1
2
,..--.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-.
25
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Regular Session
Monday, December 8, 2003
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge
H.A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4
~i
no
2
1
,,.~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2.1
22
23
24
.-.
25
	I N D E X	
	December 8, 2003	PAGE
---	Commissioners' Comments	4
1.1	Status of Kerrvill Kerr County Joint Airport	
	Advisory Board p2 ~`~t'3 ~	6
1.2	Set public hearing for alternate plat process of	
	Lots 83 and 84, Northwest Hills, Precinct 1~ q ~~(~	35
1.3	Approve FEMA project completion and certification	
	report, Disaster Number 1425, and authorize	
	County Judge to sign same p? $ ~ ~ r	41
1.4	Presentation of interlocal contracts for mental	
	y
health services for approval, authorize Co m	
	'
Judge to sign same as they are returned. ~ ~1~ Z	45
1.5	Request to use courthouse grounds on December 13	
	for rally in support of retaining acute care beds	
	at Kerrville V.A. facilityo2 ~7~~3	58
1.6	Resolution of support for retention of 20 acute z ~ ~~~
	beds and 5 ICU beds at Kerrville V.A. Facility	61
1.7	Request to utilize the open area in lower level	
	of courthouse annex for a Christmas party for	
		
	clients of Juvenile Probation Departmentp2 ~}~~,Z	71
1.10	Set public hearing on authorizing the freezing of	
	ad valorem property tax values on residential	
	property of owners who are elderly or disabled	72
1.8	County Attorney's advice on whether Commissioners	
	Court has legal authority to grant merit pay	
	increases to employees	78
1.9	Approve policy and procedures for granting merit	
	pay increases	82
1.11	Approve contracts between Kerr County and Ingram	~~~~
	& Hunt VFD, authorize County Judge to sign same	85
1.12	Request to reserve and use southeast corner of~ ~	~f(~
	courthouse square on April 8-10, 2004, for annual	
	mop and broom sale by the Kiwanis Club, Kerrville	85
1.13	Environmental Health Department (OSSF) procedures,	
	forms and fees	87
1.14	Discuss parking, installing signage, and policya ~ ~ ~~
	on exterior door use for Environmental Health	116
		
1.15	Authorize purchasing additional office equipments	~ ~W 9
	and build-out for Environmental Health Department	127
4 . 1 Pay Bills a ~ 4~Sr~ 135
4.2 Budget Amendments '-" 139
4.3 Late Bills --• ---
4.4 Read and Approve Minutes ~ ~ ~~ 143
4.5 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports ~t~sp'~ 144
5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison reports 144
--- Adjourned 158
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
On Monday, December 8, 2003, at 9:00 a.m., a regular
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the
Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville,
Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning. It's 9 a.m.
I'll call to order the meeting of the regular Commissioners
Court meeting that was posted for this time and date,
Monday, December 8th, 2003, at 9 a.m. At this time, I'd
like to call on Dr. Joe Taylor, pastor of Southern Oaks
church right down the road from me.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. Please
be seated.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thanks, Joe.
JUDGE TINLEY: At this time, if there's any
member of the public that has joined us that wishes to bring
any matter to our attention that is not listed on the
agenda, you're privileged to come forward at this time.
We'd welcome you to come forward. If you wish to talk to us
about a matter that is listed on the agenda, we would ask
that you wait until that time that that agenda item is
called to talk to us then. And we'd also ask -- it's not
absolutely required, but it helps us for planning purposes
if you would fill out a participation form that's located at
i~-a-~~
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the back of the room, and you can bring it up here so that
we'll be sure not to miss you when that agenda item comes
around. So, if there's any member of the public that wishes
to address the Court on any matter that is not on the
agenda, why, we'd ask that you come forward at this time. I
see no one moving this direction. Hopefully, we'll get some
participation when we come to agenda items. We'll move on
to the next section of the agenda. Commissioner Baldwin,
what do you have for us this morning?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't have anything.
I just want to move into the agenda and take care of the
business of the people.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nothing at the
moment, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Couple of comments.
Final congratulations to both the Kerrville and Comfort
football teams. They went very far in the playoffs, though
unfortunately both of them did get beat, Comfort this past
Friday night. And the other comment is, I just want to -- I
went -- had the opportunity to go to two Christmas parties
yesterday afternoon, one in the Cypress Creek community, one
at Lane Valley community, and I just want to report that
Spanish is not the only second language spoken in this
12-8-03
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-~
25
county. There was -- (Laughter) -- a good part of both
meetings were spoken in German, and I was left out of it.
But it was interesting. A lot of fun to see a lot of the
old-timers, and very interesting. Only comment I had.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No schnapps?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All kinds of things down
there.
JUDGE TINLEY
Commissioner Nicholson?
Thank you, Commissioner Letz.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's very dry out in
west Kerr County, and the -- the KARFA, Kerrville Area Rural
Firefighters Association, met last Wednesday, and they --
all the chiefs asked that we reinstitute a burn ban, so I'm
going to ask for a meeting -- a special meeting with due
notice to do that. The one other thing, I want to
congratulate Rosa Lavender for the excellent article she
wrote about water in Kerr County, and about the headwaters.
It is very educational. Of course, Mr. Letz is an expert on
water, and I've been studying water for a couple years, and
I learned something from the article, and I think it ought
to be required reading for everybody in the county. Thank
you, Rosa.
MS. LAVENDER: Thanks.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If I could, on water,
Region J met last week and we did two things. I'm not
-~_-s-o~
6
1
.-. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
sure -- the City Manager's aware of one of them, but we
added two slots -- or actually three slots to Region J
Board. One will be an additional member from the City of
Kerrville, and one will be the General Manager of
Headwaters. And they are currently -- City of Kerrville
currently has one slot served by a City Councilman. We
discussed it, and we expanded the overall board basically to
get more input from people that are actually doing a lot of
the work. And I'm not sure who they're going to appoint,
though I have a very good idea who the City's going to
appoint to fill that slot; a good asset to our board. And
also, finally, after a lot of -- seems like an eternity,
water planning -- the first year or so is a lot of
administrative stuff; doesn't seem like you do much, dealing
with population and all this stuff, and we're finally
getting into the actual supply and demand issues of water,
and it's interesting. We're looking at some -- hopefully,
some studies are coming out of this that are going to really
be a big benefit to Kerr County and the whole region.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else, gentlemen?
Thank you very much. Let's move right into the agenda. The
first item on the agenda is consider and discuss the status
of ttie Kerrville/Kerr County Joint Airport Advisory Board.
Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this item on the
i,-a-o~
7
1
~., 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.--.
25
agenda for a couple of reasons. One, there was, I guess, an
editorial that got my attention several weeks ago about this
overall topic and the -- and the, I guess, management of the
airport. But also, I think even more importantly is that it
just -- that editorial brought to light, in my mind, again,
that for over eight months a situation has existed that we
really haven't resolved, acid I think it's very important.
And, as I understand it, in a nutshell, is that the -- in
1970, Kerr County basically created, through a number of
mechanisms, the advisory board, and that board was set up to
run the airport. And in about '87, I believe, both the City
and the County passed resolutions that it was to be an
advisory board only.
This year, I think both our legal staffs of
both the City and the County have advised that that's
something that we can't do. We can't change the will of the
voters in 1970 and make the board advisory. That was not
set up to be advisory by the voters, and I just think that
we need to move forward on that. The -- I think it's very
important that we honor what the voters of Kerr County
wanted in 1970 when they created this board, and that is
that the Airport Board should run the airport pretty much,
as I understand it, from all matters. And I think that we
just need to progress to shift from having -- from using
that board as an advisory board to a functioning board that
1~-8-03
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~.~ 13
14
"15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,~-
25
administers the airport, so I put it on the agenda just for
this reason. I really don't have a -- necessarily, a game
plan. I just wanted to get it on the table and discuss it a
little bit this morning.
I appreciate Granger MacDonald coming; he's
one of our -- the County's appointees. Mr. Miller was also
invited, but due to some situations that he was dealing
with -- and I'm not sure even -- he even got the message.
Last week I left a message at the phone company, and he's no
longer at that office, I should say, so I'm not sure if he's
-- you know, but he was invited as well. We do appreciate
Granger coming, and he's welcome to participate as well.
And one of the reasons I really wanted both is because
they're our appointees, to have them present or invite them,
but also it changes greatly, possibly, who we put on that
board. I mean, it's one thing to be a -- you know,
appointed to an advisory board; it's another whole thing to
appoint a joint -- an airport board, and potentially the
time commitment changes substantially. So, I just wanted to
get it on the table, and I'll open it up to the rest of the
Court and get their ideas. Maybe we can come up with a
direction by the end of this discussion today.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm glad you --
Commissioner, I'm glad you put it on. I had intended to put
it on. I was sort of waiting for the County Judge, and the
1~-~-0~
1
,,.~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
9
Judge didn't put on it, so it's on and here we are; we`re
going to talk about it. You indicate you didn't
particularly have a game plan. I do have a game plan, and
it's embodied in a motion which I'm going to spread around
the table here and offer at the right time. We have talked
about it. We have determined that we need to do something
about it, and I think that the time is right to do just
that, and so what I've attempted to do in this motion is to
embody all of the things, as best I could recall, that were
discussed between the County and the City with respect to a
change in governance, and that would be the structure of the
board, what the board is allowed to do or not to do, the
composition of the board, the terms of the board, the
tenure, and all those various things, and I've got it
embodied in a motion. And, to further this discussion and
get it wide-open, I'm going to offer the motion, and then
we'll see where this takes us.
So, I'm offering a motion that Court Order
17103, dated February 9, 1987, be rescinded and replaced
with Court Order -- whatever number of the clerk gives us --
dated December 8, 2003, that sets forth the following; That
the Kerrville/Kerr County Joint Airport Board of Directors
shall Yrereinafter be an autonomous body with the authority
to make all decisions relating to the operations and the
maintenance of the Kerrville/Kerr County Airport and the
i~-a-u~
10
1
„-. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
leasing of airport buildings and land parcels therein, with
such other limitations that may be here express -- expressed
herein. Two, that the Kerrville/Kerr County Joint Airport
Board of Directors will be comprised of seven members
appointed for two-year terms, of which two members to be
appointed by the City of Kerrville, two members appointed by
Kerr County Commissiaiiers Court, and one member of the City
-- Kerrville City Council and one member of Kerr County
Commissioners Court. The six voting members each year will
select the chairperson. All Joint Airport Board members
shall serve without compensation. Three, the Joint Airport
Board of Directors shall exercise complete and final
authority over airport revenues and expenses and shall cause
to be prepared an annual balanced budget that coincides with
the fiscal year of both the County and the City. Four, that
the Joint Airport Board shall have no authority to issue
instruments of debt without first obtaining the approval of
the City of Kerrville and Kerr County, nor shall the Board
be empowered to sell airport property or purchase additional
property without first obtaining the approval of the City of
Kerrville and Kerr County. And, finally, that the joint
Airport Board may enter into contracts for administrative
and other services as may be required to conduct airport
business. And, lastly, that the County Judge be further
authorized to communicate the above to the City of Kerrville
1'~-~-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
11
Mayor and Council and urge their concurrence to the adoption
of amendments to the existing city ordinances. That would
be in the form of a motion.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I second the motion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wow. Where's the
discussion?
JUDGE TINLEY: One of the things that I would
offer, Commissioner, when you're talking about the powers of
that body --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm? If I left
some out, Judge, put them in.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I -- I think there's
some limitations that are imposed, if I'm not mistaken,
by -- I believe it's Chapter 22 of the Transportation Code.
The one that comes to mind immediately with respect to
leasing prohibits a board that is organized under the
provisions of the current legislation -- actually organized
under its predecessor legislation -- that the leases could
not exceed 40 years. And there's a general prohibition
against sale of property. But the limitations are spelled
out; I believe it's Chapter 22 of the Transportation Code.
Mr. Motley may be able to tell us that.
MR. MOTLEY: I don't remember the section --
the chapter off my head, but I think the Judge is right, 35-
or 40-year limit on the length of the leases. As long as
1 ~ - 8 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1J
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
..-,
25
12
they don't go over that duration, then the County and the
City really have no say-so on how it operates.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, the actual limitations
on the -- on the authority of that body or board are spelled
out -- I believe it's in only one section there, if I'm not
mistaken. One section refers to it; the other one spells it
out. But that would be -- that would be my concern about
the authority or lack of it as embodied.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could we cure that
deficiency by making reference to Chapter 22 of the
Transportation Code?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. That's -- to me,
you know, I don't -- I mean, I agree with all of the body of
this, but really, the only thing that I see that we do is
the -- recently, the ccinposition of the board itself, which
-- you know, and I really need the County Attorney to say
that we have authority to make a change there. Everything
else, I think we just refer to the -- to Chapter 22, and
that's the authority they have. I mean, last time we tried
to fiddle with that chapter, we got in trouble, which is
where we are right now. So I think --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whichever works.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think whatever that --
whatever the voters voted on, which is now embodied in
Chapter -- I think it's 22, that should be the authority of
l~-fi-~3
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
13
that board. And whatever those powers are, let them have
it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And you're saying
that -- that the Transportation Code specifies that they
have decision-making authority?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I don't know if it
does or -- I mean, I haven't read it clearly, but as I
understand it, when the voters voted on it, they were voting
based on that legislation, and that legislation is what that
board should be set up as, and nothing more, nothing less.
JUDGE TINLEY: When -- when the board was
initially created, it was created from what was then known
as the Municipal Airport Act. That legislation has
transformed into now what is under Chapter 22 of the -- of
the Transportation Code. The -- that portion of the
Transportation Code generally says that it's in charge of
the overall operation of the airport, and then it merely
imposes certain limitations or things that they can't do,
but other than that, it has carte blanche authority, so to
speak.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It might be helpful,
Judge, then, if the County Attorney recited for us whatever
those prohibitions are so we could be certain we'd know.
MR. MOTLEY: Right now"?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No better time I can
8 U 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
14
think of.
MR. MOTLEY: Well, a lot better time I can
think of. I mean, something that you need me to work on in
advance, I need you to give me some heads-up on it. I don't
-- I don't actually have the, you know, airport authority
memorized, so I didn't prepare anything on it. I think that
what we're talking about, just general -- the Airport Board
has broad authority, and the County and the City are not to
interfere with that authority except in very limited
situations. And as far as -- you know, I mean, if you'd
like me to go and research it now and give you an answer,
I'll try the best I can.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think the
Court would probably like to know the answer. I would, for
one, would like to know whether or not Chapter 22 as
referenced -- of the Transportation Code as referenced by
the County Judge would eliminate the need for us to state in
a motion such things as the issuance of debt instruments.
Can we do that?
MR. MOTLEY: I'm going to review Chapter 22
and see what you're referring to, because --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, I mean,
it -- to me -- well, maybe the right course is not -- I
mean, the County Attorney doesn't have -- doesn't have the
advance notice to know we were going to discuss it in this
1~-~-~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
15
detail. If we delay action on this order or motion until
our next meeting -- I hate to delay, 'cause it's been
delayed for, I know, months and months, but I don't want to
get in a situation where we do a court order that's not
correct either.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Neither do I.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that what we
could do today, clearly, is rescind Court Order 17103, and
we know we're doing that. And then, by doing that, I think
that board is then, without question, under the
Transportation Code.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't have a
problem with that, and that's a good first step. I would
add to that, if we're going to amend the motion, that --
which is possible to do -- that the County Attorney be
instructed to take a look at this motion as offered
originally and compare it to the Transportation Code,
Chapter 22, and to determine whether any or all of it's
necessary, or if other safeguards are necessary as required
by law. I'll amend my motion to include that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll amend my second
to include that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge -- go ahead, sorry.
Didn't mean to interrupt. I was just going to -- I believe
Mr. Patterson wants to -- had a comment he wanted to make.
1^-f~,-n 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
16
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Mr. Ron Patterson, City
Manager, is here. He and I have had some discussions about
these issues over the past three months.
MR. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. For the record, my
name is Ron Patterson, City Manager, 832 Washington,
representing the City of Kerrville today. I just want to
clarify a couple of points real quick about the discussion
that's happening here today. First of all, the election
creating what's called an airport authority versus the
appointment of an airport board are two separate issues. I
want to make clear the action of the board -- or I should
say the action of the Commissioners Court or the City
Council with regard to the matter of the election. The
election was called and held, and there was an airport
authority created, which was not created under the Texas
Municipal Airport Act at the time; it's a separate
authority. Different body of law as well; give you a
heads-up.
MR. MOTLEY: I understand that.
MR. PATTERSON: Okay.
MR. MOTLEY: I understand that's correct.
MR. PATTERSON: Yeah. So that authority that
was created was never populated. In other words, there was
never anybody assigned to it, nobody ever put against it,
and the authorities given that by the law were never put
1~-~-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-.
25
17
into effect by virtue of creating the body to sit and govern
that authority. Okay? The body that was created, the
airport board, by -- by and under the Texas Municipal
Airport Act, and subsequently in the Transportation Act, is
separate. There are two different bodies of law when
looking at those under the authority. There's one list that
says here's what they care and can't do. Under the Texas
Municipal Airport Act, or now the Transportation Code,
there's a different list of here's what they can and can't
do. So, by virtue of taking any action, whether by the
Commissioners Court or the Council, a determination -- first
of all, talking about doing what the will of the voters
want, well, if you're goinq to do what -- purely what the
voters voted on with regard to the airport authority, you
have to look at that body ~f law. If you want to look at
what it is that the Commissioners Court and the Council want
this board to do with regard to how it was created under the
Transportation Act, that's a separate body. So, my -- my
statement here is only to say, let's be sure. Which
direction are we talking about going? Because that list is
significantly different in some areas.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mr. Patterson, I guess in
the -- and I've heard that argument before, but I -- when I
-- and I believe it was the memo from the City Attorney to
you where I got the other impression, and that impression
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
18
said that -- I think it was in February that the -- the
current advisory board was created, and I thought there was
a comment that said, "in anticipation of putting these
people on the airport authority."
MR. PATTERSON: That's correct. But it was
never done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it was never done to
that step.
MR. PATTERSON: That's correct. Basically,
what happened was -- is that there was some discussion --
and, again, we're talking '70's here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know. It's hard to
know what happened.
MR. PATTERSON: So we're trying to piece a
lot of old information together. But, at that point in
time, there was a discussion about having the election and
creating the authority. All right? Well, it appears as
though, at that point in time, whoever was on the Council
and Commissioners Court and whatever else was going on
during that time, a decision was made, well, we don't want
to wait for the election because we got too much business to
do. Let's go ahead and appoint a board, and then at that
point in time, we can transition them over to the authority.
However, that never occurred. So, what happened was -- is
the -- the authority was created, but it just sat there.
1_-8-~=~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
19
The board that was created under the Texas Municipal Airport
Act continued on and continues on. Okay? And then, after
the election, some months after that, both the Council and
the Commissioners Court, as you've already said, said, well,
we'll just make them an advisory board. And that's when you
saw the resolutions, et cetera, that occurred. So, the
reality is -- is, yes, it was created, but -- and the idea
was, let's get the airport board set up so we can move
forward, but they never took the next step. And that next
step was to move them from the board, per se, to the
authority.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Have you -- has your --
and this question is -- I know your legal staff has looked
at this at the City. What is the situation when an
election's held and then you don't implement what's voted
on? I mean, the votes were canvassed.
MR. PATTERSON: They were.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How can you -- I mean, I
have a question as to the legality of not doing what the
voters tell you to do.
MR. PATTERSON: Mm-hmm. I fully understand.
I fully understand the question.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There was also
another deficiency in that original election. The
authority, as created by the voters, while it was never
13-5-~=~ 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
20
populated, also there was never given to that authority the
right to impose a tax or a -- set a tax limitation so they
could operate as an authority with taxing rights. So
there's a lot of things wrong with that. The question is,
how do we cure it and move forward?
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams is
exactly correct, that -- tYlat the way the statute read was
you specifically had to have two items on the ballot, one
creating the authority, and two, creating the ability or the
authority within the authority to tax, so that they would
have the ability to move forward and create a revenue
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Without saying it,
that probably -- that probably brings forth another
possibility or probability, and that would have been the
ultimate transfer of the property from the City of Kerrville
and Kerr County to the airport authority, none of which ever
happened.
MR. PATTERSON: That's correct. That's
correct. They -- the authority -- as you said, sir, the
election was held and it was never created, you know. So,
you have that sitting there, but it's never been used, ever.
So, you know, it's a matter of -- the reality is that if
we're going to move forward, I think we have to ask the
question, in what format?
~~-8-U3
21
1
,..,. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But if the -- from what
you're saying, or if the -- the current -- forget -- assume
the election never happened, and say we're going under the
Municipal Airport Act, which still dictates how the -- how
that is run, how that advisory board is run, so it's
still -- we still need to change; it's still not an advisory
board.
MR. PATTERSON: The fact is that some sort of
action in the future needs to be done. Which way we go, you
know, again, that's a policy question.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think what you're
hearing here today is the desire of this Court to go to the
management board, whether -- whether it's done to properly
implement what the voters voted on 33 years ago, or whether
it's done to -- to comply with the current law.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think -- I
agree with that. I think the sense is -- if I'm reading
correctly, the sense is that we want to structure it so it's
an autonomous, decision-making board; give it the authority
to run the airport on a day-to-day basis and to contract for
services, administrative or otherwise, and to do those
things necessary so that it operates, with the goal -- which
has been stated repeatedly, the goal is to make it
self-sufficient and paying for itself, and not a burden on
the taxpayers through either taxing entity. That's the
~~-~-03
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
goal. That's a laudable goal.
MR. PATTERSON: I understand. And, again, I
can't speak for the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know.
MR. PATTERSON: -- for the Council.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We thought we were
going to give you something to take back for them today.
MR. PATTERSON: That's fine. Now, one thing,
too, that I'll just kind of touch on as well is -- is that,
you know, I do have a concern from an administrator
perspective, not a policy perspective, that -- you know, I
actually sat down and jotted down over the weekend -- you
know, took a look at where we've come from in the last eight
months to where we are today. And what. I don't want to
happen is, I certainly wouldn't want this policy issue
that's on the table to detract from what I believe has been
a very successful year, when you look at the facility that's
co-owned by us. I mean, when you look at the fact that
we've got, you know, a $600,000 facility coming to us that
costs neither one of the taxpaying entities anything; the
fact that, you know, we've got a half million dollars worth
of sewer projects going in. You know, again, the facility
is on a fast track in the right direction.
Do we have problems that still need to be
fixed? Absolutely. Positively. As a matter of fact, I

23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
can't name one thing that's running perfect anywhere, ever.
If we do, we'd all be out of a job anyway. But the reality
is -- is that when you look at the facility and where we're
going, I do believe that it's in a positive direction. I
think that if you look at that facility, where we've come
from with regard to adoption of a master plan, you know,
looking t~ the future, being able to get the land around it
properly obtained and zoned properly, those kinds of things,
it's all headed in the right direction. Is it perfect? No.
But we certainly are making strides that I had not seen
prior to that 12-month period.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, Ron, I think
it's this Court's desire to enhance that, not detract from
it. I don't think anything we're talking about here today
is intended to be a detractor. It is, in fact, intended to
facilitate that very thing from -- to go forward and do
better.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And there's nothing -- we
have no criticism of the direction that the airport has gone
or anything like that. That's not at all what I'm talking
about here. The criticism I have is that we have a -- a
board set up that is not functioning properly, and that's an
administrative side of the whole problem. I mean, and I
think we need to solve that, and it's been on the table now
for, you know, getting close to nine months, and I've seen
i~-e-~~~
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
r
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
..-
25
very little action by either body. And I think we just need
to get -- you know, get it set up properly, running properly
from an administrative standpoint. And it has nothing to do
with the direction -- I mean, I think I think I can speak
for the whole Court; we're very happy with all of the things
that have happened with the airport this year, but on the
administrative side, it just needs to be cleaned up. You
know, we've talked about it long enough, in my mind. We
just need to get it done.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I have a couple
questions. I have one question that needs to be answered,
and I'm going to draw a couple of word pictures or
scenarios, with the same question to both -- both word
pictures. And that is -- and what I'm going to do -- and I
apologize, Bill, fir -- I want to take us back. The City
Manager used the word "reality," and I just kind of wanted
to get back to that, if I could, of where we are today and
how the thing functions today and who makes those decisions
out there today. I -- I don't know. If someone asked me
who makes all these decisions, I can not answer that
question. One picture I wanted to -- we're in the -- we're
in the process of building a hangar out there, I understand,
out on the edge of the apron, is my understanding.
It seems to me that the -- it's just my
opinion -- the proper way you would do that would be you
~_-~-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
would take your hangar and build it up behind, let's say,
Kennedy's business up there closer to the road that comes
into the airport back there, and build your little driveways
for airplanes, whatever you call those things up there, and
run your water and sewer to that building, and then you open
up -- open up a whole new area of the airport for growth,
for businesses, ~the~- hangars, private hangars, et cetera
and so forth. Seems to me that building it out there on the
apron, you're -- we've closed ourselves in. We have one
building there, and there's no room for growth. But if you
move that thing up behind Mr. Kennedy's business, then it
opens up the rest of the airport land for growth. That's
one. And my question on that is, who makes those kinds of
decisions?
New, i've got the same question for the next
scenario. I drove out there yesterday had visited with some
folks over the weekend and just drove through and drove by,
and I don't know this to be a fact, but I understand that
there are some airplanes that tie down out in front of Mr.
Kennedy's business out there on the -- on the parking lot or
whatever you call an airport parking lot, and they're tied
down and they are -- and that area is not part of
Mr. Kennedy's lease. That's just the way I understand it.
And he charges 75 bucks a month per airplane to tie down on
City/County property. Now, in my mind, I would think
i_-a-~=
26
1
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 -- I mean, there's nothing wrong with doing that, but
there's got to be some income for the City and County on the
thing. It's not part of his property; it's our property.
And we're not set up for collections, and I can't imagine
how the City would do it, but seems like we could work out
some kind of deal where Mr. Kennedy continues collecting the
rental fee and keep part of it and give the rest of it to
the City and County. Now, that's the other scenario I
wanted to draw, and the same question as the first. Who is
making those kinds of decisions? Who made that decision to
do that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, we can answer
them. Do you want to start?
MR. MACDONALD: I'd like to address those, if
I could, Mr. Baldwin. I'm Granger MacDonald, for the
record. You are making those decisions.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
MR. MACDONALD: Currently, as the -- to the
first one, the hangar that's being built was on a land lease
done by Mr. Kennedy, and was approved by the County
Commissioners Court and the City Council. There was lots of
discussion about that at the Airport Advisory Board.
Because we are an advisory board, we felt somewhat limited
as to what we could do and what we can say. We had a lot of
participation about it, made a lot of suggestions. Your
1~-s-o3
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
r..
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
point is well-taken, and is part of the master plan that the
Advisory Board made the suggestion -- of course, it's only a
recommendation at this point -- that future development,
future hangars be built up on what we call the second tier,
up closer to the access road. That's one of the reasons for
the fencing that's going into -- being designed to encompass
that area. The current construction that you're seeing now
is not part of that hangar; that's just additional tarmac
and tie-down facilities. As -- and, like I said, the hangar
was the lease approved by this body and the City Council.
The second item you bring up about tie-down
fees, I personally brought that up to the Advisory Board,
and that's something that we're looking at. And I would
like -- and I think if we were a sovereign body, we would
have already implemented an arrangement by which the
operator of the F.B.O. didn't get to use all of the
County/City property in front of him and collect money for
it. That doesn't seem right to me. And -- and if we go to
a sovereign board, obviously, I think that the board will
have to start funding itself completely, and we'll be
looking for revenue in every place we can find it. And --
and one of those places quickly will -- would be the
tie-down area. They do overnight rentals as well as weekly,
monthly, and annual rentals on the tie-down area. And there
needs to be a compromise written where Mr. Kennedy takes in
i,-a-~~
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the money, takes a fee for collecting it, for managing it,
overseeing it, but all the costs of repairs of that area,
the cables, the paving, everything, is -- is borne by the
taxpayers of Kerr County and the City of Kerrville.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So -- so you -- your
board has been acting as an advisory board?
MR. MACDONALD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You see those things
the way we just discussed it, and so you -- as an advisory
board, you advise both governments -- or actually you advise
this government, but the board itself advises both
government entities of what you think should happen out
there. So, you're really and truly functioning as an
advisory board only, aren't you?
MR. MACDONALD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. MACDONALD: And I will assure you that
the idea of charging something for that ramp fee -- space, a
fee to generate income for the operation of the airport is a
very popular idea, and I would say that it would probably
pass within the first 90 days of the Airport Board not being
a sovereign -- of being a sovereign body.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I know when --
when this discussion first started this year -- and I'm
going to go to bat for the County Judge. He brought this
1~-3-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
~9
up, and it -- he maybe stepped on some toes, hurt some
feelings, but basically all he's been saying is that we need
to find ways for that airport to pay for itself.
MR. MACDONALD: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, it's a
real -- and that's what the Judge was saying when he got a
little crossways with some folks. But that basically is
what he's saying, and I agree with that a hundred percent.
I appreciate you and your representation to this board.
MR,. MACDONALD: And let me tell you, there's
lots of income that could be generated out there that's not
being done.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I bet so.
COMMISSIONER LET 7,: I think this -- I mean,
this exactly illustrates why we need to solve this problem,
because we currently ,have -- it`s three heads and three
people out there, or three entities trying to run it, and it
should be one.
MR. MACDONALD: And the Airport Manager is
literally serving two bosses.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's true.
MR. MACDONALD: Both the County and the City,
and everybody knows that doeUn't work.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Only one footnote I
would add, Buster, to what Granger said, and that was that,
~_-~-u3
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
i6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
with respect to the Kennedy hangar, that was all part of the
extension of his lease and the new lease for a parcel of
land and the blue hangar, which we discussed here in court
six months ago I guess, and approved.
MR. MACDONALD: And there were performance
guidelines attached to that. He's got to do a certain
amount of things, and the lease income -- income escalates
over a period of years. There's also the installation of a
self-service tank that has to be done in a period of time,
which is going to be a major income boost to the -- to the
revenue of the airport.
JUDGE TINLEY: The other thing that I would
add, Commissioner, is that with regard to the placement of
the various types of activities generated, he they hangars
or service-related aviation business or any other type of
activity, we approved a master plan that was forwarded to
the F.A.A., and that pretty well sets out on a tiered basis
how that development should occur. And so that -- that'll
be the guidance on the policy for -- for those developments
to occur out there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's real nice. I
just wanted -- there's Mr. Kennedy back there. I just
wanted you to understand that I'm certainly not throwing
rocks at him or any other business out there. I just wanted
to get everything on the table so I can understand it. You
1_-~-~;
31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,^ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
know, I represent a fourth of the people of Kerr County, and
I vote on these issues, and it's their money and I want to
understand what I'm doing and talking about.
JUDGE TINLEY: While we're getting everything
on the table, I think Mr. Kennedy had a desire -- if you'd
come forward, please, sir, and give us your two bit's worth,
as it were?
MR. KENNEDY: I just wanted to add a little
bit, just a small comment in regards to the tie-down issue.
I had the discussion and have had the discussion with our
Airport Manager and a couple members of the board. I'd like
to, just for the record, give you a little bit more detail
as to how that situation came about and what the situation
is really with our leases. With respect to the tie-downs,
irr my original leases, the tie-down issue is addressed in --
under my mandatory services. When my -- in the original
leases that I assumed when we purchased the business, those
-- the tie-down area was addressed under mandatory services,
and the idea was, it's mandatory for me to maintain those
tie-down chains and all those things. We maintain keeping
the garbage off the tie-downs and everything, and there's 21
tie-downs listed out there. And, under mandatory services,
I am required to maintain those tie-downs; the chains, the
hooks, all the stuff out there, and keeping the area clean.
I make sure those tie-downs are -- every aircraft is tied
i~'-3-5~ 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
32
down properly every single night.
I've got staff that collects for any tie-down
fees. There's a total of about $3,000 a year that's
collected off of tie-down fees. I don't think you can hire
somebody in the county, the city, anywhere, to manage this
thing for $3,000 a year and take care of all those issues.
That was the reason, I suspect, in the original negotiations
of these leases that it was put in under mandatory services,
that we have to do that. We were given the right to collect
those tie-down fees. We never collected tie-down fees until
the last year, so about less than two years ago, we
implemented the tie-down fees. I did convey to the Airport
Manager I'm willing to
maintain it, the tie-d
tied down every single
revenue to it, because
large revenue source.
year.
do -- if the airport wants to
own, and make sure that things are
night, I'm happy to give all the
it's just not -- it's simply not a
It really isn't. It's about $3,000 a
We don't charge $75 a month; we charge $50 a
month for mandatory -- for monthly tie-downs. We don't
charge nightly tie downs. We -- we basically -- the policy
that we put in place is if you buy fuel, we don't charge you
a tie-down fee, simply because it's not worth the
collection, it's such a small source of revenue. And that's
the reason we charge for those tie-down areas. It was put
1~-~-0~
33
1
.._. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-.
25
in my leases as a mandatory service, not something that we
went and lobbied for, and I just wanted to make sure that
was clear to everybody. And we're -- I told the manager
we're happy to set something up to where we -- we share that
revenue, though it's very small, to be put back into the
airport. We've always been a proponent of paying our fair
share. I think we pay considerably more than most
businesses on the airport, and our fair share, and we're not
opposed to doing that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just take a deep
breath. You're wearing me out, man.
MR. KENNEDY: We've been under a little bit
of pressure, yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Mr.
Kennedy. I -- I think all of this discussion points up the
need to finalize the existing legalities and authority that
exists out there. And that's exactly the direction I see us
moving, and the direction that the City Manager and I have
talked about in meetings in the past few months, and I
appreciate him being here today.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me restate --
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion on the table.
__-R 03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1J
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~.-.
25
34
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That Court Order
Number 17103 dated February 9, 1987, be rescinded, and it
will be replaced with a court order to be determined in an
action to be taken by the Commissioners at the December 22nd
meeting.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded
further discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that 1987 court
order was to do exactly what?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Advisory board.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just says it's
Any
strictly an advisory board?
JUDGE TINLEY: Designates them as an advisory
board. Any further discussion or question? All in favor of
the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, before you get
past that, let me give this to the County Attorney and ask
him to compare what was included in this motion against
Section 22 -- Chapter 22 of the Texas Transportation Code
and see where we are. And I'd like to have it ready to go
__-8-03
35
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
back on the agenda on the 22nd.
so I'm happy.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And we're moving forward,
JUDGE TINLEY: We are moving forward. Thank
you, gentlemen. The next item on the agenda is to set a
public hearing for alternate plat process, Lot 83 and 84,
Northwest Hills, Precinct 1. Good morning, sir.
MR. JOHNSTON: Morning. This consists of
making a minor adjustment to kind of a lot line between two
lots, 83 and 84, owned by the same owner. I think there's a
10-foot offset due to -- there's a residence built on one
lot, and it's too close to the line for the -- according to
the rules for Northwest Hills, and so they -- they're going
to do a minor replat. I'd like the Court to consider that
this might be the sarzie situati~rr as c~rtibiriirry lots as far as
having to notify everybody for such a minor adjustment. You
know, be a big expense for just a minor adjustment, but that
would be the Court's decision. And I suggest the date may
be January 12th, the first meeting in January, for the
public hearing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Franklin?
MR. JOHNSTON: Yes?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does Mr. Bledsoe own
both of those lots?
MR. JOHNSTON: It's my understanding.
~,-s-o?
1
.~. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,_ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-,
25
36
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 83 and 84?
MR. JOHNSTON: Is that right, Lee?
MR. VOELKEL: Sorry, I missed --
MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Bledsoe owns 83 and 84?
MR. VOELKEL: Yes, sir, and he's here if you
have a question of him.
MR. JOHNSTON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's see. He had
another question in there, Jon, that's really kind of yours.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The minor replat
question.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't have a problem
with doing -- doing this at all.
MR. JOHNSTON: That sentence doesn't include
adjustment to lot lines, but in the past we've -- we've had
those two combined as a single item as far as --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean --
MR. JOHNSTON: -- considering them that way.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The intent would be that
it would be a minor revision.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm curious. It
really doesn't make any difference, I suppose. Couldn't
this have been solved by him simply creating an easement
from, one lot to the other? House is too close to one lot
line. Couldn't he just have simply added an easement to
1~-a-~~
37
1
,~.~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
cure that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wouldn't that have
been a variance, as opposed --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wouldn't come before us.
But I think that was in the -- I thought I saw that
somewhere in the letter; he didn't want to do that.
MR. JOHNSTON: I think he wants to sell the
lot, or I think just wants the line moved over. Is that
right?
MR. VOELKEL: We also have an issue here of
some existing easements and making sure that we don't have
an encroachment to existing easements, so technically,
moving -- removing the lot line and removing those
easements, encroachments.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're not moving that entire
middle lot line; you're just going to come down and jog it?
MR. VOELKEL: That's correct, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 10 feet.
MR. JOHNSTON: There's a sketch, I think, in
your packet.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 10 feet.
MR. VOELKEL: Can I make another comment
about the notification issue? Just to reassure you,
Mr. Bledsoe's here, the owner, and he has -- does have
permission from the property owners or homeowners'
lz-e-o~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,_ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-,
25
38
association that this is okay with them, so that kind of
might reassure you that, as far as what's being done is okay
by the actual subdivision people themselves, even though
they might not all be notified by return receipt letter.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How do we know that?
MR. VOELKEL: I'm sorry, sir?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I said, hew do we
know? Just because you're the highest vote-getter in the
county, is --
MR. VOELKEL: Do they have a letter or
something they delivered to you about that? This
is Mr. Bledsoe, the owner of both of the lots.
MR. BLEDSOE: Yes. Mr. Milton Nutall, the
man who's head of the board out there -- they actually had a
special meeting and requested that I do come in and replat
that area to take care of this property encroachment on the
existing easements. So, the architectural control committee
board out there has actually suggested that we do this, and
this is why we're pursuing this avenue.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other notice difficulties
that you see with this?
MR. JOHNSTON: (Shook his head negatively.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not in the ETJ, is it?
MR. VOELKEL: I was going to say, I'm so glad
it's not in the ETJ. Thank you for reminding me.
1~-S-U3
39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,,_ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
._..
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, you know, what
we're doing is setting a public hearing, and that would
certainly give the opportunity for that community out there
to come in and speak if they so desire.
MR. JOHNSTON: It will be in the newspaper,
but it also is required, if it's -- if it's not certain
things listed in the rules, that it's also sent out
certified mail. But one of the exceptions being combining
lots. This is just a lot line adjustment. But --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, their
Commissioner will notify them of this as well.
MR. JOHNSTON: That's kind of your call,
whichever way you want to go on that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know what you
do about the notification. That doesn't ring my bell one
way or the other.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- clearly,
this -- I mean, the intent of the rules and the state law,
as I would understand it, is not -- would not require the
notification here. I mean, notification purpose is so
people aren't changing -- you know, to me, a substantive
change to lots within a subdivision that could affect their
interests. And an adjustment of this nature is not a
substantive change to a lot line.
MR. JOHNSTON: Not like you're dividing a
1~-~-.~
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
lot.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, it's not dividing,
and so I don't know why you'd have to do the full
notification.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Me either.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's the same as
combining.
MR. JOHNSTON: That was my thinking.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, what are you
saying? Could it be approved today, just go on our merry
way?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you have to have
a hearing on it. You have to have a public hearing, but you
don't have to notify all the property owners individually.
MR. JOHNSTON: By registered mail. Still
needs to be in the paper.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Be in the paper.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move that we
set a public hearing for alternate plat process of Lots 83
and 84, Northwest Hills in Precinct Number 1, for
January 12th, '04, at 10 a.m. That's my motion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
set a public hearing specified in the motion. Any further
question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify

1
.,..,. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
?2
23
24
•--
25
41
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 to consider and discuss approving the FEMA Project
Completion and Certification Report, Disaster Number 1425,
and authorize the County Judge to sign the same. This is
part of our overall FEMA process as a result of the '02
floods.
MR. ODOM: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: And I think the only remaining
issue that we have outstanding on this one has to do with
that -- that little bridge between the two Flat Rock Lake
Park portions; is that not correct?
MR. ODOM: That's correct sir. The park that
they use for a jogging trail across the Third Creek.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Only comment I would
have about that, Judge, would be, is there a way for us
to -- well, I guess we can -- we can request additional time
required -- that may be required to accomplish some sort of
replar_.ement of that bridge across Third Creek, Flat Rock
Lake, one of the two. I would hate for to us lose the
$6,900, but, by the same token, I don't want to put in
jeopardy the whole thing. So --
i2-a-~;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
42
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. I think we
ought to -- I mean, I think -- Leonard Odom asked that --
thought that you'd be a good person to write this,
Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I didn't see that in
the work-up here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's in ours; it's not
in yours.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I didn't get a copy
of that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think that, you
know, request a one-year extension on that one item, and
finalize everything else. But that's -- so I think we ought
to -- that makes sense to me; I agree with you. We
shouldn't -- don't want to jeopardize the balance for the
$6,900, but it would be nice to keep the $6,900 if we can.
If they say no, we just don't have that. It's not enough
for us to do a permanent fix anyway.
MR. ODOM: That's right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And we don't have
budgeted funds right now to do a permanent fix.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The question I would
have, Hermann Sons -- none of the Hermann Sons Road -- I
didn't see any Hermann Sons Road listed on there. Is it in
i~-8-03
43
1
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 different category? I know we did some -- a lot of work
was done. Maybe I just missed it. But I want to --
MR. ODOM: You probably missed it. I don't
know how it's -- Hermann Sons, we had no FEMA money for the
Hermann Sons crossing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. ODOM: N~ funds there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But didn't we expend
funds on some of those back crossings?
MR. ODOM: Yes, at the -- back by Lender
Branch back there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I didn't -- I couldn't --
didn't see it when I went through the item-by-item list.
MR. ODOM: There's a timeline.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
MR. ODOM: And that -- I'm not quite sure how
that hit at this point.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe it was on a
different timeline.
MR. ODOM: It was on a different timeline.
What we got -- the notice was there was 39,000. We're at
84, 000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. ODOM: So, some of that did not hit at
that timeline that we -- that we needed to. Some of that
i ~-~-~~ 3
44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
work was already done. Pipes, things likes that, maybe
concrete was put in there, but maybe not the whole -- whole
project. It was a certain point in there that we had to cut
off.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. What's the -- so
I'll make a motion that. we approve the FEMA project
completion and certification report for Disaster Number
1425, as submitted, and authorize the County Judge to sign
same, and to request -- and for Commissioner Williams to
write an extension of time request for the one item at Flat
Rock Lake.
MR. ODOM: That's it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. 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.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I could have
authorized you to write the letter.
JUDGE TINLEY: You could have.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, if you hadn't
acted so quickly, I would have changed that.
i_ R ~ 3
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
45
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item is consider and
discuss presentation of the interlocal contract for mental
health services for approval, authorize County Judge to sign
the same as they are returned to the County. This has to do
with our outstanding interlocal agreement with the various
counties that we serve in our cachement area, in other
counties with the Mental Health and Mental Retardation
services for the mental health hearings that we conduct on
their behalf. It's been in existence for a number of years.
We made a few modifications and changes and updates to it,
and the County Attorney and I have been commiserating on
this for, oh, a period of a couple months or more, probably.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Now, have the fee
schedules changed, Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, we did on the -- on the
attorney's fees, we changed that to bring it in line with --
with what the County Court at Law and District Courts
upstairs are on appointed cases.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would it be fair to
ask if the attorney fees went down or went up?
JUDGE TINLEY: They went up.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, they went up, as they
did in the County Court at Law and the District Court some
time ago, when the Fair Defense Act came down the pike,
1~-3-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
46
what, two, three years ago.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All other fee
structure remains the same?
JUDGE TINLEY: I believe they are, are they
not?
MR. MOTLEY: Well, there was an added fee in
the probable cause hearings.
JUDGE TINLEY: Master's fee.
MR. MOTLEY: Right. And then there was just
an issue not related to fees, but there was an issue about
guardianships. Those represent the only three changes I'm
aware of.
JUDGE TINLEY: That was to pass along the
costs that Kerr County would otherwise incur to the counties
utilizing the services.
MR. MOTLEY: I believe that's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. That was the intention
of both of those, certainly.
MR. MOTLEY: All other fees remain the same.
I checked all of them through the third called session, and
everything was the same. The Sheriff had thought about
raising his fees, but decided not to. So, we were kind of
holding off to see if that was going to happen until after,
but it was approved and such, but it's ready to go.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about the main
1_-e-.,~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
a,,,_ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
47
body of the agreement? Is there any major changes from this
year to last year?
MR. MOTLEY: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Probably the major significant
change was that, rather than going through this drill every
year, we provided that it was automatically renewable unless
it was canceled, rather than a year and then you come back
and do a new agreement the next year and so forth. And with
regard to --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Forever?
JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Forever?
JUDGE TINLEY: Until canceled by either side.
By either side. And that the fees to be charged would be in
accordance with the then current schedule that Kerr County
charged to everybody else.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So you -- next year,
if -- if other people's fees have changed, you can
automatically just go in and change the fees without
approval of this Court?
MR. MOTLEY: What would --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just a question. I'm
asking a question.
MR. MOTLEY: I don't know that there would be
approval by the Court, because the fees would be authorized
~_ s-o?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,--.
25
48
to be changed by the State Legislature, or there are certain
fees that would be approved -- have to be approved by the
Court, changes in fees. But I think what the Judge is
saying is, if our fee schedule changes, that we will send
notice of the new fee schedule to the various agencies in --
I guess it would be 25 other counties, provide notice of
those new fees to the other counties, and at that point in
time, if they choose not to proceed with the agreement, they
can cancel at that time. But, rather than to renew the
contract each year, we just make the notice of the new fees
an event which they could choose to cancel. As a result of,
I should say.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The comment -- I don't
have real .strong feelings on this, but a little history;
David Motley is aware of it. Several years back, I think
probably four or five years ago, this whole area was in a
mess. These -- these contracts that we weren't getting
money -- I mean, it was not as -- going as smoothly as I
think it's going right now, and I'd hate to get in a
situation just because we -- I mean, I hope this contract
gets reviewed on some sort of a regular basis by the County
Attorney or the County Judge, Court, somebody, because I'd
hate for it to get -- you know, Legislature make some
changes all of a sudden, and us end up with a contract
because it's automatically renewed; we just don't pay
i~-a-^~
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
..-,
25
49
attention to it as much. You know, so I would almost rather
have, like, some -- maybe a five-year period or some kind of
a period, make sure it does get reviewed on some sort of a
regular basis. And maybe, you know, y'all can assure me
that it will happen anyway, but I just remember that -- I
think this is the contract that we had a lot of problem
7 I with.
MR. MOTLEY: This is the one that corrected a
lot of the problems. This version has corrected a lot of
the problems. Actually, the collection of fees I don't
think was an issue related to the wording of the previous
contract as much as it was an attitude on the part of
certain counties, or inability to pay on the part of certain
counties.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Of course, we're not
naming any counties, but it we were, we would say Bexar.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bexar.
MR. MOTLEY: Well, in any event, there was an
A.G. opinion sought requiring them to pay certain fees they
maintained they didn't have to pay. And I don't -- I've
not -- I've not checked the status of the collections, but I
believe they're proceeding well. This contract also
initially, when it was written, raised certain fees. There
were fees that you might say were being left on the table,
and it raised certain fees, and implemented fees that were
1~-~-~~~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
50
not being collected that were allowed by law. So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just -- it just
concerns me to have a contract that's all of a sudden in
automatic renewal phase, because we have so many contracts,
and I just think we need to, at some regular period, review
all our contracts, because every time we decide to review
one, we realize we need to make some changes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Particularly if we're
held accountable in some way in here. Is -- does the law
say that these contracts come before the Commissioners
Court, or are y'all just being nice, letting us know what
you're doing?
MR. MOTLEY: I mean, actually, there is an
agreement between Kerr County, the County Judge, the County
Attorney, and these other 25 counties. What it is, is an
agreement for our Judge and for myself to provide services
to these other 25 counties so they don't have to ship their
County Judge and their County Attorney down here to have
hearings.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure, I understand.
MR. MOTLEY: Or else to bring the mental
patient back to their county and have hearings there, then
transport back and forth. There's at least two hearings
associated with everybody LYiat is eventually committed, and
so they would have to carry them back and forth, you know,
l~-a_n3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.~
25
51
four times -- or I should say back and forth twice, but four
trips back and forth between these counties, and some of
them are pretty distant. So, it is a convenience to them.
The County -- you know, we contract with the county. I
mean, the County can't really order the Judge or myself to
do these hearings, but we are doing them as an interlocal
agreement to benefit these other counties, and it saves them
time and money. So, I -- you know, I don't really know if
it's required to come before the Commissioners Court, but I
think, you know, it's good practice to bring it before the
Court. There's nothing wrong, I think, with -- there's no
county revenue spent by this county by the contract, so it's
not an expenditure issue which normally would come before
the Commissioners Court. And the automatic renewing
provision in it is just something that -- it just probably
will save some time; allow a contract to go from
year-to-year, and then the only part of it that really
changes is the fee schedule. Typically, that's the only
part that changes. Then you can just, you know, review the
fee schedule or whatever, but I don't oppose it having to
come before the Court at any particular time. I -- you --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm just trying to
find out, David, if something -- something went wrong
somewhere -- I don't know what could go wrong, but if
something went wrong in there, and am I as a Commissioner
i? a o~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
52
going to be held liable for anything?
MR. MOTLEY: I don't see --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If so, I want to look
MR. MOTLEY: Yeah, and I hear you. I'd -- I
don't see how this contract obligates the Commissioner to do
anyttiirig, ~r Kerr County t~ do anything.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Looks like a courtesy
deal to me.
MR. MOTLEY: I don't believe it obligates the
Court to do anything.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't want to do -- we
have too much time; you know, we have a short agenda and so
we're going to discuss it. Say there's something -- say you
make a mistake or the Judge makes a mistake. I know it
wouldn't ever happen, but a mistake was made in the -- you
know, in the commitment of someone, and then there's a -- a
lawsuit filed about that. I mean, there is -- that would be
suing the County. I'm sure Kerr County would be sued and
the other county that it came from.
MR. MOTLEY: Probably right. You're probably
23
24 Court.
25
1,-a-o~
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So that would affect the
MR. MOTLEY: Any deep pocket that can be sued
right.
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
53
will be sued.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And any time we get sued,
we're the ones that -- or, you know, we usually get sued
too, but that gets thrown out. But, you know --
MR. MOTLEY: Good thing is that the Judge has
a very, very high standard of immunity in that situation; he
has judicial immunity. And I don't have quite as high
standards of immunity. I have some --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're not real
concerned about the Judge here. We're a little bit
concerned about us.
MR. MOTLEY: Well, the County -- the County
would be liable in that situation. Once it all shakes out,
we should only be liable through the acts of the County
officials. There's no acts by the Court in that particular
scenario Jonathan came up with, so it would be only through
the acts of the County official, and not -- and I don't see
how the Court itself would be responsible, as far as being
sued individually, but the County could possibly be looked
to for legal expenses and such as that if there were a
lawsuit.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The reality is, we're
not performing any services. We're authorizing you and the
County Judge to do certain things.
MR. MOTLEY: That's basically correct. And
1"- is -0 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1~
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
54
for our clerk to collect -- I didn't mean to leave the clerk
out, but for County Clerk to collect and bill those counties
for those fees.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And another nexus, of
course, is that those funds go into the General Fund,
correct?
MR. MOTLEY: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, clearly, we need
to do it. My only concern would be the -- you know, I hope
we don't just do it and forget about it for 10 years, and
then all of a sudden come back and -- oh, yeah, we haven't
been doing something correctly.
JUDGE TINLEY: The truth is, this agreement
is not that old, and David and I thought it would be a good
idea to revisit it and take a look at it and tweak it,
update it a little bit. That's why we're here today. We
could have left the one in -- in existence that we had on
the table previously, but we thought it was a good idea to
update it, and I think if the Legislature authorizes
additional things in the future in the way of increases in
these fees or whatnot, we're going to be attuned to that to
put out new fee schedules and so forth. But, as
Commissioner Baldwin stated, I wasn't real concerned about
the liability to the Commissioners under this agreement,
l~-d-u3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
55
'cause they weren't performing anything under it. But I --
Mr. Motley and I have looked it over very, very carefully,
and we've had considerable discussions about this over the
last few months.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, in the actual
agreement here, you -- under 1.2, you have the automatic
renewal verbiage in there. Why would you do that? Why not
just -- we just agree that you can do it? I move that we
approve the interlocal contract for mental health services,
and -- and authorize County Judge to sign it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the motion -- or the agenda item. Any further
question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've get a couple
questions. Confirm, if you will, please -- I think I heard
that these changes won't have any impact on county
expenditures. And second question is, do any of these
changes inure any financial benefit to any organizations or
individuals? Is somebody -- some organization, some
individual going to be paid more under this contract than
they have been?
JUDGE TINLEY: The only instance,
Commissioner, is the attorney's fees issue. It was raised
from $50 an hour to $70 an hour for the attorneys that are
1.-8-,; 3
1
..~. 2
3
4
5
6
7
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-,.
25
56
appointed as ad litems to handle these cases. It's a
footnote at the very end of the fee schedule; you'll see it
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: To my knowledge, that is the
only change, is the increase in that rate to bring it in
line with what the District and County Court at Law are
8 paying on that.
9
10 that?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And who's paying for
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, whoever -- it's charged
as costs, and if the patient is from Kerr County, instead of
paying $50 an hour, they'll be paying $70. The -- whatever
r_ounty is -- has the patient. There are a total of 26
counties in the cachement area, plus other counties that may
-- we may get overflow patients from, but it depends on
where the patient comes from. That's who is sent the bill
of costs.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And definitely, the
majority of the patients out there are from one of these
other 26 counties, not home people.
JUDGE TINLEY: The last -- the last. time we
looked at the numbers, 80 percent came from counties other
than Kerr County.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think -- actually, I
i ~ 8 n 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
57
think the attorney fees -- my god, I can't believe I'm
saying this -- the attorney fees are fair.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, they -- they were too
low; they needed to be adjusted upward.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got a whipping
coming for saying that, don't I?
MR. MOTLEY: You're riot going to find me
attorneys in this county that are practicing the law and
charging $70 an hour. That's low. That's a public benefit
that the attorneys are doing on behalf of mental patients.
It is a public service.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I understand.
JUDGE TINLEY: You'll find more plumbers
charging that than you will lawyers, I'll guarantee you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No comment.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's why so many
lawyers have got their plumbing license.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or need to.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm going to take my exam
month after next.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That answered my
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
1.-8-03
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
58
(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 to consider, discuss, and take any
appropriate action on a request by Dean Ward, President of
Local 2281, American Federation of Government Employees, to
use the courthouse grounds on December 13th for a rally in
support of Hill Country Veterans to regain acute care beds
at the Kerrville V.A. facility. Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Ward?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Morning, Mr. Ward.
Thank you for waiting. I told him to be here about 9:30,
and, Judge, it's 10:10 and we're just --
JUDGE TINLEY: He was here at 9:30.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The issue of
retention of those beds -- acute care beds at -- at the
Kerrville V.A. facility is one that we deal with more
directly in the next one, but Mr. Ward called and wanted to
know if they could schedule a rally, and I want you to tell
the Court what kind of rally, and we'll go from there, okay?
MR. WARD: Yes, sir. My name is Dean Ward.
I'm President of the American Federation of Government
Employees, Local 2281, the Kerrville division of the South
i~-~-.,~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,--
25
59
Texas Veterans Health Care System. Two of our brother
locals in San Antonio had an informational picket a couple
of weeks ago, and it generated some interest by the media,
which generated some interest from us, in that we wanted to
bring attention to the national C.A.R.E.S. Commission
recommendation to Mr. Princippi, which is due pretty
quickly, any day now. Mr. Princippi, I understand, is
supposed to make a decision December the 31st. The impact
of that decision can be very egregious for the Kerrville
facility. We feel like, as a local labor organization, that
the veterans would be better served having acute care beds
kept in Kerrville, and we want to have a rally in support of
that. We've got endorsement by the Hill Country Veterans
Council, by the veterans service organizations, by just
everybody that we've contacted about having a rally here.
The bottom line is, this is about quality patient care for
the veterans of Kerr County, and all of the veterans in the
surrounding counties as well. So, that's why we want to
have this rally. Very positive thing. It's bipartisan. I
don't know if that hurts or helps by saying that, but it's
bipartisan. I don't think anybody can dispute the fact that
we need quality patient care for our veterans. That's what
we want to do, and have this rally here. Generally, when
you have something like this, it takes place at the
facility. We feel like, because of the essence of all of
i~-~-
1
,_._ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
60
the support that -- that is forthcoming, that this would be
a more appropriate venue, and that's why we respectfully
request to have the rally here on the courthouse grounds.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mr. Ward, what time will
the rally be?
MR. WARD: Be from 1:00 to
Saturday, December the 13th. I've spoken
representatives from the trades day organ
they're very much encouraged by this, and
see this happen as well. Would be a very
relationship.
3:00 p.m. on
with
ization, and
they would like to
symbiotic
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How many people will
you anticipate, possibly?
MR. WARD: Several hundred.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is a rally
exactly? I mean, are you just trying to gain attention
toward the issue? I mean, we're not going to get ugly out
there? Or are we?
MR. WARD: Not unless you show up, Buster.
(Laughter.) No, I think it's going to be very --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I'm
talking about. Don't get ugly.
MR. WARD: It'll be very popular and very
positive. We hope to have some people marching around the
periphery with some posters in support of quality patient
~~-a-o~
61
1
,~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,,-.
25
care, keeping acute care beds here in Kerrville at the
Kerrville facility, and generating something that the media
might want to report on, and lend some weight to what we'd
like to see happen here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval of the
request.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. 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.
MR. WARD: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mr. Ward, you might get
with Glenn Holekamp, our Maintenance Director, just to let
him know as well that this is going to take place, so he's
aware for his maintenance, grounds, et cetera.
MR. WARD: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item on the agenda is to
consider and discuss and take appropriate action on a
resolution of support for retention of 20 acute care beds
~_-a-~,~
b2
1
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 5 ICU beds at the Kerrville V.A. facility, as requested
by the Hill Country Veterans Council. Again, Commissioner
Williams and General Schellhase.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge.
Just kind of a companion item. The issue is in front of us,
and the C.A.R.E.S. process, which is putting these
recommendations forward to the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs, Mr. Princippi, needs to know, and emphatically,
where not only the Hill Country Veterans Council and those
that it represents, but this Court, as to what takes place
at the facility. Very simply stated, this talks about
retaining the 20 acute care beds and the 5 ICU beds, and
making the point that instead of spending millions of
dollars in San Antonio, they can spend a lot less by even
adding more acute care beds here. I asked General
Schellhase if he would not only provide me with a lot of the
information which is contained in the resolution, but some
of the background material which is in your packet, to come
today and ;ust give us a briefing, just a brief summary of
where we are in this and where he hopes it's going to go.
MR. SCHELLHASE: Walter Schellhase, 529 Water
Street, Kerrville. I came before you last month and brought
the issue to your attention and asked for a resolution to
the C.A.R.E.S. Commission, of which you did. We've lost
that battle. It's now a political issue. It's no longer
i~-~-o~
63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
facts or figures as to what's best for the area; it's now
turned political. And it's been -- it's been done in a
rather unusual fashion. The committee's report is not due
Secretary Princippi until the 1st of December, which has
been delayed now till the 15th of December, and probably he
will not make his recommendation to Congress till January
15th, or refer this issue back to the committee. The
committee released the information to an A.P. reporter that
said that we need to transition the beds in Kerrville
immediately; that waiting until the year 2012 -- which
they've assumed it will take that long to do the
construction in San Antonio -- is unacceptable. Why they
released this information before the report, we feel like
it's one of the normal things that bureaucrats do; "We'll
release a little bit of information and see what the
kickback is going to be." We want the kickback to be big.
We don't know what the report's going to say
yet, because it has not been prepared, but the fact that
they've released this information that Kerrville is to close
those beds immediately and transfer them to San Antonio is
not a good sign for us. They have no facilities in
Kerrville -- in San Antonio to take care of our 20 beds plus
the 5 ICU beds. We have the facilities here to maintain the
20, plus add 20 more, so we're going a step further. We're
asking -- we asked the committee to not transfer our beds,
1~'-8-~) 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
64
but to add 20 more. They've chosen not to do that, so now
it's in Secretary Princippi's hands and the congressional
leaders. We have not had Lamar Smith come up online yet.
He made none of the hearings. Kay Bailey made all of the
hearings or had someone there to present the fact that they
do not want to change Kerrville. Senator Cornyn has made
ttie major meetings; has taken the position that we do not
want to make the changes in Kerrville. As recently as the
30th of November, Lamar finally did write a letter to
Secretary Princippi saying we should not change these beds
in Kerrville.
It's interesting to note that since Lamar
Smith has been congressman for us, our hospital has gone
from 420 acute beds to 20. We've lost surgery. We've lost
our urologist. We've lost our pediatrics facility and
numerous other specialty cares. So, he's not coming up
online for us as we would like to have happen. In
discussion with his office, he's -- the comment is he's
working behind the scenes, and our position with
Secretary -- with Representative Lamar, he better come
forward now, because we're in a losing situation at this
time, and we need to take immediate action. The rally plan
for Saturday will certainly help bring some attention to
this. The resolution that you've passed, or propose to
pass, will certainly bring light to the fact that we need
1 _ - ft - _
65
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
help from congressional leaders at this time, because it's a
political issue. It's no longer in the hands of the
bureaucrats.
In addition to the resolution, we're asking
-- we'll have an issue coming out in the paper very shortly;
we're going to have sample letters, sample resolutions.
We're going to have ttie facts that Commissioner Williams has
in-hand to try to get the public involved. At this stage,
we need a lot of input from the citizens of this area in
order to keep these beds here and increase the others. The
proposal that they have made is totally ludicrous; it makes
no sense at all. We're taking care of patients here at $870
a day in our hospital. The closest to that is $1,200 a day
in other areas. Kerrville has the lowest cost per-patient,
per-day in the nation. Not just locally, but in the nation.
And yet they're going to close these beds and move them to
San Antonio, where the cost is over $1,200 a day. It makes
no sense whatsoever, but that's the way the committee has
chosen to supposedly have this in their report, which is not
due yet, but they say that that's what it's going to be.
So, we need the input from everyone. We have for each of
you -- we would like to have you do a letter in addition to
the resolution.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You want me to pass
those around? Just hand them all to me and I'll pass them
__-'3-03
66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.r..
25
around.
MR. SCHELLHASE: There's two letters, one to
Secretary Princippi and one to our congressman. In
addition, in the paper, you will find we'll have a list of
those key people that are involved. Senator Evans chairs
the Veterans Affairs Committee. We need that input to reach
him prior to the secretary receiving the input from the
C.A.R.E.S. Committee. We need to have all of the
bureaucrats involved and knowing what has to happen and when
it has to happen, and the fact that this is a time-sensitive
issue and we need your input immediately, and we need a lot
from the public. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: General, I have a
question. I notice on the -- in the backup, it gives all
the addresses, also gives e-mails. Do you have any feel if
letters are better than e-mails, or if it makes any
difference? I'm just wondering if e-mails aren't deleted
right away.
MR. SCHELLHASE: The best at this time is a
handwritten letter faxed to our congressman. First off,
letters right now are taking three to four weeks to reach
the congressman. They go through Pennsylvania, a clearing
area for the anthrax issue, and then they come back to
congress. The second best way is to -- like, in the case of
Kay Bailey, would be to send a letter to her office in San
i~-a-~~
67
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Antonio, because they use carriers on a weekly basis to
carry information back to them. We still say the best way
is a fax. Handwritten fax probably gets the best attention,
quickest.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, thank you.
MR. SCHELLHASE: And we give all of the fax
backup, there's a --
MR. SCHELLHASE: Yes, I believe we provided
one to Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, fax is listed here.
MR. SCHELLHASE: We can't emphasize enough,
this is so time-sensitive that. we need to act now. You
know, there's been a lot of issues, and it will be covered
in the paper shortly that -- that a lot of people are
opposed or have no concern about losing our acute beds, as
well as there's a lot of veterans being taken care of that
don't need to be taken care of at a V.A. Hospital at
government expense. For my own situation, I'm what they
call a Category 8. I'm the last that would receive care in
a V.A. Hospital. And if I do, when I go to the V.A.
Hospital, I have to pay for it; it's not a free ride for
those peop~e that can afford it. A lot of people think that
this is the case; that every veteran's entitled to go out
1 ~ - 8 - ~~ 3
68
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
there. That's not the case. The people that first get care
at the Veterans Hospital are those that are -- I believe
it's 70 percent disabled, service-connected. That cuts out
a whole lot of veterans. The second group are those that
are 30 percent disabled, service-connected. So, if you're
not service-connected disabled or have a condition that you
received in wartime, the chances of getting into the V.A.
Hospital with free care is not likely. You have to pay some
co-pay. You have to participate with your private
insurance, so that issue is not a big one any longer.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My only question,
Commissioner Williams, is what -- what was it that we did
about a month ago? Same issue?
MR. SCHELLHASE: That was to the C.A.R.E.S.
Commission.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Different --
MR. SCHELLHASE: What you did went to the
C.A.R.E.S. Commission, and we lost.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is going to our
various politicians and Mr. Princippi. I would move the
resolution as presented.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Acid authorize the
County Judge and the Commissioners to sign same.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
1~-~- ~
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
approval the agenda item. Any further questions or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got two
questions. One, do we know how many jobs we will lose if we
don't prevail on this issue?
MR. SCHELLHASE: If I had to make a guess,
it'll probably be around 25. That's strictly a guess, and
here's the reason. For any group of so many acute beds,
there's a package of support that goes with those acute
beds. When those 20 beds leave here, that support package
will go, and my guess is 25. I don't know; Dean might know.
MR. WARD: I'd say 25 to 30.
MR. SCHELLHASE: It will have a significant
impact, because it's not going to be minimum-wage people.
We're talking about high level doctors, skilled care,
including doctors and nurses.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The second question
is, this list of people we might contact to ask for their
help, what's the rationale for having the Honorable Henry
Bonilla as a part of that group?
MR. SCHELLHASE: Henry Bonilla may represent
the V.A. Hospital in Kerrville if the redistricting planning
goes through. He now has the San Antonio -- Audie Murphy is
now in his district.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's also a friend of
i,-~-o3
70
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
Kerr County.
MR. SCHELLHASE: Yes, and he has -- we've
been to him on numerous occasions with regards to the V.A.
Hospital. He has never come up online in support of
anything that we've done, and the reason is -- his rationale
is, "That's out of my district, and when Lamar comes up
online, I'll come up online." So, therefore, he hasn't come
up online.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Walter, let me say
something here. The motion on the table is to approve the
resolution.
MR. SCHELLHASE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But you're asking us
to do that, as well as individually write letters to --
MR. SCHELLHASE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- these folks?
MR. SCHELLHASE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The motion would
include sending this resolution to all of these various
people mentioned in the final resolve.
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.)
1~-~-os
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
71
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item
on the agenda is to consider and discuss request to utilize
the open area in the lower level of the courthouse annex for
a Christmas party for clients of the Juvenile Probation
Department on December 17th, from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I attached a letter from
Kevin Stanton requesting this, and I move approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second -- I'm sorry,
did you want it?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Free food, though.
There'll be Lree Loyd.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Any further question or
discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next
item --
(Discussion. off the record.)
l~-a-n~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,--
25
72
JUDGE TINLEY: We'11 go ahead and take our
mid-morning break, come back at 20 before the hour. We'll
stand in recess.
(Recess taken from 10:25 a.m. to 10:45 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's come back to
order, if we might, and resume the Commissioners Court
meeting scheduled for this date. Next item on the agenda is
consider and discuss the County Attorney's advice on whether
Commissioners Court has the legal authority to approve or
disapprove requests -- excuse me. We seem to have lost the
County Attorney.
MS. SOVIL: He'll be right back.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Why don't we move on to
Item 10 instead, pending his return? Consider acrd discuss
and set a public hearing on the subject of authorizing the
freezing of ad valorem property tax values on the
residential property of owners who are elderly and disabled
beginning in 2004. Commissioner Nicholson?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Proposition 13
provided that HJR 16 would authorize a county, city, town,
and junior college district to freeze property taxes on a
residential homestead of a person who is disabled or age 65
or older. That proposition passed statewide by a vote of
81 percent in favor and 19 percent opposed. It passed in
1~-~-c 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
73
Kerr County by a larger margin, 87.25 percent in favor. The
act provides that -- that this government entity can -- can
authorize the freezing of property taxes for those groups,
or that if we do not act, the voters can petition for an
election to determine the issue. It seems to me, with
the -- in view of the fact that it passed by 87 percent,
that an election on the issue would be redundant, and so I'm
proposing that we authorize a public hearing for the 22nd of
December at 10 a.m., and I make that motion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got a question,
if there's nothing else going to be said.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I've got a question
before I can --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we all have
questions. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you want to second
it first?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, let's see what
goes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Come on. I'm
wondering what -- what financial impact this will have on
Kerr County.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's exactly what
I'm wondering.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ballpark?
_ _ - g - ii 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
74
MS. RECTOR: You're looking at me?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ballpark?
MS. RECTOR: First year, probably about
$100,000 we're looking at, financial impact on Kerr County.
And then, as years go by, that will gradually increase as
people turn 65. And just one clarification on the agenda
item. It's not freezing the values, but it's freezing the
tax amount.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Freezing --
MS. RECTOR: It's not freezing the values;
it's freezing the tax amount.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Tax bill.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Rate? The rate?
MS. RECTOR: No, it's freezing the actual
amount of tax. So, say you're paying $300 a year in county
taxes. Your values can increase each year, but your taxes
will never exceed that. It's a cap on the amount of taxes
when they're frozen. You'll never pay more unless there's
improvements made to the property that increase the value,
and then that can increase your taxes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My -- I guess the
question I have -- and I don't know who the person to answer
1~-~-,,~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
75
or who I'm asking, but it is, can the Commissioners Court
call an election without the petition of 5 percent? And my
reason is, my preference is for an election. I know an
election will cost money, but I also feel that
constitutional amendments, historically, and the elections
have a relatively low voter turnout. And also, by looking
at the constituticrral amendment by itself, you don't
understand the full impact to all of the county taxpayers,
and I think that all county taxpayers, you know, have -- I
don't think it's my position as a Commissioner to, you know,
raise my hand and vote on this. I think it should be voted
on by the voters. It very well may pass in Kerr County, but
I think that the interest and the understanding of it would
be a lot better after an election, when everyone understands
that this will freeze people at 65 and over, but everybody
else is going to pay more, and I think that issue has to be
brought out to the public. And there are many that may be
65 or older that look at that and say, no, that's not fair.
So I think that the -- the -- you know, the impact to the
County would come out in an election, and I'm more in favor
of doing the election, even though it certainly -- election
does cost taxpayers mcney.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Give us the
opportunity to make sure that the public understands this
impact. $100,000 the first year is a pretty good chunk of
~_ ~-o~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,,.._ 2 4
25
76
change, and I'm not sure people really and truly understand
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know. But, I
mean --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know that,
but --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, I would -- I
mean, I think, you know, based on the -- based on the
numbers of the ratio that it did pass in the county, I would
be in favor of just calling for an election, but I don't
know if we have the authority of calling for an election
without getting 5 percent of signatures. So, that's the
reason -- my question is, can we just call for the election?
And then I would be in favor of that, but I don't know if we
have that authority, based on --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Way I understood it,
there has to be a petition from the public, from what I've
understood.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I -- I'll kind
of weigh in on this. I think that's a better approach. If
Commissioner Baldwin hadn't asked the question about the
impact to Kerr County, I would have, as well as others. I
want to know what that impact is, and I think it's only fair
that all of the voters in Kerr County have an opportunity to
at least learn through some form of public education as to
1~-~- ~?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,---
25
77
what this means. For some of us, me included, it would mean
a freeze of my tax rate, I guess, as well as --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Taxing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or the amount of
money that I pay in any of the categories of taxation; is
that correct?
MS. RECTOR: County and the city.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: County and/or city.
MS. RECTOR: Right. The City has to go
through same motions that all --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not the rate or the
value of my property. But the flip side of that is, what
does it mean to the county? What does it mean to the other
taxpayers, and who's going to pick up the difference and so
forth? So, while we have an opportunity here, I'd rather
see us petition for an election, or if the County Attorney
tells us we can arbitrarily, through court order, without an
initiative petition, set a date for an election, then I'd be
willing to entertain that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm looking at the
language, and it says we can -- we can do it, and then it
says, as an alternative, on receipt of a petition signed by
5 percent of the registered voters in the county, shall call
an election determined by majority vote whether to establish
a tax limitation provided by this subsection. So, I'm

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
78
reading that to say, no, we can't call an election; we'll
have tc wait and get a petition.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, I agree. And I
think another thing, that if -- with what all that said
and -- well, what the resolution says, if it's a joint -- if
the City can do it and the County can do it, it would be
good, I think, ~c have the election on the same day. I
mean, if possible. I mean, that may not be -- I think it
would be less confusion to the public and to the voters, and
they'd, you know, get a true picture if it's one time. And
I think I would really encourage us to try to work that out
with the City if -- if and when we receive a petition, and
if and when the City receives a petition.
JUDGE TINLEY: Where does that leave us on
the public hearing, gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There was no second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There was no second
JUDGE TINLEY: None being offered, motion
dies for lack of a second. We'll return to Item 1.8,
consider and discuss County Attorney's advice whether
Commissioners Court has the legal authority to approve or
disapprove requests made by elected officials to grant merit
pay increases to employees. Mr. Motley?
MR. MOTLEY: I found nothing that says that

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
79
it is illegal to implement the plan as -- as proposed. I
don't know if there is any authority to say positively that
it is legal. In any event, you know, I mean, often there
is -- there is no authority to say something is positively
okay. I found nothing to say it's -- it's not -- I don't
have anything to say it's prohibited. One suggestion was
made to me, and this would be -- I don't know if this is
this item or the next one, but procedurally, as far as the
rules as to how this is to operate, which I thought was a
really good suggestion, if there's a way to make these
nominations, I guess you'd call them, for the employees to
receive these additional benefits, these merit raises or
incentive pay boosts, if there were a way to make it
anonymous and apart, but neutral; not list the person's
name, just talk about specifically the -- the acts that were
done over and above what is required of the job, and look at
it strictly based on the merit of the work, as opposed to --
not name the department or the individual involved, and
evaluate it that way, that seems like it would get an
additional layer of insulation and protection away from the
issue that Ms. Uecker was raising, which was she was
concerned about the Commissioners individually raising one
person's pay. And I think, even as proposed, that's
probably okay.
But if you were able to say -- and it might
1'-~-r3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~-.
25
80
be difficult in a department like a J.P. office, for
example, but if the -- 'cause J.P.'s only have one employee,
but if you were to make it just a -- a county office or a --
you know, a J.P., something like that, and not mention who
the person is, and somehow maybe turn those in based on a
number system or something to the Treasurer or the personnel
officer, that would keep that issue, it seems to me, out of
-- of the person who it is or the department. At least the
person's name, who it is that's being considered. Then the
Commissior_ers could not be -- I won't say "accused"; that's
not exactly the right word, but couldn't be said to be
making decisions on pay according to the person's identity.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How would you like
"pilloried"? Does that work?
MR. MOTLEY: Say that again?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pilloried.
MR. MOTLEY: That's a controversial issue;
there's a lot of people that are fussing about it. But it
seems if -- if it were more neutral in that way, that it
might be even more likely to pass muster. I think to get a
definitive answer on this, I'd have to get an Attorney
General's opinion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My reaction is that
the anonymity of it would last until the first paycheck was
waved in front of the other employees.
1^-8-03
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
81
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It would not last that
long.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
MR. MOTLEY: Well, it may, and that may be
the case, but the -- the issue is not to keep it anonymous
from the other county employees, but to keep it anonymous
before the Commissioners Court when they're making a
decision, so you can't be accused of --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let's move on.
MR. MOTLEY: -- saying A or B.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One comment on that;
that that defeats the purpose of the merit pay scheme. The
purpose is to provide recognition for people who make a
significant contribution.
MR. MOTLEY: Well, that might be able to be
done even afterwards, after the decision is made based on
the merit. That might be able to be done once it`s revealed
who it is. I don't think there's anything wrong with
recognizing the person. It's just the idea of, at the time
the decision is made, to know who it is and --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, if I might make
a comment -- and I sense some frustration with Commissioner
Nicholson, which I don't blame him for having some
frustration at this point, seeing how many -- how many times
it's been on the agenda. I think, you know, I don't -- what
1~-~-,.~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
..- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
82
I would like to see us do is discuss this at our strategic
workshop. I think -- you know, and I'm tossing it out right
now as an alternative, to do it during the budget process,
which I would favor more. Let the elected officials and
department heads be aware that we will give -- we will, you
know, consider merit increases at that time; let them submit
them at that time, and depending on budget considerations,
we can grant them at that time. And, you know, it kind
of -- I like the concept of merit increases. I think it
improves productivity. We kind of did it this year a little
bit in our budget process, but I think it -- that what the
problem that we are having here is how this body basically
is getting some oversight over independent areas that we
don't have any authority over.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why don't we move to
the next agenda item? I think the Commissioner has
something to say about all that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner --
let's do move to the next item.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let me go ahead and
call Item 9 -- agenda Item 9, cnnsider, discuss, and approve
policy and procedures for granting merit pay increases.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner
Williams and I met for about an hour, I guess, and -- and
discussed a concept that's different than the ones we`ve
l~-a ~~
- .,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
it
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
83
talked about before. It's different in terms of the
process. P.nd we're going to meet scme more, and we'll come
back to the Court with a -- a different -- different way of
administering a merit program.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, good,
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And the ideas that
we hear here, we'll take those into consideration also.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And I would add only
one other thing. If we -- if the Commissioner and I are
able to forge this approach, which I think we can, we won't
have to worry about you doing any more research, Mr. Motley,
'cause it will -- it won't concern the Attorney General.
MR. MOTLEY: One of the things that -- I
mean, I'd like to make a comment about the -- the idea of
merit pay. It -- the thing that makes this innovative and
new and attractive, I think, is the fact that it's to be
done -- the raise is to be given at or near the time of the
excellent performance. That's what -- you know, instead of
delayed gratification, delaying it up to 11 months or
whatever. It's just more, like, I guess you'd say ordinary,
and real business in the real world, that somebody is
recognized at the next paycheck rather than the anniversary
of their employment or the budget year, and I think that's
an idea that's kind of outside the box, and I think that's
12-~-~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
84
something that if -- if it could pe worked out, I think it`s
very creative and a good idea.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I want to make
my comment on it just real quick. I never have been
comfortable with this thing. I kind of wanted to ride it
through and see how it was going to work, and I don't see
that it's going to work the way that we've been going. You
know, we have the elected officials coming in that are
speaking against it. So, I mean, that, to me, is
confirmation that we're heading in the wrong direction. And
I think, in my mind, the wrong direction is -- is not -- not
giving it out to those persons that deserve it, but this
Court making those decisions. I just -- I think we're
totally and completely out of line. The only true way to do
it -- and we've tried it before, and I don't know why it
doesn't work -- why it didn't work, is -- is to allow the
elected officials to do their own. I mean, they`re the ones
that can read that stuff. We have -- in my mind, we have
zero business making any kind -- I will not make -- I mean,
T won't participate in it; I can tell you that. I won't
have Linda Uecker jumping on me. We're not going to have
it. Not going to happen.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've been there and

1
.-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
85
done that. It's not fun.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move on. Item 11,
consider and discuss approving contract between Kerr County
and Ingram and Hunt Volunteer Fire Departments, and
authorize County Judge to sign the same.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move that we
approve the contracts between Kerr County and the Ingram and
Hunt Volunteer Fire Departments and authorize County Judge
to sign same.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Any questions or discussion?
All in favor, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item,
Item 12, consider and discuss request to reserve and use the
southeast corner of the Kerr County Courthouse square on
April 8, 9, and 10, 2004, for the annual mop and broom sale
by the Kiwanis Club of Kerrville.
COMMISSIONER WILI~IAMS: Question. My
question is, are we going to keep putting these things on
the agenda, Judge, when they've been going on routinely for
-- since Hector was a pup?
~_-8-U3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
86
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who is Hector?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Hector's --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm just teasing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He's that armadillo.
That's my question.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I -- I brought, on two
separate occasions, a request for a policy and -- and rules
for prescribing use of the courthouse facilities and grounds
to the Court, and --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You opened this thing,
Bill.
JUDGE TINLEY: And --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just wanted an
answer.
JUDGE TINLEY: The second -- the first time
the administrative assistant/court coordinator was asked to
prepare a draft. She did so. Brought it back the second
time, and what I heard that took place the second time was
it's not a problem.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Your Honor, true to
your profession, you didn't answer my question. (Laughter.}
JUDGE TINLEY: So, until -- until we have
policies and rules in place, I suppose, yeah --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're going to keep
25 ~ doing this.
i~-a-n-~
87
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,--..
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move we give the
Kiwanis Club, who has been doir_g the annual mop sale for 46
years, permission to continue doing so this year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Any
discussion or questions?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question. In
the letter from the Kiwanis people to Glenn, it says --
requesting that he notify the parking people that parking is
affected. Is anyone's parking affected out there? I mean,
those are not designated areas out there. Okay.
MR. HOLEKAMP: It's usually not an issue,
because they coordinate it with the Market Days people on
that particular weekend.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you,
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item
is to consider and discuss Environmental Health Department
procedures, forms, and fees.
1.'-8-03
88
1
2
3
4
F
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
]5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge -- speaking of
Miguel, here he is.
MR. ARREOLA: Need me now?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're up, Miguel. I put
these next three items on the agenda kind of so we can talk
about them one by one. The first item is consider and
discuss Environmental Health Department procedures, forms,
and fees. I told Miguel that I really didn't think that
that was required, to come to the Court for us to approve
those. I think that's something that he has authority to
do. However, I did encourage him to come in and kind of go
over them with us, and in doing so, kind of give us more
information on the procedures of how he's running the
department, and kind of keep us up to speed, so if we get
questions and things of that nature, we're aware as to what
-- how the department is running. So, Miguel, I'll turn it
over to you.
MR. ARREOLA; Okay. Well, I think you got
the package of forms with you, and we're going to try to go
as the way it was presented. It's probably the
chronological order that we go in the department also. So,
the first one we have there is the application. That's the
largest of all the forms, and it has a lot of information in
there, We're required tc have most of that information. It
is used later to review plans and to match with the property
1 ~ - 8 - n 3
1
.-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
~9
20
21
22
23
24
.-~
25
89
and with the O.S.S.F. We do assist the customers filling
out the application if they need to. The -- the fees are
also posted in the application; all the fees for the
department are posted in there, and the hours that we're
available to assist, they're posted also. You got any
questions on that one?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: The expedite review, when does
that come into play?
MR. ARREOLA: That is when -- we have certain
time -- certain periods of time that the law gives us to --
to turn in a document, to finish up a document. If they
need it faster than that and we have to jump a few other
customers waiting, we have to do that for next day, then we
charge them that. That is not used a lot. It's been used,
since I've been here, for two times, I guess, and that is
when they have to have it next day or same day, and
there's -- there's, you know, more paperwork waiting. If we
don't have anything waiting, you know, we don't charge that.
That is only when we have to move somebody out of the line
to give them that that way.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's say you've got an
application that is filled out by an applicant, and you've
got a bunch of stuff in the pipeline.
MR. AR.REOLA: Mm-hmm?
1 ~-~-~~
90
1
.-. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
JUDGE TINLEY: And the applicant is
requesting you to take some action earlier than what you're
required to do so under the law, and you've got plenty of
work ahead of you.
MR. ARREOLA: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there something that you
can clearly point to, in terms of what they're requesting,
that clear~y authorizes you to charge that expedite fee`?
That's my only concern. As opposed to having the customer
say, "Well, where'd you come up with that? How come..." Do
you have some rules or something that you've published and
given to them that says if they want this quicker than this
time frame, or if they want this other quicker than some
other time frame, that you're authorized to charge this
expedite fee? That's my manly concern. I don't want to be
hearing that -- that you've just pulled out of thin air an
expedite fee on somebody without having some clear basis for
it.
MR. AR.REOLA: Yes, sir. Yeah, we have
T.C.E.Q. rules that tell us exactly how long we have to
finish that document.
23
24
,.-
25 to?
l~-a-;;3
MR. ARREOLA: So we can go by that.
JUDGE TINLEY: You have something to point
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
91
MR. ARREOLA: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good enough. That's all I
MR. ARREOLA: Any other questions on that?
In the bark of that application, it has an acknowledgment
affidavit that explains the property owner all the rights
they have for that septic and all the obligations they have
with this office, where they approve us to go and inspect,
to go onto their property and all that. So, that's very
clearly stated in there, and they -- they need to sign it.
The next -- next one is the preliminary plat review, and we
use that to inspect the replats or plats we've used, and
it's very self-explanatory. We'll go by those items in the
list. That's what we review, and that's what we send back
to -- to whoever applies for it, tell them what we checked
and if you pass, or if you didn't pass, why you didn't pass.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What are the -- are these
fees set by the court? Or are they set by --
MR. ARREOLA: It's already set. I think it
was set by the Commissioners Court.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- Subdivision Rules?
MS. SOVIL: Commissioners Court set them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But this is part of our
rules we set with Subdivision --
MS. SOVIL: Fees are separately set.
__-8-r_i 3
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
92
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it's the fees page in
the -- part of the Subdivision Rules, so if we wanted to
modify this, we'll do it when we do the Subdivision Rules.
MS. SOVIL: No. No, you --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, it doesn't have
anything to do with subdivision.
MS. SOVIL: Has nothing to do with
subdivision.
MR. ARREOLA: That's just the fee for the
department, I think.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is an O.S.S.F. fee,
okay. The -- and the reason I was asking, I mean, I think
it might be a good idea to put that fee on here.
MR. ARREOLA: Include it in here?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Include the fee amount on
here, if there's a way to do that.
MR. ARREOLA: If I'm correct, I think that
process starts with the Road and Bridge Department. That's
where they have the forms, and then it comes to us as a
separate issue. We do have our own fee, though, so we can
add it in our application. It's not going to be an
application for a septic, but we can add it to it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just think it ought to
be on that form, so when they fill out the form, they know
what that fee is.
1'-8-G3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~-.
25
93
MR. ARREOLA: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Full disclosure. Good point.
MR. ARREOLA: Okay. The next one we have is
the request for septic license search. That is used when a
customer doesn't know if the system is licensed or not, and
if they need to sell, they need to upgrade, the license has
a lot to do with it. They fill out this form, and we look
in our database, in our files, and everywhere we have to
make sure it does have a license or not. We also have a
book that is free of charge with a printout from the
database if they want to look themselves, if they want to
look in there. If they can't find it or they don't want to
do that, they can let us do it. It's a $10 fee for that
search.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- and, again, on
this one, I think I'd put that fee on here.
MR. ARREOLA: Okay. In the application also?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And -- and up there,
where you have the -- allow minimum of 24 hours for reply.
MR. ARREOLA: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think probably we ought
to put a -- you know, a maximum as well, or how long --
needs to be replied between 24 to -- you know.
MR. ARREOLA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just so people know that
~_-8-03
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
94
-- you know, and also they understand that it'll take
however long it's going to take, whatever that is.
MR. ARREOLA: Okay. You might take that
to -- okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask a question
here. Now, if -- if I come to your place and I want to know
about some other septic tank -- I mean, that's basically
what this is -- your staff will go in and search the
information out and get it to me, and you're going to charge
me 10 bucks for that?
MR. ARREOLA: That is if -- if it's not
available right away. If we can find it on the computer the
minute you come in, we'll let you know, and it's no charge.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What if I want to
search it out myself?
MR. ARREOLA: It's a form in there, in the
front entrance. It's free of charge, and you can look.
It's a thick book with all the septics that we -- we know in
the county.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, it is available
for the public to come in and do their own research without
being charged?
MR. ARREOLA: Without being charged, yes,
sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good. Thank you.
=~-8-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1.4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2.2
23
24
,.-.
25
95
MR. ARREOLA: You're welcome. Okay. The
next one is the complaint form. That one is used when
someone calls or comes into the office and reports a
complaint. We try to get as much information as we can
pertaining to the property with the problem, and then we do
inspections on it. This form, it's -- it takes some time to
finish with it. We do a lot of follow-ups on those. So,
it's -- the form is designed to have some room for
follow-ups and notify whoever needs to be notified. And
then, at the end, it -- it asks us if we can close that file
or not, or we got to continue with it. So, this is a
complaint form. It does -- it does not -- is not the only
part that we do. We do a lot of reports on it, but there is
the basic of it, the front -- front part.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is a good --
good process, and it's helpful to me in terms of getting
educated about how you operate. I'm thinking about the
issue of access to property. Say you've got a complaint;
somebody suspects that their neighbor's system has failed,
and you go out there and that neighbor won't allow you
access to the property. What are your -- what's your
recourse for that?
MR. ARREOLA: If we're not allowed into the
l~-~3-G3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
96
got to notify the law enforcement for that. If we're
allowed to go, then we do it. If we're not allowed to go,
either they don't let us in or it's posted not to go in, we
have the right, under the T.C.E.Q. rules, to go. You know,
we have the authorization tc qo in, but we have to notify
the law enforcement.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tc go or to get a
court order to go?
MR. ARREOLA: No, to go.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon?
MR. ARREOLA: To go.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: To go?
MR. ARREOLA: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Whenever you do go, do
you leave, I guess, a card, a note, a letter or something
that says --
MR. ARREOLA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- we were here?
MR. ARREOLA: We were here and we need to
talk to you, and call me here or call me there. We leave
numbers and all the information we got in that. We try,
when this is -- when this comes out, we try to get in touch
with the property owners first by phone or by mail or
something, trying to talk to them and explaining that we
need to do an inspecticn, and let us in, try to get their
1='-~-03
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
97
permission before we go, but not always is possible.
Sometimes they're, you know, vacant properties; nobody's
there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. ARREOLA: Any other question on that one?
The next or.e is the fax cover sheet that we use. It's
pretty simple. I don't know if you got questions on that
one. The next one is the permit to construct. That one, in
order to get to here, there's a lot of in-house, a lot of
internal forms that we need to go through. I didn't bring
them in, 'cause it's pretty lengthy, but it's basically the
plat review forms, what we use to review each plan. We need
to do an inspection before we get to this one. We got to
have a site confirmation, we call it. Once everything is
okay, application is in place, and we did all reviews that
we needed to do, then we issue this permit to construct.
This is to inform the property owner and the installer and
whoever else is involved that it is approved to go ahead and
start the construction. Nobody can start construction of a
septic system without this permit. The only exception is
when the property is exempted from the permitting process.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Couple questions,
please. From the time that someone fills out an
application. --
25 I MR. ARREOLA: Uh-huh?
1~ 8 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
98
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- to the time that
they get a permit to construct, how long is that?
MR. ARREOLA: It varies a lot. It depends on
when they bring us the planning materials. Some people come
in and fill out the applications, and it's -- the property
owner's the one who needs to do it, or the agent. They come
in and leave the application sitting in there until someone
comes in with planning materials. After we get the planning
materials, it takes us two or three days normally. We do
have, under T.C.E.Q. rules, up to 30 days to do it, but, you
know, our experience has been two to three days and we can
get a permit ready. But, from the time of the application,
it varies a lot.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second question.
MR. ARREOLA: Uti-huh?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And Commissioner
Baldwin will be happy to know this. I got my first
complaint about O.S.S.F., and you'll be even happier to know
that I referred the party to the manager.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So you will be
getting a complaint.
MR. ARREOLA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHCLSON: Would you take us --
and this issue has to do with a dispute over whether or not
i_-3-03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
99
an aerobic system is needed. And I think, in our earlier
deliberations, you'll recall that we learned that we have
more aerobic systems in Kerr County than they do in Bexar
County. Of course, they're a larger municipal, you know,
city. But we have -- we have -- by any measure, we have way
more aerobic systems than similarly situated counties that
have our soil types, and so this complaint has to do with a
disagreement that an aerobic system is needed. Will you
take us through the steps that you go through --
MR. ARREOLA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- to determine what
kind of system is needed?
MR. ARREOLA: We actually do not determine
the type of system. That is with the designer, the
installer, and the property owner. They get together and
they decide what type of system. We only might say no or
yes after it's already presented. We do not tell them what
type of system they need to have. Sometimes aerobic units
are not -- they don't fit in the property; they don't have
the area for the disposal. Sometimes the type of soils,
sometimes the, you know, easements that they have on the
property. Every property is unique and has different
situations on it. So we do not determine -- we do not tell
anybody what type of system they need to have. We just
approve or not approve what was presented. I don't know the
l~-~-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
100
specifics on that one, but -- but if it was not a good soil
for anything else and they had to have an aerobic, that was
the only better option, you know, that's what they need to
have.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Miguel, but isn't -- I
mean, I think, almost without exception, there's always an
alternative.
MR. ARREOLA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The cost may be, you
know, worse than the aerobic or --
MR. ARREOLA: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- whatever, but there's
-- and I guess the -- I guess, what is your philosophy how
-- or your department's philosophy on helping the public
understand what types of systems they have the option to
use?
MR. ARREOLA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess it goes back to
the education issue.
MR. ARREOLA: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And -- you know, and it
may be that we reed to get to the next step of what we've
talked about, developing some educational material. And
that -- my idea of them going through where we are so far on
this, as soon as someone gives you an application or signs
1~ e ~~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
..- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~-
25
101
an application, we give them this material and say --
MR. ARREOLA: This is the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- this is kind of an
overview of Kerr County septic rules -- or not rules, but
septic systems.
MR. ARREOLA: What we do -- and we do that a
lot. There's a table vzi T.C.E.Q. rules of all the approved
systems in the state of Texas, so what we do when we see
that the customer is not sure what they're going to get or
that they can argue already what type of system, we give
them a copy of that, and that presents all the different
systems approved and the type of soils that go into it, so
it's pretty easy to read and understand and see what options
they have. An aerobic is not the only solution most of the
time. But there -- the rest of the solutions, they're more
expensive, so that's why they go with -- with an aerobic.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, Miguel, you sign
this?
MR. ARREOLA:
COMMISSIONER
to -- this permit to the bu
MR. ARREOLA:
COMMISSIONER
here what kind of system is
Yes, sir.
NICHOLSON: And you give this
ilder and/or the landowner?
Yes, sir.
NICHOLSON: And you indicate on
approved -- in particular is
approved?
i~-a-u~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,... 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,~-,
25
102
MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It sounds like
you're telling me you're not the one that decides that an
aerobic system is needed.
MR. ARREOLA: No. I just approve if the
aerobic system will fit on that spot or not. If they
present to me plans for an aerobic system and I review the
plans and I determine that it's a good system for that
property and the surrounding environment, I approve it. You
know, I'll sign it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The installer decides
what the system for the property --
MR. ARREOLA: Installer and homeowner.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And they submit a plan
that you approve or not approve. You don't care what kind
of system it is.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, if I've got a
new construction and I contact one of the builders, the
installers, and he says I -- I need an aerobic, and I don't
think I do, then my option is to go find another installer?
MR. ARREOLA: That will be one of your
options. If the installer says only -- I do only aerobics,
then you probably want to go and find someone else.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it would be
probably a good idea if the page out of the T.C.E.Q. you
1~ ~ 03
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.--.
25
103
referred to --
MR. ARREOLA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd give that to
everybody. I'd give that to everybody. When they get an
application, I'd give them a -- a page as to --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He almost said that
they did that. But back to your question of your complaint,
why -- why didn't that person have all those options in his
hand? This sheet of paper with a list of all the options.
Why didn't that person have that?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And that's -- he
should have it. And why is it he believes his grievance is
with Miguel instead of the builder? Why -- he's mad at
Miguel.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I suspect the installer
told him Miguel wanted it. You know, just because it's a --
pass the buck. But I don't know that; I shouldn't say that,
'cause it's --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, the installer
tells him, "You have to have an aerobic system." He doesn't
think he does, and the installer says, "Oh, yes, you do."
So, our citizen or taxpayer is mad at our employee.
Something's wrong there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Hello? Did we say
we're going to have that problem?
1 ~ S c~~ 3
104
1
2
3
4
6
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we need to --
MR. ARREOLA: We can solve it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can solve it by giving
the information out, maybe.
MR. ARREOLA: We can easily explain to the
homeowner what the situation is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the first step in
that is when scmeone fills out an application, we give them
something right now, and I think we need to work on that to
make it as user-friendly as possible. And I don't have a
problem on putting in range of cost of the systems for Kerr
County based on experience.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask something.
I agree with that, but at what point does the property owner
get to us? See, he's out there dealing with -- dealing with
the designers for a long time before he even gets to us,
does he not?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, but when -- the
homeowner has to do the application, though.
MR. ARREOLA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, early on, we have
the opportunity to --
MR. ARREOLA: We can provide that, mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's his first contact, when
1 ~ - P -
1
--~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
105
he comes in to -- to make the application, or maybe even
prior to that. But hand him the information of permissible
types of systems.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't understand why
that wasn't done. That's my question. Why wasn't that
done?
MR. ARREOLA: Probably -- I don't know if
it's the same -- I looked at one Friday, and I don't know if
that's the same one you got there.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No, he was mad by
Friday.
MR. ARREOLA: All right, that's not the one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, it's a he. This
is going to be a piece of cake.
JUDGE TINLEY: And what I'm hearing is -- and
possibly, in addition to giving the applicant -- the
landowner, giving him the permissible --
MR. ARREOLA: The type of systems.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- tabulation of all the
permissible types of systems, specify that you don't --
MR. ARREOLA: I don't control.
23 system
24
.--,
25
^-8-~:~ 3
MR. ARREOLA: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's between him and the
JUDGE TINLEY: You don't specify what type of
1
--- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
..-. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
106
designer-slash-installer. However, if the system, as
proposed, is not in accordance with our regs or T.C.E.Q.
regs, you have the authority to disapprove it.
MR. ARREOLA: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Something to that effect.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question. Is there
not a situation where a property owner working with Yiis
designer/installer comes in wits a plan, and you know that
the soil conditions in this particular location are such not
to be able to accept a system of that design, and you would
say to that, "I think this is not the way it ought to be.
We should do an aerobic." Is there not a situation that can
occur like that?
MR. ARREOLA: I will not mention the word
"aerobic." I will probably say --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Alternate. Forget --
other, alternate.
MR. ARREOLA: Yes.
a site specific, --
MR. ARREOLA: Uh-huh?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- you would have to
say, in good conscience, "That won't work, sir. You have to
do such-and-such"?
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
107
MR. ARREOLA: You have to go to a different
option, yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That could happen?
MR. ARREOLA: That happens.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Then that means you
do sign off on whether it's an appropriate system.
MR. ARREOLA: Sure, that happens. What we do
here is -- and that's the internal forms that I was talking
to you about. Once we get the planning materials, then we
go and do cur first inspection. We check the soil and site
conditions all around, and then we'll know if that design he
was provided is good for that specific location.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You say you check
the soil. What do you actually do?
MR. ARREOLA: We have them dig two 5-foot
deep holes in the property where they want to have their
disposal, and we actually check the soil by texture. We
check the soil and make sure it is good soil and it's
permissible for that type of system. And if we disagree --
and that is also in the T.C.E.Q. rules. If we disagree with
what they believe it is, then we have to go to a lab or a
professional soil scientist and have them take that
position. Once we get clear on what type of soil it is and
we know that the system they design will fit in there, will
work fire, will not pollute the environment, then we will
i~-a-~
1
.-, 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~- 13
14
15
16
17
i8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
108
review the plans and issue the permit.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do you do a perk
MR. ARREOLA: No, that's not approved any
more. We do check the soil with texture. Soil texture is a
type of test we do. So, we actually go in and we can say,
"The design you presented is not good, is not going to
work." But I don't say what to bring me next. They can
design and tell us what they wart to have instead.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Would you say,
Miguel, if aerobic systems have been oversold, then that
overselling has been done by -- by septic builders? Not --
it hasn't been done by you?
MR. ARREOLA: Not by us, I'm sure. We had
nothing to do with that. There's some people that games into
my office, property owners, and they want to have an
aerobic. They find it good; they find that they can water
their lawn. They like it. So, you know, even though they
don't need to, they want to have it. We tell them that you
don't have to go this way; you have good soil, but they want
it, so it's their decision. We don't encourage anybody to
have any specifir_ system at all.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is why we need to
improve the education part of it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
i^-a-u~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
109
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the -- that's a
key to correcting the misconception, is to get the
information out to the public that, you know, here are your
options.
MR. ARREOLA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And all we need is a --
you know, and let them figure out their own. I mean, they
can look at the soils ar.d figure out whatever, look at the
table. But if it's relatively user-friendly -- and we can
:Hake it user-friendly if it isn't, I think.
MR. ARREOLA: It is. It's very clear. It's
very easy to read and understand, and we use it a lot.
Probably not in that specific situation, but we use it a
lot.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, you know, the
aerobic system is good that you can water your yard, but you
may want to tell them that if you live up, like Commissioner
Baldwin does, on the hill, you water everybody's yard. And
when the thing gets -- gets a little stinky at times, you
stink up everybody. I mean, you're not alone, though, see?
I mean, that's the good part of it. It just doesn't get
stinky at your place; everybody gets it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I've talked to -- I
know Dave and I both talked to Miguel about this, and I
think, you know, it's a good time just to, you know,
y__~_r,3
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
110
sometime in the first or second meeting in January, if that
works with your schedule, to bring back an educational rough
draft form, and then we can send the bill to U.G.R.A. to pay
for it. But -- but do a -- to get the -- 'cause this is a
priority, I think, to get this done and move forward. And
we want to let you, obviously, get settled in in the new
office space, and there's more settling to do, but hopefully
at that time we can have some sort of information that we've
looked at, and really start approving that public
information.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Jon, I have another
question that could -- I sense that you're closing this
thing out, but under the agenda item, it's O.S.S.F.
procedures, so I have a specific question about that. Let's
get back to the aerobic systems again. You know, a couple
of years ago, I'm -- I have an aerobic system, and I'm
required to do an annual contract, maintenance contract.
Required by the State.
MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: To do an annual
maintenance contract. And a couple of years ago, that
angered me a little bit. I did -- I refused to do that, and
after a month or so, I get this cute little letter from
U.G.R.A. at that time, and I assume that I would get them
from you from this time on, that said something like, "Our
1~-~-~~
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
111
records indicate that you have nct renewed your..." da, da,
da, da. That's fine. So, we rock on another month or so,
and then I get this threatening letter saying, you know,
we're going to put you in jail and you're going to rot and
all this stuff, or something sirr.ilar to that. And -- and at
that point, I -- you know, I -- of course, I don't want to
end up in a lawsuit; I'm an elected official, and that's
stupid and everything, so I complied. I wrote the check and
got my maintenance thing. Here's my -- here's my question.
You leaned on me pretty good to comply with the law, and
that's cool. I'm glad you did that. Now, what if that
company doesn't comply with the contract I have with them?
Do you lean on them as well?
MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIUNER BALDWIN: Do you really? Would
you check mine, please?
MR. ARREOLA: Sure, I will.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right, thank you.
MR. ARREOLA: We do.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 'Cause they're overdue
with the damn contract. I've got to live up to it; so
should they. I bet you that happens a lot. A lot. I'm
sorry to interrupt you.
MR. ARREOLA: Okay. Yeah, we do have the
obligation to check on the managed providers.
i~-~-o~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
112
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you write those
ugly letters like that, too?
MR. ARREOLA: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, qod, I'd love to
see one. Can I sign off on ore of them?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Now it's going to be
signed by you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah, absolutely.
I want to participate in this deal.
MR. ARREOLA: Okay, we'll bring you one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Write to yourself.
MR. AR.R.EOLA: Okay. Any more questions on
that? We get the next form; it's basically just a wrap-up.
It's called a design and inspection report. That contains
all the information we got into the process, and it's used
for a database information. It's what we put in our
computers. And alsc, it's a detail on when it's approved,
when it's not approved, what is missing, what is not
missing. At the bottcm is what we finalize it with,
"Approve fcr license or transfer." We're still doing
transfer, so we're still using that part. But it's just
a -- a finalized form of all -- everything we did.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Miguel, there's obviously
a lot of forms and follow-through, and how, if at all, are
1_-~-_~
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
,._ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.--.
25
113
they related? Like, can you -- like, when you say you go to
generate this form, these people have already given you some
of this information several times already, and -- such as
the owner name, location?
MR. ARREOLA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All that. Is there a
mechanism right now that you can just type in the file
number and the form will print everything that it already
has?
MR. ARREOLA: We're working on that. That's
our goal. That is the process I tried to implement a couple
years ago. We want to have that. We want to have a system
that it will make it easier for everybody and faster for
everybody. Right now, we're kind of doing everything by
hand. And we got new computers that's going to help; we
just need the programs in those computers to make them work,
but it's possible. We're already working on it. We have
all the -- the steps done; we just need to get them all
together and, you know, hit a button and get it going.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. ARREOLA: So, that's next. Next one we
have is the O.S.S.F. receivables. This is what we use for
everyday log and the moneys received in that department. It
is turned in every day to the Treasurer's department, signed
by them, and then we file it for our own reports. We use
=_-8-03
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
114
this a lot too, every day. The next one is the actual
license to operate. It is just an example of a license to
operate. It contains the owner information, the property
information, and some highlights of the system, and just
general information of what we did. This is what the
homeowners get. Normally, a typical homeowner will come and
do the application and then won't see anything else until
they receive this license to operate. Normally, the
installer/designers get involved in the rest, and he just
comes in with the application and then, at the end, receives
his license to operate. Yes?
JUDGE TINLEY: When it's a system that
requires a maintenance contract, I assume you specify that
in Special Conditions?
MR. ARREOLA: Special Conditions, highlighted
and bolded. It says, "This system requires maintenance
contract," yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you.
MR. ARREOLA: You're welcome. And the last
one we have is the one Mr. Baldwin received that says --
letter to the homeowners, and this goes straight to the
homeowners. It's -- according to T.C.E.Q., they are the
party responsible fir ttie maintenance contract. It goes to
the maintenance -- to the homeowner saying it has expired,
and then normally give him 30 days to get a new contract in.
1____~~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
115
This is just the first letter. We actually send a reminder
before this letter; that's like a postcard, and if we don't
get anything, then we send this letter.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Remember, Miguel, you
still have U.G.R.A. on this one.
MR. ARREOLA: Do I? Probably gave you the
wrong copy, then. Oh, that's right, it's here. Okay.
Yeah, we just need to wcrk on it. It's the same as -- we'll
change it to Kerr County. Those are my forms.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Miguel, do I recall
that -- that the system owner does not have the option of
doing his own maintenance?
MR. ARREOLA: They don't. No, sir, not in
this county.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And, again, that's
T.C.E.Q. rule?
MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir. Well, it is -- they
-- they might be able to get it if they get a Class D
wastewater operator, and they get trained by the
manufacturer of the system. So, it is possible, but they
have to get a special license for it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There are -- there are
-- there are some folks in this county that do that, that
have done all that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I think that's it
i~-.-_;~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
116
for this item.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move on to the next one,
then. Item 14, consider and discuss allocating parking,
installing signage, and policy cn exterior door use.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda,
and this is just a couple of things to look at, everything
from designating parking spots to door and signage, things
of that nature. Probably, to me, out of this, one of the
most important is probably to designate two spots for the --
MR. ARREOLA: Jeeps.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- County jeeps for the
Environmental Health Department. As we head down to our
other offices that have vehicles and that are at the
courthouse, I don't have a really strong preference. I
don't think that Miguel does either as to where they are.
Most of the designated spots are kind of in that lower level
or on the ramps, and there's employee-only slots on both
ramps coming in on the Jefferson Street side of the
courthouse, and I would just recommend that we take two of
those employee-only slots and make them Environmental Health
Department vehicle slots. The other item is -- and this
one -- there's -- it's not clear-cut in my mind as to
whether we want to open up some of those employee-only spots
to the public, or specifically for customers of the O.S.S.F.
department. And the reason I say that is that it is --
1~-~-~,~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
117
currently, all the slots down in that area are reserved for
Kerr County employees or Kerr County vehicles, and it's
quite difficult for the average person, including myself, to
get down there from here. When you come into this
courthouse, to get down to the O.S.S.F. is -- it's not real
convenient. And if we would remove some of those
employee-only spots on these ramps, I think it would be, you
know, kind of beneficial, and then put some signage when you
come into the courthouse square that O.S.S.F. department is
down there, or actually give signs as to where they are. I
just think it would probably make it easier to get people in
and out of that department where we do have public coming in
and out.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You take the -- take
the employee-only signs off and put what up?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know. I've
thought about putting "O.S.S.F. Customers," but I think -- I
don't know. Some other elected official or department head
or someone told me, "Why don't we give hot check people
slots? Why don't we designate..." So this is really -- I'm
more in favor of just making them open places for people to
park.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because I think,
otherwise, you start going down a road that may get us in

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
118
more trouble.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me respond, if I might,
Commissioner. We probably need to designate some spots for
the two County-owned vehicles that the O.S.S.F. people
utilize, very similar to the Juvenile Probation. We've got
two vehicles that we leave here. That, of course, is a
matter of designation. Haven't heard where they ought to be
designated. I've heard where some have thoughts that they
should not be designated, and that's that first ramp there
on the west side where you come in at the back where the tax
people and some of the people from the Tax Office and the
County Court at Law are parking. They've been utilizing
those spots, even though they're not assigned spots. So, I
have a bigger problem with designating those spots for use
of customers or applicants or patrons of the O.S.S.F. I
think you got a real slippery slope. Why not have some for
Juvenile Probation for the County Attorney? For the
Treasurer? For the --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner 1.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, Commissioner 1, visitors
for him.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Should.
JUDGE TINLEY: And then how are you going to
enforce it, even if you do that, after you pay a bunch of
money for signage? I think we may have another issue with
12-a 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
119
trying to do some signage; we've got some economic issues.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. I mean, I would
think this -- just from a -- where I would recommend that we
put the two vehicles is on the -- the eastern side --
eastern ramp going up. I don't know how many -- I think
there's four spots ever there that are employee-only slots
right now?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah, that's probably right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I would designate two
of these to Environmental Health Department vehicle slots.
And I would also recommend that on the -- the western slope
coming down, that we remove all those signs; let anyone that
wants to park there. And the reason is, I mean, I
understand that people are -- you know, as -- if we're going
to ask the public to go down into that area, I think we
ought to provide parking. And, I mean, that's where this
office is. And I understand it's going to possibly
inconvenience, you know, some employees, but, you know, we
have -- you know, we have an employee parking lot up on the
top level. And I think that it is important that we allow
and provide parking for people that use the courthouse, and
this isn't designated just for O.S.S.F.; this is Juvenile
Probation, people that go to Hot Checks, and that ramp is
various people. And if we put signage up there that
points -- you know, that says that those departments are
i~-~-~~„
120
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
down in that lower level of the annex, including the County
Attorney, I think it would help, because I think it is -- it
is not user-friendly right now to have people coming into
this building and trying to get to the lower level of the
annex, and I think that we should do what we can to
accommodate the public.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: As far as -- as far as
parking is concerned, I would take that as a recommendation,
what you just laid out. And the way I understand it, the
County Judge is the parking guru of the courthouse, and has
authority to assign parking places -- oh, yeah, you do.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We might have to get
a legal opinion on that. The next thing, he'll be wanting
to approve merit increases.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or have broom and mop
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We don't want to give
him that much authority, my god.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that
we direct either the County Judge or the Maintenance
Director tc install two signs -- or replace two of the
employee-only signs on the eastern ramp to Environmental
Health Department vehicles, and remove all employee-only
slope -- 1 mean, employee slope -- employee-only signs on
the western slope.
l~-a-o?
1
--- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2.1
22
121
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Any
further question or discussion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How much do the signs
cost, Glenn? Are we talking about, like, those -- you know,
like, parking-type signs, those blue ones that we can
make -- I guess Road and Bridge can make them? I mean, what
is the expense to get signs to say that the departments that
are located in that lower annex that would like to have
their names on it, with the directional signs too, that say
where those departments are located?
MR. HOLEKAMP: It really depends on how much
-- how elaborate you want them, where you're going to locate
them. I'm not in agreement with putting signs on the
outside of the building, personally, against the brick.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I'm thinking more
MR. HOLEKAMP: But where else would we put
23 them?
,.- 2 4
25 the coY
1~-E-03
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think more on posts, on
on a sign --
1
,..-,. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,--
25
122
MR. HOLEKANIP: Well, you're talking about a
signpost, and we can probably get the metal material from
Road and Bridge at cost and do the lettering. Probably
$200, $300 a sign. That's cost, now. That's not --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe we can hire
somebody to stand up there and do this.
MR. HOLEKAMP: You know, and I'm -- let me
take this a little further. I know y'all are getting close
to lunch.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, it is.
MR. HOLEKAMP: There is a lot of confusion as
to how we get people down there. I don't have the answers,
other than very expensive signage. Do we want to put signs
on posts in the walkways? The issue that -- I don't think a
lot of people understand that roost of the people that are
going downstairs are not interested in looking; they're
interested in finding. They -- they're not even looking at
the signs that are there, so I don't know what it's going to
take to put enough signs to get people there, whether it be
outside, and giving them directions from outside through
that door. Once they get in the door, it's going to be very
difficult. And that's just a -- we can use ropes and, you
knew -- yc;u krr~w, direc:ti~rial things like a theater.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was thinking more in
lines of painting some duck feet --

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~--.
25
123
MR. HOLEKAMP: We can do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- on the floor.
Follow the duck feet.
MR. HOLEKAMP: A lot of times we have trouble
getting people off of this first floor to get them down to
the basement. They really make some really nice signs,
$350, $400. They're glass-enclosed, because they have the
letters that you remove that has the -- what the number is,
the office number, but there's no arrows. And people are
not patient enough so say, "Well, it's BA-106; that's
basement," or -- you know, so they stand there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know what the
answer is. Maybe the answer is to ask you to look at it a
little bit more. But I think that somehow, we need to -- I
think we have an obligation to the public to provide signage
to get them from this floor to the basement annex. And it's
not easy. And it's a -- when people -- when I've met people
out in the hall that are usually trying to get to David's
office, rather than -- I start out trying to explain it, and
I just say, "Well, just follow me." It's easier just to
walk down there and do it, and it shouldn't be that hard.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do we have a basic
courthouse directory?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Is there
lz-~-~ ~
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
124
anything wrong with posting it there?
MR. HOLEKAMP: People -- my point was -- is
that there's no patience in this world for people to stop
and look at that thing and follow that direction. It's the
same plan that they use for evacuation of the courthouse,
you know, in case of fire. They're posted at the elevators
downstairs, and this level and second floor. Those types of
signs can be placed here in the halls. We can put them on
-- they make them where they're on, you know, the little
stand. Looks like disc plowshares, and you can move them
anywhere you want to. You can change the lettering. But,
there again, they're portable, changeable letter boards,
they call them. You can put it out in the middle of the
hall; you can change them if you're having a meeting
upstairs, whatever. But it's going to take more than one.
It's going to take probably six, seven cf those things in
this -- to -- to direct everybody to the different
locations. Because I guarantee, the people that are going
down to see David in his one department, they're really not
very interested in going there. So, I guess what I'm saying
is, is this Court -- the Court's going to have to kind of
make a decision as how much money do you want to spend? Do
we really want to do a study on signage? Which we can do.
These -- these Road and Bridge signs that are made with the
-- you know, the plastic that we hang, they're a little
l~-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
125
cheesy, you know, for -- to put on walls in here, I think.
They'd work outside, probably.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think the --
you know, I don't know. I think the plowshare signs or plow
disc signs, I mean, almost -- I think we need to do one. I
mean, my concern is to get people from this first floor of
the courthouse into the basement. If we can get them into
the basement, I mean, I
MR. HOLEKAMP: No. I -- and I'm not arguing,
but once they get off the elevator, they are in a different
world. They're in Kendall County.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Maybe -- maybe the
Court would be willing to accept your recommendation if you
came back and gave us a list of signage and the reasons and
the cost and where they're going to be placed, because we're
not going to settle this today, whether we're going to do
Road and Bridge or a $400 sign. So, why don't you put
together a package for us and tell us what we need?
MR. HOLEKAMP: And the reason I say these
$400 signs, and I'll preface that, is the -- that's with the
removable lettering. If you don't do the kind with the
locking front, you're going to be without letters after a
little while.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That should be in
your recommendation.
---~-~,~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
126
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah, there's a reason. So, I
would really like -- if y'all would give me a little time,
I'll be glad to try to put a plan together for you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. HOLEKAMP: But from the exterior of the
building, there really needs to be some -- figure out how we
can do that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Just -- I think
it's something we need to look at, and it's been an issue,
and it's more of an issue now that O.S.S.F. is downstairs.
So, I agree, Commissioner Williams. Why don't we request
that Glenn come back? And I believe, Glenn, as you told me
earlier, the door situation has been handled. That door is
left unlocked?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, it is unlocked. And that
brings up another issue. We -- and I may have to do this by
memo. We're -- and I'm not blaming Miguel or his people by
any means, but on the weekends and at night when you come in
here, you got to relock those doers when you leave. There's
some doors have been being left unlocked, and it's not my
people. We check them twice. So, I don't know -- we may
have to -- Miguel's been real good about it; I'm not fussing
at him by my means. But we usually lock up.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A memo would probably be
a good idea to send to everyone in the courthouse.
1^-8-u3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
127
MR. HOLEKAMP: Some of them are getting a
little more lax about it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I think that takes
care of 14.
JUDGE TINLEY: Item 15, consider and discuss
authorizing purchasing additional office equipment and
build-out to Environmental Health Department.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you'll find
attached a -- a list of office equipment-type needs that
Miguel needs to complete his office, and I'll turn it over
to Miguel to go over his list.
MR. ARREOLA: Okay. Well, that is equipment
that we need, that we got to have to operate, to be
efficient, to provide a good service for the public. We
really need to have it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Glenn, is there any funds
left over from the 10,000 that we allocated for the finish
out?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes,
COMMISSIONER LETZ:
to be funds left over after the --
JUDGE TTNLEY: Cozen
COMMISSIONER LETZ:
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes,
COMMISSIONER LETZ:
sir.
Is that -- is there going
the --
tern.
-- counter's built?
sir.
Do you know how much,
1~-~-~~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
128
about?
MR. HOLEKAMP: No. We're working on the
prices on the -- on the counter thing as we speak. There's
some -- there's some costs there that -- there's some
unknowns right at this moment yet, because I'm losing one of
the -- one of the really good carpenters that is currently
in the trustee program is leaving. So, I'm looking at both
trying to -- not keep him in, no. Trying to look at a
couple of placements where they build those tops that we --
all we have to do is build the frame. That's an option that
I'm looking at right now, because it may be more
cost-effective than trying to build the whole thing. I
think that can be done. A workstation for $500, I would
think.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Will you have $1,600
left over when you get through?
MR. HOLEKAMP: I'll get pretty close to that,
sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Pretty close?
MR. HOLEKAMP: I found -- I don't know if
anybody -- if Miguel said anything; I've located another
lateral filing cabinet for him last week.
MR. ARREOLA: That one didn't have the
pull-out.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Pull-out so they can -- they
__-~-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
r
25
129
just have to make sure their tabs are to where you can read
them on those kind. Right?
MR. ARREOLA: That's pretty hard to get to.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I know.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, Glenn
and his people have done a great job of holding down costs
and turning that into a very good office, and our O.S.S.F.
people have done a good job of getting in there and getting
organized, and I believe they have to have this equipment.
I think we've done it right so far, and we shouldn't stop
now. We ought to go ahead and get the file cabinets we
need.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. And the file
r_abinets, Glenn found a file cabinet -- I didn't know they
made them like this, but the drawers don't slide out, which
makes it difficult for -- I mean, they have to file -- the
system doesn't work; they can't pull out the drawers. They
can use them for storage of office supplies and shelf space
and that way, but it doesn't really work as a file cabinet.
But, I mean, I agree with Commissioner Nicholson that we've
-- we have a heck of a bargain getting that whole office
space and the equipment that we have in there for $10,000 --
or I guess it's $14,000 -- yeah, it was $4,000 for the
others.	So,	we	have	some money	from U.G.R.A.	Either way,
we got -	- we	've	got	the start-up	costs down to	a minimum,
1 ^ 8 0 3
130
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and I think we just need to, you know, authorize Miguel to
spend up to this for these items, up to this -- to this
amount. And if it requires a budget amendment, you know,
when all the bills come in, we'll do it at that time. But I
think that we need to authorize the purchase of this final
equipment, and if it takes -- if it means spending an
additional $1,600, we'll --
MR. HOLEKAMP: What is on that list?
MR. ARREOLA: It's a --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Sorry. On chairs, right
now -- and this probably is not the place to talk about it,
but on the chairs, they've got some on sale right now over
at Office Max, very reasonable. They've got a sale going.
I would encourage, if they do go, it would be a good time to
go.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll just make a motion
to authorize the Environmental Health Department to expend
up to $1,637.81 for the equipment listed, and if a budget
amendment is required, to come to the Court at that point to
complete the build-out; that Glenn has just a little bit of
an unknown on what the file cabinets will be.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I second the motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the motion. Any further questions or
discussion?
l~-R-03
131
f~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just had a -- I want
to make a comment that I agree with everything that was
said. And we're also -- you're talking about possibly
signage, and in my mind it got up to around $1,000 there for
a few minutes, but at some point, we have to slow down. I
mean, we have to say, "This is about it."
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we're about
there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I hope so. I
hope so, 'cause we -- we keep adding on every week. But you
got to have the stuff to function; I understand that. Why
didn't you get it before you came over here? That was a
joke.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just
JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, go ahead. No,
I do. I just -- Miguel, thank you for your -- for your
input and the briefing, and I hope to see you in here
regularly.
MR. ARREOLA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let us know how we
can help you.
MR. ARREOLA: I mean, yeah, I want to thank
i_-s-o~
132
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
,,-.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the Court for all the help we've been receiving, and I think
we're doing good so far. We haven't got complaints, unless
the one Mr. Nicholson said, but that probably be the first
one. We're doing good and installers are happy, and the
professionals in the industry are okay in the county. So,
you know, we -- if I just get this lot of equipment, I
probably be ready, set to go. All right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I've got something
before -- or after you take the vote.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question,
discussion on the motion: All in favor, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge -- before you
move on, Manuel (sic), AACOG has released its allocations
for solid waste programs, and there is about $1,600,000
available over Fiscal '4 and '5, years four and five, for
priority projects of source reduction, reuse, local
enforcement, litter and illegal dumping clean-up, citizen
collection stations, small registered transfer stations, et
cetera, et cetera, et cetera. I'll give this to you to see
if there's anything in there we can get some money out of.
1~-b-n~
133
,,
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. ARREOLA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: One other final comment,
and I meant to bring this up on the procedures. We can
bring it up at one of our future times. Miguel and I have
talked briefly just about monthly reports and communication,
and for everyone to think about -- I think it would be a
good idea to have a monthly report, but to have Miguel come
probably every other month, maybe every month, and present
the report so we keep a good dialogue going with that
department, so we don't -- anyway, we'll -- I'll put that on
the agenda at a future time as to the frequency that is
probably appropriate to have Miguel come up and give a
presentation report, just give us an update. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any items to be
considered in executive or closed session?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, I would like
to hear a briefing from the County Attorney on the potential
litigation involving the Juvenile Detention Facility in Kerr
County, if any. And I don't know whether that's appropriate
in executive session or -- or the time for reports.
MR. MOTLEY: I'd say it was an item -- if it
is to be done, it needs to be done in executive session.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, it would be.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Want to come back
after lunch that and do that? Or are you prepared -- I'm
1 ' - 8 - ~ 3
134
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.--.
25
just going to shut up. Whatever y'all want to do.
MR. MOTLEY: I'll come back after lunch.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let's make it after
lunch; we have a few other items to go through, reports and
all the Auditor's.
JUDGE TINLEY: We will stand in recess until
(Recess taken from 12:04 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: I'll call back to order the
regular Commissioners Court meeting scheduled for this date,
Monday, December 8, 2003. At the time that we recessed, we
had considered through Item 15, and we were down to the
executive session portion of the agenda. Is there -- is
triere a need -- some need on behalf of anyone on the Court
that we need to go into executive session for any of the
matters as specified on the agenda?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. At this time, we
will go into executive session. We will -- we will recess
the closed session at 20 minutes till 2:00, and we will now
go into executive session.
(The open session was closed at 1:38 p.m.,
and an executive session was held, the
transcript of which is contained in a
separate document.)
~_-8-03
135
i
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~2
L
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: I'll first inquire if we -- if
anyone wants to propose any formal action to be taken as a
result of what occurred in Executive Session? Hearing none,
we'll move on to the approval agenda. We need to pay the
bills. Where is Tommy?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where's Tommy?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we pay the
bills.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I second that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
we pay the bills. Any discussion or question?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I had a question, but I
couldn't find that we were paying it, so I won't ask.
MR. MOTLEY: Do y'all want me to go get
Tommy?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, do we have any budget
amendments?
MS. ALFORD: He has something on a budget
amendment.
MS. SOVIL: Yes, he does.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, he does.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: You said you had a question on
one of them?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I -- the question was
i_-~-o~
136
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
really related to floodplain as to a bill, but I don't think
it's in this group of bills; I couldn't find it anywhere.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I didn't see it
either.
MS. SOVIL: I thought they turned it in.
That may be the budget amendment.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's a
possibility.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got a question
on Page 5. Juvenile Probation, $2,441.25 to Tom Green
County Treasurer. What is this for?
JUDGE TINLEY: That's placement of a child up
there at Roy Robb facility, cost of that child being placed
there. That's a facility operated by Tom Green County.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: In my work with Hill
Country Youth Ranch and through 3-H Youth Ranch, I've seen
that probably all of the children that we have in those two
facilities are not from Kerr County, and I've seen that,
because of their different backgrounds, that very often the
chances of them being involved in the criminal justice
system is better than the average child in Hunt. So, I'm --
what I'm wondering is, because we have these facilities -- I
think Star Ranch would be one of them, too, and we bring
children in from all over the state to Kerr County. Do --
l~-a-u3
137
1
2
r
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
..-~.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
does this wind up -- do we wind up underwriting the costs of
these kinds of things and others for other counties?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You mean if they commit a
crime in Kerr County? Or if one -- I mean, if one of the
juveniles at Star Ranch does something wrong, is that a Kerr
County resident or another county resident?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know.
JUDGE TINLEY: No. If you take a -- a
resident of 3-H, Hill Country Youth Ranch, and they engage
in conduct in Kerr County, they -- they come under the Kerr
County juvenile justice system. It does r.ot revert back to
their county of residence. The -- the thinq that determines
it is where the conduct occurs. Now, the placement of this
particular child took place out ~f the Kerr County Juvenile
Court, but the placement was in the Roy Robb facility up in
Tom Green Ccunty. G1e've got a number of them. We send them
to San Marcos, Hondo, Corpus --
MR. TOMLINSON: Medina.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Kerr County kids or
out-of-county kids?
JUDGE TINLEY: Kerr County.
MR. TOMLINSON: Kerr County.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, it's --
25 ~ COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good question.
1'-~i-~i3
138
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 NICHOLSON: When the State of
Texas places a child from San Antonio, and probably half of
them out there are from San Antonio, at a facility -- a good
facility here in Kerr County, and then the chances of those
children having some legal difficulty are a great deal
higher than -- than the average here in our community, --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- they wind up --
the State -- we can be altruistic about it, say it's a good
thing we're doing, but-t's a fact that the State of Texas
is sending us children that wind up costing us.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, I see your point now. By
virtue of them originally coming from elsewhere, becoming
residents of Kerr County by virtue of an initial placement
here, then there's difficulty, and then they end up being
subsequently placed, yeah, that's certainly a possibility.
So, yes.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. That's --
JUDGE TINLEY: We may be getting more than
our fair share.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I just -- my point
was to make sure I was seeing this correctly, and I think I
see that I am seeing it correctly.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: May be something we
iz-~-~~
139
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1g
19
20
LI
22
23
24
25
want to think about sometime. That's all I had.
JUDGE TINLEY: Page 6, two laptops,
Environmental Health. Did I miss something?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We just approved them
for that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They were approved from
the amount of money ~r~e sent to U.G.R.A.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Like, $14,300. Part of
that was to -- or $18,000, whatever that amount, not that
U.G.R.A. money. It was part of that original --
MR. TOMLINSON: Budget amendment.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- budget amendment,
those two laptops.
JUDGE TINLEY: I remember the U.G.R.A. and
the vehicles and so forth.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This included that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. That's all I have. Any
other questions? Comments? A ll in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: A11 apposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Budget
amendments?
1~-~s-o3
140
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TOMLINSON: I need a clarification of a
prior budget amendment, and it has to do with -- with the
Floodplain Administration. Ana in -- in the minutes, it
indicates that we've -- we budgeted $5,000 for -- for
salary, but I need to know whether or not this salary
comes -- is it a salary or is it a contract? Because
there's no provision in the budget amendment for -- for
retirement or FICA on that $5,000, and so I have a statement
from -- from the administrator for 34 hours.
JUDGE TINLEY: 34?
MR. TOMLINSON: 34 hours. No, I'm sorry,
39.5 hours, yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's what I saw.
MR. TOMLINSON: Ar.d the total is $1,343.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy, is the -- in the
budget, under Floodplain Administration or Floodplain,
whatever this thing is in our budget, when we did the
budget, it was all -- it was a payment to Upper Guadalupe
River Authority of $5,000, as I recall. Now we've taken
that program back, so that $5,C00 needs to be put into a --
a budget, I would think.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, we did that. We -- we
actually set up a separate department within Road and
Bridge, within the fund that Road and Bridge is -- so we
have an account set up for salary under that department in
i~-a-,:3
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
the Road and Bridge budget. But my question is whether or
not we need to pay FICA and retirement on these dollars, or
if the FICA and the retirement comes out of the $5,000 that
we've approved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it comes out of
the $5,000 that we approved, and I think we have to pay it.
MR. TOMLINSON: I think you have to pay it
too. I think that's -- I mean, you -- the Court indicated
that that was part of his job, so I -- and there is no
contract, so I think it needs to be payroll. But -- and, I
mean, it's time to pay him, and -- and I just need to know
whether to tell -- give these hours to the Treasurer, or
to pay it through -- cancel payment. So, what I'm hearing
is it needs to go to the Treasurer to be added to his -- to
his salary.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, I would think so. I
mean, I think -- I mean, as I recall, we -- the County
Engineer came in with a $40,000 budget request, something
like that, and we said no, we didn't like that. We got
$5,000 to spend for a while, and then we'll take another
look at it. That's kind of what I remember us doing.
COMMISSIONER NICNOLSON: That's what I do,
too.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. Well, we can't
have an employee who also doubles as a contractor, so it has
i~-~-~~~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.^.
25
142
to go through the Treasurer.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I think so too. But I
just needed to know there wasn't anything approved for --
for the benefits. So, I -- I just need to know whether
to -- you know, to take it out of the $5,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd say, for right now,
take it out of the $5,000. And considering we're going
through that pretty quick, I presume we'll have a budget
amendment to look at sometime in January or February.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. At this rate,
we'll be out of money in February.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, I think part
of that was schooling, wasn't it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Quite a bit of it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what it
indicates, yeah.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's all I need. So, we'll
do it --
MS. SOVIL: There's a schooling budget that
part of that needs to be taken out of, then.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Based on here, I don't
know -- these are just hours here.
JUDGE TINLEY: 20 hours on training and --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, but there's -- I'm
sure there were some hard costs to go to that school.
i~-a-„~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
l~
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.-,
25
143
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That are going to come
under a --
MR. TOMLINSON: That will be a different
conference -- right, that will be different line.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's all I have.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. I have before
me minutes of the Kerr County Commissioners Court Special
Session, Monday, November 3; Kerr County Commissioners Court
Special Session, Monday, November 10; Kerr County
Commissioners Court Regular Session, Tuesday, November 11;
Kerr County Commissioners Court Special Session, Monday,
November 24, all in 2003. Do I hear a motion that these be
approved as presented?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved -- second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the designated transcripts of minutes be approved as
presented. Any question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
144
JUDGE TINLEY: I have before me monthly
reports from the Sheriff, County Clerk, Justice of the Peace
Precinct 3, and Justice of the Peace Precinct 4. Do I hear
a motion that these mcnthly reports be approved as
presented?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
the designated monthly reports be approved as presented.
Any questicns 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. Okay.
That brings us down to the information agenda, Reports from
Commissioners. And I have done a little doctoring to the
agenda, in case some of you haven't noticed. I've added to
that Liaison Committee Assignments so that we'll have an
opportunity to hopefully include any reports that each of
you may have about your respective liaison designations.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I have one
liaison -- I have three items here I want to talk about. I
don't know where they come under all this, but the one
liaison is the 9-1-1 issue. This week, as you know, we're
i~-a-c~3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2i
22
23
24
25
145
closing out the year, and ail this addressing and all that
going on, and January 1 is the target date of putting the
new addresses in place, you know, and doing all that thing
that we've been working on so hard. This week the 9-1-1
folk are meeting with the postal people out of San Antonio
to finalize, dot all their little I's and cross all their
little T's on the -- on the postal end of it, and then as
scon as that's over, Commissioner Letz and I will then go
and meet with the 9-1-1 people and finalize the whole thing.
So, it's a -- I mean, not finalize it, but just be briefed
to make sure that everybody's doing what we said we're going
to do and all that. So, that's my liaison report.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Do you have anything
other than that to offer?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, I do.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question
here. We've been talking about doing our think tank.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or whatever. I like
"think tank." I can't wait, by the way, to get in there to
ask you guys, "Are y'ail thinking?" I mean, we can smoke
cigars and think together; this is going to be fun. We had
received a letter, or at least I did, from a member of this
community that is interested in being the facilitator. Did
l~-e-o~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,,--~
25
146
everyone receive that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Three.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I got three.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I only got one. Okay.
So, are we considering those? Or what -- to be honest with
you, I can't remember where we are on this thing, or where
we were going.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I'll tell you what I've
done. I think I did it at the Court's direction. This was
my understanding. I contacted the L.C.R.A. representative
locally, Mr. Roland Pena. He, in turn, has been in contact
with some people in his organization. He indicated that
there are at least two individuals in his organization that
are truly professionals at this, and that he was working
with them on scheduling. I -- I gave to him our selected
tentative date, which I believe was January 21.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Something like that.
JUDGE TINLEY: On a Wednesday, I believe.
And the only response I've gotten so far is that they
schedule these sorts of things a number of months out, and
that he's trying to clarify schedules, and he may be coming
back to see if we can utilize maybe a different date, maybe
not. I don't know. But I'm waiting on hearing from him
again. I expect I'll be hearing something real soon.
1~-~-„~
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
147
Secondly is, I contacted Texas Association of Counties, also
at what I believe was the direction. of the Court, to try and
have someone from their organization to maybe give us input
because of the governmental aspect. In contacting those
folks, they do not have anyone, per se, that acts in that
capacity. I have a call in for the Assistant Executive
Director, Just tc talk with her about general guidance on --
on the government aspect of it, about the possibility of
maybe somebody from their legal department, or maybe not; I
don't know. We'll just see where that leads. But L.C.R.A.,
of course, has some governmental overtones, since it is a
political subdivision itself, so I would think they would
have some ability to relate to the government aspect of it.
But that's where I am on it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Three?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I've had three
coming from someone you probably know, Christopher Avery out
of Comfort. Not the Chris Avery that runs for his father
the jewelry company. So, I've had three inquiries; one was
local, one was this gentleman, and I forgot the other one,
all of which I just said, "Thank you. Appreciate the
information. I'll tell the Court at the proper time."
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I've had one inquiry, and
I advised that person that, of course, they knew that there
~_-~-o~
1
,- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
148
would be no compensation for this effort, and they withdrew
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've had three, and
I passed the names on to the Judge. One of them wanted
compensation, and I wouldn't recommend that person, and a
couple other ones would be excellent.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think there's a -- a
plus and a minus for using someone in government, whether
TAC or L.C.R.A. I mean, I think you -- it's good because,
obviously, they deal with things that are unique to
government, which helps. But the other hindrance is that
they tend to be focused on things that are good for
government, which can be bad. I mean, it's kind of -- so
it's just -- I don't think we should -- just because, you
know, they're not associated with government, I don't think
we should necessarily rule them out. I think we should try
to find the best person at facilitating.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: A good facilitator
won't have any opinions on the substance of our issues we're
talking about. They -- they only help us manage the
process, so if a facilitator starts engaging in evaluating
the subject matter, then he or she's doing the wrong thing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll give you the
names, Judge, so you can follow up later.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Y'all are way beyond
1~-~-~_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
i2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
..-.
25
149
me. I didn't realize all that was going on. That's good.
The third thing is our Christmas party. We're going to have
our county Christmas party on December the 24th, and
hopefully we'll start eating at 11:00, and hopefully it will
be through around 12 noon for those that lock the doors and
head out, be through. I think everybody's kind of planning
on being around -- excuse me -- around the courthouse
through noon on Christmas Eve anyway, so hopefully this
thing will work cut just right. Bill has found us a cooker,
someone that'll cook for us, and he -- that person needs the
meat by the 22nd of December, which is plenty of time.
Which brings me to the point of us paying for it. So,
historically, what has happened here is each member of this
Court kicks in 20 bucks or 25 -- I can't remember what it
was, but $20 would be $100 worth of meat. How much -- will
that buy enough to feed --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN:	-- the	county	system?
COMMISSIONER	WILLIAMS:	We're	talking	about
brisket.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 120 people to feed?
So, I mean, I don't know how to figure all that out. I'm
not a cook.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Half pound a person?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah, 60 pounds.
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
150
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's about right; be
about probably $25.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: $25 apiece will do
it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $25 apiece will do it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Brisket only.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, talking about
brisket. And former Commissioner Butch Lackey, at my
request, has agreed to do the barbecuing over -- smoking
over at his big -- got a big pit somewhere in the vicinity
of the park over there, and he will do that. Like Buster
said, we need to have the brisket in his hands by probably
the morning of the 22nd. So --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can we do this? Let
me ask you this; can we put the money in his hands and let
him --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I think probably
what we need to do is give our money to Thea, and she's got
the pot. We'll -- between she and I, we'll try to find out
what the best price is, whether it's here in Kerrville or
whether we got to chase to San Antonio or some place else.
We'll get the meat purchased and I'll get to it him on the
morning of the -- of the 22nd.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, we need to get
~_-8-03
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
the -- give the money to Thea?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He agreed to cook it,
not buy it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll be glad to visit
with one of our local meat companies that helps this Court
out on occasion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: YeaYi, fine. If you
can get it cheaper, let me know.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bernhard's has donated a
lot over the years for us, and they might just get the
briskets at cost or below cost.
MS. SOVIL: They can get shoulder clod.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think shoulder clod
instead of brisket. Less fat, which --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whichever.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll call and find out
about that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If we need $25, fine.
If we need less than that, fine. Whatever.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll call with how much
-- I mean, how much --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You get back with us,
how much we need.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll tell Thea, and then
she can --
-~-s-u~
1
.,^ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,_ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
152
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. That all right?
And then, on top of that, then we're going to -- you're
going to send out a memo to the courthouse people that this
thing is definitely on, and to be sure to bring a dish; you
know, whatever it is y'all say to each other every year?
MS. SOVIL: If you want me to.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like for you to,
if you don't mind, please. Actually, I'd like to add to
that that everyone is required to bring a dish. There's
been times where a group have gotten together and furnished
something together, and the rest of the courthouse family
thinks that's a little bit unfair, et cetera. So, I'd like
to see -- I'd like to see the verbiage on there that
everyone is required to bring a dish -- not required, but
please do.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or dessert.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or dessert. A dish of
some sort. And ladies first.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ladies first on bringing
the food? Or --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ladies first in line.
And I'll tell you privately why I say that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think I know the
answer to that.
25 ~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a tough one.
i~-3-U3
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
153
(Discussion cff the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have anything further,
Mr. Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, let's see. I
think, since I'm looking at this list here, I -- how'd my
name get on all this? Airport, we've pretty well kicked
that around this morning. I don't know anything different.
There's a meeting tomorrow, which is a regular monthly
meeting. The Library Board is dormant for the month of
December; however, I have in front of me a request from the
Judge to prepare thoughts on the revision of a contract in
response to a letter the Judge received from the Mayor. I
will do that, with a "Merry Christmas" salutation. Let's
see, what else? Tomorrow is -- tomorrow is the semiannual
meeting of AACOG, and I did share with our Environmental
Health people today some information about solid waste
moneys that are available. Hope that we can get our hands
on some of those. And I think, other than that, I'm -- our
Kerrville South project, with the Judge's signature, some
letters went out to three property owners seeking response
for some easements that we need to move the second phase
along. That's all I have.
JUDGE TINLEY: That it for you? Okay.
1 ~ - b' - 0 3
1
.- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.-. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
154
Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think Commissioner
Baldwin covered the 9-1-1 issue. Ag Barn, nothing new from
the standpoint of projects out there, though I know of
several groups in the community that are working on various
ideas and concepts, and so I suspect that sometime during
2004, some new trial balloons will be floated on what to do
with that facility, and not coming out of our strategic
planning group. And also, just to remind everybody that
January is the stock show, and traditionally we all
participate in that event, so line out those days on your
calendar. I'm not even sure what days they are. I think
it's late this year, though. But -- and I guess the other
thing -- it's not a liaison, but of interest because of the
cost of it, and the cost is getting YiigYrer every time I hear
a new number. Hermann Sons Bridge is -- I think right after
the flood, it was estimated that the new bridge was going to
be -- I think it was $680,000. Well, the last price I got
from TexDOT is $1.23 million. So, it's a --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not quite doubled yet.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not quite, but it's
getting close. But they haven't even -- don't even have a
contract yet, but it l~~ks like right-of-ways are
progressing. Hope to hear from our last holdout very
shortly, and then talk with the County Attorney. We'll
i~-~-~;~
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
155
probably be sending out actual agreement documents and deeds
and acquisition checks and all that stuff, and very soon.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Is that it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Nicholson?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Nothing to report.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything from elected
officials or department heads present today? Reports from
boards, commissions, committees? You'll note that I've
broken that out. What I'm -- I intend to do in the future
is, I have asked the City Manager to forward me, as a matter
of routine, copies of any reports that he gets in connection
with any activities which are joint activities; library,
airport, things of that nature. As those are received as
informational items, they will be part of the agenda, so
that at least there's an attempt to try and disseminate as
much information as possible. Doesn't appear as though we
have any this time, but just a heads-up, as we get them,
they'll be included in the next meeting. Road and Bridge,
nothing there. Anybody have a report from Road and Bridge?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just, I mean, the monthly
one that we, you know, get.
JUDGE TINLEY: We currently get that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We routinely get a
monthly report from Road and Bridge. I think that it's a
_~-8-u3
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
156
good -- I would really recommend that, either monthly or
bimonthly, that we start requiring department heads to come
in and give us a report. I think a lot gets lost. You
know, we get these -- I mean, so much volumes of paper come
in, and I think this goes back tc better communication. If
we see these department heads on a more regular basis --
maybe quarterly is the way the do it, I don't know. Monthly
may be too much. As we've talked about with Miguel this
morning, I fully intend to -- he needs to come up here and
report things to us in person, even though he does send us
the monthly reports. And I just think that it -- it
improves communication, so we might think about that as to
how we want to handle that; might put it on the agenda in
early January.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, you know, that
same line of thinking; at some point, I think that we need
to do the same thing with our appointees to these boards.
We have two over at 9-1-1, we have two at out at the
airport, and I don't know what else. I guess that's it,
but --
JUDGE TINLEY: Maybe we'll get some on the
Library Board.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: May get some on the
Library Board. And --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We've got three right
i~-B--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
157
now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Have them to come in,
kind of give us a little -- we've never had that happen,
ever.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think it's -- I
just think it would be -- be good, and I think it would be
for all those people. Maybe we can invite, one month, the
department heads, and another month -- or some format. I
don't care how we do it, just so we get it done.
JUDGE TINLEY: One other item that I'd like
to throw out. Of course, the designation of the liaison
assignments customarily occurs in January, and that's now
upon us. We're going to have a new one, O.S.S.F. At least
that's the way I see it. Maybe y'all see it differently.
That's probably going to fall under somebody's primary
responsibility. But we could make that designation in
January.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's not going to
come down this end of the table.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, it's not coming
down here. Stopping right there. Letz is the septic tank
guru.
JUDGE TINLEY: I see.
COMMISSIONER LE'1'Z: Subdivision.
JUDGE TINLEY: Kind of go hand-in-hand, don't
lz-~-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
158
they?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you want to join
them, Judge, you can join them. It's not coming down here.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there anything else,
gentlemen? Beinq nothinq further, I'll declare us
adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 2:32 p.m.)
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF KERR
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as
County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County,
Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 12th day of December,
2003.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
Kathy B nik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
1^-8-G3
ORDER N0.28439
APPROVAL TO RECIND COURT ORDER NUMBER 17103
ON KERRVILLE/KERR COUNTY JOINT
AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD
On this the 8th day of December, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner
Williams, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0, that Court Order Number 17103 dated February 9,
1987, be rescinded, and it will be replaced with a court order to be determined in
an action to betaken by the Commissioners at the December 22, 2003 meeting.
ORDER NO. 28440
APPROVAL OF ALTERNATE PLAT PROCESS
AND SET PUBLIC HEARING ON LOTS 83 & 84 NORTHWEST HILLS
On this the 8th day of December, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner
Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by
a vote of 4-0-0, to set a public hearing on January 12, 2003 at 10 A.M. for
alternate plat process of Lots 83 & 84 Northwest Hills, Precinct 1.
ORDER N0.28441
APPROVAL OF FEMA PROJECT COMPLETION
AND CERTIFICATION REPORT DISASTER #1425
On this the 8"' day of December, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner
Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously by a vote of
4-0-0, FEMA Project Completion and Certification Report Disaster #1425,
as submitted, and authorize the County Judge to sign same, and to request for
Commissioner Williams to write an extension of time request for the one item
At Flat Rock Lake.
ORDER N0.28442
APPROVAL OF INTER-LOCAL CONTRACT
FOR MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES
On this the 8th day of December, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner
Baldwin seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved
by a vote of 4-0-0, of the inter-local contract for Mental Health Services and to
authorize the County Judge to sign same as they are returned.
ORDER N0.28443
APPROVAL OF AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES TO USE COURTHOUSE GROUNDS
On this the 8`h day of December, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by
Vote 4-0-0, request by Dean Ward, President of Local 2281, American
Federation of Government Employees to use Courthouse grounds on December
13, 2003, from 1 P.M. to 3 P.M. for a rally in support of Hill Country Veterans to
retain acute care beds at the Kerrville VA Facility.
ORDER N0.28444
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR
KERRVILLE VA FACILITY
On this the 8th day of December, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner
Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by
a vote of 4-0-0, a Resolution of support for retention of 20 acute beds and 5 ICU
beds at the Kerrville VA Facility as requested by the Hill Country Veterans
Council and authorize the County Judge and Commissioners to sign same and
include sending this resolution to all of these various people mentioned in the
final resolve.
ORDER N0.28445
APPROVAL OF JUVENILE PROBATION DEPARTMENT
FOR CHRISTMAS ON DECEMBER 17, 2003
On this the 8th day of December, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a
vote of 4-0-0, of Juvenile Probation Department to utilize the open area in the
lower level of the Courthouse Annex for a Christmas Party for clients of the
Juvenile Probation Department on December 17, 2003 from 5:00 P.M to 7:00
P.M.
ORDER NO. 28446
APPROVAL OF VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT CONTRACTS
On this the 8th day of December, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner
Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved
by a vote of 4-0-0, the Volunteer Fire Department contracts and authorize the
County Judge to sign same for the following contract:
Ingram Volunteer Fire Department
Hunt Volunteer Fire Department
ORDER N0.28447
APPROVAL OF HIWANIS CLUB KERRVILLE
TO USE COURTHOUSE GROUNDS
On this the 8`h day of December, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner
Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by
a vote of 4-0-0, of the Kiwanis Club Kerrville to use the SE corner of the Kerr
County Courthouse Square on Apri18, 9, and 10, 2004 for the annual Mop and
Broom Sale.
ORDER N0.28448
APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
SIGNS AND PARKING
On this the 8th day of December, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a
vote of 4-0-0, to direct the County Judge and Maintenance Director to install two
signs or replace two of the employee only signs on the eastern ramp to
Environmental Health Department Vehicles, and remove all employee only signs
on the western slope of parking lot.
ORDER N0.28449
AUTHORIZING ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
TO PURCHASE ADDITIONAL OFFICE EQUIPMENT
On this the 8th day of December, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a
vote of 4-0-0, for Environmental Health Department to expend up to $1,637.81
for the equipment listed, and if a budget amendment is required, to come to the
Court at that point to complete the build-out; that Glenn Holekamp has just a little
bit of an unknown on what the file cabinets will be.
ORDER N0.28450
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
On this the 8th day of December 2003 came to be considered by the Court, various
Commissioners precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are:
10-General for $71,018.25; 14-Fire Protection for $18,462.58; 15-Road and
Bridge for $58,577.54; 28-Records Management & Preservation for $4,000.00;
50-Indigent Health Care for $39,317.08; 70-Permanent Improvement for $894.34;
80-Historical Commission for $18.58.
TOTAL CASH REQUIRED FOR ALL FUNDS: $192,288.37.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner
Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to pay said
Accounts.
ORDER N0.28451
APPROVE AND ACCEPT MINUTES
AND WAIVE READING
On this the 8t" day of December, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a
vote of 4-0-0, to waive reading and approve the minutes of Special
Commissioners' Court Meeting November 3, 2003, Special Commissioners'
Court Meeting November 10, 2003, Regular Commissioners' Court Meeting
November 11, 2003 and Special Commissioners' Court Meeting November 24,
2003.
ORDER NO.28452
MONTHLY REPORTS
On this the 8`h day of December, 2003 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a
vote of 4-0-0, to accept the following reports and direct that they be filed with the
County Clerk for future audit:
Sheriff s Report
County Clerk's Report
Justice of the Peace Pct. #3
Justice of the Peace Pct. #4