'s attached.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a couple of
comments. I apologise, I wrote out my comments and e-mailed
them, but then I deleted them. My e-mail didn't go through,
so I lost all my comments, so T was frustrated and decided
not to do it a second time. But the comments are on the --
under the -- I guess, the reasons. "Because of security and
personnel issues, all meetings or other gatherings will be
limited to official county government related business
only." This is related to things inside the courthouse.
That's, I think, a little bit on -- it's too restrictive.
As an example, I don't know -- I think -- I'm not sure that
a Christmas party is an official county function. I'm not
sure that the thing ~~ae did with Costco is an official county
function. So, I think you need to -- you know, I don't know
what we need to say there, but I don't think we need to -- I
think that -- I would just think "efficial county government
related business" to be a little bit too strict in that
area.
Under Courthouse Square, I don't think we
should limit it to 501(c)(3) nonprofit entities. Then, on
the other -- what was the other ore? On the sigr.age issue,
you know, we have a current policy, I guess, from. what it
said, relating to signs. I know we allow that United Way
sign to go up there on a pretty regular basis, or every year
l~.- 19-03
121
1
^ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
L
~3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-
25
it goes up there. I don't really recall other signs going
up there, but I think -- you know, I think that's a
potentially -- I mean, is that corner open for any nonprofit
to put a sign up? You know. Or is that what the intent is?
And what kind -- I mean, I'm a little worried about that. I
mean, I know we've always -- this is what happens when you
start writing policies all of a sudden. Sometimes it's
better not to have a policy, because, like -- and I -- I can
see it being a benefit to the community, but I don't want
that corner to start looking like a, you know, garage sale
corner. I don't mean for garage sales. I mean, I can
envision every organization around town wanting to put a
sign up there for raising money. And I don't know that --
you know, how we would prevent it if we have a policy that
says they can do it. So, it's almost like it may be
inviting, you know, something that we don't really want. So
I think, cverall -- T mean, I know we talked about it, and
part of me says we need a policy, and part of me, after
thinking about it further, says I'm not so sure we need a
policy. I think --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Are we trying to
solve some specific problems? Or just anticipating that we
may need to nave guidelines to avoid having problems? I
dcn't know.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I didn't bring it up.
lr-1~-n~
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
JUDGE TINLEY: Probably, the -- one of the
things that -- that ~~rompted it was I received a request
earlier for a political group to utilize an area inside the
courthouse to conduct a meeting, and I was uncomfortable
with that, because my feeling was that if -- if that occurs,
if you permit one political group, for example, you must
permit all political groups, irrespective of the acceptance
or -- or size or whatever the case may be. You have the
same potential issue with regard to civic groups, religious
groups, and there's all sorts of various shades and nuances
that -- I was more concerned about the inside than I was the
outside, but when I put it on, I figured, well, you know,
we'll just throw the whole thing out there on the table.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The political groups
-- isn't this where the Republicans and Democrats hold their
annual --
JUDGE TINLEY: County conventions, that's
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Would this bar them?
JUDGE TINLEY: It -- well, if you adopt the
use of the courthouse building and facilities, the actual
interior confines of this building, yes, it would, unless
there were specific permission granted from the Court as a
deviation from that policy.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If we adopt this
10-14-03
123
1
^ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-- 13
14
15
16
1~
18
19
20
21
22
23
~. 2 4
25
policy as written, in addition to the Republican and
Democratic parties, would we expect other grievances to
arise because of the new policy?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They couldn't sell mops
out there. I don't think they're a --
MS. SOVIL: It's a civic group.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They may not be a
501(c)(3} The cheerleaders aren't a 501(c}(3).
MS. SOVIL: That's a -- I thought it said
civic or educational.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I -- you know, and
the cheerleader thing, that's --
MS. SOVIL: That's educational.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, that's iffy.
That's pretty -- I d~~n't know who does that thing, whether
it's the actual cheerleaders out there doing it, or if it's
a fundraiser for the supporters cf the cheerleaders.
Anyway, I mean, I just -- I kind of view the overall -- I
mean, the only thing that I really -- and it's a personal
pet peeve, really, not necessarily the Court. I'd like a
moratorium on more things on the courthouse grounds. Other
than that, I really don't -- I think it's -- it's kind of
public grounds, and until we have a problem, I don't know
that -- you know, let people use the courthouse grounds. If
we have -- you know, start having a problem, and we need to

124
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
l
15
16
17
18
19
2G
2,~
22
23
24
.-.~
25
start banning certain groups or doing certain things, but I
just don't see that l.ig of a problem right now.
And the use of the court -- inside the
courthouse, you know, I think if you -- if you start putting
in a policy like this, all of a sudden, something comes in,
and say -- you know, I'll pick on Barbara 'cause she's here.
Say Barbara wants to meet a person here, and it's not
technically courthouse-related business. Well, can she do
that? You know. My feeling would be yes. But if you put a
policy of courthouse-related, if she's not doing -- acting
as our Treasurer, she wouldn't be allowed to come in here
and do that. And I don't -- you know, I don't want to get
that nitpicky. If Barbara wants to meet somebody here, let
Barbara meet somebody here, you know. It's -- and if we
start having a problem, then I think we address it. I
just -- I think the more policies like this you have, you
ust start creating more and more problems potentially, or
people doing things in violation of policy that wasn't the
intent of the policy.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we got something to chew
on. We're going to need to come back to some of these
items. Why don't we go ahead and adjourn for lunch now and
come back at 1:30?
MS. SOVIL: Recess.
JUDGE TIPJLEY: Excuse me, recess. Buster,

125
1
L
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
i3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
you didn't remind me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I tell you what, you
did it right this mcrning. You want some of my medication?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, then you went to sleep
on me. We'll stand in recess until 1:30.
(Recess taken from 11:55 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I will call the meeting
back to order. It's just a smidgen after 1:30. Gve stood in
recess shortly before noon, and we will be back in order
now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, can I ask you a
question? How does a smidgen stack up against, let's say,
a -- a tittle?
JUDGE TINLEY: A tittle? A smidgen is about
three times longer than a tittle.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How about a tidbit?
JUDGE TINLEY: About twice as long as a
tidbit.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see, okay. I'm glad
we got that established. Now we know what we're doing,
finally.
MR. TOMLIN5ON: We're going downhill quick.
JUDGE TINLEY: We were on Item Number 22,
consideration and discussion of adoption of the policy, or
1 C- 1 Y_~ 5
126
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
not, regarding use of courthouse or courthouse facilities
and courthouse grounds.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think I'm probably in
the "or not" category, except for altering the grounds, such
as ditching. And the reason is not as much to -- you know,
the recent ditching that's gone on out there. It's that I
look at that right now, and I don't know if they're done or
not, but I see that the County's going to have to expend
money to get rid of a bunch of rocks; otherwise, we're going
to have a whole bunch of broken windshields. With what the
Courthouse Lighting Committee did, there's a bunch of rocks
on the ground now. And I think that, you know, anytime
anyone does anything that's permanent of nature, it needs to
be coordinated with Maintenance, at a minimum. And whatever
is done, ever, whether it's people using the courthouse
square or anything, it needs to be at no cost to the
taxpayers. Which, to me, no -- which, to me, is no cost to
Maintenance, 'cause they're the ones that have to pick up
all that stuff. And I don't know how we have that in a
policy, but at the same time leave it as open as possible
for use of community.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maintenance is not
here. Is that what that -- all that ditching was out there?
Is that for courthouse lights?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think. I don't know
1~~-14-^3
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
that to be a fact.
JUDGE TINLEY: That was my understanding,
part of the -- some of the new permanent wiring for the
Christmas lighting program.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I -- and my
concern -- and let me go back a step further. My concern is
that we spent quite a bit of money, as I recall, with Mike
Walker locating everything on this courthouse square; every
tree and every bench, every sidewalk was all mapped out.
And now we go arbitrarily and put a ditch across there and
put electrical lines in it, you know, we start ending up
with a situation where no one knows where everything is
again, and I think, from a maintenance and safety
standpoint, we need to know where all these -- you know,
where all the fixtures on this courthouse square are.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree -- well, I
guess we need to see that that new electric stuff out there
needs to be put on that map.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wherever that is.
JUDGE TINLEY: They have presented, if I
recall correctly, a schematic last year as part of the --
their overall proposal for the permanent installation. I
don't know if this is in the same place, or whether it's the
same type of installation or -- or type of improvements or
1G-19-03
128
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,.,, 2 4
25
circuits or whatever that they had planned. Apparently they
didn't have the money to do it last year, so maybe they went
out and got reloaded financially, and now they're starting
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think -- I
don't know either, but I think that the -- and a little
historical perspective, I mean, ttie courthouse lighting --
well, the Court has tried to not get directly involved in
any of the courthouse lighting projects, and it's kind of
given a fair amount of latitude to the committee that pays
for it and does it and responsible for it. And I think
Maintenance has assisted them along the way, and I think
we've kind of felt that it's a community-type organization,
but I'm not sure that that was the right decision back then.
I mean, you know, I think that at some point, there needs to
be some direction, maybe, or policy or -- or understanding
or something with that lighting committee as to what -- you
know, where they want to go. And the Court changes every
two years, so, I mean, I think they have to almost bring it
back every two years, make sure the Court -- the new Court
agrees. I mean, I think it's been a -- you know, a positive
event for the community. I may not agree with all the
things that they've done specifically, from a personal
standpoint -- taste standpoint, but I think it's good. I
mean, I'd like to see it continue. But when it comes to
10-~~~-03
129
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ditching, I think that needs to be coordinated with us
pretty closely.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And it may have been.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I don't know.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just saw them doing
it over a couple days ago.
MS. SOVIL: Do you want me to get Glenn?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think it would be
kind of wise, to get that straightened out, 'cause Letz is
not going to let it go. I can see that. He's like a
bulldog, man.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My question is, Judge,
is on this courthouse square part here, moratorium on
donations for items, and it has "animal, vegetable, and
mineral." Explain that one to me.
JUDGE TINLEY: You'll have to talk to the one
that prepared that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That would be
Ms. Sovil?
JUDGE TINLEY: That would be your court
coordinator, that's rorr_ect. That's who was directed to
prepare the draft.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You wasn't in on this?
See, this looks like lawyer talk to me.
iu-i~-u~
130
1
.•- 2 mineral?
3
4 to wait on her.
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
,._ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,--
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Animal, vegetable, and
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. I guess we need
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think that -- you
know, I presume everyone on the Court's heard my comments
about things on the courthouse yard. I just think that we
just need to -- I think less is better, frequently. And we
have -- we don't have less on this courthouse square right
now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, with the new
flower beds and -- and the new rock walls and those kinds of
things, it's beginning to fill up. It's getting kind of
strange looking. But --
JUDGE TINLEY: You don't have any more
memorial tree designation spots?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, we have a lot of
pretty big trees already in this square. Now, around the
perimeter, there is some -- there's maybe some vacancies
there, but I'm more thinking of cannons and benches and
flower beds and things of that nature. And trees, really --
I mean, T think --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When is -- when we
started talking about this a couple years ago, you know, put
i0-~?-G3
131
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,..
25
together a courthouse plan of what's out there and what's --
and I'm still in the same place, that all cedar trees and
hackberries need to come out.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I'm glad I'm not in this
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm almost through.
That was just a quickie; nothing's going to happen with it.
But, you know, cedar trees and hackberry trees, God made
them for us to cut down. That's what they're for. And no
use. If you took those out, some of -- that old big
hackberry thing out there, ugliest thing in Kerr County --
took that out, then you'd have a place for a memorial tree,
something nice.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have a chainsaw, Glenn,
that's safe for Commissioner Baldwin to operate?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe safe for him, but
not for the community or those standing nearby.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, Ms. Sovil, my
question was, under Courthouse Square --
MS. SOVIL: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is the moratorium
on donations for items animal, vegetable, mineral? What
does that mean exactly?
MS. SOVIL: Well, that means anything.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, that just covers
1G-14-r3
1
^ 2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
^ 13
14
I5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,..,, 2 4
25
132
everything? We can't put a stuffed deer out there or -- or
MS. SOVIL: Well, it was primarily
birdhouses. No, Commissioner Letz, in his statement, wanted
to put a moratorium on all things on the courthouse, so I
thought "animal, vegetable, or mineral" covered it a11.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, that's fine.
And I want to go to -- well, let's get to Glenn, let him get
back to his rat killing.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- the recent
ditr_hing in the courthouse square, and we -- or I said I
presume that's related to the courthouse lighting. The
question is, were you -- did you know they were going to do
it, and have they coordinated with us? And my beef probably
is that it's done in an area, in a way that works with the
Maintenance Department, and that information where these
pipes are added to -- as I recall, we had a map made by Mike
Walker with all the trees and all that stuff located on it,
and that we keep an updated version of where everything is
out there so we don't get in the same position we did
several years ago of having stuff everywhere, and no one
knew where they were.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Okay, Commissioner, I can give
you what I know. To my knowledge -- and I do sleep
10-14-~3
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
133
occasionally -- I was not notified this year of any ditching
that was going to take place, but I was informed the other
day that this is a continuation of the requested underground
electrical that. they had gotten approval from Commissioners
Court last year. That never did take place because of lack
of funding. As far as being diagramed, the lighting
committee is going to put -- be putting it on the master
plan sheet that they have within the ground, other
utilities. As to -- if you -- I see it as -- in a lot of
ways, as a plus. First of all, it's upgrading the
electrical, which is sorely needed. And secondly, it gets
it off of our electricity bill. The more that they put out
there, that goes onto their meters, not on ours. So, I
would -- I would say it's to our advantage to allow them --
you know, they did not notify me prior to last week
ditching, and with their placement, but that was part of
last year's master plan that they presented to -- about the
underground wiring.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do they -- are they going
to do more this year? Or is that all they're --
MR. HOLEKAMP: I can't answer that today.
I'm going to a meeting on Thursday afternoon at 3 o'clock to
try to get that question answered by the committee.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: When in conversation with
the committee -- this just popped into my brain, that we
10-14-03
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
134
want to make sure they don't cut our new parking lot paving
anywhere to run wires somewhere.
MR. HOLEKAMP: That's already been brcught to
the electrician's attention the other day out here, where it
got pretty close. They said something about gong under,
and I said I really think there needs to be some discussion
about that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. And I think -- you
know, we just spent quite a bit of money for surfacing. We
don't need to have someone ditch through our parking lot
right now.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I understand that. But I
don't -- at this time, I don't foresee any of that taking
place.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Glenn, if I had my
preference, even though it's mapped out and approved and all
that, it -- if I had my preference, I would like for them to
get with you before they did any of the work, just to make
double sure that we're not destroying something that's
already there or -- you know, I just think that would be
good policy or good business, just to make sure. Touch base
and -- you know, we're fixing to destroy your property -- I
mean lay our electrical lines.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I can't say that I don't agree
with you, Commissioner.
io-l~-"<
1
^ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
135
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN:
guys don't say the same thing, would
feel that way? If nothing else.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Oh, no
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I
(Low-voice discussion
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I
unanimous sentiment.
If the rest of these
you tell them that I
problem at all.
believe I just said it.
off the record.)
think you have
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They just need to
touch base with you, "This is what we're fixing to do."
MR. HOLEKAMP: I agree.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Probably everything is
going to be okay, but it would just be a good thing to touch
base. Thank you.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then -- I'll get
to that sign thing in a minute, but I want to come to the
indoor. If you -- if you allow one -- let's just use the
political parties as an example. If you allow a political
party to use the facility, inside the facility, then you
must allow the others -- plural, others -- to do that. Just
on the surface of that thought, I would be opposed to doing
that. However, Number 4 brought up a -- the historical
issue. I mean that's the county --
MS. SOVIL: Convention.
=0-?4-03
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
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- conventions. I
remember Julius Neunhoffer holding those things upstairs and
just -- I mean, great debates. I mean, most wonderful stuff
I've ever seen. And -- you know, so that's a historical
thing. And kind of -- you know, and I see those things -- I
see that as, that's what the courthouse is for, you know,
and that kind of issue. And then, once -- once you -- you
know, so I'm -- I've changed my mind now. I think, well,
maybe the political people need to use it. And if you say
that they can use it for the convention, they should be
able, I guess, to use it for a meeting. Where do you -- do
you draw a line between convention and meetings?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Maybe the -- I'm not
sure, but maybe the convention is part of the political
process, process by which we select people to conduct our
state and county --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe that's it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But if you're having
something to do -- that's dealing with campaigning or
something like that, I`d say no.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's -- I'm kind of
that way too, but I don`i-. know how to draw that line in
there. How to draw a -- a definite line there, 'cause you
know how politicians can blur those lines.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just don't see it as a
l~-i~-C,3
137
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
problem we need to do anything with right now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that may be.
That may be the case. And -- and I also see, as the Judge
and I were visiting about it the other day -- you know, and
Commissioner Letz pointed it out. If an elected official is
having a meeting in their personal office -- and I`ll just
use myself. You know, if I'm having a group of guys up here
in -- meeting in my office, and I don`t affect the
Maintenance people having to stay here to lock up after me
or clean up after me, then it's -- it's my call, whether it
is a political meeting or whether it is a church meeting or
whatever hot issue that may arise. Number one, who's going
to stand outside my window and peek in there and tell what
kind of meeting it is? I'm not -- I'm not going to police
the building to do that. So, if it causes -- you know, if
somebody's using the facility and it's causing our
Maintenance people to stay over past their normal times, or
having to stay here to lock the doors or clean up after
people, to me, that's where the line is drawn. We should
not be doing that. And I guess the way to do -- just do the
whole thing is what Letz is saying, is don't do anything. I
mean, if there's a -- if there's not a problem, don't try to
fiX it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We may have a
solution looking for a problem.
~n-i~-o3
138
1
2
3
4
5
G
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe, yeah. It's
kind of like -- do you know what I relate it to? I relate
it to these constables coming in here wanting new cars, new
fancy shirts, new hats and new guns and new everything. And
we give them all that stuff, and then here they come out of
the woodwork wanting to run against you. You know? That's
how it works.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've noticed that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You create a little
storm out there, by gosh, they'll come to the storm. So --
and then my only other question is -- is this. I think it's
important that we do address the signage out there on that
corner. Again, the -- who uses it now?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: United Way.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: United Way and their
little red marker of how much money they've collected, that
never has bothered me. And I don't know of the Fourth
Church from San Antonio wanting to put up their little sign
there; I don't know if that's ever happened. That's the
only sign I've ever seen up out there. So, maybe -- maybe,
there again, we don't have a problem with that.
MS. SOVIL: There were two different issues.
There was signs, and then there was that civic sign. I
think I addressed the civic sign in the southwest corner,
that that could be put up. But the signage I was talking
1 0- 1 4- ~ 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
139
about was that vendor signage. Like, what comes to mind is
that when we have had -- we had a pest controller come to
the Court; he donated termite control, but he wanted to put
his sign up, and Commissioners Court said no, in no
uncertain terms. Now, if -- if a vendor can't, why is it
then all right to have signage in the yard saying, "This is
donated by so-and-so"?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, when was that?
I -- I know you're telling the truth, 'cause I remember
seeing it, but I don't remember what the function was. Was
it the Christmas -- wasn't there a Christmas display --
light display, and there was a sign there that says, "This
display was donated by such-and-such"~
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah, there's numerous ones of
those.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Is there a
problem with that?
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know. That's one of
the issues. What if the Fourth Church out of San Antonio
would want to come up and put a sign over there on that
southwest corner?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I would say,
25 answer.
to-l~-o~
"No. Motley, come help me."
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's the right
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
15
16
I7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
140
MR. MOTLEY: Well, I mean, you could -- I
mean, you could probably make a distinction, like I think
Dave or Jonathan, one, said; you could -- a sign that's
there for, you know, charitable works related to the county
is one thing, other than just a blatant advertisement or
something like that is -- is different, even if it's -- but,
I mean, that United Way sign is a -- it's to announce some
progress of a campaign which benefits the county generally
as a charitable contribution. Its purpose is for the
welfare of the citizens of the county.
JUDGE TINLEY: What if Y.M.C.A, wants to put
up something relative to their fundraising campaign?
MR. MOTLEY: Well, I mean, I see that as
being more akin to the United Way thing than to some -- just
some business advertisement or some -- something related to
issues outside of the county. You know, I mean, I'm trying
to draw a line again. If y'all are talking about --
JUDGE TINLEY: What if the church out here
that was -- instead of spending their money on a Halloween
thing, was raising funds and publicly announced it was for
orphanages in Mexico, and they wanted to post a sign that
spelled out their progress in what they were doing?
MR. MOTLEY: You're taking me back 25 years
to my first year in law school, all these what-ifs. I don't
know. You can try to just slice it as thin as you want to
1G-14-03
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
slice it. I'm trying to maybe come up with some sort of a
distinction as to what United Way is doing. It's a
community chest, type of a community fundraising deal for
the welfare of the community, and is a charitable event.
And that is a --
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, the problem I have is
that I'm the one that these inquiries come to. "Say, would
it be all right if we put up a sign?" Or, "Would it be all
right if we held a garage sale?" Or, "Would it be all right
if we..." You know, those come to me. Now, if -- you know,
if everyone comes to somebody else, I'm probably not going
to be nearly as interested, but they come to me, and I'm --
I'm expected to give them an answer, yes or no. And if I
give them a no, I need to give them -- I think I`m obligated
to give them some reasonable basis, that which would be
otherwise viewed as a, quote, community-type function or
affair, why I'm telling them no.
MR. MOTLEY: I can see a practical problem
with what you're talking about. Another aspect that just
kind of came to mind is for how long somebody wanted to use
the grounds. You know, the United Way thing is a pretty
long fundraiser, typically, so it's up there for a matter of
weeks, I think, showing the progress that they're making.
You know, I think other things you probably get requests
about would be things like maybe the car wash-type situation
1G-19-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
142
or something like that. There's other places in town where
they do that. I don't know if that's been a problem here or
a request, but, I mean, you already have an agreement that
we're working out with the Market Association for the
alternate Saturdays. That -- that was a pretty specific
agreement to use that, and it seems to be working very well.
I don't know. That might be something that we could -- of
course, maybe it's one of those deals that's better left
alone. I don't know. But if --
JUDGE TTNLEY: But it doesn't leave me alone,
is the problem.
MR. MOTLEY: No, I hear you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why can't you just say,
"i don't have the authority," and put on it the agenda? If
they want to make a presentation, come talk to the Court.
And most of them probably will say, "Not worth it." And if
they come, we'll decide. And if it starts becoming a
problem, we do a policy.
MR. MOTLEY: That's what's the Market
Association basically did, is they made a presentation -- a
good one -- to the Court, as I recall.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Excellent.
MR. MOTLEY: About what they wanted to do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That way, I mean, you
know, if you say you don't have authority to do that -- and
io-i~-nJ
1
'^ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
143
you don't, unless the Court gives you that authority, which
is why you brought it to the Court. So, I mean, I just -- I
just -- I don't see it as that big of a problem right now.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And maybe, if we start
getting, like, three or four a meeting, then maybe I'll
change my mind; I'll think this is more of a problem, and we
can then try to work out a policy.
JUDGE TINLEY: And with regard to the use of
the interior of the facilities, the sense that I'm getting
on the use of the interior facilities is, if you've got
access to the courthouse and it's not going to impact or
interfere or cause any effect on any County employee, then
it's okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I don't -- I don't
look at it that it's okay. I look at it more, you know, not
the -- there's not a whole lot of -- most of the access is
to elected officials that have keys, and -- you know, and
certain employees. I would think, you know -- I mean, you
know, if I was to have a religious meeting here, that I'm
responsible for that and I'm the one that's going to be
called on the carpet, not you. I mean --
JUDGE TINLEY: That's true.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a decision that I
made. And if the Treasurer does it or Buster does it, it's
l0-1~-_~
144
L
'"' 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
a little bit of personal responsibility.
JUDGE TINLEY: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, hopefully, our
people will not abuse it.
MS. SOVIL; Aren't you putting an undue
burden on Maintenance to come tattle that, "So-and-so didn't
clean up his office after his meeting last night"? That's
not fair.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think it's undue.
I mean, I don't think -- if there's a problem, I think that
Maintenance should, you know, point it out. I just don't
know that -- you know, one, I don't know that I have -- I've
got a real question about authority, if I can tell Linda
Uecker what she can do in this courthouse. I don't think I
can.
MS. SCVIL: Not in her office. Not in her
office, you can't.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know that I can
tell her what to do anywhere in here. I don`t know. I
don't really see that I have that authority.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I`m damn sure not
going to try.
COMMISSIONER LETZ; I just like -- you know,
if -- if any elected official starts abusing it, I think
it's up to the -- you know, it needs to be brought to the
lu-i~-o~
145
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
r 24
25
Court or brought to the public at that time. But I'm just
not sure how -- you know, it's like trying to tell Rusty
what to do in his building. I don't think I want to go down
that road.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I'm still a
little bit unclear, and I feel like maybe you are as well,
about what do you do about the broom sales and the
cheerleaders' sale, and --
JUDGE TINLEY: You're going to get to make a
decision on that, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In other words, those
organizations that have been using it every year for 40
years are going to have to come to the Commissioners Court?
Is that what you're saying?
JUDGE TINLEY: I think that -- yeah, I think
that's what I just heard. We got one sitting there right
now that we're going to have to notify, the Veteran's Day --
people that conduct the Veteran's Day program, or at least
one group that conducts the Veteran's Day program.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See, if I were those
organizations, I would want to come in here anyway, to just
let the County fathers know what I want to do, plus maybe
the press will pick up on it and it will be advertised,
what's -- you know, the program going on on the courthouse
square. That's -- I don't see why they didn't want to come
10-19-G3
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
in, anyway. I would. So, maybe it's not a bad thing to ask
them to come -- to come to court. I don't know. Does
that -- do you see it as possibly clogging up the agenda?
JUDGE TINLEY: Don't know. I suspect we're
going to find out, though.
MS. SOVIL; Right now, we tell them to work
it out with LuAnn.
JUDGE TINLEY: You know, if it's going to
occur on the weekend, you know, like the Golden Girls'
garage sale or something like that, we just tell them to be
sure and coordinate it with her so that -- you know, and
it's a win-win deal for both of them, really, because of the
traffic that. it creates helps, and --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: And -- but it just requires
the coordination.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the Market Days
people have been excellent --
JUDGE TINLEY: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- excellent with
that..
JUDGE TINLEY: Everybody that's had some
other event on those same days has -- has been very pleased
with the cooperation, number one, and number two, the
increased response to their event because of the traffic
10-14-03
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
that it generates.
MS. SOVIL: Maybe you need to define what
needs to come to Court and what doesn't. I mean, to have
every -- the American Legion that's going to do their little
memorial service out here, is it really necessary for them
to come to court? Or can't -- this is their courthouse, and
they're just telling you that they want to use it, you know,
that day. Or the Golden Girls; they want to use it that
day, but they have to coordinate with LuAnn. What
parameters do you want them to come to court? Do you want
everybody to come to court, you know, and ask --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think what the Judge is
saying is that, what's the difference if the K.K.K. wants to
come to a rally, or the V.A. people? And there isn't any
difference.
JUDGE TINLEY: None.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you know --
JUDGE TINLEY: We've had a K.K.K. rally here,
as a matter of fact.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's right. But, I
mean, I think that the -- you know, I just -- I think a
policy is very hard to write that's not -- that there's not
loopholes and problems with that. I mean, I wouldn't at all
be adverse to getting with -- seeing if Glenn can come up
with a list of those types of organizations, saying they can
10-19-03
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
use it, and other than that, those have to come to court.
But I think we'd be real -- it would be more for
coordination than saying yes or no, because I think once you
say yes, you say yes to everybody. Which I'm in favor of.
JUDGE, TINLEY: Any motion to be offered in
connection with Item 22? We'll move on to 23, consider and
discuss authorizing Request for Proposals for health
insurance coverage plan for County employees for either
January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004, or alternatively,
for January 1, 2004 through September 30, 2004. I put some
-- put a timeline in there that I think is generally
applicable, that necessitates us -- if we're going to get
proposals nn our insurance coverage, we need to start asking
for it immediately.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I -- yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: The earlier RFP that I
presented to the Court would have asked for either a -- a
self-insured, partially reinsured, or a fully insured plan,
alternatively. The -- the other mention that I made was
that any proposals to be considered must either state that
specifically, what the total compensation to be paid to the
broker/agent is, or in the alternative, set some maximum
dollar amount. A figure that was suggested to me was
$20,000, but, you know, that`s -- that can be any figure.
My thinking there was, in order that this Court can truly
1U-14-03
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
compare apples to apples and know what portion of its funds
are being paid for insurance coverage benefits or benefit
funds, rather than outside compensation, and not otherwise
available for payment of benefits or insurance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we definitely
need to do it. And I'm glad Commissioner Nicholson's here,
with his experience on this type of issue, because I think
-- I mean, I almost think we need to go back to the -- look
at what we're offering, and if we're offering the right
menu, for lack of another word, to our employees. And
decide on what we want to offer and then go out, you know,
and -- for proposal. We may be offering the right things,
but it seems -- I don't recall, since I've been on the
Court, that we've really looked at -- maybe -- I guess we
did one time since I've been ozi the Court, looked at what
we're offering employees.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, ideally, what -- if you
have the time, what you may want to consider doing is to
advertise for qualifications for a consultant, and then let
that consultant try and analyze what you're presently
offering versus what you might offer in the way of
alternatives. And then, getting some idea from the Court,
then let the consultant do a Request for Proposals. And --
but we, frankly, don't have the time to do both of those.
We've got coverage that's going to be expiring December 31.
lli-19-03
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
It takes a minimum of three weeks, according to the
information I have, for any prospective bidder to put
together -- that's if they have all of the information, all
of the loss information, the employee census, the whole nine
yards. Once they have that in-hand, it takes them a minimum
of three weeks to put together their proposal, and then
you've got -- once you know what proposal you're going with,
you've got to enroll those people in the plan. They`ve got
to have time to fabricate the identification cards and so
forth. So, we just flat don't have the time at this point.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What -- what I would
not like to see us do is simply invite the various providers
to provide a bid on the current coverage. I`d like for them
to come in and say, "Here's what it would cost for your
current scheme. Here's an Alternative B. Here`s an
Alternative C." And those alternatives -- I don't know what
all that would include. That would include things like not
paying the full cost of an employee-only coverage. It would
include things like whether or not we have what's called
coordination of benefits. I don't know if we have that in
ours now. That -- that's where, if -- if my spouse is
employed and she has a claim and she has coverage at her
company, then it has to pay first and not us pay first.
There are various alternative ways to go about insuring
people, and I would like these bidders to give us
10-14-03
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
151
alternatives that are better than the scheme we have now.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But have them all bid on
JUDGE TINLEY: Benchmark.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Benchmark. I think we
need to do it, and I like that. Sounds good to me.
COMMISSIUNER BALDWIN: How would you define
-- I mean, they bid on the benchmark, and then what are
those other -- just things that they offer? And how would
you compare that from one company to another company? If
you did, I mean, you wouldn't be comparing apples and
apples. It may be just that Plan B would seem like
something -- I mean, how would you do that? Seems like
something that we'd be more interested in for our employees?
CUMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't know how you
get around the apples and oranges thing, 'cause I would hope
at least two bidders would come in, and one of them would
propose a better plan than we have now, and the other one
would propose a better plan, and they'd be different.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
COMMTSSIONER NICHOLSON: And we then just
decide which of those two different ones we like the best,
or we'd be prevented from doing that. The one provider that
I've had some experience with -- and I don't know near as
much about this as you might think I do. It's not one of
1G-14-03
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
152
the topics that excited me very much when I was working.
One of the local agents provided a -- three options to the
Hill Country Youth Ranch. "Here's what you've been doing,
here's what it costs and pays, and here's B and C." And B
and C were clearly better for the employees and the
employers than the current one, and the Hill Country Youth
Ranch opted for one of those other two, and costs went dawn
and the benefits to the employees was -- was well-received.
JUDGE TINLEY: If you merely give them an
opportunity to present other coverage options, you know, at
their discretion, then, you know, some of them may come up
with a half a dozen different ones.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there any problem in
accepting one of those other ones that's not -- I mean,
there's no -- no problem with -- from the meeting
standpoint, if --
JUDGE TINLEY: Best value to the County.
Best-suited, best value to the County.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: In our opinion,
that's good enough? I'm comfortable.
JUDGE TINLEY: Correct me if that's an
erroneous statement, Mr. Motley.
MR. MOTLEY: As far as --
JUDGE TINLEY: If they offer various options,
and -- and we like one particular bidder's one out of, say,
1 ~ - 1 =? - Cl J
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
153
five plans that they propose -- say there's three bidders,
and they each present five different proposals, maybe a bid
on something that's akin to what we have now as a benchmark
and four others at whatever their discretion is, and we just
think this is the best one for Kerr County over here on --
on Bidder Number 3, Plan Number 4.
MR. MOTLEY: I think it's the best that --
JUDGE TiNLEY: Yeah, what we consider in the
best interests of the county.
MR. MOTLEY: Yeah. And it's the best bid
given what it is you're looking to do, which is to provide
the coverage.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, Mr. Motley, just
for example, so I'm clear on it, if two of these providers
come in mere and they're both offering the same plans that
we like, and we like both of them, and one of them's got a
$500 deductible and the other one's got a $1,000 deductible,
we can decide which of those --
MR. MOTLEY: I believe you can pick the
best -- the bid that ycu feel is best for the purpose you're
trying to achieve.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay.
MR. MOTLEY: And that doesn't necessarily
have to be the cheapest amount of money. And there can be a
preference granted to local vendors. I mean, that's
i0-14-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,-, 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~„, 2 4
25
154
allowed. And it's allowed to be paid more, I think, as
well, if you feel that is the best plan for the county, the
best overall deal. That's my understanding.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you say all that in a
motion?
(Commissioner Nicholson shook his head.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would -- I'll make a
motion that we go out for proposals for new health
insurance, and all bidders must bid on the benchmark, which
is our current policy attributes, and can bid on any other
policy options that they so choose, and the term for this
policy period will be January 1, 2004, through
September 30th, 2004.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I second the motion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I see Tommy waving his
hand already.
MR. TOMLINSON: I think I would substitute
the word "proposer" for bidder.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Did you intentionally
omit any reference to compensation to the welfare agent?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I did.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I said intentionally;
that's the reason I used the term. Okay. Any -- any
discussion or questions concerning the motion?
1G-19-03
s
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
155
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you see a problem with
me intentionally leaving that term out?
JUDGE TINLEY: No. No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And note that I did put
it at the end of our fiscal year, as opposed to calendar
year, which is --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We want to do that.
JUDGE TINLEY: When do you want those -- when
do you want the submission to be available, and when do you
want them to be -- to be returned by?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would say -- when are
our meetings in November?
MS. SOVIT,: The 11th and the 25th -- I mean
24th. 11th and 24th.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, Tommy, how long do
you need to -- or how long do we need to get them? Well,
why don't we just get them due back for the 11th? Have them
do it the Friday before the 11th, which would be --
MS. SOVIL: That's not long enough.
MR. TOMLINSON: I think you have a better
r_hance of -- of getting more proposers if you -- the longer
you give it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: So, I mean, I -- I would
stretch it as far as you could.
10-19-03
L
2
3
4
5
6
_~
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
156
MS. SOVIL: First meeting in December is the
8th.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Then you only have
three weeks. Is that enough time to study the thing and
make a decision?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is November -- do you
think November -- in your experience, is November 21st too
soon?
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't think it would be
hard -- be difficult to get the material for them to make a
proposal, but -- because all of our data is -- is here, plus
at our third-party administrator. So, as far as any loss
experience, that should he easy to get.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can start getting that
right now.
MR. TOMLINSON: I think the -- I think we
need some time also to be able to negotiate, if we want to,
and so I think maybe the first meeting in December would be
the latest.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, you know, we
don't have to have it on a regular Commissioners Court
meeting day; we can call any day we want.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we say
December 1st? What's December 1st?
MS. SOVIL: Monday.
1 0- 1 4- U 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2C
21
22
23
~,,, 2 4
25
157
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we have it
December 1st? 10 o'clock?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then give a full
month to negotiate and decide.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We just have a special
meeting on -- you know, if we have it at 9 o'clock on the
lst, we could just have a meeting at lU o'clock, accept the
bids and refer them for whatever we need to.
JUDGE TINLEY: When -- when are the bids
going to be available for the -- the Request for Proposal,
when -- when are they going to be available for pick-up?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: As soon as possible. I
mean, Tommy, how long will it take to get that together?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You said on or
before November 1, Judge. That sounds reasonable to me.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's probably -- I would
think that's reasonable.
JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon?
MR. TOMLINSON: I'm sure that's reasonable.
I mean --
JUDGE TINLEY: 11/1.
MR. TOMLINSON: -- it's not my data, so --
JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon?
MR. TOMLINSON: The Treasurer's the one to
answer this, because she -- she would be the one to -- to
1U-14-03
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
158
gather that information from -- from her records.
JUDGE TINLEY: Proposals will be received not
later than?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 9 a.m. December 1st.
JUDGE TINLEY: 12/1 at 9 a.m.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Bid packets will be
available on or before November 1.
MS. SOVIL: Who's going to make up the bid
packet?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I don't know whether you
can use "on or before." I think we got to have a date,
don't we, Tommy? Specific date?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, I think you need to
have a date.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On November 1st.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What day is
November 1st, please, ma'am?
MR. HOLEKAMP: It's a Saturday.
JUDGE TINLEY: We're going to have to back
that up. 10/31?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: December 30th -- I
mean October 30th.
MS. SOVIL: 31st is Friday.
JUDGE TINLEY: 10/30 or 10/31? What did you
put down?
l0-1~-0~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,^ 2 4
25
159
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 10/31.
JUDGE TINLEY: Does that fit with your
motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's all in there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. SOVIL: Are you still in discussion?
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Any question or
discussion on the motion, as stated?
MS. SOVIL: You didn't say in your discussion
who's going to put together the bid packets, and you didn't
say who was going to put out the newspaper ad.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The newspaper -- well,
Tommy, don't you usually put together these bid packages?
MR. TOMLINSON: I have for property coverage,
or I've -- not this time, I haven't. The Judge did. But I
think this falls within the scope of Personnel.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: Since it's employee coverage.
JUDGE TINLEY: Employee benefits.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: I'm going to be -- I have a
conference next week for four days. I'm going to be out of
town.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think the
1r-14-J3
1
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
Treasurer's got all the data, employee demographics,
experience.
JUDGE TINLEY: Should have, yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did you draw some
money for your per diem?
MR. TOMLINSON: It's in the process right
now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
JUDGE TINLEY: You can be first, right after
him. And what's -- where it's going to be published?
MS. SOVIL: No. Who is going to make up the
language to put in the paper for --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: County Treasurer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: County Treasurer, And I
think it would come out of the --
JUDGE TINLEY: County Court budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Our budget.
JUDGE TINLEY: Or Commissioners Court budget.
Not the County Court, no.
MS. SOVIL: I think that needs to be part of
your court order, so there's no misunderstanding on who does
what.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: She`s probably right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, Judge, are you going
to repeat that motion?
10-14-~3
1
^ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
161
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good job.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that it, Judge? I
23
24
,---
25
l„-~~-~;
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. Yes, be happy to.
Motion's been made and seconded that we authorize Request
for Proposals to be prepared by the Personnel officer, that
being the County Treasurer, for health insurance coverage
plans for the County employees for the period January 1,
2004 through September 30, 2004, with proposals to be
submitted on current coverage benefits as a benchmark, and
then any alternate proposals that the proposer wishes to
submit, such Request for Proposals to be picked up on or
after October 31, '03, and to be -- and proposals to be
received not later than December 1, '03, at 9 a.m.
MS. SOVIL: And opened?
JUDGE TINLEY: And opened on that date, yes.
MS. SOVIL: 10 o'clock?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 9 o'clock. If we get
them at 9:00, might as well open them at 9:00.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Any further question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
1
"' 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
162
want to go back to one, revisit it just for a second.
JUDGE TINLEY: We've got a couple of them
that we can revisit.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, just -- I only
want to revisit one.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just wanted to ask,
on the per diem and travel issue, if Thea is comfortable
with the amount of information she has so that she can put
together a paper of some sort?
MS. SOVIL: Well, all except -- do we have a
court order on mileage? We -- I know it was discussed that
we were going to follow the state guidelines on mileage, but
I don't know if there's a court order, quote, unquote, that
says we -- we're going to adopt the state mileage rate, and
when it changes, ours will automatically change. I know it
was discussed. That's the only thing that's kind of left up
in the air.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Personally, I think we
did, but I couldn't put my hands on it.
MR. TOMLINSON: I'm sure we did.
MS. SOVIL: Okay. That was the only thing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we did that
part of it.
MS. SOVIL: To answer your question, I can
10-14-U3
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
put together a draft.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine. You
know, I just -- I just know that this issue is going to pop
up over and over again, and I'd like to have our office and
Tommy's office and the Treasurer's office to have a -- a
piece of paper with the same language on it so we can all be
on the same horse -- riding the same horse.
MS. SOVIL: We're going to bring it back next
time?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. Is -- do you
agree or not agree?
JUDGE TINLEY: We're on the same horse?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That we're all riding
the same horse. This is --
JUDGE TINLEY: We all need to be, I know
that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what we're
trying to do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You were talking about
per diem; when I came back, we're riding horses.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just think this is
one of those issues that's going to come back and come back
and come back and come back, and we're going to end up
saying, you know, what did we do back in 2003? You know,
it's one of those things, if we can get it down in writing
is-l~-o?
1
2
3
4
164
so we can have something.
MS. SOVIL: It's good to put it in the
minutes, and no one ever questions it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So ten-four, good
5 buddy.
6
7
8 revisi
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Generally right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That`s all I wanted to
JUDGE TINLEY: All revisiting is off?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Far as I'm concerned.
JUDGE TINLEY: Time to go back on your
medication, right? Okay. Are we -- are we going to go back
to the O.S.S.F. matters?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I visited with the County
Treasurer prior to lunch about the job descriptions, and she
was working on them, and evidently she hasn't had -- you
know, she was going to try to get them done this afternoon
before we left. Bum she hasn't, obviously, so I think we
will have to meet tomorrow morning on that. I think it is
important enough for us to come back tomorrow morning to get
that resolved so we can advertise for those positions.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're busy till
11:00, you said?
JUDGE TINLEY: I should be through about
11:00, yeah. I think 11:00 is going to work for me. I
'0-~-4-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
.-. 2 4
25
165
haven't seen the -- the number that I've got to hear
MS. SOVIL: How long do you think it will
take?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The job descriptions? I
don't feel it's going to take long at all.
MS. SOVIL: Why don't you do it at 8 o'clock?
And then we get it over with and out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's fine, too.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fine with me.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I wouldn't mind
giving the County Treasurer long enough to get it --
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm thinking she may -- she
may need until late morning or early afternoon to get it
done, and either way, we're within 24 hours.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm okay with
whatever you all want to do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Doesn't make any
difference to me. I just think it's important enough that
we get it taken care of tomorrow.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Come in at noon and
let Motley buy us pizza.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I want a peanut butter
sandwich. 11:00 is fine.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 11 o'clock.
to i~ ~~
166
1
^ 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: Well, we'll announce that when
we -- are we ready to move on to -- does anybody need --
have a need to go into executive session on the matters
stated on the agenda? If not --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is there a matter
stated on the agenda?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, two different areas of
consideration, litigation and personnel.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We had -- seemed like,
to me, last meeting we had an executive session on a
particular issue. Is it not time to come back and talk
about that more? Or --
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you want to?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I mean, I don't have
anything new to bring to the table. I'm -- if we were going
to go -- I'd want somebody to tell me what's going on. Has
anything moved on the deal?
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know. We can go into
executive session and find out, if you want that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. If -- Motley, do
you have anything to report from last meeting?
MR. MOTLEY: Well, I wouldn't say I have
anything new.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right. That's it.
MR. MOTLEY: But I'd be happy to meet in
io-l~-u~
167
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-^ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
executive session to be sure what it is y'all are talking
about.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Visions of Get Smart.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I guess that brings us
to the approval_ agenda. Payment of the bills.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we pay the bills.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second that motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's made and seconded
that we pay the bills. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only comment I have is
that we sure pay attorneys a lot of money every month.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Shhhh, you can't say
that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got two
questions. First one is on Page 12. This question is for
my continuing education. What's the history behind paying
the birthday moneys to these various organizations and
persons?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's a Commissioner Baldwin
question.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm on Page 12.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Child Service Board
expense, birthday moneys.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Child Service Board.

168
1
''~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1i
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,,.-, 2 4
25
I still don't see it here. Where is it?
JUDGE TINLEY: 630, down -- two-thirds of the
way down the page.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, Health and
Emergency Services?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're required to have
a Child Service Board -- is that the correct word? -- Child
Service Board, and we do. And this Court is not required to
provide these kind of services, but we have chosen to do
that through the years. It is children that have been taken
from their homes and -- and that are in the care of,
usually, the State facility.
MS. SOVIL: C.P.S.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm sorry?
MS. SOVIL: C.P.S. children.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: C.P.S. children, if
that makes sense to you. And many times, when they get --
they get taken from their home, they're taken in their
pajamas; no toothbrush, no hair comb, no soap, no nothing,
and this Commissioners Court has chosen to provide those
kinds of things. And then, annually, they get together and
have a Christmas party, and this, nine times out of ten, is
the only time that they receive any kind of Christmas gift.
We do that -- seems like, to me, we pay -- we buy their cap
10-19-03
169
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and gown, maybe, for graduation, if they reach that point.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And birthdays.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Birthdays.
MS. SOVIL: We give them $25 each for their
birthday usually.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why are you asking me?
Everybody else knows. (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That's what it says, is
"birthday."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, is it?
JUDGE TINLEY: That's why --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's why I found it.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's why we were telling
you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. But they --
and they all have birthdays.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Every year. Every year
they have one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I've had many more
than they've had.
JUDGE TINLEY: Unlike some women you know,
these children have birthdays.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, they do. And
it's -- to me, it's an honor to be able to help them. This
is the only -- for many, many of them, it's the only thing
1 0- 1 4- 0 3
170
1
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 they receive in the form of gifts. It truly is. I
have -- I have acted as a Santa Claus for their Christmas
party, and I'll tell you, it will jerk your heart out.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's big-time.
JUDGE TTNLEY: When were you the Santa Claus?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's about -- about
three years ago.
JUDGE TTNLEY: Did they ask to you return?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They have not asked me
to return.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we'll have to look into
that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I enjoyed myself.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They didn't want you to
gain any more weight.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can fit in the suit
now.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The -- I recognize
some of these names on here. And, for example, Hill Country
Youth Ranch has about 85 children, and I think what I see is
that every month, we make a $25 contribution, so apparently
that $25 doesn't go to an individual child. They also have
a -- their Auxiliary has a program where each child is
1G-14-03
1 ~ ~
1 sponsored by a person in the community, and when it's trait
2 birthday, they get_ a cake delivered, a card, and I think
3 it's $20 in the card, or $10 or something. So, I think what
4 I'm hearing is this is a way to help underwrite the expenses
5 of children that are wards of the state, and we're happy to
6 do it. On Page 14, fourth item from the bottom, Benno's
7 Electric, $9,250, rewire arena barn, extra breaker panel.
8 MR. HOLEKAMP: Those were the major
9 improvements that we had scheduled for last year in the Ag
10 Barn budget to rewire the indoor arena.
11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's all I've got.
12 MR. HOLEKAMP: To bring it up to code.
13 MR. TOMLINSON: For additional information,
14 on -- where you see the three letters, "enc", in this
15 department's report, that means that that item is charged
16 against the prior year.
1~ COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay, thanks.
18 That's all.
19 JUDGE TINLEY: What does "enc" stand for?
20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Encumbered.
21 MR.. TOMLINSON: Encumbered.
22 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other questions or
23 comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
24 your right hand.
25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
1u-_4-C~;
172
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
--~ 1 3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
{No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget
amendments.
MR. TOMLINSON: I have two. I -- Number 1
relates to '02-'03 year. It's for Records Management
Preservation. We had budgeted $5,000 for records
preservation for -- for the District Clerk. The bill -- no,
I'm sorry, we budgeted $4,500, and the bill came in at five.
So, my request is to increase this -- this budget by $500
to -- to make this payment.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve Budget Amendment Request Number 1.
MR. TOMLINSON: I do -- I do need a hand
check to go with this.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, hand check to --
MR. TOMLINSON: It's to Hart Intercivic for
$5,000 for records -- restoration of civil records.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. To include hand check
to Hart Intercivic for $5,000. All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising Vour right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.}
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
10-19-03
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
173
(No response . )
JUDGE TINLEY: Budget Amendment Request
MR. TOMLINSON: WP have a situation here that
we -- we have a -- we have line items in the budget that do
not exactly mirror the court orders passed during the budget
process. I've attached Page 165 and 166, and 179 and 180
out of the transcript. Specifically, on Page 165, item --
Line 21 through 25, and on 166, Line 1 through 3. And then,
on Page 179, it's Line 5 through 10 and 16 through 25. And
then, on Page 180, it's Line 1 through 4, and it has to do
with -- with the mental health fees charged at the State
Hospital. Essentially, the -- the order called for the line
item, Mental Health, and 10-426-104, which is the County
Court, to be $16,000, with the proviso that -- that the
Justice of the Peace -- salaries for Justice of the Peace
Precincts 2, 3, and 4 would not exceed their regular salary
plus -- plus the $2,000 that they receive for that. So, the
request for the amendment is to increase the Mental Health
line item by $10,000, decrease the elected officials'
salaries for Justice of the Peace Precinct 2, 3, and 4 by
$3,333. I'm sure you all recall this issue.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know that I
anticipated doing anything to the -- to the J.P. salaries.
I realize there was a proviso there.
10-14-03
174
1
~`° 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, we --
JUDGE TINLEY: That may be the only way you
can get there. I don't know, but --
MR. TOMLINSON: I think that's the only way I
can get there ar.d pay them the same amount. 'Cause I --
what I'll do is pay them out of the Mental Health line item,
as we are now. We already do that. So, part of their
salary comes from --
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, $2,000 of it comes from
there.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. So -- so $5,333 will
come from there, the way I see it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me say it back
to you and make sure I understand. We budgeted to increase
the J.P.'s salaries by the cost-of-living amount. Was that
2.5?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And we voted to
increase their compensation another $1,000 on top of that,
but_ we did not vote to increase the -- the amount, which was
$2,000, that they receive for conducting these mental health
hearings.
MR. TOMLINSON: I think -- I think we did.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Said another way --
try it again -- we agreed to increase their gross
io-i~-a}
1
,"'`- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
175
compensation by 2 and a half percent, plus $1,000.
MR. TOMLINSON: I agree with that, yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Is this doing
something on top of that?
MR. TOMLINSON: No, this does not do
anything.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is just moving
numbers around between accounts?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, that's correct.
Between -- between the budget for each J.P. and County
Court.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where it's changed is
where the money's coming from?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's exactly right. That
change reflects the transcript as to what actually happened.
Anybody see anything different?
JUDGE TINLEY: It's not going to increase the
gross compensation to the J.P.
MR. TOMLINSON: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ:
MR. TOMLINSON: It
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms.
MS. SOVIL: The on
you have to -- we published their
paper, and the law says you can't
No.
remains the same.
Sovil?
1y problem I have is you --
increase as it was in the
change that. You can only
10-14-03
176
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,.1 2 4
25
pay according to what is published in the paper. We got an
opinion on that, remember? That if -- if there -- if you're
going to change anything -- I don't know that you can change
it at this point.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're not changing.
We're just changing where the funds come from. We just are
pulling their salary from pot A instead of pot B. We're not
changing what they get paid at all.
JUDGE TINLEY: The amount of compensation
under what he's proposed here --
MS. SOVIL: I understand that, but are you
changing the amount of salary or the amount of --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Of mental health?
MS. SOVIL: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY; Yes.
MS. SOVIL: It wasn't changed -- you can't
pay them, then, because, if you'll remember, the County
Attorney's opinion from Seguin -- I mean, not the County --
the A.G. opinion from Seguin said that they couldn't pay any
more than what was advertised in the paper -- publicized.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thea, we're not --
we're going to pay them the exact same amount that was
advertised.
MS. SOVIL: Okay. As long as -- you can't
10-~4-03
177
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
change what was advertised.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're not changing, we're
just changing where the money comes from that we're paying.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's right.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you.
MS. SOVIL: I'm just --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Keep us straight.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval of Budget
Amendment 2.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
approve Budget Amendment Number 2. Any further question or
discussion? All in favor of the budget amendment, signify
by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sicrn.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Okay, that`s
all the budget amendments.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Boy, you know how to
stir it up.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have any late bills?
MR. TOMLINSON: None whatsoever.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I have before me
minutes of the special session Tuesday, September 2nd, 2003;
to-i~-o3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
178
the minutes of the regular session of Commissioners Court
Monday, September 8, 2003; minutes of the regular session of
the Commissioners Court Monday, September 22, 2003. Do I
have a motion to approve these minutes as presented?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the minutes 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 carries. I have before
me monthly reports from the Sheriff's Department, County
Clerk, Justice of the Peace Precinct 3, and Justice of the
Peace Precinct 4. Do I have a motion to approve these
reports as presented?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the monthly reports as presented from the Sheriff's
Department, County Clerk, Justice of the Peace Precinct 3,
and Justice of the Peace Precinct 4 be approved. Any
further question or discussion? All in favor of the motion,
10-14-03
179
I
~" 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
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.
Gentlemen, do we have arly other reports of any kind?
Elected officials? Department heads?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I attended the
airport -- Joint Airport Advisory Board meeting last week,
and what I heard was a very good and thorough presentation
on the status of projects, an update on that. And the
issues that we talked about in here recently, the contract
with Mooney and the status of the board's authority, were
not discussed. So, nothing -- nothing significant to report
there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other reports? Being
nothing else, I will declare the meeting adjourned.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
MS. SO`JIL: Recessed.
JUDGE TINLEY: Excuse me, declare the meeting
in recess until 11 a.m. Tuesday -- or, excuse me, Wednesday,
October the 15th. I'll get it right.
(Commissioners Court recessed at 2:45 p.m.)
10-14-03
180
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
STATE OF TEXAS ~
COUNTY OF KERR ~
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as
County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County,
Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 21st day of October,
2003.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2Z
23
24
25
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
Kathy Ban Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
10-14-03
Order No. 28344
County Extension Agent-Agriculture/Natural Resources
On this the 14th day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin,
Seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0 to
hire Roy Walston for the position of County Extension Agent-Agriculture/Natural
Resources.
Order No. 28345
Flu Vaccinations to be held at the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center
On this the 14`h day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson,
Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0
to provide the use of the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center for a clinic to provide flue
vaccinations to the citizens of Kerr County as requested by Texas Department of Health.
Order No. 28346
DISASTER OR BIOWARFARE EVENT
On this the 14`h day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
Seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-
0 to allow the use of the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center in the event of a disaster or
biowarfare event as requested by the Texas Department of Health.
Order No. 28347
PUBLIC HEARING FOR ALTERNATE PLAT REVISIONS
On this the 14~' day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0
to set a public hearing for November 24, 2003 at 10:30 AM for Alternate Plat Revisions
for the following:
a) Falling Water, Lot 138A & 139A, Volume 7 Page 75 & 76 (combination of lots)
b) Falling Water, Lot 12A & 125, Volume 7 Page 52 (combination of lots)
c) Greenwood Forest, Lots 8 Block 6, Volume 3 page 123 and Lots 16 & 17, Volume 6
Volume 5 page 92 (combination of lots)
d) Riverpark Estates, Lot 27, Volume 4, Page 42 (variance for lot size granted)
Order No.28348
Release Letter of Credit #07366775
On this the 14th day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson,
Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0
to release Letter of Credit #0736775 for Road Construction in Stablewood Springs
Subdivision.
Order No. 28349
Amending Court Order 28232
Order for Emergency Service Road District Election and change the District
Number from 1 to 2
On this the 14`h day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson,
Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0
to Amend the Order No. 28232 to change the number of the District from Number 1 to
Number 2 for the Emergency Service District Election in the Mountain Home area.
Order No. 28350
APPOINTMENT OF ELECTION JUDGE AND ALTERNATE JUDGE
On this the 14`'' day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson,
Seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0 to
Appoint Misty Smith as Judge and Jane Alley as Alternate Judge for the Emergency
Service District Election No. 2.
Order No.28351
SUPPLEMENTAL DEATH BENEFITS
On this the 14`h day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0
to approve the adopting the Orders from TCDRS for participation in the supplemental
death benefits fund program effective January 1, 2004
Order No. 28352
ADOPT STATE RULES & GUIDELINES FOR OSSF
On this the 14th day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
Seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-
0 to adopt the current State Rules and Guidelines for OSSF and set a public hearing at the
next Commissioners Court Meeting.
..-.
Order No. 28353
STAFFING THE ENVIROMENTAL HEALTH PROGRAM
On this the 14`h day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0
to approve the staffing of the Environmental Health Program and authorize the Treasurer
to create the job descriptions for each.
See Transcript
Order No.28354
LOCATING THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
On this the 14`h day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
Seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-
0 to locate the Environmental Health Department adjacent to the Treasurers office in the
lower level of the courthouse.
Order No. 28355
Administration of the Flood Plain Program
On this the 14th day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
Seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-
0 to Notify UGRA that this Court will resume the duties of the Flood Plain Program and
have the Judge to send out a letter to UGRA stating such.
Order No. 28356
Kerr County Flood Plain Administration
On this the 14th day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson,
Seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0 to
approve the Flood Plain Administration under the direction of the Road and Bridge
Department.
Order No.28357
BUDGET AMENDMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
On this the 14th day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson,
Seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0 to
transfer $64,000 from Line Item No. 10-630-211 Health & Emergency Services to the
Environmental Health Budget; add $77,000 from the Environmental Health revenues
Line Item No. 10-335-201 & increase Revenue Line Item No. 10-335-201 from -0- to
$77,000.00.
Order No. 28358
PROPERTY TO FACILITATE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
DEPARTMENT/OSSF PROGRAM
On this the 14th day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin,
Seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-
0 to authorize the Kerr County OSSF Committee to negotiate acquisition of certain
property to facilitate setting up the new Environmental Health Department/OSSF
Program.
Order No. 28359
CITY/COUNTY FIRE FIGHTING AGREEMENT
On this the 14th day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin,
Seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-
0 to approve the Fourteenth Amendment and Extension of City/County Fire Fighting
Agreement and authorize County Judge to sign same.
..-_
Order No. 28360
CONTRACT BETWEEN OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION AND
KERR COUNTY
On this the 14`" day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
Seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-
0 to approve the contract between the Office of Court Administration and Kerr County.
Order No. 28361
USE OF HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUES FOR CONVENTION
CENTER FACILITIES and BUDGET AMENDMENT
On this the 14th day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin,
Seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0 to
approve the Agreement between City of Kerrville and the County of Kerr for use of Hotel
Occupancy Tax Revenues for improvement of Convention Center Facilities for the
purchase of Bleachers and an Ice Machine increase the budget by $3859.00 and authorize
County Judge to sign same.
Order No. 28362
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE
On this the 14th day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
Seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-
0 to Request for Proposals for health insurance coverage plans for County employees for
January 1, 2004 -December 31, 2004 to be prepared by the County T reasurer
Sce Transcript.
ORDER N0.28363
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
On this the 14ND day of October 2003 came to be considered by the Court various
Commissioners precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are:
370- Other Revenue $1456.66, 400-County Judge $54.94, 401-Commissioners Court
$1550.55, 402-Election Expense $97.66, 403-County Clerk $8943.53, 404-Records
Management $1096.68, 408-Information Technology $12.95, 409-Non Departmental
$7,425.80, 426-County Court $2874.28, 427-County Court at Law $3052.19, 429-Court
Collections $187.35, 434-Jury $800.51, 435-216`h District Court $24,617.28, 436-198`h
District Court $15,942.96, 445-198`h District Attorney $8957.67, 450- District Clerk
-- $12,009.11, 455- JP #1 $1533.15, 456-JP#2 $232.15, 457-JP#3 $1895.56, 457-JP#4
$2747.15, 475-County Attorney $1837.63, 495-County Auditor $2364.02, 497-County
Treasurer $2295.79, 499-County Treasurer $5474.44, 510-Courthouse & Related
Buildings $11,406.82, 511- Jail Maintenance $1883.26, 512-County Jail $23,893.57,
513-Parks Maintenance $50.85, 551-Constable Pct #1 $299.50, 553-Constable Pct #3 .94,
554-Constable Pct. #4 $22.47, 560-Sheriff's Dept. $61,817.30, 570- Juvenile Probation
$18,232.61, 571- 216`h Adult Probation $ 2081.38, 580- Department of Public Safety $
154.26, 595- City/County Operations $2986.16, 630-Health & Emergency Services
$1151.25, 640-Enviromental Health $656.68, 642- Rabies & Animal Control $1256.35,
660-County Sponsored $1800.00, 665-Agriculture Extension $2205.85, 666-HC Youth
Exhibition Center $15894.25. 611- Fire Protection $17,356.19.
Total Cash Required: $393,363.02
Upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the
Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0, to pay said Accounts.
ORDER N0.28364
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
RECORDS MANAGEMENT & PRESERVATION
On this the 14`h day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0
to transfer $500.00 from #28 Surplus Funds into line item 28-635-411 for the budget year
2002/03 and to pay by a hand check $5000 payable to Hart Intercivic for restoration on
civil records.
ORDER N0.28365
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR
COUNTY COURT, JUSTICE OF THE PEACE #2, #3 & #4
On this the 14t" day of October 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
Seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-
0-0 to transfer $3334.00 from line item 10-458-101, $3333.00 from 10-457-101,
$3333.00 from 10-456-101 and put $10,000.00 into line item 10-426 X04 mental health.
ORDER 28366
APPROVE AND ACCEPT MINUTES
AND WAIVE READING
On this the 14th day of October, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson,
Seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 3-0-0, to waive reading and approve the minutes of Special Session of September 2,
2003, Regular Session on September 8, 2003, and Regular Session of September 22,
2003 of the Kerr County Commissioners' Court.
ORDER N0.28367
ACCEPT AND APPROVE
MONTHLY REPORTS
On this the 14th day of October, 2003, upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin,
Seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 3-0-0,
to accept the following reports and direct that they be filed with the County Clerk for
future audit:
Sheriff s Department
County Clerk
r,., Justice of the Peace #3
Justice of the Peace #4