~}. n !' s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 21 22 23 24 25 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT Special Session Monday, December 22, 2003 9:00 a.m. Commissioners' Courtroom Kerr County Courthouse Kerrville, Texas ~I 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 2 1 ..-. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~ 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I N D E X December 22, 2003 PAGE --- Commissioners' Comments 4 1.1 Presentation by Bob Miller, Executive Director~(llf~ ~ of Texas Arts and Crafts Educational Foundation 7 1.2 Joint Resolution authorizing execution of gran agreement for airport repairs/improvement s ~~~~0 20 1.3 Establishing Airport Board as autonomous body 23 1.4 Report from Rabies and Animal Control Department 28 1.5 Re-elect commissioners to the Kerr County Emergency Service District No. 2 Board of Commissioners ~+~c~S737 1.13 Discuss funding of items used in employees' work areas to decrease strain placed on their bodies 39 ~ 1.8 Resolution authorizing designated signatories for ~c%~ the Texas Community Development Program con/tract 48 1.9 Privately maintained road name changes v'Z ~y a ~ 49 1.6 PUBLIC HEARING for Alternate Plat Revisions for Lots 122 and 123 of The Horizon 53 1.7 Alternate plat revisions for Lots 122 and 123 of The Horizon, consider refunding OSSF fees~S~''{~FE~ 53 1.12 Resolution to approve a grant application to the ~~/(P~ Office of the Governor, Criminal Justice Division, for Juvenile Behavioral Transition Program 55 1.14 Request to use courthouse for`~various early voting and election days in 2004 ~ y y~ z- 57 1.15 Request to allow the Credit Union to hold their annual meeting at the County Extension facility at the non-profit rate ~ ~~~'' ~ 59 1.16 Appoint Kerr County Sheriff Rusty Hierholzer o AACOG Criminal Justice Advisory Committee ~ ~ ~;~~ 60 1.10 PUBLIC HEARING for road name changes, regulatory signs, roads to be added to or removed from county maintenance "~62 _ 1.11 Consider road name changes, regulatory signs, and ~d'y ~'1 roads to be adde/d_ fo_r removed for county maintenance 62 1.17 Burn Ban :~ ~ ~ ~( W 66 1.18 Approval of Amended Contract with TxDOT forp~ b1 Y CL/7 construction of Hermann Sons Bridge project 76 1.19 Approval to pay 2004 Dues to AACOG 78 4.1 Pay Billsv~ d'y ~[!~ \,,/ 85 4 . 2 Budget Amendments ,,.z a Y 7 ~ '~ .~ ~ ~~~ 94 4.3 Late Bills '- , / -- 9.9 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports, ~ Y ~ Z 96 5.1 Reports from Commissioners 98 1.20 Acceptance, rejection, or other appropriate action on Employee Health Insurance Bids 112 --- Adjourned ~ ~ Y ~ 2j 163 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 On Monday, December 22, 2GG3, at 9:00 a.m., a special meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court: P R O C E E D I N G S JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let me call to order the special Commissioners Court meeting scheduled and posted for this date, Monday, December the 22nd, 2003, at 9 a.m. It appears to be that time now, and at this point, I'll call on Precinct 1 Commissioner Buster Baldwin. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. If you'd stand and join me in a word of prayer, and then when we finish, we'll do the pledge of allegiance. (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. At this time, if there's anyone here that wishes to address the Court on any matter that is not on the agenda, you're privileged to come forward at this time. If you want to talk to the Court about a matter that is on the agenda, we would ask that you fill out a participation form. They can be found at the back of the room. It's not absolutely required, but it helps us in planning, and it also helps me in not forgetting that you had wanted to -- to talk to us about an item that is on the agenda. But if there's anyone 4 i^'~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 that wants to talk to us about an item that is not listed on the agenda, well, please feel privileged to come forward at this time and let us know what's on your mind. No one's making a move to the front, so I gather there is no one that wishes to address us on something that's not on the agenda. Mr. Baldwin, do you have anything for us this morning? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do have a couple items. Happy first day of winter today. And secondly, don't forget the Christmas -- the courthouse Christmas party the 24th, I think that's Wednesday, at -- we'll start eating at 11 a.m. in the basement of the courthouse. And I understand that the meat purchase and all that's happened, and -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That transaction is taking place this day. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: God, I wish we were out there. And the -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At the butcher shop or at the property? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Doesn't matter. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just somewhere. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be a part of it. And then I saw -- I got a peek at a list of the things that the -- the courthouse family is participating in, and looks like it's going to be a big feed, tons of beans and salads, and 1?- u3 5 r .~'` 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 it's going to be fun. Going to be fun. So, that's all, Judge. Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It will be a good time. I don't have anything other than that, but I just -- just for those who want to know, every year Commissioners put together a -- this little Christmas get-together, and somebody always prepares the meat dish, and in the past it's happened out in the western part of Kerr County. This time I have encouraged a former Commissioner, Butch Lackey, to do his famous barbecuing, and he will be doing that as soon as I get the briskets over to him later this afternoon. Should be a fun time for all. And I just want to take this opportunity to express my thanks and appreciation to all the people in Kerr County, and particularly in Precinct 2, for their wonderful cooperation and -- and for the privilege and honor of serving them this year, and wish everybody a blessed Christmas and a happy new year. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner 3? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ditto, the comments that were previously said. And the only thing -- I want to jump ahead to next week. I don't want us to get ahead of ourselves, but I've had several discussions with employees and elected officials regarding working on January 2nd. And it's not an agenda item; it's not an official holiday, 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 6 I've told them -- though many of them feel, or some of them, that it's an unproductive day, and I tend to agree, I told them that, in my opinion -- and I told them I'd bring it up today, but in my opinion, it's up to the elected official. If they choose to close their office, so be it. That's the only comment I have. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Nicholson? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Jennifer -- Jennifer Dawn Herron was a former resident of west Kerr County. She was an abused and abandoned child who was sent by the State of Texas to the Hill Country Youth Ranch, and she attended Ingram Tom Moore High School, and last Saturday, she graduated from Baylor. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wow. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: With honors. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wow. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And we think probably more than a hundred people in Kerr County helped finance that education. So, it was a good day for west Kerr County and for Jennifer Herron. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Golly, great story. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else, Commissioner? Speaking of young people making good choices, I don't know how many of you took note of the letter in the weekend ~_-_~-a~ 1 ~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~.., 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 newspaper locally that a young teenage girl had been involved in a number of fundraising activities through the year, and rather than utilizing the funds -- which she was not writing the letter; her father wrote it. Rather than I know that young lady, and they're not people of means, but I think her actions speak to the heart, and I would hope that others, young and old alike, would take inspiration from that attitude and be more mindful of their fellow man during the Christmas season. Thank you. Anything else, gentlemen, before we get into the agenda? First item on the agenda, Mr. Bob Miller, Executive Director of Texas Arts and Crafts Educational Foundation, wanted to make a presentation on the scope of work and start date for infrastructure and other improvements on the River Star Park site on County-leased property. This item was placed on the agenda at the request of Commissioner Williams. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. I did that at the request of Mr. Miller, who tells me that they're about ready to start work on the infrastructure, and knowing that they need to come before the Court and tell us what they're going to do, we invited him to do so. Bob? 25 ~ MR. MILLER: Morning. Morning, Judge Tinley 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~ 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~'^ 25 and Commissioners. The Arts and Crafts Foundation is getting ready to go forward with what we call Phase I, our infrastructure stage, of building the River Star Arts and Events Park. And, according to our contract with you, we're supposed to come to you and present our plans before we start construction in order to get your approval and let you know what we're going to do. I have some drawings this morning; they're hot off the press from the architect. They're not terribly different from what we looked at before. Going to be hard to see, 'cause they're small ink-line drawings, but Phase 1 initially is to grade the site and prepare the drainage so that when we do events on the -- on the grounds, they're not going to be subject to the flooding as they have been in the last 33 years that we've operated on our current site, which is -- was not professionally graded. We just really kind of used it to the best of our ability. These are -- these rectangles are potential tent sites and pads, and they're being lined up both east and west for the benefit of the artists who don't like the sun burning into their eyes during a show. It also works real well on this property, because that's also the drainage flow on the property, so the drainage will be pulled off those tents and driven down between these -- we've got a -- the bottom of that drainage ditch runs right through here. i_ __-_; 9 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 And then we will install an underground culvert underneath this interior road to move that drainage on through there to the culvert there, you know. The water just builds up behind it and flows over that road during the flood, so that will -- that will keep that water moving on through there. The biggest change in the grading will be this corner over here will be raised probably 6 to 7 feet, and if you see, we've been dumping dirt out there on the site at this point, mainly for that. And they're going to try to get this up and level it this way, and then grade it towards them. We've got a site we have to protect that is -- let me see; I can barely see it -- roughly like this. That is the Texas historical site. We've applied to the Texas Historical Commission for permission to overlay that site with 5 to 12 inches of dirt, which would then allow us to put small tents, tables and chairs and that sort of thing on top of those grounds so we don't have to dig into it. We're restricted from -- before we put the dirt in, of -- of not penetrating the surface more than 6 to 8 inches. So, that will give us 12, 15, 18 inches that we can kind of use and insure that we're not disturbing that historical site. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bob, you're talking about the Indian mounds? MR. MILLER: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And at one point -- 1~-..-rt 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 and I'm not fussing at you. At one point, we had talked about the possibility of putting a -- a little fence around that and using part of it as an exhibit, even. Is that not -- MR. MILLER: Well, I imagine during the fair, that we -- we normally do early Texas crafts and whatnot; that we will do something -- some sort of Indian demonstration there on that site and -- and let people know that it is, you know, a protected site. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just thought that was such a neat idea -- MR. MILLER: I do too. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- that you had. MR. MILLER: And it kind of tells a little bit about the history of that property, which is nice. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, absolutely. MR. MILLER: This -- these two tents here will probably really not even be there. We're going to have to shift them off. See, I talked to the tent people, and thinking that we could use barrels of water to secure the tents, as they do in some places, and they don't like to do that at all. So, there's a -- the wind load on a tent is unbelievable when a 350-pound, 55-gallon drum of water is not enough to hold those tents in place, so we'll have to do something else. Small exhibit or open air tents are -- are, i° __-u, 11 .r^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 you know, very acceptable there, and would work real well. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bob, before you get too far, go back to the Indian Mound exhibit. Since the part that they are -- they want us to protect is over here, and the part that you can see that has been, you know, dug through many times is kind of up to the, I guess, north, is there a way that we could use take the old part that's been, according to the Historical Commission, destroyed, but to me looks a lot more like an Indian mound than the open grass field that they want us to protect -- I mean, you know, that way you can protect -- put the dirt over this area and -- but we can put the exhibit up there where the old -- where the -- you know, the digging has gone on. MR. MILLER: It would possibly be easier to do an exhibit on the old site, actually. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. MR. MILLER: Because it's in the trees and everything else. They're proposing walking trails to run along the edge of that hillside and then back around this -- there's a little group of trees up here and throughout the area, and this will be a nice thing to have along the site of those walking trails. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Put a little pipe rail fence around it and kind of reclaim it the way it is. But it's a -- -- ---a; 12 ,^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. MILLER: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, it's -- I was somewhat shocked they want you to protect the area that I don't see -- well, I'm not -- MR. MILLER: You can't tell the Indians were there, right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The part where I can see where Indians have been, they don't want protected, but that's their choice. MR. MILLER: In addition, after the grading of the site is done, we'll install underground utilities to these tent sites on this side, in order to then have on top of the ground electricity to distribute to the exhibitors, which will be a plug, plus we don't have to dig it up every year, trench, lay electrical lines, and then put them back down. We -- we're buying a modular bathroom building that is A.D.A. approved that will be temporarily placed here. It's in the plans; it's to be placed back here, but we need one up here until we get some buildings built, so this will -- they'll place it on a semipermanent basis right here opposite -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Will that suffice for the traffic of the fair this year? MR. MILLER: Not for the entire traffic, but for more than a third, a third and a half. 13 i"~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~~ 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Then you'll have other modular -- MR. MILLER: Yeah, you need to have bathroom facilities supplied around the property so someone doesn't have to walk from one far end to there. That -- the only physical, on top of the ground facilities you're going to be able to see when we get through are this building, and we're going to move our two portable buildings in that we have at Schreiner right now, and there's a place for them along the side toward there on Highway 27. And we would try, if we have any budget left, to build a storage shed for equipment and whatnot inside of the yard. But -- and then this ground, after it's graded and leveled, utilities in, then we'll sod it, we'll have an underground irrigation system in place in order to water it, and what we are looking for is a -- a nice grass field that we'd like to maintain for use for both our events and other events at that property. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Your electric utilities will be underground? MR. MILLER: Yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's part of this additional phase? MR. MILLER: Yes. We'll have one sewer tap that will feed that modular bathroom building that will be down in that lower corner -- lower right-hand corner of the is __-na 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~~ L L 23 24 25 map. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where are you going to be hooking on the city sewer? Is it going to be anywhere in the close proximity of -- where? MR. MILLER: Well, we were thinking of putting it in somewhere between the back road on Riverside and the corner, I think, site. You all are looking for somewhere in here, though. You're on that -- COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Right. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think so, yeah. MR. MILLER: The other side of this -- one of our big problems is that drainage ditch; almost anything you do, you have to figure out how you're going to get across it. I mean, at some point we will need another tap, and I'd asked you all for permission to put two taps in there before. The other one will have to come up here on this property line, and I can't go across the Indian place; I need an easement from the next property owner in order to do that. Nothing's easy. It all looks easy from a distance, but it is all sorts of complications. Anyway, that's where we are. We're planning on holding the fair there in May. We're planning on having utilities in place and grass up and roads and walking trails in place in May, and we're tickled to death. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are the -- are the roads 15 /'~ 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 made of crushed granite? MR. MILLER: Crushed granite. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Crushed granite. I guess the trails will be the same? MR. MILLER: Yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When do you anticipate starting? MR. MILLER: Well, kind of, in a way, we've been dumping dirt there. We've been getting the donation of dirt from Mike Lowe's construction company, 'cause we need a lot of dirt in there to level that up and then put on that -- that back side. So, we've been trying to acquire dirt wherever we could. We started -- but they'll be starting probably the first week in January, second week in January. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fantastic. MR. MILLER: We think it will be a great project. We think it will be a nice addition to the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center, too. COMMISSIONER LETZ: My final comment on the -- I think you -- it looks like you're doing it, but no one knows the -- when you get over to the Youth Exhibit side of that, how that property's going to look long-term, so I guess, in your planning, you're planning on -- you're not kind of cornering yourself in any way? MR. MILLER: Well, the entrance that we will ._-~~-,~ 16 /^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 use is our temporary -- everything's temporary, based upon future funds, but we will -- we're setting our entrance up right here, next to the yard coming in right here. And that would be -- in the final analysis, when the -- the front entrance is built here, according to the architects, this would be a back entrance to the property. If people were parking in the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center, or you had an event that was on both properties at once -- which, when we talked to the Convention and Visitors Bureau, is a strong possibility. That's the way they would like to promote it for a lot of things, have both an outside and inside component. She thinks it's -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: If the rodeo arena stays or leaves that current location, it won't affect the use of the property from your standpoint? I mean, one way or the other? MR. MILLER: love to have that. There's scheduled to be built right available, of course, we'd COMMISSIONER giving you more land. MR. MILLER: COMMISSIONER one. I think I'll be quiet Not in the short term. We'd an office/art gallery that is here. Now, if that became Like to move it back. LETZ: I wasn't talking about Less? Shame on you. LETZ: You kind of got into that at this point. 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. MILLER: Well, there was talk at one time about that going and whether we could use that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it still lingers in the minds of some. MR. MILLER: What makes sense to us, maybe not to everybody else in the world, is we're not allowed any more road cuts by TexDOT into this property. The one road cut is up here coming into the property. What would really be nice and complement both properties is if you moved this road right on through and had an exit out the other side in a straight line, and it would help you all as well as us. It would help move people around for parking and everything else. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess what I'm saying is, try to keep the eastern side of y'all's location as flexible as possible, until we know what we're doing with the other piece of that property. MR. MILLER: You bet. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And we just don't know what's going to happen there, but something is going to happen there, I think. MR. MILLER: And the only thing that's going to be there is that building, which is going to be set up to be moved in the future anyway. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, so that works. i-' -- "3 18 r^ ,~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 <3 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Bob, you've been showing that road coming out right there, looks like on Main. That's going to be your -- ultimately going to be where -- MR. MILLER: Main entrance, yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Will that be an entrance this year for people who -- overflow parking that may take place at Flat Rock Lake Park? MR. MILLER: Either there or here. This would actually be a closer entrance right now to come up out of the park and go -- a lot of it's going to depend on where the shuttles -- the shuttles will end up dropping people off from Flat Rock Lake Park or to the polo field or whatever. We have rented the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center, you know, at your regular fees during the fair, and I think we'd like to continue to do that in the future. To -- we're going to -- we're planning on doing an R.V. show on the property this year at the same time the fair's going on, and we would like to see our event kind of grow and expand to be greater than just the Arts and Crafts show itself. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Final comment, I'd just like to thank you for all your work on it, A. And also, just -- you know, I again point out to the public, and this event's been brought along this whole time. This is, to me, i~-~~-o~ 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 G S a great example of government working with quasi-private business to do something that's going to benefit all the taxpayers of the county. I mean, I think this is -- your organization is nonprofit, but still it's a joint effort by a governmental entity and a nonprofit organization, and somewhat similar to what the City did with the Cailloux Center, and this is the type of thing that I hope we can have more and more of in Kerr County, 'cause it benefits everybody. MR. MILLER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Bob. JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Miller, were you seeking authorization from this Court today to proceed with the infrastructure plans that you had? MR. MILLER: Yes, sir. I didn't realize -- I don't know how formal that process needs to be. This is really our first time in -- in trying to comply with that paragraph in the contract, so if that's required, yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll be happy to offer up the motion, Judge, if that's appropriate. JUDGE TINLEY: Probably would be. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would move that the Court grant Mr. Miller the formality of an approval so he can proceed with his plans for the River Star Park. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 1 ~ - ~ - - 20 /^ /"` 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~5 JUDGE TINLEY: I assume you're talking about the -- the Phase I development plan, as that is itemized, the 11 items that are on here? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As presented to the Court. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval. Any further questions or discussion of Mr. Miller or otherwise? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Thank you very much. MR. MILLER: Thank you very much, gentlemen. Appreciate you. JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate you being here today. The next item on the agenda is consideration and discussion for the approval of a joint resolution authorizing execution of grant agreement for airport repairs and improvement at the Kerrville/Kerr County Municipal Airport. MR. PEARCE: Good morning, Judge and Commissioners. JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, sir. 1~-~2-~3 21 1 ~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 r-~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 MR. PEARCE: What you have before you today is what is commonly referred to as a R.A.M.P. program grant; that is, a routine airport maintenance improvement. It is a state grant cahich is fifty-fifty in support. It was voted in the airport budget for this year, so the funding is available for it. What TexDOT has agreed or has supported and proposed in the funding is the clearing of the area in the front of Runway 30, which is for the future of a runway extension when it takes place, but more importantly, for a precision approach. We have obstacles that are penetrating the precision approach. That will be for both GPS and an ILS when we get it. Also, continuation of our fencing project, which we were working under -- excuse me, under the grant program last year of R.A.M.P. And then herbicide which we can purchase, and instead of our nickel, it's a fifty-fifty split. The total cost is $60,000. The money's in the budget for $30,000 from local match and then $30,000 from the State. They propose, if this is signed by both yourselves and the City, that it'll go to the State in January, and then we should have approval to move ahead at the end of January. Any questions? JUDGE TINLEY: The obstacles that you're speaking of, they're on the -- the east end where the new road is being cut in? MR. PEARCE: Yes, sir, in between the east 1 2 3 4 5 h 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2I 22 23 24 25 22 end, where the new road is being cut in, and the runway and that area in there. And there's a -- a penetration, if you can envision almost an axle-type area that goes into the runway. There's certain provisions for heighth hazards and stuff when you have a precision approach. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's all set out in the Master Plan, if I'm not mistaken, isn't it? MR. PEARCE; Yes, sir, it sure is. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: David, in addition to the removal of the obstacles that you note on Runway 1230, you also mention a continuation of security and wildlife fencing and herbicide. MR. PEARCE: Yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought we already had funds available for that fencing. MR. PEARCE; Not to complete the entire fencing. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 'Cause this will add -- MR. PEARCE: We envision that entire fencing project, by the time the entire airport is closed off with electric gates and everything, will probably run in the neighborhood, from start to finish, of about $500,000. We have -- $330,000 have already been allocated to that last year. We spent $32,000 for part of the fencing, and as we _____~, 23 r-'~ ~" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 L 1 ~2 23 24 25 get grant money, we do not want -- we do not propose to do that at our nickel, but as we get grant money, we continue to push and add on to it as we go all the way around the airport. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, thank you. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll note that the County Attorney has approved as to form, and with that said, I'll make a motion to approve the resoluticn as presented. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second -- I'm sorry, Bill, go ahead. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, go ahead. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion is made and seconded to approve the resolution as presented. Any further questions or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: A11 opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item on the agenda is consider and discuss and take appropriate action establishing the Kerr County Airport Board as an autonomous body acting on behalf of Kerr County, with authority to operate, maintain, improve, equip, regulate, protect, and police the Kerrville/Kerr County Airport, as provided in appropriate sections of Chapter 22 of the Texas is __-aa 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 1S 16 17 18 19 20 27 22 23 24 25 Transportation Code, as specifically enumerated, and such other provisions as stated, and authorize the County Judge to communicate the actions to the Mayor and City Council of the City of Kerrvil]e for concurrence and appropriate action. Commissioner Williams? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. I placed this on the agenda as a follow-up to our action two weeks ago in which oae rescinded our previous court order which set up that governing body as advisory-only. On Thursday afternoon of this past week, I and the County Attorney received a memorandum which I'm passing out to the Court this morning from the City -- Assistant City Attorney, Ilse Bailey, in which she requests that we delay consideration of that -- of this item for a few weeks, and she cites her reason why under Chapter 22 of the code. But, more importantly than her citation of that is her representation that the City is in the process -- her office is in the process of preparing what would be the basis of a joint resolution for our consideration, and she cites the need for any action to be taken as being a joint undertaking of both the City and the County. Based on her representation that that document will be forthcoming early in January, which would become the basis of any future discussions that the County and the City would have over the governance issue, I would propose that we pull this -- ~- >> 2s .~^~ 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 particular item today from consideration, and I would reserve our rights -- cr my right to come back with it at a later date. But I -- I believe that Ms. Bailey is working on this document, has said so to me, has said so in her memorandum, and I think it would be appropriate to wait for that document before we move forward. Mr. County Attorney, since this document that Ms. Bailey sent was addressed to both you and me, do you have any other comments you wish to offer on this? MR. MOTLEY: No, I don't. I think you've expressed it properly. I think we should see something fairly shortly on this from the City, so I think that's fine. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, I will pull it and I will come back with it at a later date, with hopefully a joint resolution. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can we still have a little conversation? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, absolutely. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What exactly -- you just handed us this, so I haven't had the opportunity to read it. What are -- what are the exactly the governance issues? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Making an autonomous board that does its own thing without coming back and forth i'- ---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 26 to the County and the City. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about -- what about -- let's pretend that we do that, that we do the things that we -- your agenda item today sets out. The members of that board -- will we start completely over and appoint new members, or reappoint people? Or are we just going to leave the machine that's in place moving, or how do you see that? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I see that as an item that we probably need to talk out. My sense of it is the County has two very good representatives on there now. COMMTSSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not questioning that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And whether or not the Court wants to proceed with them or start again is a question we have to resolve. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, it's -- it's not a personality thing I'm looking for here. I'm looking for what is -- what does the law say? Do we start afresh and reappoint? Or are we just kind of -- nod our heads and go on with what's going on? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My -- the County Attorney can jump in on this if he pleases, but my reading of Chapter 22 leaves that open for us to make that decision. i>-a'-o~ 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 It says we set the -- we set the tone and terms of the board, the number, the appointments and so forth. So -- so, my reading of it is we could do whatever. We could reaffirm the current appointments or we could go back to the drawing board if we wished to do so. It's our decision. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- my take on that is, I mean, the -- the current board isn't -- is supposed to be autonomous right now. I mean, you know, what was done had no effect, or shouldn't have had any effect, even though obviously it did, the way it was run. But -- so, I mean, I think -- you know, but I think Commissioner Baldwin's concern is -- well, I think we need to relook at, you know, appointees to make sure, 'cause it is a different -- autonomous board is a different function and a different commitment of the people, and make sure they want to do it on their side. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure is. COMMISSIONER LETZ: 'Cause it is very different than just being advisory. But I'm just -- I thank you and anyone else who's been involved to get this off high center. That was my intent at our last meeting, when I brought it forward. We've been talking about it for close to a year, and we're going to resolve it, and that makes me very happy. l~-?'-03 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 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the whole purpose, to get it off high center. JUDGE TINLEY: I think how the board is structured, how the appointments are made, when they're made, by whom they're made, that would all be the subject of whatever that joint agreement or resolution would be. You can be as specific or general as you want to be. It's just a matter of whatever the two -- the two local government entities come up with. I think that's going to be it. Anybody else got anything in connection with this particular item? If not, we'll move on to the next item on the agenda, consideration and discussion of a report from the Rabies and Animal Control Department. Commissioner Nicholson, you asked that this item be placed on the agenda. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, I did, and for reasons that I think it's good that this Court hear what's going on at the Rabies and Animal Control. They're typically a pretty quiet operation. They operate effectively and efficiently, and I think it's appropriate that we give Marc Allen the opportunity to tell us what's going on out there and what our plans are for it. So, Marc? MR. ALLEN: We try to have no problems out there. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just don't kill any cats. MR. ALLEN: I'm going to start with numbers 12-?' Uj 29 ,o" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2q 25 from last year, October 1st, 2002, to September 30th, 2003. Animals brought in from the city of Kerrville, that was 821 dogs and cats. Bites from the city of Kerrville, we had 44 animal bites. Animals from Kerr County, there were 775. Bites from Kerr County, there was 35. Animals brought in from city of Ingram, 117. Bites from city of Ingram, there was 4. Animals brought in by citizens, there was 1,595. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: How many? MR. ALLEN: 1,595. So, that's a total of 3,391 animals that came through the shelter. We adopted out 232. 430 were reclaimed, and we euthanized 2,176. We ran 3,696 calls. COMMISSIONER LETZ: How many? MR. ALLEN: 3,696. 1,796 were domestic animals, dogs and cats. 396 were dead animal calls. 516 were wild animal calls; that's raccoons, deer, possums. We did 105 injured animal calls, 35 livestock calls, 44 law enforcement assists, and other calls, which are just checking on the welfare; there was 390 of those -- or 414. There was 390 "unable to locate," so that's when we go out and we're looking and we just don't find it. So -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Marc? The -- the 300 -- the 3,000-plus calls that you made, can you break that down City/County? MR. ALLEN: Not this year, but we will be i_-_z-u~ n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1S 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 30 able to do it next year. We've got it already started; we started October 1st. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. MR. ALLEN: So, when we get ready to negotiate our new contract with the City, we'll be able to say exactly how many dogs came from the city, how many came from the county, and hoca many calls we ran in the city, you know, vice-versa. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just thought today would be a perfect time to start that negotiation. MR. ALLEN: Well, I mean, we've got it in the works. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. MR. ALLEN: It takes a lot of -- just a lot of looking and going through paperwork to separate them. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Marc, what was the number of total adopted animals? MR.. ALLEN: Last year, 232. And that -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does that include those sent to the Humane Society and Freeman-Fritts and the other -- MR. ALLEN: Yes. Yeah, we count that as an adoption, because they're really no-kill shelters. You got the S.P.C.A. in Fredericksburg; they do a wonderful job. I think they do more than any of us in the whole area, And i^ ~~ u3 31 r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 then H.S.K and Freeman-Fritz isn't doing a whole lot, but they do some. So -- but that's all counted. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Marc, talk a little bit about the steps you take to place a desirable animal. MR. ALLEN: Well, if it's a good animal, we have breed rescues. If it's a pure-bred or looks like a pure-bred -- it doesn't have to be a pure-bred, but it can look like one. If the animal's in good health, we call them breed rescues. We take them to any of the animal shelters, or Kinky Friedman has a rescue ranch. We go way out of our way to get rid of the ones that are adoptable. I mean, we can only hold them so long at the shelter. I mean, every now and then we'll have one that we just -- we want to keep. We don't want to give it to somebody else; we want to be the ones to say that we adopted it. So -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, if it's an adoptable animal, you waive that 48-hour rule? MR. ALLEN: Oh, yeah. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You keep it until you're able to place them? MR. ALLEN: The only time we even do that is when we're just way overbooked, and we're getting rid of the animals that aren't as adoptable. I mean, we don't adopt out Pit Bulls. I mean, people don't like to hear that, but we're not going to adopt out Pit Bulls; they're very 1^-<<-^3 32 ,~^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 aggressive. There's been numerous attacks in the news lately, people getting killed. You know, and that's a liability to us. If we adopt it out and we know it's a Pit Bull, you know, and it kills somebody down the road, we knew it, so we would just -- we're not going to do it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: As a -- if somebody has a pet that they want, will you try to keep your eye out for that, if people -- MR. ALLEN: We have a wish list. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wish list-type thing. It's a great service, which I was a benefit -- I guess a benefactor of that service. MR. ALLEN: Yeah, we saved you one. So we try really hard to adopt them. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a -- MR. ALLEN: And we have a really good working relationship with H.S.K. -- you know, all the adoption shelters, and even some in San Antonio. They'll give us a call now and then, so -- or we call them. So, it works out really good. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a great service to the community, something that's necessary, obviously, to get rid of a lot of feral animals. But I think the -- my experience with your staff has been phenomenal, that y'all go above and beyond helping any way is-~~-u3 33 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you can to -- to everybody. MR. ALLEN: Well, that's not our priority, either. Our priority is still out on the street, making sure the streets are free of stray animals, you know. And we still do a really good job of adopting. So -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I tell you, Jon, one of the most painful moments of my life was to drive up out there and see my little girl being held in jail. And she's just -- she's only two years old, and she's locked up. God, it hurt me. MR. ALLEN: She's a really sweet dog, and she's real easy to catch too. COMM7SSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I know. She'll get in the truck with you. MR. ALLEN: Just open the door and she'll jump right in. JUDGE TINLEY: I appreciate the extra effort that you've gone to this year to try and get these extra numbers. I realize it's -- it's an extra burden on you and your staff to put these numbers together, but I -- I think, as Commissioner Baldwin was mentioning, I think it's going to become relevant and material to try to renegotiate this contract with the City, because we need to know which of those services are being utilized and for whose benefit they're being utilized, i~ __-~~3 34 1 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. ALLEN: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: And I think that will be very helpful. I appreciate you. MR. ALLEN: We'll be able to get down to the exact numbers for them now, what's going on in the city, what's going on in the county. So -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One process I think that may be misunderstood by people in the community is what happens if your -- if your pet gets picked up? If Marc picks up my terrier, that terrier's not going to be destroyed in 48 hours or any other time, because it's registered, has a tag on it. I'm going to get a phone call, or that terrier is going to get a free ride home. So, if everybody will register their -- their animals and put a tag on them, there's -- there's no likelihood that that pet's ever going to be destroyed by -- by our facility. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a really good point. And I think some of the complaints the Court has had in the past have to deal with that, which, you know, pet owners come in and they're all emotional about the fact that we took a pet and perhaps even that pet got destroyed ultimately, after 48 hours or whatever, but the basic reality of it is, it was their fault to begin with, 'cause the dog or cat wasn't registered appropriately to start with. 1_ ~~-~~3 .^a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 35 MR. ALLEN: It had no identification. It's still -- about 90 percent of the animals that come in there, there's no identification on them, no tags. You know, half of them don't have collars. But my registration tags will be in -- maybe even today. I called Friday, and we're just about ready. I got my envelopes all printed up; I can hand them out now. I'm -- I mean, we're ready to blow and go by -- by January 1st, I'm hoping. So I can hand them out; I've got them. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll take mine right now. MR. ALLEN: So -- and we're just about ready -- I want to say one thing. Two weeks ago, I won a really big case in Precinct 2, where the judge -- he put out more than $4,000 in fines, so I was real happy. In 12 years, I've never got $4,000 in fines, so -- but it was all deferred as long as they got rid of the dogs. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let's hear it for J.P. 2. MR. ALLEN: Yeah, it was great, And our -- our problem we had out on West Creek Road, I believe this lady has gotten rid of most of her dogs. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's good, 'cause my phone hasn't been ringing -- MR. ALLEN: Mine hasn't either, COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- quite as much 1~ _~-n3 36 T 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 lately. MR. ALLEN: Sometimes when we put the pressure on, it works. Sometimes it doesn't. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you, Marc. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait just one second; I want to say one more thing. You know, the -- the age-old war over euthanization, et cetera, and -- and the size of our facility and 98 hours and all that, that debate, and -- and there's some public that feels like that we need a larger facility, and we've just recently gotten an ugly letter from somebody -- I can't remember who it was -- wanting us to -- what's wrong with us, that we don't go out there and build a larger facility? And I agree; I think we probably need a larger facility. However, I also believe that the way you do that is what Commissioner Letz was just talking about a few moments ago, the partnership between the private sector and the government. So, if you have any friends or neighbors out in Riverhill, Bill, that feels like we need a larger facility -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just tell me the amount and we'll just -- you know, your wish will be my command. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or you could do it on your own. We'd be happy to have your money as well. 12 2~-"3 37 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 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sure. Thank you. I'll put it in your back yard. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thanks, Marc. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Allen. We appreciate it. Next item is consider, discuss, and re-elect Commissioners to the Kerr County Emergency Service District Number 2 Board of Commissioners, to be effective January 1, 2004, and set their appointment terms in accordance with the following: Bruce Oehler and Wes Patton for one-year terms, F.C. "Corky" Henson, John Gibbens and Cleo Meadow for two-year terms. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: A month ago, we appointed these five people as the Board of Commissioners for this new emergency services district, and as required by law, on January 1 we need to reappoint them and -- and describe their terms of service. They've held the first meeting, and they made this recommendation on terms of service. And I -- I move that -- that we reelect Commissioners to Kerr County Emergency Service District Number 2 Board of Commissioners, effective January 1, 2004, and set the appointment terms as follows: Bruce Oehler, one year; Wes Fatton, one year; F.C. Henson, two years; John Gibbens, two years; and Cleo Meadow, two years. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for i_-~~-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 38 approval o£ the agenda item. Any question or discussion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, we -- we're not adopting this particular document right here? We're going to scratch through the second "Wesley Patton"? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And John Gibbens is the name that goes in there? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I expected you'd probably point that out. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, it was Wes Patton and Wesley Patton. I thought maybe it was a father-son team, which I know it's not, but -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good, 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. Let's move on to Item 8, consideration of a resolution authorizing designated signators for the Texas Community Development Program contract. Well, I don't see Ms. Hardin. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Everybody's looking ------0~ 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 at everybody and nobody's moving. JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have anything on this -- on this particular item, Mr. Johnston? MR. JOHNSTON: No, sir. Truby said she was going to be here, and she didn't give me her backup. Maybe I need to call her. MS. SOVIL: Sir, isn't that the remainder of the money on FEMA moneys? JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, mm-hmm. MS. SOVIL: It's a cleanup for the FEMA moneys. JUDGE TINLEY: Sure. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we skip it and come back? JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Let's move on to -- do we have an Auditor with us? No, we don't. Let's move on to Item 13, if we might. Consider, discuss, and approve funding the following items for the ability to organize individual employees' work area and decrease strain placed on their bodies. And the items listed are seven chairs, five adjustable keyboard holders, eight wireless keyboards with wireless mouse, -- or should that be mice? -- one mouse palm rest, four gel pad wrist supporters, one typewriter, two printers, one desk. County Clerk. MS. PIE PER: Gentlemen, after the safety film i~-?? u~ 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 that all the County employees were required to watch -- I didn't watch it; my son had a doctor's appointment that day. However, my employees hit me with a list of things that they feel they need. Considering it's not in my budget, the only thing I can do is come to y'all. This is the items that they feel that they need that is going to keep the strain placed on their bodies. They said according to that -- the film, that the -- their workstation could -- should conform to them, and not them conform to their workstation. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How about the workload? Same? MS. PIEPER: Workload increases continuously; there's no way around that. JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Pieper, have you -- with respect to these various items, have you taken a look at each one of these requests and found them to be essentially appropriate? MS. PIEPER: Yes, I have. Each -- each one of them -- each of the employees that have voiced this to me has stated good reasons. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- I mean, I don't have a problem at all with pursuing this, but it has to be within the confines of the budget. And, I mean, some of these items, if you had money in your Office Supplies or some of those kind of generic-type categories, I won't have i~----o; 41 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 any problem purchasing them if you think they're necessary. And I'm talking about the wrist supporters and the mouse palm rests and the -- MS. PIEPER: I do -- I do not have the money in the budget. This was not a budgeted item. So, just to figure out if it was approved, how much it would cost, I have researched between Office Max and Office Depot, and the second page of this shows the -- the amounts. So, the total that I feel that would purchase all of this is $1,897. You know, that's not getting the most expensive thing; that's just getting the items that -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: What I'm saying is that I think it needs to be handled in next year's budget, the I larger items. But I think some of these items, under Office Supplies -- you know, I would think there's probably $100 or so that you can at leas t_ start on some of these items, or $200 that we can find out of your Office Supplies budget, because I think that we need to -- and I appreciate your employees and you bringing it forward, but I think it has to be handled within the budget. I don't think we have the funds available in contingency funds this year to purchase chairs, printers, typewriters, things of that nature. And I think that your department is probably one of about half a dozen that have the -- you know, the same issues. And I think they're legitimate issues; I think we need to fund it, iz-~~ 42 1 ~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 ~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,/. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That was it. But anything that you can -- you know, or are able to get during the year out of your current office supply budget or computer supply budget, you know, please do it. But if you don't, you know, I think it all has to wait until the budget. JUDGE TINLEY: I would make the observation that the amount being requested by the clerk, number one, is approximately 10 percent of the incentive that I believe we will receive for participating in the safety program, the cash incentive that we will receive. Secondly, I think it's fairly important that we address this issue from a time standpoint. Now, that may be a relative question, but you take these particular items that she's requesting for her entire office at this time, and one routine procedure for carpal tunnel, and you've chewed this up, plus a whole bunch more. And that's where we're trying to go, to make these employees, number one, more productive, more efficient, and do so in the safest way possible, and without putting any of their health at risk. And so I -- I think it's fairly important that we address that. And where we find the money may be another issue, but if we can't do it right now, I don't want you to be discouraged, nor do I want anybody else ,. __-~1 3 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 to be discouraged, 'cause I think safety is very, very important. And I -- MS. PIEPER: I do want to point out -- JUDGE TINLEY: -- I think if we exercise it correctly, it'll pay off in the long run, and it will pay dividends to us. MS. PIEPER: One of the -- one of my concerns is, I do have a deputy that her only request is a new chair; that the chair she has has arms on it. She cannot fit underneath the desk very well. And she said that during the course when she has to sit too long, she said -- because she can't sit comfortably, she said that one of her legs is starting to go to sleep, so that kind of concerns me. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with everything that's been said here. Of course, you know, that was -- she had that same chair during the budget process; should have dealt with it then, but we -- we need to deal with these things. And I understand what you're saying, the safety awards and a11, but I -- you know, where do you -- I think the -- where you do find the money is the issue. I don't have any question that the safety issue -- I don't think that that's the issue. ~ think the issue is where you find the money. You have a suggestion? Or do you -- do we need to put it on the agenda next time with a clear cut area to get that money? 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 zs COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- well, the Judge mentioned the 10 percent savings would pay for it. Were you referring to the 10 percent discount would pay for this? Or pay for the entire County's? JUDGE T7NLEY: No, no. What I'm referring to is the safety incentive program that we're currently enrolled in, and I have made every effort to be sure that we comply with every step that is required to be taken and every hoop jumped through. At the end of -- at the end of that road, we are due to receive a cash award of 17,5, $18,000. As I recall, it's something in excess of 17, but less than $18,000, and that's cash money. That does -- that does not include any discount we may get on our workman's compensation insurance coverage, any savings we may have under our -- our stop loss amount that we have in our employee health plan, or any of those others. This -- this is cash money over and above, on top. COMMISSIONER LETZ: When that will money come? This budget year or next budget year? JUDGE TINLEY: Presumably, it will come at the end of this budget year, because we just -- we just went into that program. I believe in January, we voted to go into the program, if I'm not mistaken. Isn't that about right, Sheriff? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, and the __ _,-u3 45 ~^^' 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 reason I'm trying to say -- I mean, if the funds are going to come in this budget year, even though it's later in the year, I don't have a problem with using those funds. But if they're coming in next budget year, it's a different problem, the way we do our budget. JUDGE TINLEY: I wish I could make the assurance they would come in this budget year, but I'm not in a position to do that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: If there's a way that we could use those funds t_o get these items, and other items for all other, you know, departments, I think it's a sound thing to do. But I'm like Commissioner Baldwin. COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: I think that's the key; all the other departments as well, not just singling out the Clerk's office and taking -- accommodating the Clerk's office only. We need to find out what all we need to do system-wide. If we're going to do it, do it, and if we recover those dollars at the end of the line, that's great. I -- I have a question, though, about -- in terms of the selection of equipment, Jannett. My experience in purchasing office equipment is, if you buy a $50 chair, you get a $50 chair; you'll be buying another $50 chair again next year. If we're going to do these things, why don't we find a type of equipment that will last us significantly longer than -- than an Office Max $50 chair? i~-_ ~ 46 r-~ 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. PIEPER: Well, these just happen to be on sale for $50. But the ones that wanted chairs, I, you know, showed them this picture, and -- you know, and it had something to do with the back support that they're requiring. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand the intent. My point is the quality. And I question, if we're going to do this, why not buy the kind of equipment that will last us significantly longer than this quality would last us? And if we're going to do it, why not put it together for the entire system at the same time? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, my preference would be to not -- to table this for today, see if we can find out when the additional revenue will be coming in as a -- from a refund, and also get input from all the other departments. And if we -- if that money is coming this year, I'll be totally in favor of spending every penny of it on safety-related items and upgrades, but that's just -- it's an unknown right now. I think -- but I do think it needs to be done county-wide, not, you know, one department and not the other. JUDGE TINLEY: Good observations, I believe. You think it would be possible for you to coordinate with other departments, Ms. Pieper, and see what their needs might be? And maybe we can get -- get it through Christmas, ----- 47 /'~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 a wish list put together. MS. PIEPER: Sure, no problem. JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If I may suggest, isn't there a member from each department that was appointed to the safety committee? I know one of my members are that review a lot of that stuff, JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know that there was one out of each of the administrative departments here in the courthouse. We wanted a representative on the safety committee from each of the major departments that -- that had significant safety risks; Road and Bridge, Sheriff's -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER.: Right. I know when my department viewed the videos, which we all had to view, and I viewed them myself, there are a lot of upgrades that technically should -- or -- or must be made for the employees. And what I would suggest is kind of along the lines of what Jonathan said; iY we can buy some of the things out of our operational supply budget right now, do that, but let that committee that was appointed put together a list and let that committee come back to this Court with a list of what it's going to take to get the entire county in compliance, and prepare for that with the next budget or the incentive payback or whatever, to do -- JrJDGE TINLEY: Essentially, work through the 1'_-~?-C3 48 /^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 safety committee process? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right, because I've got a large number of employees that this does affect, especially dispatchers. Greatly. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think this is certainly a -- I mean, an effort that -- whether we can do it during the year or we have to wait till next budget year, either way, it's something that's a plus, because I think dividends to the employees and to the taxpayers long-term is clearly going to be there. I mean, anything we do to help their safety and reduce medical costs is certainly a plus to everybody. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. MS. PIEPER: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. Let's go back to Item Number 8, if we might; consideration of a resolution authorizing the designated signators for the Texas Community Development Program Contract Number 718257, and signing of the same. MS. HARDIN: I apologize for not being here when you called my number before. Y'all are working fast this morning. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Truby, pull that mic down a little bit. MS. PIEPER: It's not working, sir. 12-~ -03 49 ,~ r^'` 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's not working? Okay, put it back up. (Discussion off the record.) MS. HARDIN: This is a contract from O.R.C.A. for -- I think it's $84,000 for the 25 percent of what FEMA and NRCS did not pay for during the flood. They're asking that we have this resolution showing who has the right to do signatures, as when we turn it in. We're suggesting that the Judge, and we will need one from the County Auditor as well for all the financial documents. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the agenda item. Any questions or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next Item, Number 9, consideration of privately maintained road name changes in accordance with 911 guidelines. MS. HARDIN: My copy doesn't have the list on the front. Does y'all's? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. 1_-'_~-uf 50 ,^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. HARDIN; These are all privately named roads, most of them in Precinct 4. Do you want me to just go through them individually, since I don't have the list? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got some questions; let me look through it a little bit. The change from Addox to Crazy Horse, is that change going to annoy anyone that lives on that road? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Anyone else. Annoy anyone else. MS. HARDIN: I don't know. This was presented to me by 9-1-1 as the completed -- I see where you see family disagreement on it. It was named -- it was already changed once. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't have any other questions. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have one, and it's -- I think that we're dealing with different geo-regions, which makes it -- let's see -- makes it cool. But I thought it was kind of interesting, the old Aime Frank Rea1's Lake House Road -- everybody, I guess, is familiar with Colinas, and then there's one -- DODGE TINLEY: Los Colinas. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Los Colinas. MS. HARDIN: Los Colinas. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That, to me, is 51 .--~ /^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2L 23 24 25 getting a little bit too close for comfort. And it's actually in the same area of the county almost, if you look at the big picture. I'm not throwing up road blocks here, but I just -- you know, we've got to be careful of this stuff. JUDGE TINLEY: That one caught my eye also, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That was the only question I had. MS. HARDIN: It follows the guidelines. Would you like to suggest that they don't name one of them? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I didn't suggest anything like that. MS. HARDIN: I think both of them are private driveways. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm sure they are. I know they are. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it's just -- it's a confusing point. I mean, when you're in an emergency, saying Los Colinas versus Colinas -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. You just put yourself in Rusty's car, you know, at 3 o'clock in the morning, or an ambulance. Did they say Colinas or Los Colinas? Or did they forget to say "Los"? You know, and you're kind of heading out the same Medina Highway to do 52 F^-^. 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2` these things. I know it's not -- I'm not going to ask anybody to change anything. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Are the people on both of those aware of the other one's name? Maybe they voluntarily want to change it themselves to keep the confusion down. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know. 9-1-I signed off on it. MS. HARDIN: I can tell you that one of them just didn't like his address, and so he changed -- he named his driveway for an address, but that's all I know. And I'd like to point out -- I'll send the clerk the list so that she doesn't have to go through all those. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the agenda item. Any questions or comments? Suggestions? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) DODGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (NO response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. We'tl now recess the Commissioners Court meeting and I will open a public hearing scheduled for 10 a.m, this date for the iz-~~-as 53 r^. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 alternate plat revision for Lots 122 and 123 of The Horizon Subdivision. (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:02 a.m., and a public hearing was held in open court, as follows:) P U B L I C H E A R I N G JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any member of the public who wishes to be heard concerning if alternate plat revision for Lots 122 and 123 of The Horizon Subdivision? I say again, is there any member of the public that wishes to be heard at this public hearing concerning the alternate plat revisions for Lots 122 and 123 of The Horizon Subdivision? Being no expression of interest, I will close the public hearing. (The public hearing was concluded at 10:03 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was reopened.) JUDGE TINLEY: We will reconvene the Commissioners Court meeting, and Item Number 7, consideration and discussion of the alternate plat revisions for Lots 122 and 123 of The Horizon, and consider fees being refunded from O.S.S.F. for the same. MR. JOHNSTON: Good morning. JUDGE TINLEY: Morning, Mr. Johnston. MR. JOHNSTON: As far as the plats, I recommend approval of the plat. I have one comment about iz-, -~~3 54 .~'~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the fees, specifically about the combining lots. If you have two lots, and each one is authorized to have their own O.S.S. F. system on each lot, and if you combine them, they can still only have one, so I don't think O.S.S.F. has any reason to do any inspections or analysis of that situation. Should just be automatic. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I've talked with Franklin about this, and I'm -- I'm really quite amazed that no one has caught this before, but I think two caught it in the same week, two different developers. And, frankly, I just never thought about it, but I think -- I mean, their analysis is totally correct. I mean, if you can -- there's no reason for O.S.S.F. even to sign off on a revised plat that is going in this -- you know -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Consolidation. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That is consolidating. I'm guessing the reason it wasn't done is that it makes our rules longer and longer every time we try to single out a certain situation, and we try to keep it as generic as possible. So, we just need to put this in our rules. And, you know, I have no problem with waiving that fee. I think we should continue to waive it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Were any fees paid? MR. JOHNSTON: There were on this one. ---_~-u3 55 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~~ G L 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They paid. MR. JOHNSTON: They paid the fee on this one. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I tried to slip them by and let the m -- tell them to wait for a while and it would be solved, but they wanted a refund, so I support them. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we approve alternate p lat revision for lots 122 and 123 of Horizon, and refund the fees for O.S.S.F. for same. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 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 c arried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (NO response. ) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. MS. PIE PER: Excuse me, Judge. Who seconded that? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I did JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams. MS. PIE PER: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move on to Item 12, discuss and consider resolution to approve a grant application to the Office of the Governor, Criminal Justice i_ ~_-u- 56 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Division, for a Juvenile Behavior Transition Proqram in the amount of $35,850. Mr. Tomlinson. MR. TOMLINSON: This -- this application actually is the renewal of a -- of a grant that we currently have. It's for -- it's specifically for a program that's outside of the normal scope of our -- of the daily operations of -- of the facility. It does not supplant any -- any funds that have already been budgeted for -- for the day-to-day operations of the facility. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is this administered through AACOG? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. MR. TOMLINSON: I don't believe -- no, I don't. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was just curious. I'd move approval. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that. 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. 57 ~~ 1 L 3 4 J 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think you when you deal with these kind of things, these deals, you deal straight with the Governor's Office. They -- I'm sure COG would like to tap into that, but it'll never happen. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just didn't know. They do so many of them, it's hard to keep up with them. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. (Discussion off the record.) JUDGE TINLEY: Nett item, consider and discuss a request to use the courthouse for holding early voting on February 23, 2004, through March 5, 2004, and primary elections March 9, 2004, for the Republican and Democratic Precinct 312, 314, and 320 conventions starting at 7 p.m., and early voting for the runoff April 5, 2004, through April 9th, 2004, and April 13, 2004, for the runoff Election Day voting, and October 18, 2004, through October 29th, 2004, for early voting for the General Election, and again on November the 2nd, 2004, for the Election Day voting. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the agenda item. Any further questions or discussion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. On the is-__ ua 58 i" 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 precinct conventions, are there -- MS. PIEPER: Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- are there any arrangements -- or do any arrangements need to be made for opening the courthouse that evening? Or -- MS. PIEPER: No, sir, I'll be here at 6 a.m. Those precinct conventions don't start until 7 p.m., but I probably won't be out of here until at least midnight. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Lucky you. A11 right, thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Only observation I would have is that the county conventions weren't included in that lengthy agenda item, but I guess that will be something for separate consideration? MS. PIEPER: The county chairs will probably come to y'a11 for the county convention. I feel that they need to do that. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any further questions or discussion on the agenda item or the motion? A11 in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: A11 opposed, same sign. (NO response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. MS. PIEPER: Thank you. - ---n'' 59 r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 L2 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Next item is consideration and discussion of a request to allow the Credit Union to hold their annual meeting at the County Extension facility at the nonprofit rate. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll make a motion for approval. I mean, if you guys have the guts to do it, I move for approval. Let's do it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the agenda item. Any questions or discussion? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: My inclination is that we should be charging more and we should be looking at every source of revenue we can find for use of the Ag Barn. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or comments? Ali in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (Commissioners Baldwin, Williams, and Letz voted in favor of the motion.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (Commissioner Nicholson voted against the motion.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That was a gutsy move. (Discussion off the record.) JUDGE TINLEY: Next item is consider, i_-~z-n3 60 T 1 L 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 l~ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 discuss, and take appropriate action on the appointment of Kerr County Sheriff Rusty Hierholzer to the AACOG Criminal Justice Advisory Committee to fill the unexpired term of Chuck Dickerson, former Kerrville Chief of Police, that expires September 30, 2005, and also the appointment of Kerrville Police Department Acting Chief Lieutenant Rob McCutcheon as alternate to serve in the absence of sheriff Hierholzer. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. It came to my attention at the last AACOG Board meeting and subsequent committee discussions that that vacancy existed based on Chuck Dickerson's resignation, and I contacted the Sheriff, asked him if he would be so good as to volunteer his services to fill that void, and he concurred that he would do that. I also called Lieutenant Rob McCutcheon and asked if he would serve as the alternate for Sheriff Hierholzer, which is necessary, and he too concurred that he would be happy to do so. So, I would offer a motion for the appointment of Sheriff Hierholzer and Lieutenant Rob McCutcheon as our -- as our Advisory Committee person and our alternate to serve on the AACOG Criminal Justice Advisory Committee. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. DODGE TINLEY; Motion made and seconded for the approval of the agenda item. Any question or i_-_~-~~ 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 discussion? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One other -- just comment. You will have to notify the AACOG people of the appointment of Sheriff Hierholzer. JUDGE TINLEY: I presume that can be done by letter? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, very good. Any further questions or discussion on the motion or the agenda item? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. We're going to take our -- our recess a bit early this morning. We will reconvene at 10:30. (Recess taken from 10:12 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.) JUDGE TINLEY: Let me reconvene the Commissioners Court meeting called for this date, and having reconvened, I will now recess that Commissioners Court meeting, and convene and open a public hearing for road name changes, regulatory signs, and roads to be added to the County maintenance schedule and roads to be abandoned, iz-<<-u, 62 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 discontinued, and vacated from Kerr County maintenance. (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:30 a.m., and a public hearing was held in open court, as follows:) P U B L I C H E A F. I N G JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any member of the public who is present here today who wishes to be heard in connection with this public hearing for those road name changes, regulatory signs, roads to be added to county maintenance, and roads to be abandoned, discontinued, and vacated from county maintenance? Anyone -- any member of the public wishing to be heard in connection with this public hearing? (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That being the case, and not hearing anybody, I will close the public hearing. (The public hearing was concluded at 10:31 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was reopened.) JUDGE TINLEY: And I will reconvene the Commissioners Court meeting, and go to Item 11, consideration of road name changes in accordance with 9-1-1 guidelines, regulatory signs, and roads to be added or removed from county maintenance. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I have -- JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Letz? iz-__-_, 53 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- several comments. Easiest one first, is going to Abandon, Discontinue, and Vacate Kerr County Maintenance, we need to delete Louise Ehler Road at this time. We need to do -- there's some more legal work that needs to be done before I'm ready to proceed with that one, so Louise Ehler East is not to be abandoned today. Also, the -- under the Current Name section, portion of Wilson Creek from Schladoer to Roane, delete that. I've heard from numerous residents of that area, and the preference is to go to Wilson Creek and delete Roane, opposite of what we have in the public hearing, so we will have a new hearing for that in January. And the other one -- does anybody else have any comment? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I do. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm thinking on my last comment. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The change from Country -- Country Lane, there's a typographical error there. Those two roads should be Sleepy Hollow Circle and Sleepy Mountain. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not Sleepy Mountain Hollow? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: "Hollow" comes out. Does the geo designation stay? 1~-__ °3 64 !"- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, should be Sleepy Mountain North and Sleepy Hollow Circle North. JUDGE TINLEY: So, "Hollow" and "Lane" come out of Sleepy Mountain, then; is that what you're telling me? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other comments? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll just make a note, that the portion of Wilson Creek from Highway 27 to Schladoer, we are going to go ahead and change that to Schladoer as listed. MS. HARDIN: Any other questions? Do we need to read these out loud for -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably would be good, considering there's been some changes, to make sure we have them correct in the record. JUDGE TINLEY: Do I hear a motion that we approve the road name changes, regulatory signs, and roads to be added or removed from Kerr County maintenance as follows: Road name changes, Taylor Road East to be changed to Airpark Road East, portion of Wilson Creek from Highway 27 to Schladoer to be changed to Schladoer Road North, Joelle Ranch Road West to be changed to Pigeon Roost West, Country Lane North to be changed to Sleepy Hollow Circle North and Sleepy Mountain North, Mountain Home Loop to be 1 2- ~- i 3 65 /^, 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 changed to Creekside Trail West -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Creekside? JUDGE TINLEY: Creekridge, excuse me. Thank you, Commissioner. To be changed to Creekridge Trail West. Avenue C Street East to be changed to 9th Street East. Regulatory signs as follows: On Beaver Road West, 30 miles an hour; Tatsch Road Northwest, which is Lower Reservation Road Northwest, sign of 45 miles an hour. Keagan South sign to be No Dumping. Abandon, discontinue, and vacate from Kerr County maintenance Stubblefield Road East, Joelle Ranch Road West. Add to Kerr County maintenance 411 feet of Treiber Lane West. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Are we going to have two Sleepy Mountains now, except one of them's going -- MS. HARDIN: Yes. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We got Sleepy Mountain and Sleepy Hollow. SHERIFF HIERHOLZEP.: There's one out in Kerrville South. Only difference is going to be -- MS. HARDIN: I think the one in Kerrville South has already been changed. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Did it get changed, or is it still Sleepy Mountain? i ~~-n~ 66 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. HARDIN: The one off Spicer? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, it's not -- it's out in Buster's area, kind of. MS. HARDIN: I'll check and see, but I think it's already been SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I believe there's a Sleepy Mountain out there now. You're going to add another Sleepy Mountain on the opposite end? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: All I can tell you, Sheriff, is that these are the traditional names of the roads. That's what they've been named, and 9-1-1 did not report any conflict with any names. MS. HARDIN: These are all Country Lane; they were changed once, and we're just putting them back to what they were originally. 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 Number 17, consider and discuss the burn ban. Commissioner Letz? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I put this on the -_-~~-~3 67 1 T 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. I didn't know the article was going to be -- I think it was the weekend paper that had the article about year, we get into a season of agricultural burns, primarily around here, coastal fields. And in previous years -- I think two years ago, we exempted those burns under certain conditions, and I'd like to see us do that again. I talked with a representative of the NRCS office, and they seem to concur. They -- in fact, the day I called was an ideal day for prescribed burning, and they said they had several calls and wanted to know if they could burn. They were told no. So, I think that it's something that we need to look at. The way we did it before, the way I would like to see it done again, is that if -- if a rancher has a prescribed burn plan on file and approved by the NRCS office, that they would be able to burn based on the terms of that burn plan. For those that aren't real familiar with it, there's a number of conditions you set up, everything from temperature, humidity, wind direction. All these are estimated; you get them from the weather service. And there's a chance that they're wrong, but it's the best information that's available at the time. You have to make certain calls to fire departments, Sheriff's Department, 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 things of that nature, and you have to have certain time of the burn. And if you do those things, basically, you're free to burn when those conditions are met. So, I'd just like to see us do that. I talked with the -- we're talking with the probably like to make this effective sometime in early January, if the Court doesn't have any objections. And I believe the -- just the exemptions that we've -- what item is this? 17? The exemptions we did before, I'd like to go with the same form we did it in. I think it was an attached order restrir_ting outdoor burning attached. I don't know if we make this part of the burn ban, or if we replace the burn ban with this new language. I'm not sure what the appropriate way to do it is, but basically, we are exempting firefighting training, public utility -- mining operations really isn't applicable to us. Harvesting ag crops, which includes burning coastal fields, and then prescribed burn plans approved by the Department of Agriculture, which is the NRCS office. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Isn't this the same burn ban order that we approved? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. 12-__ !3 69 ~• 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 G1 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it's -- MS. SOVIL: This is the one we approved in '01. You need to reapprove it and get this one in force. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What did we do two, three weeks ago? MS. SOVIL: You just passed a court order. You didn't sign an official order. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We didn't -- yeah. This will outline more definitively, and it's not an absolute burn ban under these conditions. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, one thing, I have always thought that the harvesting of agricultural crops would be included in the prescribed burn. I don't know why they're two separate things here. Because I've been wrong all the time? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Isn't that the same thing? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Someone more knowledgeable than I is coming forward. I think part of it is that the agricultural crops is like -- really relates to sugar cane. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which isn't an issue for us. I just want to substitute coastal fields there. 1,_ ._,~ 70 ,~-~ ,~'~ 1 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: If you were -- JUDGE TINLEY: Not a significant crop here, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: Are you Mr. Blair? MR. BLAIR: Yes, sir, Keith Blair. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. MR. BLAIR: If you look at the way FSEC -- and sometimes I forget what that actually means, but the way they describe agricultural burns is really related to burning away stubble, burning sugar cane, things like that, so I'm not even sure that coastal fields would -- I would personally put that in prescribed burnings. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Me too. MR. BLAIR: As a similar issue like that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Either way. MR. BLAIR: So, anyway -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MR. BLAIR: I don't know. I'm glad to see that -- that that's maybe what you're going to do. All I was going to say is, you know, it is dry. But it's a -- it's a different dry than what I've seen in the past seven or eight years, because our -- the live moisture in the cedar is still high. Literally, the burns that we've actually gotten done in Kerr County have done very little _~-__ ~~~ 71 r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 good on cedar. However, our down, dead, woody fuels are extremely dry. And the only caution I have is -- is we've spent up to four days after we've burned mopping up those areas, and you have to do that with the winds we're having, which are -- I've been in this area for about seven years, and I haven't seen it blow like this, and it's been very strange. So, my only caution to that is -- and that's part of prescribed burning; that's what we train people on how to do that, is that you don't just walk away. You have to stick with it. I mean, the days -- the Tuesdays -- it seems like every Tuesday the wind is blowing. Guess where we are. We're on burns that we did two and three days before that, 'cause you have to do that. But hopefully that's -- you know, that's part of the prescribed burning, and they know that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Does a prescribed burn make it mandatory that the appropriate volunteer fire department or other fire department is notified prior to the burn beginning? MR. BLAIR: Not necessarily. Now, historically, when we get prescribed burns, we have to contact every single volunteer fire department and -- whether it's city or whatever it was. But, for the most part now, by contacting the Sheriff's Office, that information gets dispatched to all those fire departments, _-__ -'~z 72 /"~ 1 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 it makes it much easier, I think, for everybody. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, the bottom line is, they're notified. MR. BLAIR: Sure, yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Supposed to be notified. MR. BLAIR: Yes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: One thing I might add on that, because of, I mean, the nature of any county, there are portions of Kerr County that are very close to Kendall County, portions that are very close to Kimble County. And, you -- you know, I'd encourage anyone that does a prescribed burn to call the neighboring county sheriff, not just Kerr County Sheriff's Department, because frequently, you know, from a distance it's hard to tell where that fire is, and you could r_ause a lot of problems if you don't let the neighboring county sheriffs know as well. JUDGE TINLEY: The Local Government Code seems to, by its very language, exempt from the operation of a burn ban statute prescribed burns which are conducted by prescribed burn managers certified under the appropriate section of the Natural Resources Code, and meets the standards of -- of -- and the burn meets the standards under the Natural Resources Code. But it certainly wouldn't hurt to bolster that, even though it is an exemption in the 73 .^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 statute. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think my -- MR. BLAIR: Can I -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Go ahead. MR. BLAIR: I'm very familiar with that law; I'm one of the instructors for that course. There are no certified burn managers in the state of Texas. There is an insurance requirement that you have to have, and the only entity that we can get the insurance from at this point is Lloyds of London, and it's incredibly expensive. So, there are no certified burn managers, and there may not be for a while. We're still working on that. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. BLAIR: It's been a very difficult road. We've only got two more years, and our sunset will get that law. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, in any event, I think it's public education information. I'm -- you know, even if it is part of the regular burn ban, I'd like to get it out there because -- so the public is aware that just because someone's burning, they're not violating the burn ban if they're doing it under certain conditions, certain reasons. And I just -- it is, I think -- you know, from talking with the, you know, Soil Conservation office, that -- or NRCS office, they're very aware as well, and _-__ u3 74 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1L 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 they're going to be very strict on the burn plans this year. And I think if people go through, get them filed, go through the paperwork, follow the burn plans, I think it will, you know, make it as safe as possible with conditions we have this year. And I think -- you know, but it's a risk, but any time you burn is a risk. And it's -- but the risk is probably, in my opinion, worth it. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If I might comment, Jonathan, the one other thing that I didn't see mentioned in the Government Code, if y'all adopt that same type ordinance, but it was adopted in the 2001 policy, was the outdoor barbecue pits and the burn barrels. Y'all had adopted that as an exemption. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's in here. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's in there. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Is it in the new one? And you were talking about making it effective January. I don't know if you want to make a burn ban effective now, 'cause the one that's technically in effect right now is no good; we cannot enforce it. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Where is that? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This says charcoal grills. I assume -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But currently, from the one that was voted on two weeks ago, the court order, it was is ~~-n3 ~s 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 2~ a 2-0 vote, and I don't believe it could be enforced on a 2-0 vote. COMMISSIONER LETZ: There was only three commissioners -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There was only three of us here. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It was a majority that day. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The 2-0? JODGE TINLEY: We had a quorum, and there was a majority of that quorum that -- that was present that voted in favor. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 'Cause the vote itself said 2-0-0, so I -- that one wasn't even enforceable under that for us. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because -- it is, 'cause that was a majority of the court at that day. MS. SOVIL: You could adopt this order and just replace two weeks ago. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's what I would do. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. All right, I'll try to make -- I'll make a motion that we put into effect a burn ban for Kerr County and adopt, as part of that burn ban, a separate order restricting outdoor burning, with the i~-aa_os 76 ,~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 exemptions as set forth therein. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to enact a burn ban with the exemptions as set forth in the proffered resolution. Any further questions or discussion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Obviously, the burn ban really chokes up Number 4 down there. I mean -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: A lot of smoke in here. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Really emotional about this thing. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Sorry. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Be careful we don't put our barbecue out of commission before the Christmas party. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's true. JUDGE TINLEY: If there's no questions or discussion, all in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. The next item on the agenda is consideration and discussion of approval of the amended contract to TexDOT for construction i~-,~ 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 of the Hermann Sons Bridge project. COMMISSIONER LETZ: bridge. Costs are basically the same; they went up slightly, but the total project cost is estimated to be $1,222,850. Our portion of that is -- is we're responsible for $110,500. And by the amendment and by our previous court action, that dollar amount, we can do in-kind on another project, and that project that's identified is Town Creek Bridge -- Bridges. Town Creek Bridges. And in talking with -- as another update on that, we finally have a verbal commitment from all the individuals with the right-of-way acquisition for the construction of the new bridge, and the County Attorney's office is working with myself to get signatures and payments made and deeds and all that such done. And based on talking with TexDOT, they are almost complete with their engineering, and their plan is to let that contract on that new bridge in June of 2009. So, we're under a pretty -- you know, for the type of project, a pretty short time fuse. We certainly don't want anything the County does to delay it, so I would move approval of the amended contract with TexDOT for the construction of Hermann iz-~_ ~, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 78 Sons Bridge project. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve 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.) DODGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item is consideration and discussion of approval to pay the 2004 dues to Alamo Area Council of Governments in the amount of $2,619.18, it appears. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move to approve. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for the approval of the agenda item. Any further question or discussion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I do have a question. On the dues invoice, the first piece of paper in there, I think it talks about the things that -- that we get for our $2,600, and one of those, it says training workshops. Does that include law enforcement? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think some of them -- there may be some that are as a result of the dues, but iz ~_ ~~ 79 1 ,.., 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~,,., 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 there are also some -- there's a fee structure for a lot of COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I'm -- I'm going somewhere with that, you're exactly right. The -- I don't know what the -- I can't remember how much they charge us to put on the workshops over at Rusty's place to -- to see that his law enforcement people are certified, but they -- this particular COG -- and we are in their cachement area, no question of it -- charges us $2,600 just to be a member, and then turns around and charges us again to use their services, whereas we have been getting those exact same services from another COG for free. That has -- they drive down from the San Angelo area and see that Rusty's people are certified pear_e officers and do all kinds of training and do not charge us one penny. And I understand that AACOG now has figured that out, and has stepped back in and taken back over, and -- to start charging us again, and I -- I don't know all the details of that. That's what I'm looking for. Is that true? Is all that -- what I just said true? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, there's a lot of area -- local area law enforcement agencies that are having problems with AACOG because of their charging. We have used another COG. I guess, technically, we probably shouldn't, but I -- we can get the same training, and in fact, it's normally our own instructors doing the training, because we 1~-~_- ~~ 80 1 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 do have a number of certified instructors, and we just send in the paperwork. Well, AACOG's charging us per officer to go through the training, where the other COG is not charging us anything, and their guys are certified and all the rest, and the training is identical. I think we're having that problem, Gillespie County's had that problem, Kendall County's had that problem. I've had a couple meetings with the new person with AACOG that is over their law enforcement stuff. We still haven't come to an agreement. And I -- I agree with you, Commissioner. We shouldn't be getting charged this amount of money if we're going to provide the instructors and the students and the facility, the place to do the training, and all we're doing is reporting it to TCLEOSE. It's -- it's very frustrating that they want us to start -- or not start; they've been charging us for a number of years. And that's why most of law enforcement people around have quit using AACOG. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good reason for you to be on the Law Enforcement Advisory Committee, so you can work from the inside and change it. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, that's one of the only reasons I agreed to do that, because the stack of paperwork they sent me already in my name was about that high, after I agreed to do that. But I think it is -- there are some inequities there. I know Fredericksburg's iz-~_-o~ 81 1 ~.~, 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 .^ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 r~ 25 reporting theirs straight through a college, Kendall County's reporting theirs through a college, and we're reporting ours through -- through another COG, just to keep from having to pay those enormous fees. We're all on COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If it's an issue that needs to come before that Board of Directors, Sheriff, then I suggest you and I work to get there. Because I hear what you're saying, I hear what the Commissioner is saying, but I've never heard it out of the Gillespie County Judge; I've never heard it out of the Bandera County Judge or the new Kendall County Judge. So, if there's a problem, we need to deal with it. SHERTFF HIERHOLZER: Probably the reason you're not hearing it from any of the judges is the heads of law enforcement agencies are pretty well handling it themselves. You know, Gillespie County can just report it through -- what is it? -- Austin Community College that's over there. And it's no -- it's not a hard deal to just say, okay, we'll just report our training through y'all. Y'all report it to TCLEOSE, and ir_ don't cost, okay? And it is -- it's pretty well -- Kendall County, I understand it, is just going through SAC, San Antonio College, and we use Comfort. i~-z~-u~ 82 r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a point well-taken. Appreciate you bringing it up here. I think we need to talk to AACOG, because I think it's totally unfair that services they're supposed to be providing -- I never even knew we paid tYiem dues. I think that's wrong to pay them that, and then pay them to have our own instructor to teach our own courses. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I happen to know the Criminal Justice directors at the COG in San Angelo, and when they come into town, they, you know, contact -- telephone call or say hello or something, and they're here all the time. They drive from San Angelo, hand-deliver all those things that he needs for training. They drive, and they don't charge us a penny. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's interesting. Their jurisdiction even -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very interesting. It's -- you know, and they're not gaining anything from this deal at all. COMMISSIONER what, as far as Kimble -- COMMISSIONER Yeah, and our own COG not o get training caorkshops for, COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Their jurisdiction's BALDWIN: County, probably. ply charges an annual fee that we but then we pay extra for -- WILLIAMS: That's -- let's find 1?-~~-03 83 ,.-. ~^'~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 out about that. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The problem we also had is, I suggested to them, this being kind of a central area for these rural counties, that we could very easily have this as a training site for a whole lot of the law enforcement stuff and get people from Fredericksburg and Boerne and Bandera and all those; it's a lot closer area. And they finally agreed that that would be fine; they wouldn't charge our people for going through that, but they would charge all the other counties that we invited, so you're not going to get them to attend. Why should they? And it's not fair. So, yes, there's a lot of things I'll discuss with AACOG. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: F.Y.I., the dues structure hasn't changed; it's the same as it has been for the last two or three years. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or comments on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. The next 1 __-,_ 84 ~` i-^ 1 L 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 item on the agenda is a timed item at 1:30, so we'1L necessarily have to defer action on that until that time. Which brings us to the -- do we have any items that we might have a need to go into executive or closed session about, Mr. County Attorney? MR. MOTLEY: Not that I'm aware of, Your Honor. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Any member of the Court have any items that they feel it's necessary that we go into Executive Session about? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not that I'm aware of, Your Honor, oh Great One. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There is -- Your Honor, there is one that I have that I hadn't -- I meant to ask Mr. Motley about. I don't know if you want to just discuss it for information in executive session at this time, or wait till next time. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it's your call. If it falls under one of those items, why -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It definitely falls in one of those items, and I think the Court needs to be aware of it. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Take about five seconds. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would it be appropriate 12-~~~~ G3 85 n ,--~ r^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 for us to do -- to go do the bills first, and have the amendments? That way the Auditor can be done, so people aren't coming in and out so much. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would agree with that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good idea. COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Then he can do the report. JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Section IV of the agenda, payment of the bills. Mr. Auditor? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a comment and two or three questions. On Commissioners Court -- and I requested this during the budget process, but somehow we didn't feel like that it was that important, but I -- I still think it's an important thing to do. The Commissioners Court Conference line, I still would like to see each one of us broke out individually; divide the money up four ways, and somehow put it under each individual Commissioner, as opposed to lumping it all under everybody, so I -- I can keep -- keep -- personally keep an eye on how much I spend and see where I'm at in my spending, et cetera. JUDGE TINLEY: Y"ou're suggesting a sub-account? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Under those expenses? i_-<<-u 86 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Those appropriate expense line items? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. MR. TOMLINSON: We can keep it up outside the system, if that's acceptable. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Page 2, 434, the jury. I know this is really a stupid question, but I -- I can't -- I don't know the answer to my question, so I'm asking you. Are we paying someone to translate language in order for someone to serve on a jury? MR. TOMLINSON: No, this is for -- not for the jury, but this is probably to facilitate the court in general. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: To understand the proceedings. MR. TOMLINSON: Interpreting for the person that's -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, that -- huh? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Technically, to facilitate so they understand the proceedings, is what I've always been given to believe. MR. TOMLINSON: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So -- MR. TOMLINSON: It's for the purpose of the 12 __ ~3 r ,~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 87 jury understanding, too. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We don't have a jury member that we're having to translate to so they can serve -- MR. TOMLINSON: No. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- Kerr County public? MR. TOMLINSON: If you have -- if you have a witness that -- that speaks in a different language, then there has to be an interpreter for the jury. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Page 4. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not done with that. Does -- it doesn't make sense to me why that would come out of the jury fund, then. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know why it didn't come out of the court costs. I mean, it's a cost of the trial to have a translator, not a cost of the jury. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, i.f it's -- if it's for an indigent defendant, then that -- we pay for it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not -- I'm sure we pay for it. I'm questioning the funding coming out of -- I don't see why it comes out of the jury fund. To me, it should come out of the -- MR. TOMLINSON: Well, it's not -- it's just i~-~~-03 88 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 an account; it's not a fund. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean -- okay. It doesn't make sense that it comes out of the jury account. Seems to me it should come out of the 216th or 198th Court. I don't see why it's -- I don't see why it's charged back to the juries. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Because you have jurors that -- no, no, I'm not going to go there. COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: Don't go there. COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Anyway, it's -- it's a legitimate amount. Just a matter of where it comes from, but it's fine. MR. TOMLINSON: I don't have any heartburn about eliminating either one of them. I mean, I can consolidate a lot of things if you want me to. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Really? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just -- just move on. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Page 9, under the County Attorney. Three-quarters of the way down, Kerr County Collections for $150, reimbursement for machine repairs. I just can't make all those things fit in my mind. County Attorney, Kerr County Collections, machine repair. Those things don't fit for me. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, apparently, the County Attorney paid for some repairs out of his Hot Check fund, iz-z~-u3 89 ~^, /'~ 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and we're reimbursinq that fund for that. It's a County expense. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, this -- your Hot Check fund doesn't have anything to do with Mr. Alford and his crowd down there, does it? MR. TOMLINSON: No. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you. Page 7, three-quarters of the way down, D.P.S. License and Weights, reimbursement for a tool chest. Can you explain that one? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: To keep the handcuffs in. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It may be. Is 10-581-330, is that -- MR. TOMLINSON: That is Operating Expense line item. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Operating Expense, okay. By it landing here, that means that you think it's okay? MR. TOMLINSON: Well, we did budget for some -- for some expenses for him. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner Baldwin had a slow weekend, had a lot of time on his hands. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I did at halftime from 12-?2 c3 90 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the Cowboys. That's it. JUDGE TINLEY: That's alt you have? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all I have. JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have any? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, sir, not -- nothing. JUDGE TINLEY: Any of y'all? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Under -- back to Page 1, Commissioners Court. What -- what's the nature of the Caldwell case? JUDGE TINLEY: That is -- that was a case that was a class action lawsuit that ~~hallenged the collection of a certain court cost by county courts at law, and we were one of multiple defendants in the case. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: And paid a pro rata share to a law firm that handled it statewide. MR. TOMLINSON: We did prevail, by the way. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We did? Good. JUDGE TINLEY: We kept the money. Any other questions? Let's go to Page 12. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Want to approve these? Oh, I'm sorry. Page 12? i~ ~~ 91 T 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMM75SIONER LETZ: Not yet. JUDGE TINLEY: We've got separate West Law charges, not the one to the County Attorney, but the other one, generally. I assume that's on the equipment up in the -- up in the Lacv Library? Page 12. MR. TOMLINSON: I'm -- which one are you talking about? The first -- JUDGE TINLEY: No, the second West Law -- the first West Law charges. $1,068.80. MR. TOMLINSON: I'm not sure what that is. I have to look at the bill. (Discussion off the record.) MR. TOMLINSON: Part of it's monthly charges, $80 is, and then there's a -- the monthly charge for the West Law Texas Practice Guide. And -- JUDGE TINLEY; How much is that? MR. TOMLINSON: It's $124. And then there's one for -- let's see. There's a usage charge for the West Law Pro-Plus, says all Texas. That -- yeah, that's a monthly charge also of $684.80. And then monthly charge for West Law Analytical Library, Texas Edition, for $180. JUDGE TINLEY: Maybe that's something I need to talk to the Law Librarian about. The reason I made inquiry, Mr. Tomlinson, is because it's my understanding that persons who use the West Law service, as lawyers know ._-_.-;3 92 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that service, is that it is a subscription service, and there are account numbers. And if I wanted to utilize that service in our Law Library, i can't just turn it on and let the meter run on the County's nickel, but if I want to utilize it, I've got to plug in my subscription or account number so that it can be charged to me. That's my understanding of how that operates. The County Attorney maybe could enlighten me there. They've got a separate West Law account that they utilize on a daily basis. I'm -- MR. MOTLEY: We use a separate account. I haven`t made -- I have -- I can find out the information for you about how to use the equipment upstairs, but we don't use it. I can tell -- tell you what Tommy was talking about, the -- the Texas Practice Guide, the -- whatever, the West Texas Pro Series or whatever, those are just the basic Texas research for Texas cases and the federal courts that support our state and U.S. Supreme Court, Texas-based law school -- what am I trying to say here? Law review-type articles and journals and things like that about Texas. JUDGE TINLEY: You don't think that includes some subscription charges -- MR. MOTLEY: I don't think -- JUDGE TINLEY: -- to West Law specifically? MR. MOTLEY: I tell you, I know I can find out for the Court. I may be able to find out and report 93 1 ~, 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 back this afternoon, if the Court would like me to. I -- I don't use that service upstairs and never have had an occasion -- JUDGE TINLEY: I knew you had a separate account that you utilized for your day-to-day operation. MR. MOTLEY: You bet. JUDGE TINLEY: For research questions. Page 17. Tell me about that. That's -- there's only one item there. MR. TOMLINSON: Page 17? JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. MR. TOMLINSON: My Page 17 has six items on it. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. County-sponsored Activity, payable to Ann Bethel, $300.51, reimbursement for microwave plumbing supplies. MR. TOMLINSON: County-sponsored? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Union Church, Judge. JUDGE TINLEY: That's Union Church? Okay. Okay, I just didn't recognize the name. That's all I have. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve the bills. Any further questions or discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right hand. - o + _ n 3 ,,.,, 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 99 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. We have some budget amendments, I believe, do we not, Mr. Auditor? MR. TOMLINSON: I have two. JUDGE TINLEY: Budget Amendment Request Number 1. MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. One is a request from Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, transfer of $197.54 into Operating Equipment, transferring $97.54 from Office Supplies and $100 from Machine Repairs. This is to replace a -- a printer -- laser printer for their office. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve Budget Amendment Request Number 1. Any questions or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget Amendment Request Number 2. MR. TOMLINSON: I made a change on this one. ~~-~~-,~ 95 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 Actually, it's from the Treasurer, but on the first line, where it says Computer Supplies, that's supposed to be Computer Software. Account number's right, but it -- the request is to transfer $204.95 from Office Supplies to Computer Software. It's for the purchase of a piece of software to -- that facilitates the reporting of state fees to the Office of the Comptroller. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's great. I move for approval. But 1 just -- why don't we know these things during the budget process? I just don't understand why we don't know that. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, this -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That we report to the state. I don't qet it. MR. TOMLINSON: Well, the Legislature changed the -- a lot of the state fines and fees that weren't effective until September 1, and some of them are actually effective January 1. And besides the addition of some fees, there were -- there were new fees that were enacted at the same time. This -- this came available, and knowing the complexity of reporting fees to the state, I think it's money well spent. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for __-~ -a~ 96 i-^ /'~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 approval of Budget Amendment F.equest Number 2. Any question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Do we have any late bills? MR. TOMLINSON: No. JUDGE TINLEY: I have here before me reports submitted by Justice of the Peace, Precinct 2, Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, District Clerk, and Environmental Health Department. Do I hear a motion to approve these reports as submitted? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for the approval of the named reports as submitted. Any question or discussion? A11 in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY; Motion does carry. Okay, I guess that gets us back to the executive session. The l~ _.-~3 97 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Sheriff indicated that it was a matter that he had an interest in. Obviously, I assume it's a litigation matter? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Could be. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We'll need the County Attorney and his assistant and the members of the Court and the reporter. We'd ask that all others absent the room, please. (Discussion off the record.) JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We will qo out of open session for the Commissioners Court meeting, and we will go into executive or closed session at 11:16. (The open session was closed at 11:16 a.m., and an Executive Session was held, the transcript of which is contained in a separate document.) JUDGE TINLEY: We will now reconvene in -- in open session in Commissioners Court meeting. Does anyone have any action to be offered in connection with matters discussed in Executive Session? That being the case, it would appear that since our remaining agenda item is a timed item, that we're going to start at 1:30. We can go into recess until that time. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to go back to the Commissioners' comments. I failed to tell y'all about one thing that I'd like to tell you about. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We're going to give -- 12-L_-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 25 98 there's going to be an opportunity for that later. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How much later? No, I want a time frame. 1:30? Or -- JUDGE TINLEY: Probably about 2:30, 2:15. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we do it now? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why don't we do it right now? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which brings up a point, Your Honor. Structuring the agenda. Why don't we put these items in front of executive, and let executive be the tail end? JUDGE TTNLEY: I suppose we could. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just a request. JUDGE TINLEY: There's nothing that says we have to follow the agenda in the order that it's in, either. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's true. Sometimes we don't do that. DODGE TINLEY: That's exactly right. That's exactly right. Do you have some comments you wish to make, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Glad you brought that up. JUDGE TINLEY: I see. Well, we'll just permit you to do that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you so very i^-__-u~ /" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2 9 25 99 much. You remember in March, we have the West Texas County Judges and Commissioners Association meeting in Midland, Texas, and it's our -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Fort Worth. Zt's going to be in Midland. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, it's going -- this next March we're going to Midland so we can be as smart as the other Commissioners around the state and -- and get our required hours that the State requires us to get. And we show -- I really thought our packet would have been here by now, our bid package, the things that we need to put together, which includes a resolution from Commissioners Court that we would like to have that meeting held in Kerrville in 2005, and all the other things, the financing and all that, what it would take. It'll be here just any day, but I just want to remind y'all that March is coming up. Now, this is what I want to suggest to us. I found recently -- kind of just stumbled up on it -- a new vehicle owned by Kerr County that is -- that we could all fit in, and together, and save a lot of travel money. Not -- the four Commissioners; I don't think there's room for the Judge in there. That's just part of the gig. But I -- I'd like for us to think about that, of borrowing that new vehicle from Road and Bridge and getting in it and driving to Midland and back. i~-zz-oa 100 ,~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Wouldn't we have to take the court stenographer with us? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, Open Meetings Act. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait a minute. What do -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: To Midland? COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're at the convention together. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, we don't. No, we've already established that. If it was -- this was three weeks ago, it -- I would have never brought this up. But the -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought you were going to be talking about using the Sheriff's big Expedition. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a thought. That's a little bit bigger; the Judge could go then. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No way. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So I just wanted to think about that. Tf -- if -- you know, and some guys travel with family members and that kind of thing; I understand that. And if everybody's doing that, that's fine. But I don't, and Commissioner Letz doesn't 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 21 22 23 24 25 101 necessarily, either, so we could all just jump in and save -- do one travel deal, some gas and that's it. That's all. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's about it. JUDGE TINLEY: I see. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know about the new vehicle? Does anybody want to bite on that? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I saw it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I wasn't going to bite on that, but do you want to tell us? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I don't know much about it. It's a good-looking -- what is it, a Chevrolet -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a Chevrolet Tahoe, Road and Bridge. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is it bigger than the Sheriff's Expedition? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. No. It has rubber mats, so it's suitable for Commissioners. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm just curious about this togetherness. Are we going to bunk together, too, after we get there, or what? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can answer that. i_-__-oj 102 n 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, are we doing the other -- our other reports now? DODGE TINLEY: We can. It seems like that's where we've gone. Do you have any other comments you wish to make -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not at this time. JUDGE TINLEY: -- Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not at this time. JUDGE TINLEY: What about with respect to your liaison or committee assignments? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not at this time. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I reserve the right to do that before dark, though. JUDGE TINLEY: How about you, Commissioner Williams? Do you have anything you wish to report to us? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just one second, Judge. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, the -- I do have one item. I have exchanged an e-mail with the County Attorney with respect to some thoughts that I will impart to him for the restructuring of the library contract prior to sending it over to the City for its review and comment, period. That's it. __ __ 03 ~'^. 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 21 22 23 24 25 103 DODGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a couple comments, but first I have a question to either Commissioner Nicholson or Williams. I believe there was an Airport Board meeting since our last Commissioners Court meeting. Did -- how did -- I was just curious as to how it went and what, kind of, the pulse of the Board was after -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The Board itself and -- and/or the Airport Manager didn't get into the policies and decisions that we're talking about. They're sitting back waiting to find out what's going to happen. I had the Board Chair, after the meeting, ask me to bring him up to date on -- on things, because all he knew what was he read in the newspapers. So, I brought him up to date. I'm certain our actions today will be reported, but in terms -- there was no discussion. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Under 9-1-1, I think it was last week, Commissioner Baldwin and I met with Bill Amerine, 9-1-1 Director, and everything is somewhat on schedule. They're -- the mailouts are -- the post office coordination and new addressing is on schedule for January. It may possibly be February, but that's going to be a call by the Post Office; he's turning over all updated files to them, as I understand it, and the Post Office is going to send out the letters as they see fit, based on the routes. iz-.z o~+ 104 1 ,.~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 r"~ 25 There were something -- I think they were -- basically, it was going to all happen at once, but there was a thought that it may happen in the west part of the county before the east part of the county, then the opposite way. So, they're not real sure, but that's in the Post Office's hands. There was a -- I guess an earlier goal to have 100 percent of the county basically done by the end of the year. They have moved that date internally at 9-1-1 to the 1st of June. There is a -- there's more clean-up than, I think, they anticipated. They're going to go through with the mailout, the conversion at the Post Office is going to take place, but it's not going to be quite to the level that they had hoped earlier in the year, and it's mainly just because there's a lot of people that have not contacted -- responded to our cards that we sent out, contacted based on press information. And there's, if memory serves me, around 35,000 people that they have not heard from, owners of tracts they have not heard from, and they're a little bit up in the air as to what to do with some of these, but they're going to proceed. And -- you know, and they think and I think that those are some duplications. And there's some landowner-tenant situations that, in reality, the likelihood is that -- you know, they didn't give a percentage, but possibly 75, 80, maybe 90 percent of the actual people -- residents of Kerr County will get their new addresses, and i~ _~ u° 105 1 ,r.~ 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 n 25 it will all work smoothly. But there are some loose ends COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In terms of what you're talking about, I had an interesting phone call from a little lady in Guadalupe Heights area, very concerned about the fact that the Postal Service could not, would not, or probably never would get her address straight. And she cited some previous examples of how her mail is still catching up with her from whatever -- a long period of time. All of which is to wonder if -- in terms of the 9-1-1 and public information, public education, if we can get some reiteration into print of the Postal Service's intent, how they handle it, and maybe kind of put this -- I only had the one phone call, but, you know, it is a concern. And people say, you know, if I get my address changed, I'll never get my mail again, and if we can deal with that, perhaps that'll be helpful. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's a good media -- as I recall, another media blitz right before the Post Office -- or, you know, about the time he lets the Post Office know. There's areas that are going to be difficult based on the -- you know, just a -- the addressing and the Post Office situation and route, the way they're configured and all that, certain hot spots in the county that are going i~-~~-o~ i^'~ 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 106 to be more problematic than other areas of the county. And it's just a -- they're going to have to work through those, but it's about to be turned over to the Post Office. Now, he -- as I understand it, the letter coming out from the Post Office, Bill was successful in making -- if there's a problem with that letter that comes from the Post Office, the first call goes back to the Post Office, and they are expected to -- to solve it. I mean, to look at it, not just immediately forward it to 9-1-1. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Goes to the respective Postmaster? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, to the Postmaster. Going to go to the Postmasters, you know. It's -- I'm sure there's going to be a lot of people confused, but people remember also that your address is -- you'll have two addresses that are -- mail will be delivered to for a year. I know that in my precinct -- and it's due to the Postmaster in that area being very accommodating, is he's currently delivering to the current address -- I mean, the new 9-1-1 addresses, even though they're not supposed to be doing that right now. So, if they know -- if they can find the person, their view is, let's get the mail to them. And, I think that's it. The Ag Barn's getting ready for a stock show, I believe, coming up. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Nicholson? 1~- _ log 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You've heard the Animal Control report, so I won't elaborate on that. Just following along with Commissioner Williams, after our last meeting, I got to thinking about whether or not we had been negligent in not reporting to you about Airport Board activities, and thinking back on the four or five meetings I've attended, I would describe them as status reports. They're not decision-making meetings. It's usually a Power Point presentation that talks about how much fuel we've sold and how many T.A. hangars are ready. It's very good, but it's not something I think that this Court would have a whole lot of interest in. They do not talk about policy, organization, and -- and the things that are on the mind of the City Council and Commissioners Court. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Therein lies part of the problem. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which I hope will get solved in the new year. DODGE TINLEY: Anything else? (Commissioner Nicholson shook his head.) DODGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams spoke of a telephone conversation. I also received a telephone call from the current agent for the County's law enforcement liability coverage last Friday, Mr. Jack Furman. Mr. Furman was registering what I took to be a complaint. I invited 108 1 I~~ L 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~.~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~ 24 25 him to put his complaint or concerns in writing and forward them to the Court here, and alternatively, I left a message for him that invited him to appear before the Court today to register those concerns. And I haven't seen him here today, concerns were. In that telephone call of last Friday, Mr. Furman stated that he was presently working on the renewal coverage of our law enforcement liability insurance, for which he is currently the agent of record, and in working on that, he had just discovered that an RFP, a Request for Proposals, had been issued earlier in the year by the Court for that coverage, as well as other coverages that the County had a need for, and that, pursuant to that request, he discovered that the Court had procured that coverage from another provider who had responded to the request for the proposals. And I confirmed to Mr. Furman that that, in fact, had occurred. Mr. Furman stated that he did not receive notice of the Request for Proposals, was not aware of it, and further, in his opinion, that doing business that way was not a good way for the County to do business, and that doing business that way was not the way to save the County money. I responded to him by advising him that the entire world had notice of the Request for Proposals by virtue of l ~- c am- U j 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~5 109 them being advertised as the law requires, and that the Court had authorized the RFP in that manner, and that the Court had not directed that any potential provider be given any actual or specific notice, and that if he had a problem with his lack of notice in that regard, it, I felt, was a matter that he should bring to the Court's attention. And if he was unwilling to do so, to not be calling me up and chewing my butt out. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Was that a blunt comment, Judge, or what? JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it was -- I was a little bit more graphic than that, Commissioner, but what I've said is probably printable. And let me address Mr. Furman's concerns that that wasn't a good way to do business or that that wasn't a way to save the County money. Number one, Mr. Furman is currently the agent of record at this time for our law enforcement liability coverage, coverage for which we paid this year a premium of over $108,000. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 108. JUDGE TINLEY: And it's my considered opinion that he ought to know what's going on with our law enforcement liability coverage this year for that reason alone. I'd further point out to the Court that this call was last Friday, which was just prior to the last meeting of the year on this Monday, today, for coverage that expired at -~~-u3 1 ~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,-. 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 110 midnight on the 31st of this month. That was a time when meeting this morning. Absent an emergency meeting of this Court on that particular issue, this Court would have been unable lawfully to take any action with respect to that coverage today. Now, that was not, however, the first time that we've had this same difficulty on emergency meetings. Most of you, I'm sure, can remember that last year, on the 23rd, after the meeting had already been posted, there was no mention of the insurance coverage, and the Court was apprized shortly before the annual Christmas party for the employees that the issue of the law enforcement liability coverage, which expired at midnight on the 31st, approximately a week later, needed to be addressed. The Court found it necessary to call an emergency meeting to be held at 1 o'clock on that day, technically after a holiday had begun, if I'm not mistaken, but to address that. Some of you may remember the year before, when that same kind of thing occurred on the 31st of December, and it was necessary that there be an emergency meeting posted to consider that single issue. If that's the right way to do business, I don't want any part of it. 111 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Now, with respect to the issue of not a way to save the County money, some numbers. The law enforcement coverage insurance that was written for us in the calendar year 2002 by Mr. Furman's agency, the premium paid on that occasion represented an increase of 36 percent over the previous year. The law enforcement coverage which we procured from Mr. Furman's agency in the calendar year '03 -- that's this year -- we paid a premium which had increased by 67 percent over the previous year. The law enforcement coverage that we put in place for next year under the RFP which we submitted, and which was responded to by persons interested, the premium for this coming year is down 12 percent from the previous year. Those are the facts, gentlemen, and if what we've done is not the way to save the County money, you tell me a better way. Anybody else have anything further? COMMISSIONER LETZ: My only comment is to the press. He said it, not me. JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think there's any mistake about that. Next item, reports from elected officials or department heads. Hearing none, reports from boards, commissions or committees. Do we have anything from the City/County joint projects? It was not included in the packet; didn't see any. I don't have a Road and Bridge. Maintenance, you got a report for us? It's not required; iz-z_ !~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 llz just thought you may have one. MR. HOLEKAMP: We're still here. JUDGE TINLEY: Glad to know that. Vacation was fine? MR. HOLEKAMP: Wonderful, thank you. JODGE TINLEY: Good. That's all I have, gentlemen, except for the timed item at 1:30. We'll stand in recess until 1:30. (Recess taken from 11:50 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.) JODGE TINLEY: Let me reconvene and call to order the special Commissioners Court meeting scheduled for this date, Monday, December the 22nd, 2003, originally called to order at 9 a.m. We went into recess shortly before lunch, and it's now 1:30, and we have a timed item for 1:30; that is, consideration and discussion of acceptance, rejection, or other appropriate action on the employee health insurance bids. We have with us today Mr. Don Gray, who's a consultant from Austin, Texas, hired by the Court last week to give us some assistance and guidance and evaluation of the various proposals that were submitted, as well as to receive revisions, changes, final and best offers, as the case may be, from the various offerors whose bids have been filed on a timely basis. So, at this time, would I call upon Mr. Gray. iz _~-03 113 .~'~ .^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. GRAY: Got some spx'eadsheets to pass out. I think that's five for the Commissioners Court. And are you with the clerk's office? MS. PIEPER: Thank you. MR. GRAY: I would like to give the next round, really, to some of the county officials, and then on to the proposers. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don, there's a press lady back there in the corner, too. MR. GRAY: Can I get you some after the meeting if we need to? I've only got six -- let's see. What -- (Discussion off the record.) MR. GRAY: Have I left anybody out? I do have one more for the press. Oh, well, first, let me say it's a pleasure being here. I always enjoy coming to beautiful Kerr County, seeing good people. I want to acknowledge my appreciation to all the proposers here. Each one of them was very responsive to all my questions. They're all very knowledgeable individuals about this subject, and I couldn't have done the work I did without their help. As you know, Judge and Commissioners, the -- the proposals have changed since the last you saw them, and I just want to ask anybody, I guess, are there any further changes before we talk about these? Last chance. I'll take 114 /'~ 1 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 as a no. Now, you received more proposals than I evaluated. I evaluated -- I focused my time solely on four proposals. There were some proposals the Treasurer's office told me that had been rejected for various reasons; I don't even know why. Didn't even look at them. But proposals that I've evaluated in terms of the medical insurance would be from TAC, Greentree, Mutual of Omaha, and E.B.A. E.B.A. is your incumbent, as you probably well know. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What did you just say? MR. GRAY: I said E.B.A. is the incumbent administrator of the program. Now, three of those four had life insurance quotes. Greentree Administrators, for example, their quote was 26 cents per thousand, or in other words, $2.60 cents a month for $10,000 of life insurance. E.B.A.'s quote was at 39 cents a thousand, or $3.40 a month. And TAC was at 22 and a half cents per month. There is some variation in those numbers that I just read out. They're not shown on your spreadsheets, but the variation's so minor that, to me, the only -- I think the only way you can do this is to buy the life insurance from whoever you end up working with on the medical plan. We can also tell you that after you make a decision today on the placement of the services or coverage, there's still further work to be done. Not by me, but perhaps the Treasurer, with the -- working 12 __-U3 1 ,r-. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 ,~ 25 115 together elbow-to-elbow, the Treasurer and the Auditor's office, and the Court may want to be involved. But -- but after the stop loss carrier is selected, for example, they'll -- you'll need to decide -- you need to set the rates that are going to be charged for that you might want to use to -- and how much, if any, of those reserve funds you might want to use to support the rates. And, you know, some clients I work with, they want each month produce enough premium to equal the total annual maximum liability for worst-case scenario. Other clients say, no, let's back it off a little bit and be less conservative and take a chance, because you may know -- you may have enough money in reserves that you can afford to take that chance. Now, setting the rates is something that will be -- need to be done by January 1, if not sooner. Of course, the first step in doing that is selecting who you're doing business with. That's why I'm here today. P.P.O. networks, let me also make an introductory comment about those. When you evaluate P.P.O. proposals -- and you can look at the price they charge; that's certainly one important item. You can look at the doctors and hospitals that participate in those networks. _~-__-u3 116 1 r..~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~,.,~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 .^ 25 You wouldn't want to do business with a network that didn't County? Because if a discount -- you're doing business with a business that charges, you know, $50 for a procedure, and another one does it for $25, you want to give strong consideration to that network. Well, we -- I have no information for you on how they -- I mean, that's just -- information wasn't provided. It's tough to get to begin with, even if it -- even if the County included it in the RFP, but that is really the engine that drives the networks, is what kind of pricing discounts are they bringing to the table. If you end up going with a network that covers all hospitals and all doctors, you're probably not getting the discounts that you could get from a network that's more selective. Okay. With that said, let me turn to the spreadsheets. I'll tell you now that, in my mind, I have a firm -- a recommendation for you to consider as to how -- where you should place this coverage and who you should be doing business with. I'll save that for the end. But if you do change carriers -- or I say "carriers." If you do change administrators, in other words, get away from E.B.A., 1G-a n3 117 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 r, 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I want to keep -- want you to keep in mind that there's a cost to you of leaving E.B.A., which is $12 per claim, for depths of all the insurance you the opportunity to tell help you by defining any of be a complicated subject, b like 12-12, 12-15. I'll be specific retention, $50,000 retentions. lingo on here, I want to give me if you'd like -- if I can the terms, 'cause this is -- can ~t I'm going to be using terms using terms like $40,000 specific retention, aggregate JUDGE TINLEY: As you get to each one of those, Mr. Gray, it might be helpful to everyone here if you were to give a brief explanation. MR. GRAY: Very good. On this spreadsheet, like I mentioned, there's a line on the left-hand margin, fourth item from the top, called Coverage Basis, and it says 12-12. In most cases, there's one item that says -- in the TAC column, it says 12-15. Let me tell you, you received many other types of proposals that we'll talk about in a little bit, but I wanted you to know that I focused on these. This is the type of coverage you now have. Everybody quoted one of these, so I thought it was a fair basis of comparison, but in a minute we'll talk about options that other proposers presented. Let me just lam'-22-03 118 .~"~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 describe that term "1^-12" now. This -- what we're talking about here is the purchase of a stop loss insurance policy. This is a policy that comes into play should expenses under this medical plan get outside of what is expected. The plan you have now -- the policy you have now has a $90,000 deductible per person. If my claims in a 12-month period equal $35,000, for example, then the stop loss policy is of no benefit to the County. But if my claims were to go to $200,000, the County's cap -- responsibility is only for that first $40,000. So, in that case, it would be a tremendous benefit to the County to buy this stop loss insurance. This specific deductible -- this stop loss has two parts. One is the specific, one is the aggregate. I've just described the specific. When we say 12-12, what I'm talking about is medical expense -- this policy covers medical expenses that are incurred -- in other words, trips to the doctor and trips to the hospital that happened -- in your case, it's real simple -- in calendar year 2004. So, if someone goes in the hospital today, that claim isn't going to be on the policy we're talking about buying, because the policy we're talking about buying, at least these listed here, are for medical services rendered during 2009. So, that's one hurdle you have to get over to have a claim under the policy, is it has to be rendered in 2004. -- ---0' 119 1 ~. 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 ,.~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~ 24 25 The second hurdle is that, on a 12-12, the someone goes in the hospital in December and they're in there awhile, and with Christmas and everything, it may be a few weeks before -- in other words, it may be past January 1 for that hospital bill to be delivered to the patient, and for it to be paid by the T.P.A. So, that type of a hospital bill would not be covered by the policy we're talking about. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't see the principle behind that. What -- what insurance principle is this based on, that you don't pay claims after the -- MR. GRAY: The principle is simple as this, and that is from the insurance company's perspective, they want to be able to set a date and know what their liability is so they can produce financial records, with no contingencies out there. For example, they don't want to cover a claim coming in three years later and have to go back and adjust financial statements or profit statements. So, by putting these dates on here, it's convenient for the insurers, is one thing, and they know exactly when their time period is up and no more claims are coming in. i,-zz-o3 120 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's to prevent an insurer from delaying the payment of the claim beyond the 12-month period? MR. GRAY: Well actually, in this case, you're dealing with your T.P.A., who is separate from the stop loss company, although often closely related. The T.P.A. handles the claims. And I have -- I'm aware of situations where an employer thought that the T.P.A. was acting -- was dragging his feet in getting the claim because of a close relationship they might have had with the insurer. So, therefore, it is incumbent upon the insurance company employer, particularly around Thanksgiving time, to start monitoring claims, finding out what can we do here at Kerr County to get that claim through in time? Or if it works out to your advantage the other way, you may want to delay, but it can work both ways. But you shouldn't just sit back in the dark and -- you know, you should be actively involved in that process. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It seems that, you know, basically, if you get sick, certainly in the last week of the year, you're not going to be covered, or the -- the stop loss carrier isn't going to -- MR. GRAY: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- pick up that portion, so the County's stuck with the total cost. Say, it's a -- a _-~_-os 121 /-~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 transplant takes place on the 29th. MR. GRAY: Right. Now, that's a risk you run. It's a risk you've been running for six or seven years. I think it may have caught you this past year, if I understand all the facts. But there's one solution to it, which is better than just hurrying up the T.P.A. to pay the claims, and that is you can buy additional insurance. So, when we talk about 12-15, we're talking about claims, medical services rendered in the 12 months, 2004, but then paid in 15 months starting January 1. So, that gives you that buffer that you're recognizing the need for, Commissioner. Obviously, there's a cost to that buffer. Kerr County's elected not to buy it in the past. Now, I have no idea -- I assume it's worked well for you and has allowed you to establish some reserves, but I didn't have the data to do that type of evaluation. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don? MR. GRAY: Yes? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There is kind of an offshoot question here. I see what your function and your role today is with this process, but if you were a -- if you were on retainer to a county, would one of your functions be to -- MR. GRAY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- monitor those kind 1^_-~2-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 25 122 of things and, Thanksgiving, start looking at all the -- MR. GRAY: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see what you're -- Remember, we just talked about specific stop loss, which in your case is the first $40,000 you're on the hook for. Above that, up to a million, you're insured. Aggregate is the other type of coverage under there policy you buy, and what it says is that, you know, Kerr County can afford to pay a $40,000 claim. You may not like it, but you're setting aside the premiums to do it. But if you get more than you expected at $90,000 a pop, Katie bar the door, 'cause those $90,000's accumulate throughout the year. And so you buy what's known as aggregate stop loss insurance also, and that puts a dollar cap on your responsibility for those $40,000 retentions, and it's around one -- one million dollars. Actually, it is 1.4, the expiring policy, but you're going to get some better terms in your new policy. But that puts a cap, so that that gives you then the benefit, from a budgetary standpoint, to set rates that will produce enough premium. You charge every month, you know, a certain number of people. By the end of the year, you've collected enough premiums to pay that worst-case scenario, should it happen. And if the worst case didn't happen, then 123 1 ~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,.-. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 ~5 you've got money you can set aside for the future of the plan when you need funds. But, as I mentioned earlier, some need that extra 10 percent 'cause we're not going to have the worst case, or if we do, we've got other funds we can fall back on. So, that's the aggregate insurance. Another thing I want to comment on is, we've talked about you pay the first 540,000 per claim. Well, you can select what that figure is, that $40,000. It can be $SO,U00 it can be $100,000 or anywhere in between. The more -- obviously, the more risk you take -- all we're talking about here is deductible. It's nothing technical -- complicated. The higher that deductible goes, the higher that $40,000 retention goes, the less you pay for your stop loss insurance, but the bigger risk you expose yourself to. And so 1 would classify -- from the outside looking in at Kerr County's plan, you've run a very conservative plan. I've seen many insurers your size with $60,000 retention, some with $75,000. They save money on their stop loss insurance, but they take a risk with it. So, it would be interesting to see, looking back in time, you know, how much that has saved you or cost you. Okay. Well, with that said, let me get down to point out some aspects here of this coverage. Now, this 12-Z%-(13 124 1 ~-. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .~'^ 25 package you're looking at starts off, the first three pages, just being the stop loss insurance and administrative expenses. There's really nothing addressed on these first three pages about the coverage that the employees get. A11 these expenses on the first three pages are things that deal with the County Commissioners Court and your budget, and not the benefits page so much. Below that, we have a spreadsheet -- starts off the fourth page of your package. It's titled High Benefit Plan Levels. For example, right now, Kerr County has Plans A, B, and C. Well, Plan A, i consider to be a high plan, B the mid, and C, the low plan. Your RFP asked people to quote the plan you have, or as close to it as they could, so several of the -- of the proposers quoted identical benefits to what you have now, and some just quoted close. So, we'll look at benefits this afternoon in a minute. Let me go back to the first page, and then we'll delve into the funding options. The first -- the second column on the left, which is titled "Expiring" is just information about your current plan -- your current policy, rather, and I just put it on here for benchmark purposes, so you know where you are today. All the columns to the right, we're talking about where you're going to be in 2004. If you look at the funding methods, which is the second item down on the first column, left-hand column, 12-L3-0~ 125 1 ~\ L 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~., 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 r^ 25 virtually all these are self-funded plans, with the exception of the last one on the right by the Texas self-funded quote, so we have to keep in mind as we talk about TAC, there's really two proposals on the table. You've got the name of the insurer; you know, you're now with, Clarendon. E.B.A.'s quoting Fidelity Security. Greentree's working with Mutual of Omaha, TAC with Blue Cross. Mutual of Omaha's giving you a direct quote with Mutual of Omaha as a stop loss carrier, and then TAC's fully-insured plan uses Blue Cross. Those are all fine companies, suitable A.M. Best ratings, with the exception of Blue Cross. That is not rated by A.M. Best, because it's not technically an insurance company, although it writes more medical insurance probably than anybody in the state. On a coverage basis, this is where you see the numbers we've talked about a while ago, 12-12, 1Z-12. Notice the TAC self-funded plan is on a 12-15 basis, so they're giving you more coverage in that 15. That's going to be reflected in the pricing, you would think. Only reasonable. And then, on their fully insured plan, last column on the right, that would be a 12-24, meaning it's covering benefits -- expenses incurred during 2009, and paid either in 2004 or 2005. Next line down, iz __-oa 126 1 ,-. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~-, 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 coverage basis for optional quotes, I just wanted to point out that Greentree, for example, quoted an 8-8 plan, an 11-8 plan, a 12-15 plan. TAC quoted a 9-12 plan. And, for purpose for that is that you were considering changing your -- your effective date, your anniversary date to 10/1, so a 9-12 would be the type of policy you'd buy in that case -- 9-9 or 9-12. Another -- the next item, going down the list, is Covered Benefits. There is very important, because we've got two lines that left-hand column, one for the aggregate. What this policy, we talked about a for the specific coverage say Covered Benefits in the the specific coverage and one for means is, like, on your expiring $40,000 deductible, in essence, This medical term means that only medical expenses qo towards satisfying that $40,000. Prescription drug expenses don't go towards satisfying it. Moving one line down on your aggregate coverage, the one that puts the dollar cap annua]ly on all your retentions combined, keeps from breaking your budget, on the aggregate coverage you can submit currently medical and prescription drugs to reach that $1.4 million aggregate limit. Now, with E.B.A. this year, their stop loss carrier has agreed to allow you to put medical and Rx toward the satisfaction of 25 ~ the specific claims, and same for the aggregate. 1:.-.._-Q3 127 1 ~\ G 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 ~-.. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 "4 25 Greentree's not that way. Greentree's written it like you Next line down deals with your specific retention. Again, these examples I'm showing here are all at $40,000. But, as shown on the following line, there are some options at $50,000 retentions, some at 60, some at 75, some at 100. But with the time frame you have before you, it would be my recommendation that you buy a 40 now, and then consider changing it; spend the time and effort looking at how much it would save versus what you think the risk would be of increasing that, and leave it at 40 if it doesn't work out right, but if it shows that you should be buying $60,000 retention, then you could change that later, meaning like in January, February, March. Okay. Lasering, that's a term I haven't described yet. We've talked about, and repeatedly -- you're probably tired of hearing me talk about this $40,000 retention. It applies to everybody, each individual. However, if you've had a person with -- develop a serious illness, and it's getting close to renewal time, and that insurance -- that underwriter who's developing your renewal pricing is looking at your case, and he knows that you've got Joe Blow over here working for you who's covered, and iz ~-~~~ 128 1 ~^^, 2 3 4 5 6 i ~ a i 9 ' 10 11 12 ~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .~-~ 25 we've already spent, you know, $25,000 on this plan, and we know he's got a condition that's going to continue on into going to say, "Time out. While we're happy to give you a $40,000 retention on everybody else, on this one person that we know of who's going to produce, we feel very confident, a large claim next year, we want to increase that $40,000 to $80,000 or $100,000." And so it forces you into taking on more risk than you originally wanted to, because they can add -- they can laser somebody at each annual anniversary. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: More than one person? MR. GRAY: More than one person. Now, in your case, there is one person, only one, that is a concern to several of the underwriters, and so some of these underwriters have said, on that one person, we want to have a $75,000 retention. Everybody else at $40,000, but the County's going to take an extra $35,000 of responsibility. So, if you feel like the underwriters do, there's a good chance of that claim reaching over -- exceeding $40,000, then we've got to count that additional $35,000 or $25,000, whatever it ends up being on those actual bills. But for now, I'd say $35,000 is what they're guessing it might cost you above the 40. You've got to add that $35,000 of cost factor when you look at these proposals. 12-22 Ga 129 ,~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Now, E.S.A. is not lasering. That's who you're with now on this. Although there's a change in stop loss insurers, the E.B.A. stop loss quote will not laser. TAC's stop loss quote will not laser. But Greentree wants to increase that $90,000 to $75,000, and so does Mutual of Omaha. There's a question mark there in bold print in the Greentree line that's kind of a reminder to myself; that's an item that had not yet been pinned down. And on the way driving here today, I had the opportunity to speak to Mr. Lindsey in the back, and learned that the Greentree $75,000 retention, you'll pay the $75,000 -- for example, those expenses that you pay do not count toward satisfying your aggregate insurance, which is going to be $1 million plus. 50, it's a -- MR. LINDSEY: Don, I think I misunderstand what you were asking. That would require the same as the other. MR. GRAY: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS answer, please. Which -- repeat the MR. LINDSEY: I said I mis -- I talked to Don on the phone there morning. I misunderstood what he was saying partly, and that's -- you're not going to have a double count there, is what I'm saying. COMMISSIONER- NICHOLSON: Let me see if I is-~. - ~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 understand. Is the answer that Mutual of Omaha and Greentree are the same on laserinq? MR. GRAY: No, sir. According to what he's saying -- MR. LINDSEY: On this piece of paper it isn't, but in reality, it is. MR. GRAY: Oh, you're right. Thank you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Now I am confused. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, if we pick -- MR. GRAY: You're right, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If we pick laserinq, it's only going to apply to one employee? MR. GRAY: That's correct, and apply the same way on those two proposals. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. MR. GRAY: Wait a minute, I've confused myself, Commissioner. Mutual of Omaha, the second -- second column from the right, I've written that that $75,000 retention does not count toward the aggregate catchment point. And your -- on your quote, you say it does. MR. LINDSEY: I did there morning, but actually, I think there's not an additional -- you pay $35,000 over the spec and it doesn't go extra 35 to the aggregate. Outside the aggregate, so it's more than the other one is. That's the way Mutual of Omaha writes their is--~-o. 131 ,~-^ 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 contract. MS. NEMEC: They're the same. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Same? MR. GRAY: Okay, they are the same. Let's move down to guarantees. E.B.A. is where I'm seeing a three-year freeze on various fees, the T.P.A. fees. That would include your claim administrative fees, your COBRA fees, utilization and review and network fees. Greentree has done the same. TAC is just a one-year guarantee. Mutual of Omaha is a one-year guarantee, but they have given us their pricing for their claim administrative services in year two, and in year two, on an annual basis, you'd pay about $15,000 more due to rate increases on their administrative services. Now, below this we have various numerical rates. There's a stop -- the cost of the specific stop loss rate; that's the prencium you pay to the stop loss insurer. For example, right now, your expiring policy, you're paying $57.40 a month per employee. Then you've got a rate for the very same coverage that applies to the employee independent category of $124.21. You've got aggregate stop loss rates, claim administration rates, utilization management rates, COBRA rates, network rates. That's the amount paid for the -- to be part of the network. And that produces a monthly fixed cost, and on the next page -- top of the next page, we have the annual fixed 12-'_'_ 03 132 .~'~ l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 costs. And so, on the current year, your annual fixed cost based on the enrollment today would be about $293,000, and that's 2003 year. All the rest of the figures here are for 2004. E.B.A. is at $275,000. Greentree, 267. TAC is at 341, and Mutual of Omaha at 279. Again, back up a minute. E.B.A.'s frozen for 2009, 2005, 2006. Greentree and TAC, the next two over, are one-year guarantees. And Mutual of Omaha is a one-year guarantee, but we know what next year's would be; 2005, that would be a $15,000 increase in the rates that they have already given us, so that's how much you pay them for their services, stop loss and T.P.A. claims service. Then the remainder of this page deals with how they come up with that magic number that -- on the aggregate stop loss that limits your liability for claims in a year to a certain dollar amount. The way they calculate that, instead of being nice and simple, they could just tell you, "We're going to cap the County's claims at $1.2 million, period." But they realize that, you know, your employment numbers may go up, your employment numbers may go down, and so, to make it a little more complicated, they charge a rate per head, per month, and that's what's these rates are. And when you do all the math on multiplying these rates times the number of people in each rate category, you come up with monthly maximum claims and annual maximum claims. The policy that lz-~z-~~ 133 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 expires at the end of this year has an annual maximum attachment point of $1.4 million, so if your claims were to ever exceed 1.4 in 2003, that's when you stop paying claims and let your stop loss policy take over on the aggregate coverage. Now, I've been told that you've never gotten anywhere close to filing a claim on your aggregate coverage. You're buying this aggregate. coverage, and it's wise to buy it, because who knows what might happen next year? But the aggregate is set at a point that's high enough to where the underwriters don't think there going to have to pay an aggregate claim. Pretty unusual to hear of an aggregate claim, and I've been told you've never gotten anywhere near it, which is good, but at least you've got that aggregate there if you had that bad year. COMMISSIONER LETZ: How much -- are you going to get to a point where you tell us how much that aggregate claim coverage costs? MR. GRAY: In terms of a monthly rate? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, in terms of, is it a smart decision for us to continue to carry it? MR. GRAY: Extremely smart. I don't think there's an agent in here -- they may disagree with who I'm going to recommend, but they wouldn't recommend you buy aggregate (sic). i_-__-v° //~~ 1 L 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 134 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Recommend you not buy it? Is that what you're saying? MR. GRAY: Correct. They want you to buy it. I want you to buy it. The taxpayers of this county want you to buy it. MR. MALEK Commissioner, anyway. You're required by law to, MR. GRAY: Commissioners Court has been doing a good job every year of buying it. There are some exceptions to that. MR. MALEK: Right. MR. GRAY: Let's see here. Now, E.B.A. is telling us with a figure -- there giving us a figure of 1.17 million. That means that once the County's claims got to that level at 40,000 a pop, no more claims out of the County's budget. Greentree is considerably less, at 1.16 million -- i mean 1.1 million. TAC's higher than E.B.A. at 1.226, and Mutual of Omaha is the lowest of all at 1.043 million. So, Mutual of Omaha is giving you a comfort level of only 1.04 million. If claims exceed that amount -- let's say you stay with -- you went with E.B.A., and claims exceeded 1.04 million. You're going to wish you'd gone with Mutual of Omaha, because you're still paying claims with E.B.A. up to 1.17. That same comment applies to Greentree and TAC. Now, while that scunds great, that you've got a -- ~~-__-03 135 1 /'^ 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~-. 13 14 15 16 1? 18 19 20 21 22 23 ^4 ~~ L 25 that Mutual of Omaha gives you the lowest cap on your liability, keep in mind that if you don't reach that cap, then the difference between those quotes are immaterial. cap first. But ~f the history of the plan continues next year like it has in the past, you won't get anywhere near the $1 million. And so, what -- you know, as long as these figures are at least a million, anything above it is really kind of immaterial, if you have claims in the future that are similar to the past. If you don't, then the lowest annual aggregate attachment point is going to be the best. Okay, let's put two things together. At the top of the page we have annual fixed costs. We've just talked about the annual maximum claims; that's in bold in the left column. Add those together and you end up with a third item that's bolded in the left-hand column, annual administration and maximum claims. Again, there is the worst-case scenario. E.B.A., 1.45. Greentree, 1.38. TAC, 1.56. Mutual of Omaha, the lowest at 1.32. So, these figures just emphasize what I was telling you, in that the large part of those figures on that line comes from the low attachment points we looked at, so we don't know whether you're going to hit that attachment point. We do know you're going to pay the annual fixed costs, so those -- the annual fixed costs are certainly important, 'cause you are i~-~.- 's 136 ,~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 going to pay those. The annual maximum claims is just protection that you might need. Let me also mention that Blue Cross, on the self-funded plan, has a feature called the terminal stop loss runout liability, and they have a feature in their contract which would require you to pay an additional 191,000 when you leave them to pay the runout. And they're not trying to be mean by doing that; they're just helping you set aside -- you know, so it doesn't come as a shock to you. MR. NORWOOD: Don, can I mention, to the extent that's not used, you only spend what you use. MR. GRAY: Okay, that's true. You pay up to that amount. Then the enrollment figures that all my calculations are based on are provided below. Moving on to the next page, there's a note on the next page that mentions retirees; I don't want to leave them out of this equation. Even though on the spreadsheet I use the term "employee only" and "employee and spouse," I'm including the retirees in those figures. Also want to point out that since TAC is quoting -- back up. TAC is quoting -- well, if you stay with E.B.A., you can continue your Plan A, B, C. If you go with Greentree, you can continue your Plans A, B, C. If you go with Mutual of Omaha, they've quoted some plans that are somewhat similar to A, B, and C, but at least it's three different levels, a high, medium, and a low. But if you go 12-~~-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 25 137 with TAC, what you have is offering all employees and retirees the -- their 3G0 plan and 1100 plan, and I'll just call it A and a B, or 1 and 2. Or throw that out the window and offer, again, two other plans, which would be the 300 plan and the 1200 plan, which is like an A and a C somewhat. So, with TAC, you would not have three plans. You'd have your choice between a Plan A and a Plan B, basically, and a Plan A and a Plan C. But you wouldn't offer the whole thing to employees, just A/B or the A/C option. So, in these numbers, I'm assuming, for example, that all these people who are on the current Plan C would go to the Plan B. Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: On that one, I have a little trouble with the assumptions here, the "based on" assumptions. MR. GRAY: Yes, sir. Let's go back. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Looks like the first case, which is the high plan, the totals are somewhere around 200, and the mid-plan, the totals are only 50 or so. What am I lookinq at? MR. GRAY: Well, to my knowledge, these figures are correct. It reflects your participation. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is actual current participation? MR. GRAY: Yes, sir. What we're saying here is, yes, the vast majority of your employees are on the A i~-%~-us 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 138 plan. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And the vast majority are on employee-only. MR. GRAY: Right. That's another -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What do you make of that? MR. GRAY: It's tough paying the dependent premiums, or there fortunate to have their spouse employed elsewhere. So, without knowing your group, I couldn't say one or the other. But, you know, I would think there's some proposers in this room that would question you having three plans. There's a cost -- although you never see it labeled as such, it's going to cost you more to operate three plans, typically by antiselection, than it would if you had only two plans. And so, when you get down to participation that's as low as it is in Plan C, that tells me you need to think about eliminating that type and going back to two plans. JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Gray, on optional quotes for the coverage basis, it appears that there are -- number one, you've got TAC quoting on a 12-15, which covers that last three months of each calendar year, essentially; is that not correct? MR. GRAY: That's correct. They didn't offer a 12-12, so that was the closest thing they had to it. ~_____n 139 .^~ .~-^ 1 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: You've got optional quotes under Greentree and Mutual of Omaha with a 12-15 also. MR. GRAY: Correct. JUDGE TINLEY: What about the pricing on those? MR. GRAY: Oh, you know, Judge, there was a quote from E.B.A.; I should have typed in a 12-15 also. It's not typed there. There should be a 12-15 in that column. The differences you see in price here and in ag attachment points are carried forward, almost the same percentages, to their 12-15 quotes. So, in other words, you could decide on the basis of their 12-12 quote today, and end up meeting with them and buying a 12-15. JUDGE TINLEY: For the same money? MR. GRAY: Not for the same money, but I'm saying the less cost -- the least costly proposer, you'd see that on the 12-15 quote as well. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This shows we have -- currently have 265 people enrol]ed, which includes, I think, a handful of retirees; is that right? How many total -- how many people are not participating in the insurance at all, if it's 265 bodies, our total current employee -- employee count plus retirees? MS. NEMEC: I believe Don said he included 1~-2~-C3 s'~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 140 the retirees in there. MR. GRAY: But I don't know if there's other employees who are not on the plan. MS. NEMEC: There's probably two or three, and part-timers. MR. GRAY: Any other questions before we move into the benefits? So, the remainder of the pages ahead you're looking at deal with comparison of the high benefit plans and the mid-level benefit plans, but did not -- I did not include, 'cause I didn't think you wanted me to spend my time on it, doing the Plan C, 'cause it only has 11 people, the low-level plans. Now, we've got -- going back to the first page of this high benefit level plans, I just want to go through there with you and point out some items that caught my attention and may be of interest to you in terms of differences among the quotes. Again, we've got the current plan. Now, in is case, Plan A is the benchmark shown here. You've got two columns under Plan A, one for network coverage, the other for non-network coverage. And that follows across the page for each of the different proposers. Here with TAC, we just have one plan. Now, it's their plan 300. We have, again, the network and non-network column, but these benefits are available regardless of whether you want to take their self-funded option or their fully insured option. L -__-03 141 1 ~ 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 i-. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 `,,,, 2 4 25 Now, on the first page here, let me discuss the network. It's my understanding you're happy with the network you presently have, which is Hill Country Alliance local -- on the local level, supported by Texas True Choice outside the local area. With Greentree, they're offering Hill Country Alliance locally, and those question marks I've now got the answer to; there using U.S.A. as their out-of-area non-local network. TAC is using the Blue Cross network, and Mutual of Omaha is using Texas True Choice, both locally and non-locally. Often I'll do, when I'm writing an RFP, a doctor-by-doctor questionnaire. You know, are these doctors included in your proposals? Are these hospitals included? I've not done that, because I just -- as far as putting it on paper, I've looked through, saw that many -- these networks apply to many of the doctors, if not -- vast majority of them here locally, including, of course, the hospital and San Antonio hospitals. So, I really can't find fault with any of the networks in terms of participants. And, as mentioned earlier, I know nothing of what type of discounts these networks are giving to you. I've asked people about that -- the proposers, and, you know, I hear that theirs are the best, but I can't quantify that. Okay. Going down the page, you know, we've got deductibles that apply for individual. Notice the TAC ~~-.. .. -.: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 25 142 proposals offer the lowest deductibles. Let me stop on that point right there. When you're buying a fully insured plan, having a low deductible, for example, or high benefit might be perceived to be a great thing. But when the County -- you gentlemen here -- are in charge of managing this plan and paying for it, you have to wear two hats. One is as your -- you, the individual employed County Judge receiving medical benefits, and the other half is your budgetary position of, the higher the benefits, the more you're paying out. So, when I say that TAC is offering the lowest deductible, some -- there's a part of me that says that's great, and there's a fiscal part of me that says, "Wait a minute, I don't think we, Kerr County, for example, wants to go that route." You've got a family deductible, which is typically three times the individual; pretty standard across-the-board here. Some of the proposers -- well, actually, all of them except Mutual of Omaha offer the three-month deductible carry-over, so if you get into the last quarter of the year, you haven't satisfied your deductible, they give you a little grace period in that you can use the fourth quarter expenses to be charged against the next year's deductible. Just makes it easier. Again, that's a cost to you. It's a nice benefit to the employees. So, you decide personally how -- if it's a positive or a negative 143 r~'~ 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 feature. You've got some co-insurance maximums shown across here that vary, primarily because some include deductibles and some don't, and so I would really encourage you to turn the page and just get down to the top of the next page, where we talk about total out-of-pocket, which includes deductibles. Everybody's looked at on the same scale here. You're currently at $2,400 out-of-pocket per person, and 48 -- that's in-network, and $4,800 out-of deductible for individuals. E.B.A.'s quoting the very same thing. Greentree is quoting the same thing; that's why it's blank there. TAC has lower figures; 17, 15, 9,000. And then Mutual of Omaha is matching everybody else. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don, explain that to me one more time, the total out-of-pocket. I understand that includes the deductible, and what else? MR. GRAY: It would -- most -- many of the benefits, particularly if you qo in a hospital, are going to start out being paid at 90 percent of your own Plan A, Commissioner. You're paying 10 percent out of your pocket. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. MR. GRAY: As your 10 percents add up and then you add your deductible to those 10 percents, once those dollars out of your pocket reach that $2,400, you're at the 100 percent level for the rest of that year. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. --__ _p~ 194 1 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. GRAY: Then, on lifetime maximums, TAC is offering $2 million. Everybody else is at $1 million benefits. That's another one of those deals where it's -- $2 million is great, unless you're the one paying the $2 million. And, of course, you'd have stop loss insurance pay for most of that. Prescription drugs, we start off on the bottom of this page with generic drugs, both retail and mail-order. You're at a $5 co-pay now on retail, $10 co-pay on generics, but you're getting three months for your mail-order, so if I was on your plan, I'd definitely be using that mail-order option instead of paying $5 a month for generic retail on my maintenance medications. If it's the same as -- the only -- I guess Mutual of Omaha and TAC are different -- really, just Mutual of Omaha, with $10 on the generic retail, $20 on generic mail-order. On the next page, we continue with prescriptions. You got TAC's that are different than the renewal, and you've got some of the Mutual of Omaha, but not all are higher than the renewal. You'll note that the $90 co-pay on Mutual of Omaha and 70. Then we move into other benefits, if there are no prescription drug questions. The bottom of this page deals with transplants, because you've got the -- at present, you have a $250,000 lifetime maximum on transplants. Then you've got 90 percent coverage, for example, unless you're in the 100 percent area, which you l~-__ _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 25 145 would get to quickly. You have a $10,000 sublimit at present for transportation and lodging. You have a benefit of $10,000 for organ procurement, the cost of obtaining the organ to be transplanted. MR. ROTHWELL: Don, since we last talked, we've taken that $250,000 currently and put it into -- as any other benefit, which would be up to a million dollars. We had a problem with that last year, so we've changed that transplant benefit, going forward to a million dollar plan. MR. GRAY: Okay. That would be an exception to what I asked earlier. MR. ROTHWELL: Yes, it would. You did ask the question, and I found out afterwards. MR. GRAY: Okay. So I'll just let the Court handle that however they want. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where does the million dollars plug in here? MR. GRAY: He was mentioning -- well, for example, with Mutual of Omaha -- no, there not a good example, 'cause they go above a million. No, back up. Mutual of Omaha is a $1 million lifetime maximum, but you could spend all that $1 million, for example, on a transplant. They would cover that transplant up to a million. At present in the Kerr County plan -- and the E.B.A. renewal -- original renewal, that benefit, 'cause, iz-~z-o~ 146 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 you know, your RFP said give us the benefits we have now, and that's what they've done, and that benefit is a transplant limit of $250,000 per lifetime. Once you get to that figure in your current plan, no more transplants for you. Now I've just learned that was up to a million? MR. ROTHWELL: A million lifetime max. MR. GRAY: Except it's for a lifetime. MR. ROTHWELL: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So the transplant lifetime max changes the 250 to a million? I'm going to scratch through 250 and write a million? MR. GRAY: Actually, don't scratch through 250, 'cause I'm describing your current plan, but if you want to make a note of what Mr. Rothwell said, it's over where it says same as expiring benefits, in the gray column. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. MR. GRAY: That would be no longer true; it's not the same as expiring. It's now $1 million instead of $250,000. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Both gray columns. MR. GRAY: Yes, sir. And -- yes, sir. And then, on organ procurement, let me point out that Mutual of Omaha is at $50,000, and E.B.A. is up to $10,000, and so is Greentree. And apparently on TAC, those are blank, because 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 L1 22 23 29 25 147 I didn't address those topics with them. I assume there covering them as any other expense; is that right? At the bottom of the page, we get into the last timeline on the bottom, emergency rooms. That continues on to the next page. Not a lot of difference between quotes. I won't even pause here. In the middle of that page, we have your co-payments. This is the item that's near and dear to your insurers. How much do I have to pay when I go to the doctor? At present, if you go to an in-network doctor in the local area, you're paying $10. If you go to a network doctor in Fredericksburg or San Antonio, you're paying $20 per visit. And then you can see that, where it's blank, the columns -- vertical columns, that's the same as expiring. TAC has a $20 co-pay for local providers. Mutual of Omaha is going to have a $10 co-pay for nonlocal providers. Now, in preferred labs, you're now with C.P.L., and there -- it's my understanding -- I've been told there giving you some great pricing, and then, as far as the employee's concerned, it's 100 percent coverage for in-network at C.P.L. lab; they'll have their lab work done there, Clinical Pathology Labs. Note that TAC would also have that 100 percent, and Mutual of Omaha has 100 percent. Of course, Greentree would too, because they're blank. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Don, can we go back up a little bit to where it says "Physician, inpatient"? i^-_~-u3 148 ~~ ~". 1 L 3 9 J 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. GRAY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER LETZ: "Physician, surgery." Are those if you're using a -- going to an out-of-system provider? You pay -- they pay 90 percent of the cost? MR. GRAY: Well, 90 percent would be in service -- in-system. The 70 percent would be the out-of-system. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MR. GRAY: On the next page, you mention home health care, because that's becoming, you know, more and more common these days in an effort to keep medical expenses down, is to get someone out of the hospital, have them recover at home and have a -- pay a nurse to qo visit with that person at home instead of staying in the hospital occupying a bed. At present, you have a $10,000 maximum per lifetime in your benefit plan. E.B.A. and Greentree are, you know, quoting that since there quoting the exact benefits you now have. TAC changes that $10,000 to where it only applies per year. And then Mutual of Omaha is not a dollar limit of $10,000, but it's 100 visits per year, which is going to be around $10,000, the cost of those visits. But, again, they -- neither one of those have the per-lifetime limitation that you now have on your current plan. Skilled nursing, under your current plan -- again, this is another transition-type service out -- from out of 1-_~?-;3 149 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the hospital to the skilled nursing center. Here, the coverage is seven days in your current plan, which is something we think you'd want to consider changing, to provide someone more coverage. Get them out of the hospital, get them into that skilled nursing center, and have them stay there maybe 14 days or something. Now, I have nothing else marked as being material differences to discuss with you. I'm not saying there aren't any. I'll pause a moment, let you look at the next few pages, see if you have any questions. But those were just some of the items that caught my eye as I was looking for differences. And so, to sum it up, TAC -- you know, if I'm an employee and I don't -- I'm getting free insurance on the employee, I'd want to go with the TAC plan, 'cause I'm not paying the premium. Great benefits. If I'm on that side of the wall, I don't know that the County would want to purchase such a rich benefit plan at this point. But your benefit plan you have is -- is good, but we've talked about some areas where it could provide more coverage. The point is, there's a cost in doing that, providing those richer benefits. Now -- well, I said -- let me tell you who I would vote for based on what I know of this -- of these proposals. I'll just come out and be blunt, and then talk about some reasons why, but it would be my recommendation iz __-aj 1 ,~ 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 that you stay with E.B.A. as your T.P.A., and accept their proposal for stop loss, utilization review, COBRA, network. In the contract that you -- if you do approve that recommendation, you would want to make sure that in your T.P.A. contract, you'd want it to say that it's a three-year contract, those rates for the various components, that their services are guaranteed for three years. You'd probably want to put in there that you'd want the flexibility to back out in an annual anniversary date should you so choose, but I would think they're willing to do the three-year commitment on their end. Now, why, out of all these proposals, am I taking that approach? One is the lasering situation on that one individual. We're talking about the potential for another $35,000 in expense on the Greentree and Mutual of Omaha quotes. You don't have that potential on the TAC and know that insurers are -- or people in this business have gotten much better in recent years in issuing I.D. cards, enrolling people, getting prescription drug cards out, but this is the worst time of the year to imagine doing it in the next week. And you knew that before you talked to me, so I'm not telling you anything you didn't know. I'm sure the gentlemen who -- the proposers who I've not recommended may have some thoughts on how they could get all this done 151 r"~ .'-~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 by January 1, but I've not seen one come close to getting it done in that time frame. It's my understanding -- but this is just from one or two sources, so -- that E.B.A. has done you a good job; you're relatively satisfied with the service in terms of claims services, so that's factored into my recommendation. And the last thing is, I just don't see a lot to be gained by moving right now. One thing to be gained -- you know, just a matter of how much weight you want to put on this -- is the fact that with Mutual of Omaha, you've got that lower attachment point, and if you had a bad year next year, that would be nice. But if the next year is similar to the past years, to me, the importance of that loses a lot of its shine. And I think the fact that you can -- you're assured of what your fixed costs are with E.B.A. and know that they're the best price out there -- let me doublecheck what I just said to make sure -- yeah, 'cause Greentree is actually the best price out there, but Greentree has that lasering issue. So, of the ones without the lasering issue, E.B.A. is the lowest price in terms of fixed costs. And so those are the bases for my recommendation. Now, I'll be happy to take any questions or -- JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have an alternate -- a close alternate that comes to mind? MR. GRAY: I'm not prepared to give one, but i~-__-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 25 152 let me just talk off the cuff here. To give you a close alternate, I'd want your feedback on some things. How important is that lasering? 'Cause, to me -- to me, that's very important. And if lasering is important to you, you don't want to have lasering, that gives you the only other option as being TAC. And I think there's such a difference between the E.B.A. and TAC that I wouldn't want to call it a second option. Now, if lasering is not an issue, then that's going to -- should change things, because that would allow E.B.A. to laser that individual, which, of course, is going to reduce their costs even further. So, we'd need more information from them before we could -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, reduced to the lowest common denominator, the lasering equals $35,000, does it not? MR. GRAY: Right, the potential. Now, if we were looking at the lasering quotes, looking at just Greentree and Mutual of Omaha, I'd recommend Mutual of Omaha. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why is that? MR. GRAY: Excuse me. Again, I'm thinking off-the-cuff. I'm glad you asked me that. Let me look at some numbers here. Okay. Boy, that's a -- it's close. I wouldn't want to say anything without -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're the same? There ~~-~~-03 153 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 about a toss-up? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I feel uncomfortable asking you for a second choice, to be honest with you. Not prepared to do that, 'cause I would hope that you would want to sit down and really analyze the specs. MR. GRAY: I would, right. The recommendation I've given you is the one that I put forward. But my role here is to serve you, so, you know, I'll be happy to work with you on any of the proposers. DODGE TINLEY: But the bases for your recommendation of E.B.A. are, number one, the lasering issue; number two, the transition schedule; thirdly, that based upon Employee Benefit Administrators has gone a good job, and other than that, you just don't see a lot to be gained by moving; is that what I understand? MR. GRAY: There was one -- the three-year guarantee, I should have added that to the list as a fifth item. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, as I understand it, looking at it, if I'm looking at this properly, the cost is also a factor. I mean, if you don't count -- if you take into account the lasering, they're probably the lowest price as well, other than on the fixed costs. MR. GRAY: Certainly on the fixed cost, right. i~-__-_s 154 ,~^ 1 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: They're slightly higher on the fixed costs, but with the lasering situation -- okay. MR. ROTHWELL: Commissioner, I might add that we've had this plan for six years and have never changed the fixed costs during that time period, and it's exactly today like it has been then. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Gray, do I understand correctly that the E.B.A. quote does include a 12-15? MR. GRAY: No, sir. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It did not? MR. GRAY: They offered a 12-15, and those numbers are not shown here. They presented one in the past, and previous courts have not purchased it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. So, this is the 12-12? MR. GRAY: There is the 12-12. COMM ISSIO NER WILL IAMS: Thank you. MR. GRAY: But th e numbers have been issued for 12-15. They're not on your spreadsheets, but in other words, it wouldn't take, like -- I'm not telling you you have to wa it a week to s ee them. You can see them this afternoon. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you know or did you i~-~~_~~ 155 ,~-~ 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 have the -- well I'll just ask the question. Do you know what the aggregate claim amount is for the last couple of years? MR. GRAY: No, I don't. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You don't have that information? MR. GRAY: No, not firsthand knowledge. I've just been told that you've never gotten anywhere close to it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Barbara, do you know? MS. NEMEC: No, we just -- never been there. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And you would recommend dropping the low end, just go with the high and mid-plan? MR. GRAY: No, sir. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: MR. GRAY: Not at this to the date, I think you need to move B, and C, but I -- just kind of food COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: future? No? point. I think -- due forward with your A, for thought. Consider it for the MR. GRAY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And you can do that, and I quote, "January, February, March"? You said that _~-__ ns 156 ~, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 L 2 23 24 25 earlier. MR. GRAY: Right. And another food for -- I think the Judge was given credit for this, is that the concept of changing anniversary dates to a different day, that's something else that can be worked out after this decision is made. So -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I want to say thank you. You certainly have provided us with a -- a better ability to analyze what's in front of us, and I appreciate your efforts, personally. MR. GRAY: Thank you. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Actually, I want to say it's one of the clearest insurance proposals or discussions I think I've ever had. I think I understand some of it, anyway. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait till we get his bill, though. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll understand that too. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Easy to understand. We may not like it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It truly is -- MR. GRAY: Well, the invoice is even easier to understand. It's got one number on it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What do you want, iz-2z-n3 157 ,~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 great leader? COMMISSIONER LETZ: If there's nothing else, I'll make a motion. JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody have any more questions for Mr. Gray? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I think he's answered all my mine. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. We appreciate your assistance. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We do have at least one retiree in the room. I wondered, do you have any questions, ma'am? MS. MEEKER: No, I like the proposal. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I have a question about the retiree situation. It's been suggested that -- that something changing is detrimental to the current and future retirees. We're not changing the coverage or the cost for the current or future retirees, are we? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't see it. MS. NEMEC: That depends with who you go with. That depends with what plan you go with. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But, again, nothing's -- we're not contemplating any change. It's -- their options are the same today as they were, or in the same mixture as they are today. 12-~'2-L3 158 ~~'^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 MR. GRAY: Correct. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If you're a current or future retiree. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm confused with Barbara's comments. Under the plans that Mr. Gray reviewed, there's no difference between the retiree coverage and employee coverage. MR. GRAY: Well, there's -- TAC offers you an option that's not presented there where you could do a carve-out, a coordination. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But trying to make apples to apples, you left that out? MR. GRAY: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't feel good about having to be in this situation where it's the 22nd of December, and -- and we've got a huge cost item here to deal with, and not have adequate time to look at options. I don't feel good about not having the opportunity to make a change in the expiration date. I don't feel good about not having an opportunity to rethink the employee premiums, what part of the costs employees pay. I don't -- I wish we had time to reconsider the three levels. There's probably -- probably some other things I don't feel good about, but those are three things that are annoying me the most here, i~ ~~-os 159 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 three days before Christmas and the expiration of our policy. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. But I don't know that there's a lot we can do about that today, unfortunately. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not right now. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You can make a motion. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll -- I'll make a motion that we accept the recommendation of our consultant, Mr. Don Gray, to award the insurance to E.B.A. -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- as presented. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second it. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded to award the coverage to E.B.A. under the proposal as outlined by Mr. Gray. Any questions or discussion? Well, I have a few comments I'd like to make. I think I have an obligation to make these comments. In the motion before the Court, if it's approved, we would place the trust of Kerr County and its employees with respect to their health insurance program in the hands of two entities. Those entities are the same entities which were selected by a previous court to administrator the County's health insurance program. They were paid by Kerr County and its taxpayers to act as the County's representatives and protect iz-az-u, 160 1 ~^-~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 r'` 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 the interests of Kerr County and its citizens and taxpayers, yet it was those same entities that permitted the previous court to put $400,000 of taxpayer funds at risk under that then-existing program. And while it was subsequently to advise the previous court that it had no such responsibility. That sum of $400,000 represented just under 40 percent of the entire health insurance budget of the County. It is my opinion that those entities and their representatives, as the County's paid agents and representatives in the operation of its health insurance program at that time, had a duty -- a fiduciary duty, as it were, to disclose to the previous court that Kerr County had no legal liability or obligation to advance or otherwise place that $400,000 at risk. It is my opinion that those entities and their representatives failed in that duty, which I will appeal to the Court and the taxpayers of this county, where are we on the $400,000 currently? Notwithstanding some rather specific assurances that a return of all or nearly all of the $400,000 would be obtained, and further notwithstanding that I have placed that particular matter on the agenda of this 1^_ __ o~ 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 25 161 court at least three times this year to obtain some resolution, as of right now, the taxpayers and citizens of Kerr County are out about $200,000. $200,000 which, in my opinion, Kerr County had no legal liability to expend. I also have a fiduciary duty to the citizens and taxpayers of this county, as do the other members of this Court. Because of these facts and circumstances, I do not believe that I have the requisite trust and confidence in the entities in which the interests of Kerr County will be placed in connection with its employees' health insurance program by the passage of this motion. Because of that fiduciary duty to the Court and to the citizens and taxpayers, I cannot support the motion. Any other questions or -- questions? Comments? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is there a legal basis for Kerr County to recover the money, Judge? JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I guess time will tell, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What steps has the Court taken to find that out? JUDGE TINLEY: If the Commissioner will recall, this matter was placed several months ago before the Court, and the matter is in the hands of the County Attorney being investigated at this time. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, we're 1?-~~-n9 162 /'~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 anticipating his report back that will tell us whether or not there is a legal basis to recover those dollars; is that correct? JUDGE TINLEY: I assume so. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only comment I'd like to make on that -- and I think that it's unknown if litigation may pursue. But also, I just think, for the record, it needs to be pointed out that we were advised by our counsel that this should not be made public at this time, as the Judge has done. We were asked to keep this quiet while we pursued trying to receive this money, and pending or possible litigation. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct. JUDGE TINLEY: I'm not asserting a claim; I'm just stating facts, gentlemen. Any other questions or comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (Commissioners Baldwin, Williams, and Letz voted in favor of the motion.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed? (Commissioner Nicholson voted against the motion.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Any other business? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would like to thank -- JUDGE TINLEY: We stand adjourned. 1_-.. ~-.^.~ 163 n i"`~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd like to thank all of the companies that submitted proposals. I appreciate the effort, and I hope you continue to submit proposals as we go out for proposals. (Commissioners Court adjourned at 2:55 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 31st day of December, 2003. JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk B Y : __ _ __ ~ijt,C,[~ __ ____ __ __ Kathy ik, Deputy County Clerk Certified Shorthand Reporter 1?-~2-03