1 .... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 i~ 25 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT Regular Session Monday, January 12, 2004 9:00 a.m. Commissioners' Courtroom Kerr County Courthouse Kerrville, Texas PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge H.A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4 C'_i ~i S C.~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 I N D E X January 12, 2004 PAGE --- Visitors' Input 4 --- Commissioners Comments 15 1.3 Authorize Kerr County Environmental Health Dept. ~ ~ ~~~ to file grant application with AACOG for funding to expand existing Solid Waste program 21 (/ / 1.4 Request the County Attorney to take action in ~~` ~-~ cases where rainwater runoff causes adverse ~ ~ ~ 1 impact to private or public property 29 1.6 PUBLIC HEARING for alternate plat process of Lots 83 and 84, Northwest Hills, Precinct 1 71 1.8 Open annual bids for Road and Bridge materials/ equipment, and consider awarding same "j ~ ~(~~7 71 1.1 Consider granting authority for Sherif 's Office to dispose of four cars ~ ~~ ~~ ~ 78 1.12 Report by Kerr 9-1-1 80 1 13 K t C t bl ~ ~ R t b C ]~ [ C~ 94 . epor err oun y ons a es , y 1.2 Approve agreement between Kerr County and ~ ~YJ `~ Appris, Inc., to provide crime victim notification services to the citizens/residents of Kerr County 110 1.5 Review update and current report from third-party administrator on efforts to obtain rei mbursement of health care funds 118 ~ ~~~ ~/ 1.7 Consider approval of alternate plat pr ocess of ~ Lots 83 and 84, Northwest Hills, Preci nct 1 149 1.9 Concept plan for proposed Hermosa Subdivision - 151 1.10 Set public hearing concern ing name changes, regulatory sign, and roads to be abandoned, discontinued and vacated ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 156 1.11 Consider private road name changes in accordance with 911 guidelines ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 158 1.14 Registration/reservations for West Texas County Judges & Commissioners ann ual conference 158 3 1 ~, 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I N D E X (Continued) January 12, 2004 1.15 Consider giving Commissioner Baldwin authority to PAGE prepare proposal to host the West Texas County Judges & Commissioners conference. ~(1 ~ ~ 164 1.16 Resolution to host the 2006 West Texas Judges and Commissioners Association annual conference ~~..ll " ~t~~~) 165 1.17 Request from Kerr County Republican party to use District Courtroom for Republican Convention ~~~%~~ 168 1.18 Approve contract between Kerr County ;and Alamo Regional Transit ;~ ~~ ~ 7 169 1.19 Set a date, establish procedure, and select , facilitator for strategic planning session --- 175 1.20 y Adopt Kerr County Indigent Health Care polic 187 y ,~ ~ ~ ~7 4 . 1 C= Pay Bills ~ ~ ~~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~/~ ~~ 4.2 ~G _ Budget Amendments jZ ~ ' 195 4 . 3 Late Bills ~, ~ 7 ~ 7 --- 4.4 Read and Approve Minutes; 197 4.5 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports ~'~~~ 198 5.2 Reports from Elected Officials/Department Heads 201 5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee Assignments 217 5.3 Reports from Boards, Commissions, Committees 226 Adjourned 233 4 1 ,,,. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ..,. 25 On Mor'~day, January 12, 2004, at 9:00 a.m., a regular meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville, Texas, anal the following proceedings were had in open court: P R O C E E D I N G S JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. It's just a bit after 9:00. Let me call to order the meeting -- regular Commissioners Court meeting scheduled for this date, Monday, January 12th, at 9 a.m. Precinct 2 Commissioner Williams, I believe have you the honors this morning. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. Will you please rise and join me in a recitation of the Lord's Prayer, and remain standinq for the pledge of allegiance. (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. Please be seated. It's good to see so many people here today. At this point in the meeting, any member of the public who is with us today that has anything they want to bring to our attention or to talk to us about concerning a matter that is not listed on the agenda is privileged to come forward at this time. If you want to speak on a matter that is listed on the agenda, we would ask that you wait until that agenda item is called, and at that time, we'll be privileged to L-1~-c,~ 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ,-~. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .--, 25 hear you at that time. However, if there's any member of the public that -- that wishes to be heard on any matter that's not listed on the agenda, they can come forward at this time. Is there anyone that wishes to be heard on a matter that's not listed on the agenda? Yes, ma'am? Please come forward, if you might. And if you'd give your name and address, we would appreciate it. MS. JENTSCH: Yes. My name is Beth Jentsch, 311 Wood Trail, Kerrville. I don't -- is Solid Waste listed on the -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No. MS. JENTSCH: No. Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's listed on the agenda. JUDGE TINLEY: As a grant item only, I believe, but the general issue of solid waste or control is not listed. MS. JENTSCH: Okay. The Commissioner has been very kind and we have called him, several of the people. I don't represent a housing area, just some concerned citizens. And I'm quite nervous, 'cause I'm not a speaker, so this is very difficult for me. But we live in an area out in the west at the first cutoff from -- coming from the west, and I've lived there since '90. And there's some things that are going on out there that have just i-12-o 6 1 2 3 4 J 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,... 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 become just impossible to take. The -- the first thing would be as you come off onto Goat Creek, you go down this lovely, bucolic drive, and the first thing the people will see if they're coming from -- in a motor home to go to the K.O.A. is, on the left-hand side, there's a junkyard, and it has no fence, and it has all manner of horrible junk in there. Then, if you're to turn to the left -- turn left -- you know, his name is Wilson, and he's told us -- different people have said something to him, and he said that we could go somewhere, and that we could do nothing to him because he's grandfathered, and that we might as well just forget it, 'cause the County will do ncthing to him. If you were to go left on Hollimon, there used to be a very nice little country home there, and it's still there, but a trucking firm has moved there, and they change oil, diesel and batteries. And there's a creek that's, oh, several hundred yards -- Goat Creek -- from it. And I don't -- there's no pavement, and I'm afraid that that -- the runoff is going to get into that creek. Then, if you were to go up the hill, there up on Wood Trail, there is a man there that has decided to put just junk in his yard, just all manner of junk. And one of our neighbors went there, and he told her that if he -- anybody came in his yard, that he would shoot them. So, I personally -- I don't have a iot of nerve in that respect, and I -- I'm -l~-o-~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .--. 25 just -- I'm. at my wit's end as to what to do with this type of thing. If you go to the very end of the street and turn around, there's a home that has a ravine in the back, and they're putting tires and they're throwing water heaters and batteries down in this ravine. And then, if you go all the way around, there's a residence on Roland -- and you can see this from the highway; he's actually having trucks come in and haul away the dirt, and you can see this scar from the highway. And my husband's a civil engineer, and he said that what's going to happen with the rains, that that's just going to come down, and poor Mr. Valentine here lives next door to him, and he's going to get flooded. So, I know this is an awful lot to bring at once, but there's some -- it's -- our Commissioner said that we have a rather schizophrenic neighborhood in that we have the nice homes, and then the -- the ones -- there's only about six people that -- five or six that are -- that are causing all this grief for everyone else, and I just hope that perhaps something could be done about it. Thank you so much. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. You did a very good job. MS. JENTSCH: Thanks. JUDGE TINLEY: Is there anyone else that -- i-, ~-o ~ 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 i2 13 r-. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,,-. 25 yes, sir? Please ccme forward, if you would, please, and give your name and address. MR. BROWN: Good morning. My name is Jim Brown. I'm at 409 Wood Trail; I'm in the same subdivision she is in. Hi, Buster. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Morning. MR. BROWN: We -- just let me make it as brief as I can. The -- the neighborhood members are concerned about these areas that Beth has pointed out, and there are various spots all through here that these solid waste accumulations are taking place, and have for some time. And, na~urally, they are -- the homes are not kept up, and the -- just the overall look of their places detracts from the neighborhood. And we're very concerned about that, and apparently nothing's being done or -- or has been done that can alleviate that problem, correct it, or make an emphasis on these people to make a correction themselves. And we are seeking help from you, as a body or a member there, to help us get something done, get something enforced. And these -- there's a group of people here this morning that represent that neighborhood, and they all have the same basic concerns. Thank you very much. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else that wishes to be heard on a matter that is not on the agenda? Yes, sir? If you would please come forward 1-1-0~ 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ,.-. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and give your name and address. MR. WELLS: Yes, sir. My name is Mike Wells. I live at 140 Ranger Trail, and I just want to echo what Jim said here just a moment ago. The primary problem that we -- we've got out there in regards to trash and just out-and-out household garbage is coming from the last two houses on Ranger Trail. I live at 140, and they're directly across the street from me. You could ride out there, see for yourself. I could talk on it all day, but you could look at it yourself and see what the problem is. I've been there for right at three years, anal I've picked up garbage every other day almost for the entire three years that my wife and I have been there. I've picked up more beer cans, beer bottles, and dirty diapers and baby food receptacles since I've been there than I have when I raised my own kids, and I'm tired of picking up garbage and having it strewn all over my property. And it stinks, it's nasty, it's offensive to have to pick up, and I've picked up cans full at a time. I'm not talking about just a -- you knew, a piece of paper blowing in the yard cr something like that, but I'm talking about actual cans full of trash. Pure, nasty, household garbage and everything you can imagine. And the same thing out on Wood Trail. I get out there with my little tractor and my cart and garbage can, go up and down there, just like Jim does, picking up i-=~-~~q 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 trash, trying to keep the place looking nice. There's been times when I have beer: ashamed to have my family come up from Houston to visit me, with all the garbage that's up and down Wood Trail. And I have a back entrance that comes into my property that's not on Ranger Trail; you come in off of Wood Trail. And I have them come in in the back there at times because I don't want them to come down Ranger Trail because it's so filthy down there. And you -- as I said, you can look at it and see for yourselves what -- what would need to be done. And these people could care less. And I haven't said anything to them yet, but it's all I can do to contain myself. But I've about run my gauntlet on it, and I would appreciate anything anybody could do to help us out. Thank y'all. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else? Yes, sir? Please feel free to come forward and give us your name and address, if you would, please. MR. DAHM: George Dahm, 217 Mustang Trail. I have a specific piece of solid waste -- I say a piece; it's water pipe, PVC water pipe, about 20 or 30 feet long. Two years ago, about when the County repaved Wood Trail, there was some damage done to the water pipes alongside the road, and I have heard rumors of agreements between the water company and Roads and Bridges. I cannot say what agreements they did have, but they tore up this -- they took out this ~ u~ 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 one length of pipe that's defective, replaced it, and the old pipe has laid alongside the road there for better than two years. Now, I don't know whether it's Roads and Bridges that are responsible for it or the water company. I understood that there was an agreement that the Roads and Bridges wou,~d insta~i the new pipe where it had been damaged by the construction if the water company supplied the new pipe to be installed. And they did -- the County did install a r.ew pipe. But, whose responsibility it is to get rid of the old, I don't know, but it's one of the two. Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else that wishes to be heard on a matter that is not on the agenda? We'd be happy for you to come forward. Just an observation -- excuse me. Yes, sir? Please come forward; give us your name and address. MR. VALENTINE: I don't know if I should speak now or wait till Section 1.4 comes up because of my -- what I have to say. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're going to talk about the caliche pit on the agenda. MR. VALENTINE: So, you want me to wait? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. MR. VALENTINE: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anyone else that -- 1-12-G4 1 -- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .,-. 25 12 that wishes to come forward and talk about a matter that's not listed on the agenda? As an observation, gentlemen, I note that our Environmental Health Department head is here, and I suspect he's been paying close attention to the comments that were just made. It sounds as though we may have us an enforcement issue, and -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge? JliDGE TINLEY: Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll wait till you're finished. I think -- you know, we came -- all the concerns we just heard are not on the agenda, except for the one about the ca1iche pit we're going to hear, so we really can't answer them. It's not that we're not wanting to right now; it's not on the agenda. But I think one of the -- couple of things come to mind. There's one -- well, you know, if it's some solid waste issue, we do have authority to work or. it. Most, unfortunately, we don't. Because of the law, we just don't have the authority. But I think what would be really helpful is if we could schedule, maybe at our next meeting, maybe a workshob to kind of give -- get with the County Attorney and kind of go over for the Court -- we haven't done this in a while, I don't believe, and the public to let everyone know what our authority is and what their recourses are in situations that come up. If the Court doesn't have the authority, what are your 1-1~-.. . 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ..~ 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 alternatives? And I think that would be a real helpful, probably, discussion. And then we can, you know, post and do it in the afternoon so it's more of a timed item. It might be helpful to a lot of people in the community, because these are issues that have come up as long as I've been a Commissioner, sporadically, and they're frustrating. They're frustrating to us as Commissioners, and they're certainly frustrating to residents in the county. And I think, with the Environmental Health Department expanding under the Ccunty's control, there are certain things that we certainly would like to be able to do, but certain things we just can't do. And I think it helps everyone if everyone understands what our authority is and what your authorities are. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just a follow-up to what Commissioner Letz is saying, Judge. Mr. North, our Solid Waste enforcement officer, had a document which he has presented to the newspapers outlining solid waste requirements, options, the law, what can be done, what cannot be done and so forth, and that was published -- oh, I don't know, maybe a year or so ago. It needs to be published again, and if the newspapers don't have that document readily at their command, I'm sure the Environmental Health Department could get that document from Mr. North, and it would be good public information to print 1-1~-04 1 ,...~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 14 it again, which is -- is following up on what Commissioner Letz is saying. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Plus JUDGE TINLEY: Good point, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Plus pointing out the difference between what the state law says and what the subdivision covenants say. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, there is a distinction. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There is a distinction. And, you know, the state law we can deal with. Subdivision covenants, they have to deal with on their own through the J.P. courts. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, just for ycur information, Sergeant North and I have been out there and looked at some of these things, and -- we've looked at all of them, and the County Engineer and I have been out there and looked at scme other issues, and Sergeant North is taking action now. I think he's -- I've been out of town for a few days; I think he has delivered letters to some of these offenders, and outlining for them what they have to do before further -- further legal action. So, something's going on cn it, but more is needed. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just as a follow-up, again -- and it gets down to the same suggestion we had on --1^_-04 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ..-. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 15 O.S.S.F. enforcement. At some point, our efforts break down, and I think we need to address that. Same thing applies here as it did O.S.S.F. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think this -- it goes hand-in-hand. We were tentatively going to schedule, sometime in January or February, a workshop with O.S.S.F. education issues, ar.d I think we really can probably put these two issues -- items together, as to how to get the public informed as to what -- how to proceed. When -- you know, when there's either an O.S.S.F. issue or solid waste issue, you know what to do and who to contact and how to try to get it rectified. MS. JENTSCH: Is the article you were speaking of -- is that the one where "public nuisance" was mentioned? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It very well may have been. It covered a whole raft of information about solid waste and what the issues are all about and how to address it. Let's get it republished again. If that doesn't address some of your needs, we`ll get something else. MS. JENTSCH: Very fine. I appreciate it. JUDGE TINLEY: Is there anyone else that wishes to be heard about a matter that's not listed on the agenda? Okay. We'll move on to the next item on the agenda, Commissioners' Comments. Commissioner Williams, do 1-1~-c~ 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 you have anything for us this morning? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not really, Judge. What I -- what we're going to talk about in a little bit is our grant application for Solid Waste, but I think what's taking place this morning in the open session is confirmation. of our need to pursue this matter to every extent we possibly can. So, I'll reserve my other comments at that time. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think all the comments -- items I have are probably better suited for the Commissioners' comments on the liaison-type positions. JUDGE TINLEY: Tail end? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tail end. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Commissioner Nicholson? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Same thing; I'll talk at the end of the meeting. JUDGE TINLEY: Now about you, Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do have one comment. We had a -- went to a dinner Saturday night for -- the appreciation dinner for the ag people, and I'll just touch on it; I know you probably were going to comment as well. But, once again, the -- the agricultural young people and -i~-o4 17 1 .-, 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 folks of our community are just the salt of the earth. You know, they're the -- they're the people that -- that do well in life. And I'm not saying other people don't, but those are the kind of folks that you can count on as good neighbors, to do the things that -- that some of us don't like to do, and they are hardworking people. And being at that dinner just -- it just reminded me of how solid neighbors these folks are. Dor.'t know -- don't know -- did any of you get a count of how many people were there? Couple of hundred? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, easily that, yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Couple of hundred, 200 or 300 folks. And -- and I understand the numbers were down. But, anyway, appreciation dinner for 4-H and FFA people, and it was very nice, and I'm thankful that I got to go. That's all. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, if I may go back, one of my comments I would like to -- mainly because we have a large group here today; you know, it's more for the public. JUDGE TINLEY: We'll let you slide in out of order. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Slide in out of order? I had -- went to a breakfast at Schreiner University one day i - 1~ - 0 4 18 1 .- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 last week, and many of you, if you live in the city of Kerrville and get cable, will probably see a new advertising campaign by Schreiner University that some people made different comments -- some like it, some hate it. Some people are disgusted by it. But I want to, you know, just -- I want to brinq up a couple of key points about their campaign. And I think it's a great campaign; I think they're do~ng the right thing. They've done a lot of studies at Schreiner, and they realize they have got to get their enrollment up to 1,100, 1,200, somewhere in that range. They've done a bunch of surveys, basically focus groups, and it is not a well-known university, and they`re trying to correct that. The Board of Trustees has gone on this endeavor, and those -- the commercials you see, while they're -- you know, to me they're somewhat entertaining; there interesting, unusual. They're targeted at 16- to 17-year-olds; they're not targeted at anyone in this room today. And they're trying to get high school students that are going to -- thinking of going to college to at least understand -- you know, know the name Schreiner University, add it to their list of potential schools. Those commercials are being played in Kerrville and primarily in San Antonio. The initial response has been Schreiner has had a doubling of application requests in the first nine 1-i~-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ,~ 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 19 days of that advertising campaign, and a lot of web site interest, a lot of other information. So, you know, while they're -- you kind of look at them -- what are those r_ommercials? What do they have to do with Schreiner University? Is that the image Schreiner University wants? That's not the intent. They're trying to get 16- to 17-year-old kids interested in going to college, and specifically Schreiner. And I think, if you look at it from that point of view, the commercials make a little bit more sense. If you have any other questions, Schreiner is very happy to talk to anyone about it, because it is an unusual campaign; it's kind of an ice breaking-type campaign -- advertising campaign frcm any university in the nation. And Dr. Summerlin over there will be glad to discuss, I think, with anyone in the public. But it's a -- their publicity -- the reason I was at a breakfast is they tried to get every community leader there and to get the word out that, hey, you know, there's a reason for this campaign. And if you haven't seen them, they're quite entertaining. You should look for them. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Clever. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. I, too, had the privilege of going to that dinner this past Saturday evening, and by way of reminder to you folks, there is stock show activity going on in this county from now until the end 1-1'-G4 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 1.-, 25 of next week. They've got various schools having shows; West Kerr, Center Point, Comfort, Hunt, Ingram, the K.I.S.D., and all of those then come forward and will be consolidated in the big district show, which runs the latter part of next week, and we invite y'all to come out and observe and watch what these young people do. Like Commissioner Baldwin says, it's always a joy to watch these young people put out their efforts on these animals, and to learn the life skills that they learn in that process. It's -- it's really a joy. I realize that not everyone in the county is interested in agricultural pursuits or have that as part of their economic base, but I -- I can tell you that I do not recall a single child that appears in my juvenile court -- that has appeared in my juvenile court, as having been involved with 4-H or FFA or these ag programs. So, my point is that it's a very worthwhile pursuit. It's not limited to agriculture. 4-H teaches a lot of other life skills and leadership skills, and I -- I'm really impressed by the work that they do, and I encourage you to support them and would hope that -- hope that you would, and that our young people continue to take advantage of it. Thank you. We'll move into a timed item on the agenda; we're running a little bit late for it. That is Item 1 -- Item 3 on the consideration agenda, which was set for 1-12-:;~ 21 ....~ 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ..,. 25 9:15 -- I apologize; we're running a little late -- that being consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to authorize Kerr County Environmental Health Department to file a grant application with AACOG for funding under the Fiscal Year 2004 Regional Solid Waste Grants Program to expand our existing Solid Waste Program to include household hazardous waste, collection, recycling, reuse, and/or proper disposal. Commissioner Williams. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. I guess it's fairly appropriate that we take up this topic this morning, after hearing from the folks out in west Kerr about some of their solid waste problems. And, whether they want to acknowledge it or not, they're not unique to their area of the county. We have -- this problem pops up from time to time in various areas of the county, and it's always disheartening to see how our beautiful landscape can be despoiled by people who either have no self-respect or respect far their neighbors. Havinq said that, we have in front of the Court today an opportunity to file an application for some solid -- solid waste grant money which is available through AACOG this year. I've asked our Environmental Health Department head, Miguel Arreola, to work up this application and to figure out how cae could become involved to a larger extent in the solid -- hazardous solid waste cleanup program. And this particular grant that -1~-0~ 22 1 ~.., 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1~ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 we would seek to acquire deals with household hazardous waste, but it's broader than the title itself may -- may suggest. Now, I'm going to ask Miguel to do some talking about the stat -- the nature of the application and what it entails and wYiat we would propose. On Friday of last week, was it, or Thursday, he ran into what we think is a snag -- what they thought was a snag, and he's going to tell us about it. I don't think it's a snag, except that we're probably not going to make the 10 o'clock deadline today. But it will give me the opportunity to argue it forthwith face-to-face during the County Judges' -- Rural Judges' meeting and the Board of Directors, because I believe the information -- my interpretation is that the information that was given to Miguel about repeat grant applications is incorrect, so we're going to proceed. Miguel, would you like to tell the Court a little bit about this application, what's in it, and what we hope to accomplish? MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir. Good morning. Basically, we applied tc implement a household hazardous waste program, and that is to go through the county and collect old hazardous waste that we believe is polluting ground and water. The -- we presented that application for grant last Thursday, and it was good; they liked everything. 1-~^_-04 23 1 ,,.-.,. 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 ,,.., 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 The only holdup we had was on salaries for whoever will run this program throughout the year. And, basically, that's it, everything that's holding us right now. We have bids from different recyclers and companies that will pick up the waste and will provide us with the containers and everything that we need to -- to go through it. So, it's a very good plan. I think it is needed in the county. It's important to get it going. You might ha~~re a copy of the whole application in there, and it's not -- you know, it takes some -- some money to get it going, but it's -- it's possible. I don`t know if you have questions on the specifics on that application there. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we want to get a little bit into the specifics of what we would intend to do, anti that's -- that's -- for the benefit of the pubic and the Court, it`s outlined in the objective, and that's to measure the amount of waste disposal collected and the noticeable reduction of hazardous waste on private property, roadways, and landscapes, in addition to cleaner rivers, streams, and tributaries. Geographic area affected that we would propose is West Kerr County, Ingram, Kerrville South, Center Point, and surrounding, and we are proposing to expand the pickup of specific hazardous waste to be collected and disposed, motor oils, batteries, and paints in areas set up in these various areas of the county. Then, 1-1~-04 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 contract with hazardous waste disposal folks to come and pick up that stuff and/or bring what we can in to the recycling center as an adjunct to what they do in the City of Kerrville, because that's a joint project of the City of Kerrville and Kerr County. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER LETZ: While you're on that point, I saw a -- I don't know; I don't think it was intentional, of course. I think you should add east Kerr County. You say Center Point COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Part of east Kerr County has a pretty dense population outside of Comfort, and this is an issue that's very important to that community, timely for it. It's the Westwood area, but there's some -- I think, you know, they may be able to use the collection point at Center Point, but I think it should be targeted as a specific point. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine. Not a problem with that; you're absolutely right. MR. ARREOLA: We outlined some areas in the county that we know are highly populated, and that's what we're going to target. We wart to go all over the county, but specifically those areas. =-1~-04 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. MR. ARREOLA: That we know have problems, and there's a lot of pecple in there. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We would -- we would propose that in this grant, if we obtain the money, we would be placing approved collection bins at four or maybe even half a dozen key locations throughout the county, and collect the waste and transport it -- transport it to disposal sites and dispose of waste on an as-needed basis. An inspector, who would be an employee of Kerr County, hopefully paid for by the grant, would be responsible for scheduling collections with the various pickup companies, and so forth and so nn. Do a public awareness campaign, including hazardous waste collection broadcasts, radio/newspaper brochure medias, and advertising of it, inspections, collection. bins, roadways, landscapes, just a whole raft of things that we think we could do with this. Now, the problem that Miguel encountered was there's somebody up at AACOG that said to him that the fact that Kerr County had been the recipient of a grant previously which got our Solid Waste program underway, I believe. Right, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could not be a repeat successor to -- for grant moneys for personnel purposes. I 1 - i _ - ., 4 1 ,._. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 disagree with that. I don't read that in any of the guidelines, and I intend to argue it forthwith when I get up there. So, what I'd like for the Court to do this morning, if it is of a mind to do so, would be to approve the grant application. If we, in fact, have missed the deadline and I can't overcome the 10 o'clock today, through my own arguments and forceful presentation, we'll make the next one, which is in May. But we intend to get it; I intend to argue down somebody's point that we cannot achieve or -- or receive funding on a repeat basis. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. If that was a COMMISSIONER WII~LIAMS: I'll make that as a motion. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval cf the agenda item to make the grant application. Any questions or comments? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If my memory serves me, the first time we got this particular grant, we got a pickup, a computer, and some salary. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And those -- and I've always understood ali of those things would be renewed year after year. i--~-u4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 27 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They can be renewed on a second-year basis, and I think ours was. There's no guarantee of second-year funding. That was the case, although we received it. That would be the case here. There is no guarantee to second-year funding, but the likelihood is pretty gcod. What somebody's telling Miguel is that, because we received money for personnel on a different program several years ago, we're not eligible to receive money for personnel again, and I believe that's wrong, and we're going to go after it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm with you. JUDGE TINLE`l: Possibly, this is a question for Mr. Arreola. When it was indicated to you that we were not eligible for -- fer a grant which would include salary assistance, did -- did they direct your attention to any particular language in the -- in the grant guidelines or anything of that nature? MR. ARREOLA: No, sir. I met with the manager of this department, and she was familiar with the names and the people involved back then. I think it was about four years ago. And she said, well, this person was paid two years, and that's all we can dn. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, Judge, there are some -- there are some guidelines, but they do not deal with that point. And what it says is, Personnel funding is 1-~..-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ..-. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 limited to no more than two years; however, second-year funding is not guaranteed. It goes on to say, Grant funds cannot supplant -- this is where somebody's getting confused -- grant funds cannot supplant existing salaries and be, over time, treated as the same salary. We're not trying to supplant anything; we're trying to add to, and we're going to argue that point. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. in the backup? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, it did. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And authorize the County Judge to sign same? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, it does. And we would amend that to "east Kerr County" designation, as opposed to just Center Point. JUDGE TINLEY: Is that -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: -- amendment satisfactory with your second? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further duestions or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. -ice-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ?1 22 23 24 25 29 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Miguel, we'll talk after court. MR. ARREOLA; Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: We'll now move on to the next timed item, which was timed for 9:30; we're catching up a little bit here. Item 4, consider and discuss a request for the County Attorney to take action to enjoin violations or threatened violations of law restricting development of property where rainwater runoff rates cause adverse impact to private property or public right-of-way, and recover damages for tYie County to undertake any construction or other activity -- activity necessary to bring about such compliance. Commissioner Nicholson. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This item is on the agenda for -- basically, for two reasons; one, a specific reason, and another a little more general than that. And the specific reason is that I'd like to ask the County Attorney to take action to -- to remedy three specific instances where development of property is threatening adjacent property and county roads with -- with rainwater runoff. One place is at the end of Should Bee Road in -i~-og 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 30 Bumblebee Subdivision. It's the last lot or lots on the right between Should Bee Road and Bumblebee Creek. Someone has begun the development of a building pad there that, as I sat on Should Bee Road in my four-wheel drive pickup truck, the pad is taller than my truck. It's in the floodplain, and the first time we get a significant rain there, it's going to have an adverse impact on adjoining properties and on Bumblebee Creek, on the county road, and on Highway 39. I don't -- I'm not a licensed engineer, and I don't need to be one to know -- know that you can't create that kind of pad in the floodplain. The second one is at the end of Cardinal Hill Road on the right. Cardinal Hill Road runs adjacent to Stablewood Subdivision that's been the subject. of -- of rainwater runoff concerns in this court on numerous times in the past. This -- this new development is upstream from that. And, without trespassing, I can't tell how much development is going on, but a lot of dirt`s being moved, and it's -- they have not gotten the proper permits to do that kind of development. The third one is at 134 Roland Trail Road in Wood Trails Subdivision. What's happening there is that someone is mining caliche -- I guess that's the proper term. They're taking down a -- a ridge. I've personally observed dump trucks in there and equipment being operated, and they've -- over the past month or so, they've _-l -04 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,„1 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 removed a significant amount of dirt. Again, without being a licensed engineer, I don't need to be to -- to tell that the first time we have a heavy rain there, at least two local residents and two county roads are going to be adversely impacted because of that unauthorized development. So, I'd like to -- I'd like to make a motion that we ask the County Engineer -- the County Attorney, I'm sorry, to take enforcement on these three specific cases. And I think that on the more general case of, again, clarity about how we enforce floodplain rules and development rules, I think that'll be handled in the workshop that Commissioner Letz proposed. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can you tell me exactly -- I'm willing to second your motion if you'll tell me what your motion is. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The motion is to ask the County Attorney to take action to enjoin violations or threatened violations of laws restricting development of property where rainwater runoff rates cause adverse impact to private property or public right-of-way, and to recover damages for the County to undertake any construction or other activity necessary to bring about compliance, and that, specifically, he look at the -- the unauthorized development on Should Bee Road, at the end of Cardinal Hill Road, and at 134 Roland Trail Road. i-i~-o~ 32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think I'd be willing to second a motion that asks -- would ask the County Attorney if we can do these things. I'm not -- I just -- seems to me that we'd be doing some things here we don't have the authority to do. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, I have -- I mean, it's a very specific motion. I can't go along with it because I know that we have a -- from a prior -- I have a letter that I -- I knew I remembered, so I went back and researched it. We can't do it; it's against the law for us to do part of that motion. We have a County Attorney opinion that says that we cannot use Road and Bridge Department equipment or funds to repair something not caused by Road and Bridge Department. And what you're saying is that you want us to use Road and Bridge equipment potentially to fix a situation that Road and Bridge had nothing to do with creating, you know, and unless the County Attorney is going to change his opinion, you know, I don't see how we can -- I can't support that. That portion of it, I mean. The rest of it, I think there's things that we can do, but we have to look at -- we have to refer it to the County Attorney, in my opinion, and get a legal opinion before we car. do anything. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just a question, Commissioner. Would one of these that you describe -- I i-i~-o~ 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,~, 25 don't know which -- you said there's a lot of dirt moving going on on a piece of property, which, undoubtedly, if a big rain came along, would create some problems for property owners adjacent. Has anybody inquired as to what that property owner is doing in moving all that dirt? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I haven't inquired. I don't know who the property owner is, but it's clear to me that he's selling caliche. It's a large commercial operation. But the real issue is whether or not he has the proper permit to move that -- to alter that property. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: He's in violation of E.P.A. rules, in my opinion. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- he well may be, but he's -- I don't see -- you know, from my own research in the past, a similar situation down in the Comfort area, the County has no authority over that. E.P.A. may. They may be doing some violations there, and it should be referred to E.P.A. But we can't take action against somebody who's selling dirt, for example, which is basically what the person is doing. That's a -- you know there's some drainage issues and some civil liability issues, and there's all kinds of things that that person may be guilty of, but from my understanding, they're not breaking any county law. And, you know, certainly, that's for the County Attorney to i-~~-o~ 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 determine, not me. But that's just the -- you know, from the letters that we've received, from prior opinions, and also talking with T.C.E.Q., there's -- they're the first person that probably -- if they are making a violation, T.C.E.Q. -- very likely there is a violation there by state law. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, what happens here, for example -- a hypothetical case -- if somebody comes in and -- and asks this Court to give permissicn to create -- develop a new subdivision and disturb the terrain and move dirt, and then they get their engineering work, and our County Engineer endorses it and we approve it, and then after it's approved, they can do whatever they want tc without -- without any consequences? COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're not talking about a subdivision, though. In the situation you're talking about, they aren't subdivision issues. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is a subdivision, 134 Roland Trail. AUDIENCE: Sure is. COMMISSIONER LETZ: If it's in a subdivision, it's a civil issue. It's not -- I mean, we didn't tell them they could do that. It's a -- it's a private property rights issue, and it's also a -- you know, the subdivision -- if it's within a subdivision, look to your rules. I 1-i^-o~ 35 1 ,_, 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,^ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 mean, the County doesn't have any authority there, I don't think. I mean, based on what the -- I'm just going off of -- and I'll be glad to make copies for everyone -- a September 30, 1992 opinion from David Motley which pretty much addressed that. And that's my -- you know, T -- I'm not saying I don't want to do something. I'm just saying I don't think we legally can do something. And I'm, you know, pretty leery of doing something that we don't have authority under the law behind us. If there's E.P.A. concerns, E.P.A. needs to be brought in. If it's T.C.E.Q. concerns or floodplain -- you know, the first issue, you talked about floodplain there. We have -- you know, I would be very much in favor of referring that to the Floodplain Manager and the County Attorney for resolution of that one. But when you're digging caliche, dirt, or whatever, there are E.P.A. and state law, you know, concerns there. But I don't -- I'm not aware of any county laws, and that's my concern. And the other -- and, you know, a step further, this gets into a -- really not exactly what you're talking about here, but it may be with the one on Cardinal Hill. If he's -- if he's creating a subdivision, then we have authority there, and I would agree that we need to, you know, possibly take action. But if he says he's clearing land and putting in roads for personal use, then I don't think we have any authority. i-l~-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 36 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, would -- what I'm hearing here is, we've got a question mark about what authority, if any, the County does have with respect to these three situations. And would your motion be better stated by asking the County Attorney to investigate these three situations and determine what enforcement authority, if any, we have -- the County has with respect to them, and then the next step being, once we see what authority we have, to authorize him to go forward? Would that seem to be a -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me ask the County Attorney; he's here. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Motley? MR. MOTLEY: Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're debating a motion that essentially asks the County Attorney to take action to enjoin three landowners from -- from altering their land in a way that -- that harms their neighbors through rainwater runoff. Do you have an opinion as to whether or not you have the authority to enjoin those landowners from make -- from making the modifications that they're making? MR. MOTLEY: I believe we do have the authority. I think the landowners who are benefit -- or who 1-1z-~~ 37 1 ~.., 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 are affected by it also have the authority under the Water Code. Basic law in Texas, you cannot use your land in a way -- or cannot modify your land in a way to run more water off onto your neighbor. And, without doing specific research on it, I would think that -- I'm going to say T.N.R.C.C -- it's T.C.E.Q. now -- would have authority. And, typically, when they have authority to act, the County has authority to act on its own. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You're familiar with one of them, I know. It's a piece of property at the end of Cardinal Hill Road. MR. MOTLEY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think you've been out there and looked. MR. MOTLEY: Yes, sir, I've -- I've visited that site. COMMISSIONER LETZ: David? MR. MOTLEY: Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER LETZ: In September of '92, you wrote an opinion -- it's right here if you want to look at it, refresh your memory -- which said that the County had -- part of the of the motion he made was to use Road and Bridge Department to fix these problems. And that -- and your opinion there stated that it is against the law for the County to use county equipment and funds to fix a problem on i-,~^-o~ 1 ~, 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 38 private property, essentially. MR. MOTLEY: Well, I think -- excuse me -- the key to a lot of that, to the use of county resources, depends on who is primarily benefitting. The County can use county resources if -- if it benefits the county population as a whole, and the fact that a private landowner or private party would benefit to some degree by that improvement or that change doesn't prevent the County from acting, but it depends so much on the facts of each case. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The facts in that situation. was a drainage issue in the subdivision across from The Woods, where there was a -- some floods came in. That was one. There was a later one; same issue came up, I tr~ink, after the '97 floods, about the County going in and doing drainage work in that subdivision where homes were being flcoded. MR. MOTLEY: This one, as I recall, though, had something to do specifically with -- these were, if I'm not mistaken -- was it a private road? COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, county roads. MR. MOTLEY: A private subdivision, if I'm not mistaken. Something about this, it seems to me -- and I don't recall it that well from '92, but in this, T think the opinion was it was illegal to expend the county road funds for the purpose of improving the drainage problem, which was 1-lz-o~ 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 unrelated to the Road and Bridge work. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. MR. MOTLEY: So, again, I think the underlying theory that I expressed a moment ago is how much does the use of the county resourcPS benefit the county in general, and citizens ~f the county in general? COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're saying that if a person clears cedar on some -- on a piece of property, and that causes bare earth to be there, that the County has the authority to take Road and Bridge bulldozers and put in levies or other things to retain silt? MR. MOTLEY: I don't -- I don't know that you could expand what I've said that far. I think a lot of this -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's rrot an expansion; that's exactly what you said. MR. MOTLEY: Well, no. I'm saying that I think a lot of this is fact-dependent. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is what? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Facts. MR. MOTLEY: I think a lot of it depends on the facts of tYie case, the very -- the facts of any particular case. And this one was a specific fact situation where it seemed to me if -- again, I`m -- I`m having a hard time recalling back then, you know, 12 years ago or 11 years 1-lz-o~ 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 40 ago, but it seems to me that in this, there was -- it was clear that this was a benefit more to this subdivision than it was to the county. Now, on this business about -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wait, wait, wait. MR. MOTLEY: -- somebody clears their land -- go ahead. I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. We11, you just said the benefit to the county. In the situations that are outlined here, we're talking about benefit -- MR. MOTLEY: I mean, we`re trying to figure out how this is different than what we talked about in '97 after the flooding in -- Quail Run? Is that the name of that subdivision? It's in Bill's precinct. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One difference. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, wait a minute. If there was drainage issues done by a developer in a subdivision, or individual in a subdivision, and that caused problems in other parts of the subdivision. And this is the same situation. There's drainage or things are being done in the subdivision affecting other people in the subdivision. How are they different? They're both the same. MR. MOTLEY: Well, I -- again, without having the -- you know, without having specifically researched the facts of the case, I think it's something completely i-1~-o~ 41 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 different if you are removing nuisance growth, such as cedar and juniper and such as that, to maintain your land, and another thing entirely where you're rerouting water and putting -- you know, doing things like that. That's a completely separate thing. If you're -- if you're changing the character of the land and you're -- you know, just clearing is one thing. Building a subdivision, it seems to me, is entirely different. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're talking about lots of -- MR. MOTLEY: Routine maintenance may not be subject to the same sort of control by the County -- by the State as it would be if you're completely changing the character of the land. Again, I -- you know, I would really have to specifically look at the facts of it, but -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think I'd like to -- I think we need a new opinion from you. What you're saying is totally contrary to what you have in your hands, and that is -- and I'm saying that because there are other subdivisions and things that we have brought to you that I will bring back to you, then, because there are -- what you're saying now is not what you said in '97, and not what your memo from '92 says. Which is fine, if it's a -- maybe the law's changed; I don't know. But I -- you know, either way, I still would be in favor of what the Judge mentioned 1-13-;14 1 .-, 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2i 22 23 24 25 42 here, as to referring it to the County Attorney to see what authority we have, 'cause I'm not comfortable in making a motion telling him to enjoin someone until he has looked at it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd like to take it one step further -- excuse me, Commissioner. In anticipation of the County Attorney investigating our authority, which I think is appropriate, I'd like to instruct the County Engineer to go take a look at it and review it and report to the County Attorney and the Court exactly what he has found. MR. MOTLEY: I'd be happy to go view the site with him, the engineer. We can go -- I frequently go make visits, and I'll be happy to go with Frank. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to take it one more step further. Why would y'all want to go on somebody's private property? MR. MOTLEY: Depends on where you're talking about. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm talking about somebody's private property, is where I'm talking about. That can -- MR. MOTLEY: We're not going to trespass on somebody's property. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I appreciate 1-_^_-o~ 1 .... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1i 18 l9 20 21 22 23 24 25 43 that. I really don't want a county employee -- now, you're an elected official, but I don't want a county employee just driving on somebody's property. MR. MOTLEY: I've been with Franklin to probably a dozen sites to look at things, and not one time have we ever trespassed on -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm talking about looking at somebody's caliche pit on their private property. That is their private business. MR. MOTLEY: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now -- MR. MOTLEY: And when we go out there, we're not going to walk out and commit a -- you know, and trespass on somebody's land. We're not going to do that. We would get permission from somebody to look at their property, or look at it from an adjoining tract where we had legal authority to be. We've not trespassed on anybody's land. JUDGE TINLEY: I think one of the other things maybe we've lost sight of here is, in the beginning, part of what I heard from Commissioner Nicholson was his concern -- not -- the private property issue was incidental. We've got county roads in these areas, county right-of-way. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Exactly right. JUDGE TINLEY: And if there's adverse impact from changing of the topography of the land and creating 1-1"~-04 1 ,,.., 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~-. 25 44 additional runoff and that sort of thing -- we heard one report here just a few months ago out in this same area where a county road was being severely undermined. AUDIENCE: That's right. JUDGE TINLEY: And I think that's our focus here, is how is this -- how is this activity going to affect our county roads and right-of-ways, and responsibility we have to the public to maintain those roads in a safe and adequate condition. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't disagree with that, but I believe it's similar -- recently we had one on the Guadalupe River where there was a little dam, and people put wood up against the road, and we couldn't even get authority to remove the wood. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They removed it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think my -- I think my question would be, do we try to address it up front, while someone is developing their property, to say you may or may not -- you're fixing to damage your neighbor`s property cr county property. You may or may not do -- or do you wait until something actually happens and then file some kind of suit? 1-1~-u9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 45 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me get back to what I was trying to accomplish today. First, I had -- I did not envision that we would use Road and Bridge resources to remediate any of these three. I envisioned that the County Attorney would get an injunr.tion to stop them from doing what they're doing, and then take whatever steps he needs to to remediate it. For example, on Should Bee Road, I would like to see the Court order them to remove all that material he's put in there. If we have a 5-inch flood tomorrow -- a 5-inch rain, county roads are going to be damaged because of that pad. If they have a 5-inch rain tomorrow, county roads are going to be damaged because of that caliche pit. You don't have to trespass. You can stand on a county road and look up at that caliche pit and know what's going to happen after a 5-inch rain. I can -- I never considered using Road and Bridge manpower or equipment to remediate that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I thought you said. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, I'm quoting some language out of the book, "...and to recover damages for the County to undertake any construction or other activity necessary to bring about compliance." COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're talking about us hiring somebody, nct -- Road and Bridge isn`t involved. The i-i?-oa 46 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 County Attorney's hiring contractors. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Or -- JUDGE TINLEY: Or if it's necessary that the County take some remedial activity to its roads or right-of-way, and as a result, that's the legal responsibility of someone else, and they've breached that duty, to recover against them for the work done on our road or our right-of-way. Is that what you're referring to, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, let me make sure I understand here. So, you're now saying that if -- if the 10-inch rain comes and does some damage to the county road, then we can do some things? COMMISSIONER LETZ: He's saying -- first he's saying because it may COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Isn't that what you just said, Judge? I mean, I can see that. I can see that if there's some damage done to the county road, then we can sic the County Attorney on him. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But that's after the fact. He's talking about enjoining the action before it happens. JUDGE TINLEY: I think there may be an issue of either of a violation or a threatened violation, which i-i~-o9 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 he's got both of those covered. But I need -- I think we need to maybe, within those confines, see what our authority -- I think our authority's probably pretty clear as it pertains to our roadways or our right-of-ways. That's not a question. MR. MOTLEY: Can I address that a little bit? I think what Commissioner Baldwin is asking about, I think any sort of an anticipatory remedy that we would seek by way of injunction or temporary restraining order, any time that you're going to seek that sort of relief, I think your success in getting the relief you seek is going to be dependent on how much likelihood you can show that you're going to suffer some damage. If you just go up there and say, "I think it's going to happen," you`re not likely to prevail, it seems to me. You may even have to post a bond in order to compensate the people if you're wrong. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What I'm saying is that these three owners are currently in violation of T.C.E.Q. regulations. One of them happens to be in the floodplain, and it's clear to me that we have the authority to require them to get a permit to -- to build that pad in the floodplain. The other twc, I don't think they are; I don't know. But they're still in violation of T.C.E.Q. regulations. 25 ~ MR. MOTLEY: I'm more than willing to go out 1-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 48 and take a look at these areas with Mr. Johnston; I'll be happy to do that, and report to y'all directly or through Franklin or however y'all would like it done. Because, I mean -- you know, this sounds like such a lawyer response, but so many of the things that we look at and do are so dependent upcn the facts of that given situation, and to make a general statement is just not very productive, it seems to me. But I will be happy to look at this situation and see what's causing the -- the excessive runoff, and look at the prcbability. I think that's an engineering function, and our engineer can help us with that. And we'll have to see. We may -- we have in the past consulted hydrologists to see what -- you know, what the likelihood is of damage to a certain type of structure, and we have every right to protect our roads. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess my question is, you know, still, I'm -- I still think it's a good idea to refer all three of these to the County Attorney for an opinion, but I'm not comfortable with basically voting to tell the County Attorney to proceed with an injunction when we could be hit; if he's -- you know, if we`re not on good legal ground, we could get sued by those individuals for going after it for an injunction, for damages. I'm not willing tc do that until I have, first, a legal opinion that says that we have the authority to go after them. That's 1-i~-~~ 49 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 why I'm -- you know, don't like that injunction language in there right now. I think we need to get the -- I mean, the facts need to be looked at. And before I -- you know, I have not looked into these situations, 'cause they're not in my precinct, but you already mentioned hydrology studies. We11, our County Engineer is not a -- not, you know, licensed in hydrology. That's why we have in the Subdivision Rules that they have to be done by a licensed engineer familiar with that type of work. So, if we're going to have to start basing -- you know, challenging things like rain runoff and all that, I suspect we're going to have to exper_d funds to hire a hydrologist to prove that there's a potential damage. And -- and before we get to that phase, I want this to come back to the court, because we're talking about expending a substantial amount of money there. And it might be the right thing to do, but I think we need to first get a -- I think we need to go in order. We need to get a County Attorney opinion as to what rights we do have, and then we need to figure out what we need to -- hopefully the County Attorney at that time will tell you what we need to do to proceed. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If you put yourself in the shoes of a resident of Bumble Bee Hills, for example, it's real clear that scmeone's building a 10-foot-tall pad in there and it's in the floodplain, and that owner doesn't -_~-o- 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 have the necessary permits to do that. And we're telling those owners, We can't help you. Get your money together, go get an attorney, and see if he can help you? And -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's not what I'm saying. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- no damages have been done? COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's not what I'm -- you're talking about a floodplain issue there. We do have -- I mean, these are -- a floodplain and a caliche pit are very different. One, we have authority. One -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely. If Franklin doesn't address the floodplain issue, we need to have a little visit with him. MR. JOHNSTON: That dirt~was placed there in 1999, and they received a permit to add the dirt only to the lot. It actually covers three lots in there, and they have a permit to cover that assigned by Charles Wiedenfeld. But it does not cover any additional development. I think now they're coming back and they want an additional permit to build on top of that pile of dirt, and that's -- we wrote a letter -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They're building on top of that right now. MR. JOHNSTON: We wrote a letter saying that i-,__o~ 51 1 -- 2 •3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,--. 25 they had to do a -- you know, an engineering study. We haven't heard back from them. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, I mean, if that's the case, if they're proceeding, that, to me, is -- I don't have a problem with pursuing that one. But that's separate from the caliche pig, in my mind. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They're in violation, if that's the case. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And, in this case, I have no problem with them pursuing what you're saying on that instance. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion before the Court. My best information is that we don't have a second. Is that correct, gentlemen? MS. SOVIL: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Is there a second to the motion? (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion will die for lack of a second. Is there another motion to be offered in this matter? It would appear -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion. to -- on the issue of the floodplain, to direct the County Attorney and the County Engineer to pursue any legal 1-i?-o~ 52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 remedies we have to make sure that the individual involved follows the law. MS. FOX: Judge Tinley? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second that. MS. FOX: Excuse me, sir. May I -- I signed up to speak to that. JUDGE TINLEY: I understand. We'll get to you. We have a motion and second on that. Ms. Fox'? MS. FOX: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Do you wish to come forward and be heard? MS. FOX: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: Please do. MS. FOX: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: We've got another gentleman -- we've got a gentleman. back there, two or three here yet to go. MS. FOX: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: I wasn't going to forget you. MS. FOX: Thank you, sir. With respect -- I don't think that's working. But, with respect to what Commissioner Nicholson just said -- I wasn't sure what he was goir_g to say today when I read the item number, so I wasn't truly sure how to prepare. But, upon listening to all of this, I want to preface what -- I want to thank 1-i~-~~~ 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 Nicholson for bringing this up, but I would have to say -- and I can't believe I'm finding myself saying this -- that I have to agree with Commissioner Letz, that combining these three is much too confusing. However -- and I know nothing about two of these particular instances, but with one, I know very much. And I also have, under the Public Information Act, the entire packet that -- from beginning to end on this particular case from U.G.R.A. I have -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which case is that? MS. FOX: This is the -- the particular instance ir_ Bumble Bee Hills Subdivision, which also affects me, and I am not in Bumble Bee Hills Subdivision. It also affects all of the people of the state of Texas that travel on Highway 39 to and from Hunt, and it also affects the county. Now, in this particular instance, to make a long story short, I have documentation right here that that particular individual on Lots 42 through 44 in Bumble Bee Hills Subdivision in Kerr County is, at this moment, in violation of the Kerr County Floodplain Damage Prevention Order Number 26463, and any amendments that have been made to it. He has, according to a document on October 21st, 1999, been told in writing, "This permit does not authorize construction of structure upon fill. Further development of this -- of these properties require submittal of the 1 - 1 ' - 0 4 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 appropriate planning materials." He has -- and then I have another document that says, "If placement of a residence is planned, an additional application for permit will be required." That document is also dated October 26th, 1999. The gentleman did go in to U.G.R.A. on September -- in September of 2003 and start the process for another approval of an application. He has never been granted that approval, neither by U.G.R.A. or by the Ccunty, now that it has taken over these responsibilities, and he has already started to build upon that berm. And, therefore, as I read this Flood Damage Prevention Order, under Section E, Violations and Penalties, any person -- blab, blab, blab -- who shall place any fill material is in violation of the detailed statement or drawings submitted and approved hereunder, and shall be guilty of contempt of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County. The Floodplain Administrator is authorized to file with the County Clerk a motion suggesting contempt for failure to comply with these regulations. I have more documentation that I would very much like to submit, if the County Attorney decides to proceed with this, concerning this particular case. Far too thick a pile to get into right now. But, as this is going to affect not only private property, state property, and county property, but lives as well, for any poor, unsuspecting person that might purchase -i^-o~ 1 -,. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 i7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ---- 25 55 this home, if it were ever allowed to be built, and many other sections of your particular floodplain order, as -- one in particular; there is no way in the world that anyone, not even a helicopter, because of all the trees and power lines that are nearby, would ever be able to rescue anyone in that home during the mother flood, because it's going to be completely surrounded by water like an island. And that berm was placed there in a very questionable manner. U.G.R.A. has even conceded that to me, through Mr. Etter, in a private meeting. And I would like to propose in the future -- and I want the County Attorney to also look into this, and then I'll be through for today. Let me find it real quick. Sorry I'm not better prepared. There's a section in here where you can request a revocation of permit. It's Section 8H of the Food Damage Prevention Order. And I would like to submit documentation and proof to the Floodplain Administrator and the County Attorney that possibly the original berm -- have its permit revoked as well, and to have that fill removed once and for all to protect everyone involved. Not just property, but the lives of real, true human beings who are like you and I. Thank you. JUDGE TiNLEY: Thank you, Ms. Fox. I assume, if the Floodplain Rules give any ordinary citizen that authority, you're certainly privileged to do that. And the 1 - l - ~ 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1? 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 56 Floodplain Administrator is Mr. Franklin Johnston, and, of course, you're acquainted with our County Attorney, and feel free to take any action that you deem that you have the ability to do. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I believe the motion that's on the table right now does exactly what Ms. Fox is asking. MS. FOX: Yes. I mean, I thought that was ycur responsibility, and that's why I just read the motion. It's the County's responsibility to take the action. Then, if I'm not happy, I can proceed further civilly. Is that not correct? JUDGE TINLEY: I was referring to the revocation aspect. MS. FOX: Okay, excuse me. JUDGE TINLEY: I had not heard revocation of the existing permit mentioned previously, until you just mentioned it. That's what I was referring to. MS. FOX: Thank you for the clarification. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ms. Fox -- wait, Judge. One thing I want to comment on there. I don't believe the -- I think you -- I mean, I'm not saying you should do this, but I believe you have the ability to pursue it civilly at the same time as bringing it to -- I mean, the Court can handle it from our standpoint, but that doesn't prevent you -i~-o4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1C 11 12 ,..., 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 57 from -- you know, from doing whatever you feel you need to do as well from a ci~.Til standpoint. MS. FOX: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think the County Attorney could include it in his work as well -- his findings as well, revocation of the permit, recommend it. JUDGE TINLEY: What I was meaning to suggest was, if not prohibited, Ms. Fox would have the authority to request -- it says an affected citizen and taxpayer, the County Attorney, and the Floodplain Administrator to pursue that action on behalf of her ar.d all other citizens of this county. Not that she would be required to do it privately and at her own expense; I was not meaning to suggest that at all, but rather, that she could -- if it was not prohibited in the Floodplain Rules, that she could request the County Attorney and Floodplain Administrator to do that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: One final comment on that. I mean, and this is just 'cause there is a large group in the audience. I view floodplain as very different than these other items that were brought under this item. We have a -- there's a lot of consequences, and I think we have a very, you know, I guess, important obligation to the public to make sure that Floodplain Order is followed. And that is something that we do have direct control over, and I think that it's imperative that we -- you know, if there`s a 1 ,.-., 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 58 violation anywhere in the county, I hope that -- and the citizen brings it to our knowledge so -- so we can pursue it, because that's something that we take very seriously, 'cause it has, as Ms. Fox said, far-reaching impact to every insurance policy, basically, written. in this county. And -- and that -- that certainly affects everybody. So, you know, floodplain, t~ me, is very, very different than these other two items. That's why I made that motion. JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, sir? You had signed up to speak, I believe. Is that correct, sir? MR. VALENTINE: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Please feel free to come forward and give us your name and address, please. MR. VALENTINE: My name is Mervel Valentine. I live at 140 Roland Trail; I`ve lived there since 1989. And with Mr. Letz' comment just then, before I address that, in this 1.4 here, it says "threatened violations of law restricting development," it says here. In my case, what I'm here to complain. about is a destruction of property. "Where rain runoff rates cause adverse impact to private property." I live in a floodplain. It's documented fact. And my next-door neighbor, which Mr. Nicholson has addressed already, has turned his property into a caliche pit, which I have pictures here to document what I'm saying. In fact -- well, when, in the past, we have had some real decent rains, i-1_-~~^ 59 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ~-_. 14 15 16 i7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the water -- there's a creek behind me, and you can see it in this picture here; it's dry unless it rains heavy. But when it rains heavy, this water backs up to my back door, probably in the neighborhood of maybe 10 feet, because there's so much runoff it can't run off fast enough. Okay. So, with that being said, this material that my neighbor has decided to sell -- and he's told me he sells this material, but he wouldn't ever tel] me how much -- for how much. Disregards my well-being, my property value or anything else, and continues to destroy his property, which I have pictures here to prove it. And, besides, a neighbor of mine back there earlier said about beer cans, trash, and everything else. I've got a picture of his beer garden and trash pit in his yard. So, I'm here to address this issue about him removing this caliche, and in the event of a heavy rain, it will come down and it will flood my home. So, some -- something's got to stop somewhere. Somebody's got to get behind the wheel of the bus and drive this thing so that people -- residents of Kerr County are not in jeopardy by people who disregard the law. Like one neighbor said that, "If you come on my property, I'll shoot you." That's nonsense. ~r~e citizens need to be protected from people that don't follow the law. And if we can't get people to address this issue and help us follow the law, where do we go then? 1-i-u~ 60 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ..-. 2 4 25 Vigilante? No, no, no, we don't want to do that. So, we need the law to protect the law-abiding citizen and get after these violators, regardless of the votes or anything else. This is important to the homeowners and property owners of all Kerr County, and every -- throughout the state of Texas. AUDIENCE: Amen. MR. VALENTINE: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. We appreciate you being here today. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just -- if I may make a comment about that, is that I agree totally, and that's why I've asked that it go to the County Attorney. Because, if the law says that we have the authority, we can pursue it, but I'm not going to just because we think we have the authority, or if we may have the authority. I think we need to base our acts on the law, and if we legally have the right to do it, I'm in favor of doing it. But this is -- you know, this is different than what I have been told by our County Attorney previously, as I stated it showed in this letter. He's saying now, "Well, we may have authority." Well, if that's the case, I've asked him -- or hopefully we'll get to the point of asking him for a new opinion as to what authority we do have in this area, and if we do, we will certainly pursue it. 1-1~-'~4 .--~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 61 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, ma'am? MS. JENTSCH; Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: Come forward, if you would, please. I realize you've been forward once before, but -- MS. JENTSCH: This is rather nerve-wracking for me, again. JUDGE TINLEY: You did great the last time. Just tell us what's on your mind. MS. JENTSCH: I'd just like to -- you said that you would go next door or you could look at it from the neighbor's -- you can see it from the highway. The scar is so large that it's actually ugly; it looks -- you know how they blow up to make the road through -- the highway? It's beginning to resemble that. And this poor man lives daily, and this man is bringing trucks in and he pays them to take it off, the caliche pits, from a neighborhood. I just -- please, please, try and help us. You're our last chance. JUDGE TINLEY: Please come forward, if you would, sir. Give us your name and address. MR. BROWN: Jim Brown, 409 Wood Trail. Especially Commissioner Baldwin and this gentleman. Commissioner, when we say "caliche pit," it obviously has a broad definition. This is a mountain he's taking down, and it's 3 to 5 foot deep, and Mr. Valentine lives below down on Wood -- on Roland Trail. He's digging this -- the mountain 1-12-~~~ 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 62 out. It's not a pit -- or there's a pit down below it, but he's talking off the whole mountain. You can see it from Interstate 10, which is a mile or two away. It's a horrible scar in the -- and if you need to go out there and take a look, and that would -- that would solve a lot of this, if you could go and just see the area. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think the question -- now, I don't disagree with you in any way. I don't know how big it is. I want to come look at it, but I think the question is -- is not whether we want to do something about it, but my question is, what authority do we have? That's -- what does the law say? MR. BROWN: I don't -- I'm not arguing with you. We're just appealing to you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. MR. BROWN: And we're not after -- particularly trying to isolate any of these people and get them in -- in trouble or anything like that. We're just -- we're -- there's 15 or 20 of us here from Wood Trail that are concerned citizens about our property. COMMISSIONER BALDWTN: Sure. MR. BROWN: And our subdivision. And we're -- we are -- you know, where is -- where is the help from the County about the people that are in the county? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Well, I know. -? ~-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 63 MR. BROWN: Taxpayers are out there that are trying to do a good job, that are obeying -- Mr. Valentine alluded to -- that are obeying the law, and we are being infringed upon by people who couldn't care less. And that's all we're asking, is -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're talking about the trash issue? Yes, tYiere is laws to address that. We can address the trash issues. MR. BROWN: Okay, that's fine. But we -- we're also concerned for our neighbor. If it affects him, it affects the whole neighborhood. And he -- if you -- if you'll just look at that situation -- we appreciate Mr. Nicholson; he's been out there. He has the benefit of seeing what that looks like. And that`s why he's passionate about it, and we are too. Thank you very much. I appreciate the extra time. JUDGE TINLEY: You bet. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Anyone else that -- I have some other individuals who have signed participation forms. Ms. Fearon? Did you wish to speak, or has this pretty much been fleshed out? MS. FEARON: I'm here to support everything that the rest of the people in my subdivision said. JUDGE TINLEY: All right, thank you. You're out in Wood Trail? MS. FEARON: They said it much better than I i - 1 _ - ~ 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 64 could. JUDGE TINLEY: And you're in Wood Trail Subdivision? MS. FEARON: I'm in Wood Trails Subdivision. JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Linda Brown? MS. BROWN: Yes, I'm also here to support them. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. You're in Wood Trails also, and -- ar.d you want to echo their comments? MS. BROWN; I certainly do. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. And Ms. Craigen. Yes, ma'am? MS. CRAIGEN: I'm from Wood Trails too, and I'm here tc support tree rest of the additions. JUDGE TTNLEY: If any of you individuals would like to come forward and offer comments of your own, I want you to feel free to do so. If -- if it's a matter of just general support, as you've expressed, that's fine too, but I want you to feel free to come forward and offer your own comments if you desire. Is there anyone else that wants to be heard on this particular issue that Commissioner Nicholson has raised? COMMISSIONER LEi'Z: Judge? JUDGE TINLEY: It's not an issue; it`s actually more than one issue. But even though you may not 1-1~-p4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ]2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 65 have filled out a participation form, I want you to have the privilege of coming forward and being heard, if you desire. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, we have a motion on the table, and I'm going to call the question on that motion, because we're way -- we're talking about a different subdivision than the motion's about. And, I mean, I have -- I'd love to go back and talk to the people in Wood Trails, but I have a motion related to Bumble Bee Hills; I think we need to deal with that before we go on to other -- `cause there's two other items that I have no problem with continuing to discuss, but I'd like to try to dispense with one, so I'll call the question. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree, and it's a floodplain issue. We'll talk about the other in a second. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question 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: That motion does carry. Is there any further motions to be offered in connection with this particular agenda item? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think maybe the sense of all this -- excuse me for jumping in, 1-1~-U4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .--.~ 25 66 Commissioner. We've talked about what we think we'd like to know, which is more about what the law says, and have some realtime assessment of the problem and a report back from the County Attorney and the County Engineer as to exactly what is out there and what is the law -- what does the law say we can or cannot do. With that. having been said, I would offer a motion that the Court instruct the County Attorney and the County Engineer to investigate all aspects of this with respect to the law and the full circumstances and report back to the Court at its next meeting as to what our remedies may or may not be. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're referring to the specific items? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The other two items that we have not dealt with this morning. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I second the motion. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Any further question or discussion? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Discussion. I hope it works out that in the next Commissioners Court meeting, we'll have the information we need to make the correct decision. It seems to me that time is on the side of the violators in these kind of instances, and berth of these -- these developments in question have been going on for a long, long time, so I'd like to bring it to some kind of 1-1~-u~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1C 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 67 conclusion this month. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or comment? Ail in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (Nc response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I have one other comment. This is, I guess, more related to the people from Wood Trail Subdivision, and I -- from -- I thought that I heard that the caliche pit is in that subdivision. And if it is in the subdivision, you might look to your association rules, 'cause those have a lot more authority usually than the County does. And if they are not -- don't address this issue right now, such as running -- in a lot of them, you can't run businesses in them and can't do various operations. Most of those have a mechanism that, through a majority vote, you can change those rules, and that is another option to look at. And if it sounds like, based upon the number of people that seem to be here from Wood Trails, that may be something that, if everyone was willing to, you know, get together, that may be a way to basically get that -- those people that are not, you know, living in a -- not taking care of their property -- probably that's Z- 1 ~- v 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 72 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 68 the best way to phrase it -- you know, there's a way to do it, because they can be -- you know, most of the subdivision rules can be modified. JUDGE TINLEY: We have another timed item -- two more timed items, actually, set for 10:00. We're running a bit behind on those. I will call the -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, excuse me. You have a gentleman that's wanting to talk. I don't believe I was finished talking on that item. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, my apologies, Commissioner. I -- do you have another motion you wish to offer in connection with this? COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, but I believe I want to hear from the public. There's a gentleman who was raising his hand to talk on that; I would like to hear from the public before we move on. JUDGE TINLEY: I didn't see the gentleman raise his hand. My apologies, sir. Yes, sir? Please come forward. MR. VALENTINE: In response to what you just said about the homeowners restrictions, covenants, they're virtually useless at Wood Trail Subdivision, what I'm trying to say. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. MR. VALENTINE: That`s why we're here. We 1-1~-09 1 --- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ^, 13 14 15 16 17 i8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 69 didn't want to waste your time on Wood Trail Subdivision problems, but we had no recourse, so that's why we come to County Commissioners to seek your help, because our restrictions are -- for lack of a better word, sterile. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Worthless? MR. VALENTINE: Worthless. And so that's why we're here. Thank you, sirs. JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have anything else you wish to offer, Commissioner Letz? COMMISSIONER LETZ: My only question would be to make sure that the County Engineer and the County Attorney understand the charge that -- understand the motion from Commissioner Williams to come back and give us a definite answer at our next meeting as to what the legal authority is of this Court to pursue those two matters. MR. MOTLEY: And you said the one on Should Bee Road? That was in question, right? COMMISSIONER LETZ: The one on Should Bee Road, as I understand it, and the one on Cardinal Hill Road. Are those two correct? And have an answer for us by the next Commissioners Court meeting. MR. MOTLEY: So, these are two -- the two items that you're talking about? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And then there's another one to pursue, the one cn -- the floodplain issue. _-_~-G4 ~o 1 ~,, 2 3 issue. 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 separate. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Floodplain's a separate MR. MOTLEY: Need a motion to do the floodplain; is that what you're saying to me? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There were two motions. COMMISSIONER LETZ: One motion is to pursue the floodplain violation, and that's immediate, for you to -- and that is, if there is a violation -- MR. MOTLEY: I understand. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- do whatever is necessary to stop the violation. And the other one is to review the situation on Cardinal Hill -- I'm just -- I misspoke. It's Cardinal Hill and Roland Trail, those two, and come back at our next court with what authority the County has to remedy those situations. MR. MOTLEY: That'll be fine. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Nope, that's it. JUDGE TINLEY: A11 right. We have two timed items set for 10 o'clock. At this time, we will recess the Commissioners Court meeting and convene and open a public hearing for the alternate plat process of Lot 83 and 84 in 1-1~-0~ 71 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Northwest Hills, located in Precinct 1. (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:27 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 that wishes tc be heard in connection with the alternate plat process of Lot 83 and 84 in Northwest Hills located in Precinct 1 of Kerr County? Any member that wishes to be heard? (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Hearing none, I will close the public hearing for the alternate plat process of Lot 83 and 84, Northwest Hills. (The public hearing was concluded at 10:28 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was reopened.) JUDGE TINLEY: And I will reconvene the Commissioners Court meeting, and now move to Item 8, which is the opening of annual bids for equipment by-the-hour for paving aggregate, asphalt emulsions, corrugated metal pipe, black base, Type AA, cold mix, Type CC, and road base material, and consider awarding those bids. Road and 23 Bridge? 24 ,~-. 25 i-i~-~~ COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You jumped one. 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 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- don't we need to take action on 1.7? JUDGE TINLEY: We can come back to that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Want me to assist? If I don't cut my finger off. JUDGE TINLEY: Better yet, don't cut mine off. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can't take a recess for a band-aid. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let's see if we can get these in some order. Maybe they are in order. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Need to get a hog board to put up here between you two? (Discussion off the record.) COMMISSIONER LETZ: Office again, it appears there's a lot of interest in doing business with the county. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Because we pay our bills on time. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We pay our bills, period. MR. ODOM: Let's hope that's good for us. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you for your patience. For the record, we have had presented for us this morning sealed bids as follows: Base material from Wheatcraft, Incorporated. Base material from Lucky 3 Materials. Paving aggregates from Drymala Sand & Gravel. 1-=_-Oa 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 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: None of the base material's coming out of this subdivision we just got through talking about, is it? (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would be a fine kettle of fish. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be sure and get the address of the -- JUDGE TINLEY: Paving aggregate, asphalt emulsion oil, corrugated metal pipe, road base material, black base Type AA, and cold mix Type CC -- well, correction, we don't have bids for all of that. Let me -- base material from Martin Marietta Materials. MR. ODOM: Judge? Do you not have to call out that number? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know if he does or not. We always have, but -- MR. ODOM: Always have; that's what I'm saying. JUDGE TINLEY: I'll be happy to. MR. JOHNSTON: I think that's how we advertise it; it will be opened and read aloud. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go back to the beginning, then, and I'll just start over. First one, base material from Wheatcraft, Inc.: Grade 1, 1 3/4-inch down, 1 - 1 ~ - ~ 9 74 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5.50 a ton. Grade 1, 3/4-inch down is 6.50 a ton. The base material bid from Lucky 3 Materials: f.o.b. supplier's plant, Grade 1, 4.20 a ton. I believe that's 20 -- looks like it's been written over; appears to be 4.20. Grade 2 is 4.20 a ton also. f.o.b. Kerr County, Comfort at Wilson Creek/Westwood, Grade 1, 7.20 a ton; Grade 2, 7.20 a ton. Paving aggregates bid from Drymala Sand & Gravel: Trap rock, Type A, Grade 4, 6.90 a ton. Trap rock, Type A, Grade 5, $6 a ton. Bid for base materials from Martin Marietta Materials: f.o.b. supplier's plant, Grade 1, $10 a ton; Grade 2, $9 a ton. f.o.b. Kerr County, Grade 1, 8.84 a ton; Grade 2, 8.59 a ton. Corrugated metal pipe bid from Contech Construction Products, Inc.: 15-inch arch, 7.20 a linear foot; 18-inch arch, 8.50 a linear foot; 24-inch arch, 8 -- or 11.20 a linear foot; 30-inch arch, 13.90 a linear foot. 15-inch arch coupling band, $9 each; 18-inch coupling band, arched, 10.60 each; 24-inch coupling band, arched, $14 each; 30-inch coupling band, 17.35 each. Equipment with operator by-the-hour from MPB, Inc.: Cat D-6M, $75 an hour; a Cat 613B, 75 an hour; a Cat 12G grader, 75 an hour; 930 loader Cat, IT-28, looks like, $65 an hour; a Tampo roller, $55 an hour; an Ingram .-~~-o~ 75 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .-.. 25 roller, $55 an hour; an International water truck, $50 an hour. Equipment with operator by-the-hour submitted by Edmond Jenschke: D-6M Cat dozer, 105 an hour; 613C Cat scraper, 100 an hour; 12G Cat grader, 76 an hour; a 936 Cat loader, 85 an hour; 563 Cat roller, 75 an hour; an Ingram roller, $60 an hour; water truck, $50 an hour; asphalt distributor, Etnyre, $130 per hour; an Etnyre chip spreader, 130 an hour. Base material from Reeh Quarry, L.P.: f.o.b. supplier's plant, Grade 1, 4.10 a ton; Grade 2, 3.95 a ton. f.o.b. Kerr County, 6.75 a ton on Grade 1, and 6.60 on Grade 2. Equipment by-the-hour with operator from Schwarz Construction: JD-650G with HD ripper dozer, $70 an hour. An International 412B scraper, $80 an hour. A Cat 14E grader, $70 an hour. A Cat 928G loader, $75 an hour. Ingram 8-ton roller, $55 an hour, and a Hyster 10-ton roller, 55 an hour. F-600, 200-gallon (sic) water truck, $55 per hour. Equipment by-the-hour with operator bid from Rocky Hawkins Construction: 613 Cat scraper, $90 per hour. A Cat D-6 dozer, $85 an hour. A 12F Cat motor grader, $75 an hour. A 910 Cat loader, $70 an hour. A Vibr.Compac. roller, $65 an hour. A sheepfoot -- looks like X1B 1-1~-„4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ..-. 25 76 compacting roller, $65 an hour. 2,500-gallon water truck, $65 an hour. Corrugated metal pipe bid from Walter's Building and Supply: 15-inch arch, 4.85 a linear foot; 18-inch arch, 5.82 a linear foot; 24-inch arch, 7.74 a linear foot; 30-inch arch, 9.70 a linear foot. 15-inch coupling band, $7 each; 18-inch coupling band, $8 each; the 24-inch coupling band, 11.60 each; and 30-inch coupling band, 14.50 each. Equipment by-the-hour with operator bid from Leo R. (Bobby) Jenschke, Jr. Construction Company: A D7R dozer, 125 an hour. A 621B 20-cubic-yard scraper, 120 an hour. A 140G grader, $85 an hour. A 963C track loader, 125 an hour. A 2,000-gallon water truck, $65 an hour. Bid for asphalt -- or for emulsion oil, excuse me, from Gulf States Asphalt Company, LP, Type CRS-2, 80 cents a gallon. Type HFRS-2, 80 cents a gallon also. Corrugated metal pipe bid from Wilson Culverts, Incorporated: 15-inch arch, 4.66 a linear foot; 18-inch arch, 5.58 a linear foot; 24-inch arch, 7.43 a linear foot; 30-inch arch, 9.30 a linear foot. 15-inch coupling band, 6.99 each; 18-inch coupling band, 8.37 each; 24-inch coupling band, 11.14 each; 30-inch coupling band, 13.95 each. Bid for emulsion oils from Ergon Asphalt and 1-i^-o~ 77 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~. 25 Emulsions: Type CRS-2, .7363 -- 73.63 cents per gallon, delivered. HFRS-2 type, 73.63 cents a gallon, delivered. And AEP-type, 96.51 cents a gallon, delivered. Bid for emulsion oils from Koch, K-o-c-h, Materials Company: Type CRS-2, 90.93 cents a gallon. Type HFRS-2, 86.23 cents a gallon. Type AEP, 105.23 cents per gallon. Bid for paving aggregates from Martin Marietta Materials: Type PB crushed limestone or natural limestone rock asphalt, Grade 4, 24.53 a ton. Base material bid from Martin Marietta Materials, f.o.b. supplier's plant -- correction, strike that. No bid on that. The other bid was for cold mix and cold-laid -- asphalt, I presume. Specifies Item 330, cold mix-cold laid limestone rock asphalt, which is stated to conform to the Texas Highway Department standard specifications, Item 330. The bid of Martin Marietta Materials for this material is, f.o.b. Kerr County, black base, Type AA, 25.53 a ton; cold mix, Type CC, 25.53 a ton. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that it? Judge, I have a motion, and after I make that, I would suggest that we let our court reporter rest her hands a few minutes, if we can. But my motion is -- is that we accept these bids and refer them to Leonard Odom for review, and ask him to bring it back on January 26, 2004, for approval. -i~-o~ 78 1 - 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~-~. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. 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. At this point, we'll take our mid-morning recess -- a bit late, albeit -- and we'll convene back here at approximately 5 after 11:00. (Recess taken from 10:49 a.m. to 11:05 a.m.) JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's come back to order if we could, please, and we'll resume our Commissioners Court meeting, having gone into recess about 15 minutes ago. It's now about 5 minutes after 11:00. Maybe we can get back on track here. Next item, consider and discuss granting authority for the Sheriff's Office to dispose of four cars, those being a '93 Chevrolet, a '95 Chevrolet, a '96 Ford, and a '97 Ford. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: These are just the four old cars that we downed after we replaced them with the new cars this year. At this point, I don't even know what they're worth. They've got extremely high mileage on them. 1 ._-o- 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 We have taken the radios out of them, things like that. That's what we've given to the constables for their cars and their radios. And I'm just asking permission to have the authority to go ahead and get rid of them, and then to work with Tommy Tomlinson on what we want to do; whether we want to trade them in, whether we want to take sealed bids on them. I just don't know what they're worth doing, but we would like to have the authority to get rid of them instead of -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is this something that we declare surplus property? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we do that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to declare them surplus, and order them -- authorize the Sheriff to dispose of them. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd like to know the route of disposal before we -- hold on a second. I want to know how we're going to dispose of them, whether they're going to be traded in on another vehicle, and if so, what vehicle, what the cost is, and whether they're going to be sold. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, that's what I -~2-G4 80 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 don't know. I don't have a problem coming back to the Court with whatever we can come up with. These cars probably will not bring anything at all, hardly, on a trade-in. Like I said, a lot of times it's not worth that. I don't know. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know they're not gems in the rough. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't know if we can find a trade-in, you know, that we could trade these in for without having to spend more money also to go along with the trade-in. If that were the best option, of course, I'd come back to the Court before we even considered anything like that, but we would like to have authority to start doing something with these cars. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 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. It was brought to my attention that I missed two more timed items. Let me get back to them. Item 12, review and discuss report by the by Kerr 9-1-1. Commissioner Baldwin, I believe you asked that this item be placed on the agenda. i-~_-u~ 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 81 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I did, and I've asked Mr. Amerine, the Executive Director of 9-1-1 to come over and kind of give us an update, and as he's coming to the podium, I'd -- I -- hopefully what he's going to say here is to encourage -- one thing is to encourage the Commissioners Court to ask our constituents to participate in this program so we can wrap it up. Mr. Amerine? MR. AMERINE: Thank you. I'm Bill Amerine, Executive Director for Kerr 9-1-1. Judge Tinley, Commissioners, thank you for having me here today. I wish I could come here -- just a little commentary, first 30 seconds of commentary -- with a big grin on my face saying that this last year's efforts resulted in 90, 95 percent response and that this addressing thing is now just a bad dream that's passed, but that's not the reality. I do think, though, I have measured success to report, and I will get into that. And then I'll just make a comment for the press on how I'd like to see the remaining citizens come forward and get them in our system, make sure that we can find them in cases cf emergencies. At the end of the year, we managed to get about 5,853 responses from over 14,500 mailings. That's about a third of the people that we sent notices to responded. Fortunately, however, the information that we gathered through that process and through our own research i-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 82 allowed to us update over 8,900 records in our emergency database, our public safety answering database over at the Kerrville Police Department. To put that into context, at the beginning of this year, we had over 49,000 phone numbers in that 9-1-1 database; only 32,000 had addresses. There were nearly 17,000 that, when people dialed 9-1-1, all we got is a phone number; we didn't get a name or an address. At the end of this effort -- initial effort, it's called, since it's not over -- we've been able to update an additional 9,000, so now we're at 41,000. We still have 8,000 phone numbers that we need to identify the owner of those phone numbers and where they live, and if they don't have a physical address, assign one so that they can also benefit from the location information that will save their lives and their property. We are currently in the process of updating the Post Office with this information. They provide, in a cross-reference list -- they're called galley lists or galley sheets -- 24 different mail routes with over 10,000 addresses. We have about 50 percent of those to the Post Office, and their process is to take those, update their databases, send out what they call a joint notification letter, which looks like this. And this joint notification letter will be the first time citizens have approval to start using these mailing addresses. There's been a lot of 1 l~ 04 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 83 confusion, as I was telling Commissioner Baldwin last week, about the mailings we did earlier this year, which were the postcards, as well as the -- I'm missing something here. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm trying to get the air conditioning turned off. MR. AMERINE: I thought Somebody was telling me to shut up. (Laughter.) We've heard it before; we don't want to hear it again. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Bi11, I know that one. JUDGE TINLEY: I'm the guilty one that was making the motion, but I was -- I was referring to the back of the room, and cut it off. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, constable. MR. AMERINE: I don't want to keep blabbing on if I'm being told to wrap it up. But, these letters will be the first time folks will have explicit permission to start using their new 9-1-1 addresses for their mailing. Unfortunately, we had a lot of -- and I'd rather have this situation than people who don't care. We had a lot of enthusiastic citizens that changed their mailing addresses before receiving these letters, and it's causing them some mail delivery problems, and 9-1-1 does apologize for any confusion our notices caused in that respect. We hope to have those remaining cross-referenced lists to the Post -1~-04 1 --._ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2G 21 22 23 24 25 84 Office by the end of this week. Cindy Guerrero out of San Antonio -- their process takes two to three weeks to get notices updated and the letters mailed out. The first letters were mailed out last week, or in the process of being mailed out to Ingram, Hunt, and some of the west county areas. Center Point, Kerrville, and Comfort, Mountain Home, those should be being mailed out within the next two weeks, so we should have most of the folks who have new physical addresses that receive mail at the residence, we should have letters in their hands within three weeks. One of the other things that we've promised to do at 9-1-1 is provide cross-reference lists of the old road names versus the new road names, and we've decided to go first-class on First Responder map books, so we're contracting with a local mapping book firm to produce some colored maps, good cross-references for all of our public safety officials, volunteer fire departments, Kerrville Police Department, all the First Responders. Those are going to take about three months to produce, so we've provided cross-reference lists that show the old road name, the new road name, and clip maps to the public safety officials so that they'll have something to go on now at the beginning of this year. Some of the other things -- new partnerships that we've developed to this process, Paula Rector came to me and said, "I have no idea how to mail out i-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 85 my voters registration cards, since you're changing everybody's address. Can you help me out?" And we provided her with a C.D. that shows all the new addresses and the old addresses so that they can appropriately send out those notices, and voting will occur as it should when we come around to election time later on this year. As I -- as I can see it, the only unresolved issue that we have is getting those remaining 8,000 people to respond. I spoke this morning at the breakfast, Rotary Club, ar.d one of the things -- I'm kind of changing my propaganda spiel now. Instead of saying this is in everybody's best interest to respond and this is going to save lives, I'm starting to look for -- developing advocates for this process that understand what 9-1-1 is, understand how it can save your life, and when you hear somebody badmouth what we're trying to accomplish, I want to you step on their toes, look them eye-to-eye and try to educate them that this will save lives. There are still people that believe out there that they don't need us. They don't need no stinking 9-1-1; if they are sick, they'll drive themselves to the hospital. If they're ill, they'll call in and they'll explain to somebody where they live. That's just not reality, and it's dangerous. The reality is that more than 20 percent of our calls are hang-ups, and that people are either unable to 1-1~-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 86 or prevented from identifying who they are or where they live. And if we don't have good, accurate, complete information in our 9-1-1 database, properties will -- will be destroyed and people will lose their lives or be injured. So, I can't say it any more dramatic than that. I know that's kind of melodramatic, but that's my business, and I get passionate about it. So, all the Commissioners -- and I might add, the Commissioners, in this process in 2003, and the Judges have been outstanding in their support of the 9-1-1 office and what we're trying to accomplish, and I can't thank y'all enough. Any questions? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bill, you made the comment, 8,000 people. Is it 8,000 people or 8,000 phone numbers? MR. AMERINE: 8,000 phone numbers. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, those people may -- or, you know, we have no idea whether there's a second number or computer line or -- MR. AMERINE: No. What it averages out, just in -- just to give you a raw number, is generally, there's 1.25 phone numbers per_ person in the county. I mean, that's the way it works out -- per household, I'm sorry, not per person. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, that's a worst-case -- I mean, 8,000 is -- i-1~-u~ 1 -- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,,~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,.-- 25 87 MR. AMERINE: It's probably something less than that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whatever the number, Bill, what's Plan B? If you don't get the responses this time that you need? MR. AMERINE: Well, we're -- as I mentioned to Commissioner Baldwin, we're going to reach out and touch these people. We're going to call them and say, "By the way, we're sorry you didn't respond to our initial mailing. We have nothing in the database as far as an address for you. Here's what we have forecasted your address will be during this process. We'd like to you buy a sign or put up your own sign," and what phone numbers -- I mean, it's the same verbal deal that we do right now when people call in, but we're -- instead of waiting, we're going to call these 8,000 phone numbers and say, "Who are you? Where do you live? And what can we do to help get your address in the database?" COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Assuming they still meet with resistance, do you assign the number at this point and say, "This is your address"? MR. AMERINE: Well, we do that -- we've done that even with the people who have called in and said, "Well, I don't care what you're going to do. I'm not going to do this." You know, it's that civil disobedience, "I'm -1^-G9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .--- 25 88 not going to acknowledge that this is my new address." We still put them in the database that -- we explain to them that if they don't sign their property appropriately, then there will be a disparity between what will show on the 9-1-1 screen and what's at their residence. Hopefully, that motivates people to respond appropriately. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bill, there's a -- MR. AMERINE: There's a second answer to Commissioner Williams' question. The other thing we're doing is, the Post Office has yet created another mailbox pamphlet, and as we fill out these cross-reference lists, the galley sheets, we're putting "not found" on many of those addresses; we don't find that these people have ever called us and responded. So, along with these letters that they're putting in the postbox saying, "Congratulations, the process is complete. Here is your new address." For all those mailbox drops in the county where people have not come forward, they're saying, "Do you exist? Do you use this mailbox? If so, call 9-1-1." So -- well, "Call 792-5911, and please provide information, 'cause we don't have you in the database." And that way, we'll pick up people also through their mail drops. Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's -- you made the comment about -- you know, you really didn't say -- well, anyway, the key there is signage. Is there anything that -- 1-__-0. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 89 where either the 9-1-1 or the County or someone has authority over -- I mean, if the County has adopted signage guidelines and those recommended by 9-1-1, when someone doesn't fo-~iow those guidelines, what the recourse is? I mean, is it something the County needs to deal with? And one that came to mind, I noticed this morning on the drive in, there's a red private road sign on Highway 27 that I think just popped up over the weekend. And -- and -- but there are other issues, and several I know of in my precinct, of people that, for whatever reason, they're trying -- decide to put up a different name than the official name. Most of them are private roads. What do we do? MR. AMERINE: Well, what drives the -- the guidelines that drive my operation, the Health and Safety Code, don't have anything specific to addressing, so it certainly wouldn't come from the Health and Safety Code, 772. I do know that the City of Kerrville, City of Ingram have ordinances about proper 9-1-1 signs, and that there is a small fine if we respond to a 9-1-1 call and they don't have the appropriate signage up. And, by the way, just clarifir_ation for the public and for the media, you don't have to buy our sign. You just have to have the appropriate number signed on your property. You can make your own sign, do whatever you want. A lot of people chisel in the stone, 1-1~-04 1 ^ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,..., 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,--- 25 90 whatever. So, I do know the City of Ingram and the City of Kerrville have ordinances and fines associated with not having a proper 9-1-1 sign. I don't know about the county. COMMISSIONER LETZ: After the County Attorney gets through with all the other requests we've asked him to do, maybe we can ask for a request on this at a future date. Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The one comment I'd like to make, 'cause I even got in a conversation with our guys this morning about it, is the blue number signs that they can get at 9-1-1 is proving to be very important to us. Our guys are using them constantly, and I know the citizens can gc down and buy those things. Commissioner 1 was the first one to get one. That's already being commented on a lot, and I would encourage citizens to use that, because now that it's that design, that's what officers are looking for when they're looking for an address, is that color, that design, and it's a nominal fee that 9-1-1 -- MR. AMERINE: $5. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But it's going to be a fabulous -- you know, tremendous help for us to get to these emergency locations, 'cause it's hard to find half of these. COMMISSIONER LETZ: As soon as you get one person in a rural area to do it, the neighborhood tends to -_~-04 1 -^ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 91 do it right away. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We've got large areas on roads that are started, but I would strongly encourage, if they want a quick response, to get those, 'cause it's -- every day we're having places we can't find, and it's 'cause it's not posted. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, Rusty, I think one of the reasons that we're slow on the signage and slow on the response thing is exactly what Bill was saying, is that I don't think people have gotten their minds completely wrapped around what we're doing yet, and what we're doing is trying to save people's lives sc that you can respond and our ambulance people and our fire people can respond to a particular point. That's all it's about. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's not about trying to just change people's addresses. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right, exactly. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But out in the county -- city of Kerrville's not bad, but we really have a hard time finding places, and I would encourage it in any way I could possibly do for people to get the signs and do it. It helps us all. MR. AMERINE: I think the County has done their part in this. You know, we went through this process throughout last year, and even into this year, of getting a 1 .- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 92 lot of private, non-coun`y maintained roads signed. 'Cause, as we said in early project discussions, without those street signs, the addresses are almost meaningless, because you can't really find those streets. It goes all the way down to the residence; without those residence signs, those numbers, how do the -- how does the Sheriff's Department or First Responders know where the property is? You've got to have that property signed. By tr_e way, the sign process has been, again, a measured success. I don't want to say it's been a total success. We've sold about 1,000 signs out of the 5,000 people that have responded to us. We continue -- we'll continue to sell those signs until people no longer need them, so that's an ongoing process. Ncw, the only thing that's left undone, other than to address Commissioner Williams' question, how are we going to respond to these remaining numbers and get them in the system, there have been some things that we have decided to put off till this year, and one of them are the mobile home parks. We were able to address -- or confirm addressing for about five out of 42 established mobile home parks. That's the number-one priority for 2004, is to get out to those parks and survey them and get them into our 9-1-1 system. For the most part, most of them -- I want to clarify something, 'cause I don't want people to misunderstand. If you have a phone number and you dial i-i~-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,---_ 25 93 9-1-1 in Kerr County, your phone call will be answered by consolidated dispatch. Someone will dispatch to your location. What we want to provide for those mobile home parks is a unique address for every lot that a trailer sits i_n. Most of the trailer parks or mobile home parks now have an address for the entire park, rather than having an individual address, ust like a home would in an urban-style addressing. So, that's our goal this year, is to get that done, is to get the rest of those mobile home parks completed. Any other questions? COMMISSIONER LETZ: One question. The -- is there a plan, or have you worked with the phone companies regarding the new phone books? I think new phone books are going to come out in May; I believe they're working on them right now. Are the new addresses going to be reflected in the new phone books, or a year down the road? MR. AMERINE: No, the new addresses won't be in the -- any of the Hill Country or Kerrville, for one simple reason. There's three addresses the phone companies deal with; billing address, physical address, and directory address. And our only charter -- the only thing that they're required by law to do is update the 9-1-1 address, so it feeds into our database. If individuals want to update their directory address, they're going to have to do that themselves. 1-1 ~-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 94 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do that themselves? MR. AMERINE: Right. A lot of people -- it's just like un -- unposted phone numbers. A lot of folks don't want their address posted; they want their number, but not their address, so we don't have the phone companies arbitrarily update every physical address in the directory. That would be against -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: They've got the information to do it if they -- MR. AMERINE: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- choose to do it? Okay, thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else for Mr. Amerine? We appreciate you being here today, Mr. Amerine. MR. AMERINE: Thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Bill. JUDGE TINLEY: The next item was also a timed item. We're a bit tardy, by not quite an hour yet. Item 13, review and discuss report by the Kerr County Constables. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Judge. The reason I did put a time on it is so these guys could come in and be on time, and then get back to work if they wanted to. I just thought it was time that the -- you know, recently the public made an investment in vehicles, and -- and because of that, there's always a lot of questions -- -__-o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .-. 25 95 inquiries about what our constables are doing. So, I thought that we would just -- off the top of my head, I put together a small list of questions and sent to them, and in a questionnaire form, and asked them to come to fill out -- answer those questions and come back to us so that we could have some dialogue. Now, I've -- I would like to do that some this morning with them over -- over the numbers that they brought back in, but I also wanted to say that I would -- I would like for us to see a monthly reporting from the constables, and that this would be the front door -- or actually, the front porch of that. And maybe we can put our heads together, and you guys have some -- some comments or suggestions of a -- better questions or more information to actually put together a -- for a monthly report form. So -- but, anyway, as of today, I'd like to go through -- I think everyone has -- does everybody have a report from each constable? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I do. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do. And do you want them -- I don't see that it's really necessary that we ask them to come up individually and have a question and answer. They've provided the information. But, I mean, if you have questions, they are in the room. And -- yes, siz? Go ahead. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I have a question. =-~_-o~ 1 -^ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 i2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 96 Do all four of these reports cover the same period of time? I think not. Commissioner -- I mean Constable Number 4 can't be here today because he's in a school, so he provided -- provided a report, and he says it covers the first three months of this fiscal year. So, my question is, do the other three reports cover the first three months of this fiscal year? One of them appears to cover last year. I'm not sure. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, to be honest with you, I can't answer that either, 'cause I didn't get them till this morning either, and -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know if they're uniform. I think they're kind of different, but I do have a suggestion that we -- that would help for the future. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 24 that. .~-. 25 1-~_-0_ COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We require our J.P.'s to file a monthly report on their activity, and they all do, to the best of my knowledge, and we receive them. There's really no reason -- excuse me -- why the constables couldn't do the same thing. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. I think the -- probably the J.P.'s may be required by law to do 1 -- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 97 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't think the constables are. But, because of the public's investment into it now, I think that it would just be -- you know, the accountability, the accountability factor is -- is a good thing. Now -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Garza -- excuse me. Can I ask a question? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Garza, does your report cover 2003? Or does it cover -- what? MR. GARZA: It covers from January 1st of 2003 to December 31st of this year. And I'd like to have the opportunity -- I welcome the opportunity to come before the Court to explain my figures. I'm very excited about it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure. JUDGE TINLEY: Come forward, please, Constable Garza. MR. GARZA: Good morning. I'm Angel Garza, constable, and I welcome this opportunity to come before you, the honorable court, to explain my expenditures and how I've been performing my duties since the recent acquisition of my patrol unit and my radio. I can start any moment. Would you like me to start? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Go ahead. MR. GARZA: Okay. At the bottom there, I i-i?-o~ 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 have a list of when I got the vehicle in October, 25 miles. And I have increments of the mileage at, like, close to the end of the month. And on the number of warrants served and service fees collected, you have a report there that I also gave you. Another page there, that explains the amount of moneys. The 4,000 -- I'm sorry, $4,515, the warrant fees and fines collected by me over the last year. See, that page is one of the pages that gives you an assessment of that number of civil citations served and fees collected, 208, $10,755. At the bcttom there, Commissioners, I have the -- how I broke it down; 95 civil citations at $45 came out to a figure of $4,275. A hundred civil citations from district court subpoenas at $60, $6,120. Okay. The writs served -- writs of execution, writs of sequestration, writs of possession -- at $200 a piece, I served five for the year. And down here at the bottom here, you know, traffic tickets issued, and the warning tickets issued. Since taking office -- or getting the patrol car in October, I did not -- look at the bottom there. I did not receive the radar unit until the -- it was about the 10th of November. And from November until December 31st, or a day or so after, that I've issued 80 citations for traffic enforcement. I've collected -- if you see on your second page there, I have the figures broken down there. Page -- disposition between 11/10 of '04 is $5,019. That is actual 1 i, n9 1 -- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .~-, 25 99 moneys paid back to the County. These are fines collected. That's what I've collected there. Next page I have there is other fees collected. The -- it's called -- the fee is called, I think, Defensive Driving. That's $1,805. The total amount there is $6,824. Warning tickets, I issued 20 warning tickets in that period. Basically, it's over a hundred citations that I've issued since taking the -- the patrol car and the radar unit. Which, I might add, is -- when I got the radar unit, I installed it myself; I saved the County about $150 by installing it myself, 'cause I'm very frugal with the money of the County, 'cause it's also my money as a taxpayer. Number of assistance to law enforcement agencies, numerous. But I'd like to -- if you have a moment, I've -- I'll be very brief on two that I can give you an example of. I got a copy -- I assisted in Precinct 2 back in December, the P.D., the task force, D.P.S. narcotics had an aggravated -- a warrant for aggravated robbery suspect on Madrena, and I assisted them in -- in carrying out that warrant. They asked me to transport and book the suspect into jail, and I did, assisting other agencies. A couple of weeks later, in December, in Precinct 1, over at Los Cedros subdivision, there was a call out -- P.D. had a vehicle they had stopped and the suspect fled, so there was a call out for other agencies to assist P.D. Sheriff's i-1?-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1C 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ..-.. 25 100 deputies, D.P.S. went to the scene. I also responded, and I was asked by Sergeant Harry Fleming to stay with the vehicle and the lccation. And subsequently, after that, I made contact with the subject, chased him down after numerous fences and back yards, and captured the suspect and held him for P.D. officers. So, I'm very active in my community. I've always been active, but now, with this patrol unit and my radio, I do a better job. And I just want to have any comments, or anything you'd like to ask me, I'm -- I'm here to -- at your service. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good. I wish we'd have had that on film. MR. GARZA: Well, they do -- they probably do. P.D. does have it on film, where I have him on the ground with my gun drawn, everything else, yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Kerr County COPS. MR. GARZA: Constable -- constables. I'm just out here, you know. I've always been active, you know, as far as assistance. You know, any time I could help out, I'm there. You know, I'm not there to interfere in their duties, but I'm there to help them when needed. I did that when I had my little white car, but now -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does your patrol car run good? Everything's working fine? MR. GARZA: Yes, sir. i-lz-u~ 101 1 2 and -- 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2C 21 22 23 24 25 the community? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you happy with it MR. GARZA: Very much so, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: People see you out in MR. GARZA: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And -- MR. GARZA: That's another thing; I`m very visible now in my community. I -- I talk to Commissioner Letz on occasions, you know. MR. MOTLEY: T saw him the other night on the interstate. I mean, he made me slow down, so, I mean -- (Laughter.) You know, I saw him there and I thought it was Rusty, and then I said, no, that's somebody else out there, and I figured out what precinct it was. That's Angel. So, I saw him out there the other night. MR. GARZA: But those are my duties with the patrol car. I'm trying to do more drug interdiction. I had to have drug interdiction training I received through D.P.S., and also through the Council of Governments. I've also -- I also have a basic certification in basic SWAT training. So, I'm out there -- I try and get all the education and training I can, because I want to do the best job I can, and with -- thanks to you and the Commissioners, I'm able to do that more now. i-i~-a4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,_._ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 102 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One of the things I'd like to say is that, you knew, the way that -- I do talk to Angel quite a bit, and as an example, there's an area where high school kids in Comfort tend to congregate and probably drink beer. Rusty's aware of it, but Rusty has -- he has a larger area; he can't really patrol this a lot. And, you know, he saw a vehicle leave there at a high speed over this past weekend. I think that he can be a -- basically, I look at the constable as a way to -- for the Sheriff to be more effective, 'cause he can spend time, really, out on -- you know, in other areas and where we know there's a little bit of crime, constables can really concentrate right there and really be a big deterrent. And that's what we're -- hopefully, I think, what we're going to achieve, certainly in my precinct, is the deterrence aspect of it. And I think that it allows the Sheriff, then, to concentrate on, you know, other areas in law enforcement. So, I think that -- you know, ideally, hopefully they go where they're working closely together; it's not one against the other or any kind of competition, hopefully. It's just assistance, and I think constables are in a position to assist the other law enforcements, ycu know, iii the different areas. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have another suggestion, Commissioner, if you don't mind. Angel's report is good, but I think he -- he tried to summarize it for an i-i,-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 103 entire year, and the other constables may not have understood that that's what was intended. And I don't know whether it was or not. My suggestion would be, rather than to burden the constables with monthly reports, they do quarterly reports for three-quarters, and then an annual summary of all their activities once a year to coincide with our fiscal year, sc that we have an idea of what's going on. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Might be. COMMISSIONER LETZ: In that area, I mean, to me, if they're going to keep track of it, it's no harder to do it monthly than to do it quarterly. But I -- I think I like the -- I like the basic information that Commissioner Baldwin put together. But let's turn it back to the constables; tell them to generate a report that -- you know, come up with their own information. This is a guide. This is kind of what, you know, provides most of what they're doing. There may be something that we're leaving out, but I think a -- you know, I assume -- I think it does need to be -- I mean, from my standpoint, I'd like to see a standard record. That's why I'd like to give it back to the constables and tell them to come up with a report that they agree with that basically answers these questions. Whether you want to modify it doesn't make any difference. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think it's an 1-i~-'J~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 104 excellent idea. MR. GARZA: If I may -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you a question before ycu get off. Do you have any problem doing a monthly or quarterly -- MR. GARZA: No, sir. No, sir, I'd welcome it, sir. It's -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good. MR. GARZA: I welcome it. I want to give you a lot of what I've done. And I'd like to clarify, on the traffic tickets, over 100 citations, that`s only in 45 days. So, if you look from November I5 to December 31st, that's 45 days that I wrote over 100 citations. And, like I said, I brought in over six -- a]most $7,000. I want to work for you. I'll work for the citizens. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I know that citation business on the interstate's working. I got a call from a constituent saying, "Does the constable have the right to get out on the interstate and give tickets?" Yes, sir, he does. MR. GARZA: So, that part of the report -- you know, it was for the full year, but as far as the tickets and all that, traffic citations, that's all been just in the last three months. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you also have to _-l~-o~ 1 --~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ..-. 25 105 look at -- I mean, it's -- you knew, certain precincts have a lot of the interstate, and certain don't; you have to look at each precinct. I mean, I think that the -- in my precinct, which is Angel's, there's I-10 and Highway 27; there's two roads, and D.P.S. obviously work those roads. Sheriff's Department's actively on these roads, too. It's a lot easier, in my opinion, for Angel to be working the interstate than Constable Terrill, who's got I don't know how many miles of -- of roads out in west Kerr County. So, I -- you know, tickets are -- are nice and a good judge, I guess, in a way, but that's not the only judge. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. MR.. GARZA: Visibility. Try to be visible; that's whams I'm trying to do. COMMISSTONER LETZ: I appreciate that effort to get a report, 'cause I think it's a -- provides good information. to the public. JUDGE TINLEY: Any more questions for Constable Garza? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we ought to establish the frequency, though, because if we don't establish frequency, then one's going to do it monthly, one's going to do its semi-annually, one's not going to do it. I don't know. i-l-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ]2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 106 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We will, thank you. I just wondered if there's any one of the other constables that wanted to come forward like Angel did and give a report. JUDGE TINLEY: Either of you gentlemen have anything additional to offer, over and above what Constable Garza's offered? MR. PICKENS: My report's from January the 1st, 2003, till December 31st. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. AYALA: Mine as well. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, both the -- MR. PICKENS: For the whole year. JUDGE TINLEY: One and two are -- are '03 entirely, okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How's your cars? That's what's behind this whole thing, is a report to the public on your -- on the vehicle that they have bought for you. Your car doing okay? MR. AYALA: Doing great. It really helps us. Yeah, I've had several comments, "How many of you quys are there out there?" (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's good. MR. AYALA: You know, visibility is just 25 ~ 150 percent better. 1-1~-0~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 10~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fantastic. Bobby? MR. PICKENS: Other than just a little problem with the battery, it's up and running now. I asked one of these guys to take me over to pick it up. I got a call the other night at 11 o'clock. They said, "I thought you constables cut off at 5 o'clock." I said, "No, we work whenever we want to." So -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's good. MR. PICKENS: -- we're out and about. And, like Angel said, I appreciate the -- your giving us the vehicles, and look forward to working for you this year. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That sounds like it's working, and I'll be back with you. Thank you guys very, very much. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You want to do a motion as to the frequency, or do you want to -- how do you want to handle that, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We sure can. I agree with you that I'd like to -- I'd like to see the constables get together and work up your own little form of how you may want to compare it to the -- you know, the J.P.`s. I've been looking at that for a couple weeks. way too busy, way too much stuff. But if you could shorten it down ar.d use some -- scmething near what we've done here today. And it i-1_-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2i 22 23 24 .--~ 25 108 doesn't have to be exact, of course, but the things that you think that are important to the taxpayers of the county. Yes, Angel? MR. GARZA; I think your form, for me, would be great. I could do this on a monthly basis with the form you gave me. I think that's very good information. I think I would like to follow your form. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Convince your colleagues. JUDGE TINLEY: You guys discuss it and come up with something that is uniform amongst you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We11, we`re going to get to that right this very moment. I'm going to make a motion that we request the constables to do a monthly reporting to the Commissioners Court, and not have to actually make an appearance in here, but to turn in a written report. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you want to make -- when do our reports come? Don't we get them -- aren't we supposed to get them at our first meeting, or both? All through the month? MS. NEMEC: It just -- it depends when they turn them in to us. COMMISSIONER WILLlAMS: Would you accept a i-i~-o~ 1 --- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .-~ 25 109 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: With an annual summary. One annual summary report. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think that would be good. We need to remind them of that when that's through. And what would be the annual -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Come at budget time, so we know what their activity was and what the -- what the dollars are and so forth, and annual summary to coincide with the end of our fiscal year. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be a part of the budget process, I guess. COMMISSIONER LETZ: To me, I mean, if they are doing a monthly report, why don't they just do a year-to-date every month? That way, it's -- they don't have to go back and calculate it all. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That`s fine. If they can structure their report that way, that's fine. JUDGE TINLEY: I think that might be helpful for the budget process, too, because we're going to be -- we're going to be involved in the budgeting process several months before the end of the fiscal year, and you can kind of track things if you got a year-to-date. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A YTD is good. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 1-1~-09 110 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2 :3 24 ,--. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Any further question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Now we'll come back to Item 2, to the Sheriff. Consider and discuss approval of an agreement between. Kerr County and -- is that Apprise? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, Appris. JUDGE TINLEY: Appris, Inc., to provide criminal victim notification services to the citizens and residents of Kerr County. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'd like to start this off with -- by showing a real short clip. This is a program sponsored by the Attorney General's office and approved through the Legislature. It's a grant-type program, but everything is totally funded even in advance of what we'll ask for, which will r.et Kerr County about $40,000. But the whole -- go ahead and start it, Michael. The whole program is real quick, justifies it, and I'll explain it. (Videotape started.) "A crime has been committed. You are the victim 1-1~-U4 111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 of that crime. Maybe you're feeling like have you no control over your life. Someone took it away. You don't feel safe any more. I know how you feel. That's how I felt when it happened tc me. But there's a program that can help. It's called VINE. VINE stands for Victim Information and Notification Every day, a free and anonymous telephone service that provides crime victims with two important resources, information and notification. VINE provides information about the offender, information that will help safeguard you and your family, and information that will help as your case progresses. You can call VINE using a toll-free number anytime, 24 hours a day, and VINE will quickly provide you with the most accurate information available about your offender. But even more important, VINE automatically calls and notifies registered victims when an offender has a custody change; for instance, when he or she is released from county jail or state prison. In some cases, you may also be notified of upcoming court and case events. Registration for court notification may require special information or procedures, so check with your victim advocate for more information, and be sure to check your brochure to learn exactly how VINE works for you. VINE is a powerful tool created to help you help yourself, and it's easy to use. First, you need to be registered with VINE in order to receive automated i-yam-u4 112 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 notification over the telephone. In some communities, crime victims are automatically" -- (Videotape stopped.) SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I won't play the whole thing for time's sake, but that's the general idea. What it is, it was approved by the 77th Legislature. The money was sent to the office ~f the Attorney General to get all of Texas signed onto it. Currently, there's 40 states that use it, and two provinces in Canada that use it, and it is just like it says; it's an immediate way for a victim of a crime, especially family violence, to know if that offender is getting out of jail, if he's escaped from jail, when his court date is, if there's a status change, or even if it's somebody that's more serious that went to the penitentiary, they can register and get ontc that and find out when his release date's going to be, 'cause we get calls all the time. It's a program totally designed to assist and help victims of crime. I think it's a very worthwhile program, and the thing is, it is fully funded by the office of the Attorney General. The counties have no out-of-pocket costs, no maintenance or user fees. They pay for everything, get it all hooked up, the Legislature does. It ties in with our Software Group computer system, to where that information is automatically taken out of that. It's already being done i-l~-o~ 113 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 -.--.. 25 with Software Group; they designed a program to do it. Denton County and a lot of those other ones use it. I think there's 90 counties in Texas right now out of 254 that are signed on to it, and I think it would be very advantageous for us to qet signed on to this program, especially since there are no costs at all to us. And it -- it will save our manpower, because the Code of Criminal Procedure states now that any time we release a guy on a family violence-type situation, we're supposed to attempt to notify the victim. Now, there's no consequences if we don't, but we do have jail staff that try and call a number or try and make sure the victim knows that that guy's getting out of jail, and this will save on all that. It does it automatically. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rusty, do you have any idea about how many victims we have in Kerr County that -- that this affects, or that would participate in this particular program? SHERI~E HIERHOLZER: I think there's a large number, most -- any of the person crimes they could do. You have -- I know our department probably ends up arresting anywhere from five to ten offenders for family violence a week, okay? So, you're talking -- look at all the other agencies and those offenders, and then the jail has to try and notify these people, plus court dates, kids' -- the advocacy groups have to try and help these people get things i-~~-o~ 114 1 "~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ,.-- 2 4 25 and all that, protective orders. And I think it's just a fabulous program to get them notified. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What would be the dollar amount of this agreement? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right at $40,000 to get it totally tied in. That's Software Group's interface part and the computer and everything else with the vendor that was approved by the Attorney General's office. JUDGE TINLEY: If we sign on to this agreement, will that commit us to any obligation for funding in subsequent years out of Kerr County pockets? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: None. None at all. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is it renewable through the state? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, it's renewable every year automatically. Now, the way it's going, as long as the Legislature doesn't cut off the Attorney General's, you know, funding for it. But this has been a demand for 20-some-odd years on making sure that victims get notified, and that's why the state added into the Code of Criminal Procedure that we try to notify them. They could see that wasn't working that well with a lot of agencies, so I think that's why the Legislature is funding this through the Attorney General's office. And I don't see that funding ever going away. i-i~-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .-- 25 115 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The actual agreement is for the software to allow this to happen? Is that what we're -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They furnish -- it's a vendor. It's a private vendor. Appris is a private vendor that does it, that the Attorney General's offir_e has approved doing it, okay? They furnish the computer. They help with the interface, between them and Software Group, and then they keep the system maintained and take the registration of the people that are calling to register for it. They don't call us, they call that 1-800 number and -- the victims do, and register to get the updates, and it automatically calls their home anytime there's a change in that offender's status. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, Software -- I guess I'm -- certainly, I'm in favor of it. I'm just trying to figure out how this thing works. So, the grant assists Kerr County residents to get involved, or the grant gets the information from the Sheriff's Department into the system? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Grant also assists Kerr County residents to get involved, okay? Which is through our office, a lot of that, because they're more interested in the offender here locally. Now, if we've had one that's been sent to the penitentiary, it allows them to get involved by getting registered. They can call that 1-800 i-L^-u~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 116 number, get registered; they can get the updates anytime. But Kerr County has to be involved in it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: When a member of the public calls the 800 number, what do they have to do? They have to give a name? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They can give a name, or they'll have a pin number assigned to them, okay, and a case-type deal where they can access those records and track what's happening to that guy. And we get calls a lot of times, you know, even from somebody from out of state that moved here. I know one particular individual that was kidnapped and sexually assaulted and moved here, and came to me then -- it happened in California -- asking me to -- "Can you find vat when this guy's going to get out of the penitentiary in California? 'Cause I'm concerned he'll come here and sexually assault me again." This helps those type of people. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm a little confused, Sheriff. Does this call originate from this agency to the victim, or does the victim have to call the 800 number to get the information? 22 23 ~„ 2 4 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Both. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Both? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Both. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. i-i~-o~ 117 1 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: The victim -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The victim can't -- JUDGE TINLEY: -- is registered with the agency, and then, when there's a change in status of the -- of the offender, the victim is automatically notified under this system? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Correct. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And then the victim can also call that 800 number seven days a week, 24 hours a day, just to check on that. One of the examples they give farther in this training deal was a lady that had a very violent marriage, got divorced, got total custody of her kids, but she was extremely concerned that the ex-husband would show back up at school anytime. He ended up in the penitentiary, but he would get out, show back up at school, kidnap the kids from school while she went to work. And the example they gave in here is, every single morning, before she put the kids on the school bus, she called the 800 number to make sure his custody status in the prison system hadn't changed, and it gave her that ease of mind every morning wY.en stie sent her kids off to school knowing he -- yes, he's still in the penitentiary that morning. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think it's an 1-1~-~4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 118 excellent program. It doesn't cost the County anything, and it helps our victims drastically. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that we approve the agreement between Kerr County and Appris, Inc., to provide the crime service -- crime victim notification services. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Authorize the County Judge to sign same? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: 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. Next item on the agenda is consider and discuss and review update and current report from our health broker and third-party administrator on their efforts to obtain reimbursement of health care funds which were authorized to be expended by Kerr County Commissioners Court. Mr. Rothwell. MR. RCTHWELL: I'm Ray Rothwell with Employee 1-1~-04 119 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ..-_ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Benefit Administrators, and I've been invited here by the Judge to give you an update report, and also offered the opportunity to discuss some of the points that were made at the previous meeting by the Judge after the consultant made his recommendation and prior to the vote, and I have some specific comments I'd like to make on that. First off, I'll give you an update report. I was here in June, and according to the minutes of the Commissioners Court meeting in June, I gave you an update report. That has not changed. Would anyone like to question me on that, or would anyone like any additional comments from me? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ray, what has not changed? The amount of moneys? MR. ROTHWELL: The amount of money received back has nit changed. The opinion of the reinsurance carrier has not changed, and the opinion of my staff has not changed. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you go over all those again, and the dollar amounts? MR. ROTHWELL: Sure, I'll be happy to. We had an advance of about $400,000 for a specific reason, and I would like to discuss that reason in more detail when I get to the second part of my -- of my comments. We had -- we asked for an advance -- or we didn't ask for an advance, that's wrong. There was an advance given by the previous 1- 1 ~- G 4 120 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 Court. And, again, I'll discuss those details a little more thoroughly in a few minutes. There was an advance given, and the advance was to pay some claims to keep them -- to get them paid by the end of December, where we would have an opportunity to get some of those funds back from the reinsurance carrier if -- if that were appropriate. Working with the information we had at the time, we felt like we would get the majority of the money back, if not all. After we got the final -- all the detailed reports in, going into our second entire appeal with the reinsurance carrier, when we had all the details from -- from the hospital in question, we -- I was -- in my reviewing them, I had pretty much determined that we were not going to get the majority of our money back at that point. And the reason was, when we asked for the advance for some claims that we could pay if the County wanted to pursue it that route and have a chance to get some of the money back, we felt like, based on the preliminary review, and our reinsurance carrier, based on their preliminary review, felt like we would get funds avail -- back to us or paid through the 8th or maybe even 9th of September. We were dealing with a -- with an P_ugust 28 to September 12, I believe, issue. After we got the final results going into -- with all of the details from the hospital, for our -- for our appeal, and support from the hospital and their 1 __-o~ 1 "' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,.-.. 25 121 records, there was a device -- and I reported it in my June meeting -- that that person was hooked up to on September 5, not September 8 or 9, as we had been led to believe in the preliminary reports. That device is the one that, by medical terminology, medical protocol, and medical opinion, from that point forward, it's -- it's aimed strictly as a procedure that did happen, that we were -- that we were paying for, that we had a -- had a cap limit on in the current plan at that time. So, we paid out moneys through what we thought were reimbursable time frames, being September 8 or 9. I think we had the hospital bill even split down to mid-date on the 9th, to where we could file for -- for moneys at that point. When we got the records back and it showed that machine was in use from the 5th on, then that pretty much negated our ability to get any of the funds after that. We, in fact, got around $200,000 -- 206 or 207 thousand back from those moneys that were paid. And the reinsurance company pretty much closed their file on it, and by mutual agreement within our company, as your third-party administrator, we felt the same way. So, that's kind of a short synopsis. There's approximately $200,000 outstanding. Now, I will comment on one other -- one other thing that we have done since then. As your third-party administrator, we maintain your bank account on a monthly 1-1~-0~ 1 "' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .~-.. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,--, 25 122 basis. The Treasurer's office sends the full amount of money to us, and we maintain the bank account, and that bank account is -- is essentially a trust fund -- or not essentially; it's not technically a trust fund, but it's a fund that's employee benefit dollars. It's comingled with employee contributions and County money, and it can't be used for anything except employee benefits. We had accumulated a rather large reserve in that account during this year, and I approached the Judge and I said, you know, there is one way we can get some of your money back in -- your money back into that reserve account that these dollars were taken out of. We discussed it. He agreed, said I should do that, and we moved $170,000 from one reserve back into another reserve, leaving around $38,000 cf that $400,000 not replaced. Granted, that 170 was not reinsurance money; it was scme Ccunty mcney -- some County employees' moneys that could only be used for employee benefits. So, that's the status of it. I'm glad the County Attorney's here. I'm sure -- I'm -- I'm looking forward to him hearing my next comments, because I think there's been some erroneous information spread around the county, and I'm here to try to clarify as much as of that as I can. Does anyone have -- yes, sir? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Before you go into i-lz-u~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 123 your second phase of your comments -- MR. ROTHWELL: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- I'm not sure I totally understand how much was recovered from the $400,000 advanced. Just give me the dollar amount. MR. ROTHWELL: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How much has been recovered? MR. ROTHWELL: From the $400,000, approximately -- right at $200,000 was recovered from the reinsurance carrier. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: $200,000? MR. ROTHWELL: Yeah. And leaving the 5200,000. We, in turn, moved back to the County out of -- out of a bank account that's owned by the County about $170,000 to put -- be put back in that, I believe, Indigent Reserve that it was taken -- that the 400 was originally taken out of. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But the 170 -- 170 was not -- MR. ROTHWELL: It was not. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- recovery of the MR. ROTHWELL: That's true. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It was moneys in our ,~-. 25 -lz-o~ advance? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 124 reserve account which were -- could be returned safely? MR. ROTHWELL: That's true. And we didn't deplete that account. We left enough money in that account that -- where we felt like we could operate the rest of the year and go into the new contract year, should we be the successful bidders. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, let me take that a step further. If the reserve fund was not -- the $170,000 was not given back to the County, what would have happened to that money? MR. ROTHWELL: It would have stayed in that account, and as we've done in previous years, we've -- we have lowered monthly funding by some of those dollars by ttie County and/or the employees contributing for the health insurance. It's -- Commissioner, it's a fund that can only be used for employee benefits. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I guess, if we didn't spend the $400,000, we still would have got back the 170? MR. ROTHWELL: Oh, yes, absolutely. It had -- and I explained that. to the Judge. It had no part of the four -- it had no part -- not related to the 400, except as a way to get some of that money back into that reserve account -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. =-i~-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 125 MR. ROTHWELL: -- for indigent care that it had -- that it had originally been taken out of. That was the only reason for it. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm going to ask the same question, I think, that Commissioner Williams asked, -- MR. ROTHWELL: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- maybe a little bit different. The question is, how much did Kerr County pay in claims that we had no legal or contractual obligation to pay? MR. ROTHWELL: Virtually none. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would you explain? MR. ROTHWELL: Yeah. The -- the dollars that we paid that were in question were for the -- the stay and well-being of that County employee from the -- from the 3rd of September to the 8th of September, so there's a five-day window in there that we paid claims for items that we felt initially would be paid under nonspecific procedure benefits. Okay. The specific procedure had a $250,000 cap limit on it in that plan document. Incidentally, I have taken that 250,000 -- as of this year, we have removed that $250,000 benefit as a part of being awarded this new contract. We did that in conjunction -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Benefit or ceiling? Which? i-i~-o9 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1~ 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ^,,, 2 4 25 126 MR. ROTHWELL: We've removed the ceiling of that benefit. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. MR. ROTHWELL: It's now part of the million-dollar lifetime plan. But -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ray? MR. ROTHWELL: But, Commissioner Nicholson, we -- we -- we paid benefits during a period of time that related -- that related to -- to other types of medical conditions other than this specific provision. The unfortunate part of it is, from the insurance industry -- and that machine that was used on the 5th, from there forward is technically considered all related -- technically considered related to that specific procedure. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm sure you're right, but if we were obligated to pay all those claims that we did pay, why was it necessary to come to Commissioners Court and ask for $400,000? MR. ROTHWELL: We r:eeded them paid before December 31st to get them included in the contract that we were in during that period of time. That contract, like the contract that this Court approved recently, is a 12/12 contract, meaning that claims incurred during that 12-month period and paid during that 12-month period. So, we needed the claims paid by December 31st, and we were doing this in Z-i~-u~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 l~ 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 127 mid -- late December, if you'll recall. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ray, let me ask, I guess, a -- MR. ROTHWELL: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: To make sure I understand this. Or don't understand it, one or the other. MR. ROTHWELL: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So I'm clear. If an employee -- you know, say another employee gets sick with the same medical scenario. MR. ROTHWELL: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can -- is the County obligated to pay for all those medical bills or not? MR. ROTHWELL: No. Well, let me rephrase that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well -- MR. ROTHWELL: If the situation was a mirror image of this situation, there -- there are some -- there were some expenses related to this particular operation -- this particular procedure, operation, that were not -- the County was not liable to pay. P.nd, in effect, really and truly, didn't pay over that cap of $250,000. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well -- so, if an employee has a procedure that causes the $250,000 -- if they have a $300,000 procedure, -- -i^-o~ 1 '~' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 128 MR. ROTHWELL: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- that employee has to come up with that $50,000 out of their own pocket? Or was the County obligated to cover -- MR. ROTHWELL: Or leave it unpaid. Yes, the Ccunty's liability for that procedure during that period of time and up until December 31st of this year had a $250,000 cap on it, period. Anything above that's not payable. Now, when I -- when I approached your Treasurer, I said, "Barbara, we've got a little deal here that y'all really need to talk about. I'll be happy to give you the information. on it. I won't make the decision on it, but I'll be happy to discuss it and give you some of my opinions for it." And -- and if there were conditions -- if this thing were to happen again right now, I would take the same position I had at that time, based on the data that I had available on -- on or about the middle of December. When I approached the County, Barbara was nice enough to get the County Auditor involved, the then-County Treasurer, and one of the insurance agents for a meeting. And -- MS. NEMEC: County Judge. The then-County Judge. MR. ROTHWELL: And the then-County Judge, I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Let me, I mean, .-i~-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .-- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 129 take it a step further. And in this situation, the individual is now deceased. MR. ROTHWELL: Yes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which changes something. If that situation -- if an employee in that situation -- the guy was not deceased, MR. ROTHWELL: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- you're telling me that the County's insurance would not cover -- without the County doing what we did, the County's insurance would not have paid for his medical bill? MR. ROTHWELL: Commissioner, the bill was almost a million dollars. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I understand that. MR. ROTHWELL: And we -- we ended up paying the 250 plus another couple of hundred thousand dollars -- you know, five -- half a million dollars, around about, plus or minus a little bit. There was about $400,000 left on the table unpaid. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I guess what I'm going back to, I'm trying to understand more from the -- for the employees, what our insurance is buying them. And it's not -- I mean, if they have a -- a situation where they have a million-dollar bill, we're saying at that time -- now you've raised it up to -- the cap's a million dollars. Even i-i~-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,-- 25 130 so, say I have a $1.2 million procedure. We're saying we're only going to cover a portion of it; you're going to be on your own after that, sorry. I guess I didn't look at our insurance as doing that. I thought that our insurance covered their major medical expenses, and what I'm hearing is that it doesn't. And, you know, I think that it's a -- it opens the door to a different issue for the Court to look at, as to whether we should. Whether it comes out of our reserve funds or wherever, to me, we should be obligated to pay the health benefits of our employees, and which is what we did. And that's -- I guess I'm -- we've gone down a road which is kind of alarming to me, that our health insurance is -- you know, has the cap that it does, because I don't think our employees feel that. I think our employees think that if they get sick, we're going to pay their -- I mean, our coverage covers their illness. And you're telling me that if it's a big illness, sorry, we don't. MR. ROTHWELL: We've -- we have been the administrators of this County's plan for six years, going into the seventh year, and I appreciate y'ap's doing that. We inherited, basically, the insurance plan that was in place at the time of this incident. As of last December 31st, the insurance plan, with the exception of making three plans out of one, has nct changed in any shape, form, or fashion during that six-year period. It has been brought to l-l"-04 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .--~ 25 131 the attention of various people within the county, and the Treasurer has talked about it to the Commissioners, about moving some of the benefits and changing some of the benefits around a little bit. That cap related to those procedures was in place seven years aqo, and it was in place until December 31st this year. All the bidders that were bidding on your plan recently were bidding on that same exact plan structure, per the instructions from your -- y'all and from your Treasurer. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- I guess my -- where my confusion comes is, I thought that the -- I mean, I understood the cap; knew we did that, and I thought that was a calculated risk that the -- that we took up here that we're not going to get over that. But we -- I thought we were still obligated to pay them. MR. RCTHWELL: Six years ago, the incidence of those procedures was much less frequently than they are today, and they were much less costly, even though they were kind of front-end deals. So, at that point, the cost of these things -- you know, you can get that -- that particular organ fixed -- transplanted for $300,000, or in this case, $700,000, depending on the other medical condition of that -- of that person. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MR. ROTHWELL: It was a broad bill. 1-i~-oy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 132 Commissioner Nicholson, I'm not sure I've answered your question. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't know. I think I'm hearing something different today than I've heard in the past. I'm going to try again. MR. ROTHWELL: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If this Court had not authorized treat $400,000, the insured or the insured's estate would have owed something over $200,000. That either would have been paid by the estate or would have gone unpaid? MR. ROTHWELL: The way it ended up working out after the final review by the reinsurance carrier and my office, yes, that's true. We -- we felt, when we did this, very strongly, and our reinsurance carrier endorsed that opinion, until we all found out the real day that this one particular machine was connected. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, it is -- MR. ROTHGdELL: From that point forward, the dollars we paid technically were not payable under the contract in place by the County. Now, there is a -- there is one solution to that; we can go back to Methodist Hospital and ask for overpayment recovery, which puts it back on that employee's estate again. But while that is a solution, it's one that's not used very often. 1-1~-0~ 133 1 '^ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,..~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, it is true that we did -- the County did take taxpayer money, spend more than $200,000 that we didn't have an obligation to spend? MR. ROTHWELL: And that was clear from the very first time I met in Barbara's office. That was a very clear point of mine, and that's been -- been ignored to this point. There was no liability issues -- I mean, it was clear that -- I made it clear that the County had no legal obligation or benefit obligation to pay those claims. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But there's -- JUDGE TINLEY: Let me ask about this meeting, if I might. You said a minute ago there was -- MR. ROTHWELL: Okay, then let me flip over into my second part, if we're through with this first part. JUDGE TINLEY: You said when this thing first arose, before it was presented to the Court, you indicated there was a meeting, and that was the County Treasurer, the County Auditor, and the then-County Judge, and you indicated an insurance agent. I assume you mean -- MR. ROTHWELL: Curtis Finley. Bryan was out of town. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, Mr. Finley, on behalf of Bryan Finley and Associates Insurance. MR. ROTHWELL: That's right. JUDGE TINLEY: That was the meeting before i-l~-o~ 134 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 „_. 13 14 15 16 17 i8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the matter was presented to the Court, and that's the meeting you're referring to now where you made it clear? MR. ROTHWELL: And at the county court -- at the court -- at the presentation in December, when the Judge presented it to the Commissioners and the Commissioners voted, it was again reemphasized that the County had no legal liability in doing that, okay? Let me -- let me back up now. That's why, Judge, I take offense to the comments you made after the -- after the consultant and prior to the vote. You said you have a -- you have an obligation to make these comments. It was interesting to me that they were all written out in advance. "In the motion before this Court..." so you went on and nn about that, and then you said "tt:ose entities," talking about two entities, Ray Rothwell and Finley and Associates. That's -- I mean, everyone in the room knew the two entities. I knew quite well, because I was uncomfortable with your comments because they were all wrong, erroneous, like I told you after the meeting. I take offense to the part that -- where you say, "it was subsequently accepted and admitted that Kerr County had no legal liability or responsibility..." You went on to say, "these entities failed to advise the previous Court that it had no such responsibility." You went on to say that, "...to disclose to the previous Court that Kerr County had no legal i-~~~-o~ 135 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 i2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,-- 25 liability..." Again, "legal liability," you're talking about. You're going to appeal to the Court; you've put this on the agenda three times this last year. I knew it was on the agenda once; I was here in June to make an update report. You -- where you said three times, again, you were referenced in the minutes, "Kerr County had no legal liability." And then you go on down and you say, because of all this stuff, you don't think you have any confidence in either of these two entities handling the Kerr County program any more. At the meeting in December -- and I believe that Barbara stands ready to speak to the issue. We have a letter from the previous Judge relating to the issues you -- and I'm not sure if Tommy's in the room or not, but he can be called in and he will stress the point. I -- I gave no representation at this meeting -- I agreed to attend. 1 felt like there was some dollars we needed to get paid. I agreed to attend, explain the position. I didn't explain it as a human -- human -- humanitarian issue. I didn't explain it as a legal issue. I explained it as an issue of timing and days and dollars. If we wanted them paid with any attempt of getting the money back, we had to pay them before midnight, 12/31. I had to write the check on the last working day of December that year. In my opinion, with the -- with the information I had available to me at that i-~~-o~ 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 time, I felt like we would end up paying somewhere in the neighborhood of $370,000 to $380,000 nonspecific procedure benefits, and that we would get the majority of that money back. That's the information I had. That's the way -- and it was a timing issue. While this happened in -- in October, we got the bills in mid-November from the hospital. Didn't have the surgeons' bills till after January 1. So, I was dealing with the best information I had available. I made it clear in our meeting, and to this Court, that there was no legal liability. It was not a humanitarian effort. It was a deal strictly to get the dollars available paid and get -- and have an opportunity to get the money back. Judge, I too am a Kerr County employee -- taxpayer, as are both of the members and the employees of -- of Finley and Associates, and I take real offense when you aim directly at someone with erroneous remarks. And I respectfully ask you for a public apology to the Finleys and to me; that the records from this court include that, and that those records be provided to the other three or four insurance companies that were in place at that time. If anyone has any comments or anything they'd like to add to that, please do. I'm here. I'm tough-skinned, and if the guy here wants to talk to me, I'm willing t~ talk to him too. JUDGE TINLEY: Let me ask some questions, if 1-12-04 137 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I might, Mr. Rothwell. MR. ROTHWELL: All right. JUDGE TINLEY: Of the $400,000 that was placed at your disposal, that money was actually transferred from Kerr County over to the benefits account or the claims account and made available to you, was it not? MR. ROTHWELL: That's right. The money -- our money -- it is one account. It's a claims account that we maintain in a bank account. It's replenished every month by 100 percent of the -- of the funding numbers due based on the -- the number of months and the bill for that month. And the money came to us in the form of a check. The $400,000 from Kerr County was placed in that same account, and checks -- and claims -- checks were written out of that; two, I think. I think a total of two checks against the $400,000. JUDGE TINLEY: And to whom were these things written? MR. ROTHWELL: Methodist Hospital. JUDGE TINLEY: Both of them to Methodist? MR. ROTHWELL: Both of them. JUDGE TINLEY: And would that have been in the amount of approximately $258,000? MR. ROTHWELL: No. Part of that money was written earlier. That 258 -- part of that was written -i2-o~ 138 1 `" 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 earlier to cover the transplant benefit. It was collected subsequent -- they could have all been written about the same time, actually, yeah. Time-wise, within a few days of each other. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. My point is, approximately $142,000 of the 400 never was actually paid out of Kerr County's reserve account. MR. ROTHWELL: No, it was returned back intact. JUDGE TINLEY: In approximately April of '03. MR. ROTHWELL: About April -- well, a little before that, probably, but somewhere around that date. JUDGE TINLEY: So, there was a total of $258,000, round figures -- MR. ROTHWELL: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: -- that was paid out of the $400,000 from that reserve account. MR. ROTHWELL: That's right. JUDGE TINLEY: Tc -- you're saying to Methodist Hospital, as the health care provider. MR. ROTHWELL: That's right. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Other than the benefit that the -- that the employee or -- or his family or his estate may have received, and the health care providers that that was paid to, that you've indicated, was there anybody 1-1^-u9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 139 else that got any benefit from those funds? MR. ROTHWELL: No. JUDGE TINLEY: meeting that was held that -- was prior to the matter being MR. ROTHWELL: JUDGE TINLEY: day or an earlier date? Okay. With regard to the that you've mentioned, that presented to the court? Yes, it was. Okay. And was it that same MR. ROTHWELL: No, it was a week -- it was a week or so earlier. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. ROTHWELL: And from that meeting, the Judge was to prepare a position paper that I believe was given to the Court. I'm assuming it was. That's what he said. And -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What who said? MR. ROTHWELL: The Judge said. The -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Former Judge. MR. ROTHWELL: -- former Judge. And it was presented; it was discussed. Again, I have those notes here, and copies of the minutes. It was discussed. I was questioned. I answered. It was eventually -- after a long dissertation between where the money was coming from, primarily between y'a11 as a court to -- to the Auditor on where the money was coming from and how it was going to get 1-i-o~ 140 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 back in there, and it was approved 5-0. MS. NEMEC: May I add something to that? At that time that that $400,000 was approved, Mr. Rothwell also gave the Court the option -- because it was during the month of December, and it still needed to go before review to see if it went towards the transplant benefit and all that, there were a lot of "ifs" and we were dealing with a time deadline, he also at that time gave the Court the option of -- in case they didn't want to expend the $400,000, that they buy a 15/12 contract, just in case that we were liable. So, all that was mentioned at the time, but the Court chose to -- they -- Mr. Rothwell said that a 15/12 would be approximately $270,000, and the Court felt like, out of the $400,000, we could get more reimbursed than what it would take to pay for the 15/12 contract, and that was the reason that they went behind expending those funds. JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Rothwell, the -- generally, the benefit of obtaining an extension of coverage which would have included the first three months of the calendar year '03, that would be -- MR. ROTHWELL: Let me correct you. It would have -- it would not include those months; it would give you those months to pay bills that were incurred in the first 12 months. JUDGE TINLEY: But, generally, that's -- 1-i~-o~ 141 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that's -- that's thought of as being able to handle the claims that were incurred in the last three months of the previous year, would it not? MR. ROTHWELL: Yes, generally. Let me -- let me touch on that. This -- this -- the history of Kerr County and -- and the experience of working with Employee Benefit Administrators -- and Barbara will attest to the funding requests she got on the last working day of December this year. We paid, to get into last year's contract, every claim that we had in-house on Kerr County employees. We ended the last working day of December with zero claims of Kerr County's unpaid in our shop. When you do that, you -- you critically cut that time short. You know, buying a 12/15 contract costs something upward of $200,000 at this point. I think we had a proposal that was $270,000. We paid this last year, as an example, $111,000 after January 1 for claims that were incurred prior to that. By getting that big -- big payment in on the -- right at the last, by getting all the claims out of the shop, we eliminated 390-some thousand dollars of claims during that week that would have waited to go into the new contract, which kept them in that old contract. We paid $111,000 last year. When we entered into this year's, the contract we just finished, we paid $118,000 after the year end for claims incurred prior to. i-1^-o~ 144 1 ^ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2C 21 22 23 24 25 there's been allegations made of -- basically, implications made that we did things that weren't appropriate and weren't proper with taxpayers' money, and I disagree with that. You know, I think what was done was done with the -- you know, maybe more with our hearts. But onr hearts were -- you know, that's our employees, and I feel an obligation to help our employees. Now, this one didn't turn out very well. And, like I said, I think there's things that could have been done different and better. I think that, through this experience, I've learned more questions, probably, to ask, But I don't -- you know, that's just -- that's the way I feel about it. I don't think, you know, from my recollection, that there was ever -- there was an intent to do something where we weren't going to get our money. I may have, you know, hinged more on hoping to get a refund than we were -- than was meant. I wasn't privy to some of the earlier conversations, exactly how much of this money would maybe get -- what the risk was, but I think it's important to remember that the -- the vote of the Court was to help an employee, and I think that we have an obligation to help our employees with health matters. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd like to add a comment to that, too. I don't disagree with anything you said, Commissioner, but I'd like to add one other comment. 1-12-',~ 145 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 All -- if not -- if not all, most of the decisions we attempt to make up here are based on best available information at the time we make the decision. I don't recall ever making decisions, I think, in terms of real speculation. We were provided with what the third-party administrator believed to be the best available information upon which to make a decision, and it was his strong belief that, given the information he had, we could recover the majority of these dollars. Am I correct in what I've just said? MR. ROTHWELL: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. I'd vote again the same way, bottom line. MR. ROTHWELL: I would also recommend the same way again, bottom line. MS. NEMEC: That is one advantage we have, and that is why the Court chose to be partially self-insured, so that you all could make the decisions that you wanted within your plan. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I might ask Mr. RothwPll one other question, though. MR. ROTHWELL: Sir? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Given all of this and the fact that, after the fact, you learned some details subsequent that you didn't know when you came to us late in _-1~-04 146 1 '"' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 December, what have we learned from that? That's kind of my question. MR. ROTHWELL: Well, you know, probably a mirror image of this case, it could transpire exactly like this one happened. And -- and Commissioner Letz hit on it; it's a timing deal. We're caught in that 12/12 contract that -- do we want to roll the days that we'll -- that we won't pay the benefit and we'll carry it over into the next year, or roll the days that that many dollars won't bother us next year? There's a variety of issues that -- most of which we discussed. Occasionally, and -- and only one other time, andlt's been since then, that we've run into this in our company, a timing issue that related to questionable benefits. Would we go forward with that? That client being a commercial account -- a commercial client, said yes, go forward with it. I think we have to operate in our business on the best information we have available to us. Sometimes timing gets into it. If this had happened back in June or May, we wouldn't be here; it would not be an issue. But, because cf the timing, it's an issue, and it's an issue that's been blown well out ~f proportion. I believe the Judge has been -- this has been explained to him by the Treasurer and by the Auditor on more than one occasion, and -- and for some reason, he doesn't want to listen to it. COMMISSIONER LETZ; My final comment is, on 1-~~-04 147 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 this, that going back to that particular decision, I`m not going to say right, wrong, or indifferent. I think I made a comment on that. But the Court has, over time, chosen the policy and the coverage, and we've gone with 12/12 coverage 'cause it saves us money. If you look over the time that I've been a Commissioner new, seven years, and you figure that that 15/12 coverage would have cost $200,000 additional a year, which is conservative, versus the money we expended here, we're still over a million dollars ahead of taxpayers' money. And I think that's another thing that's part of the reason. We -- when I make a vote on health insurance, I'm trying to -- I'm weighing two things, giving the best coverage tc our employees and getting the best bang for the buck with the dollars. That's what I think I've done. MR. ROTHWELL: And that's what E.B.A. has done for you during the years also. So, is this issue going to continue, or is it a dead issue, or where is it going? That's my question. i`m interested in where is it going? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's a live issue with me. MR. ROTHWELL: It's a live issue? Okay. COMMISSTONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. I think we spent 200-some -- over $200,000 that we should not have spent. I don't know of any other employer -- or employee who would come to an employer, after knowing what the plan i-iz-o~ 148 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 is, paying his -- in his premiums, the employer paying some premiums, coming back to that employer and saying, "I exceeded my limits. I want you to pay that amount of money." MR. ROTHWELL: Commissioner, I don't think you have a full understanding of it at this point. I'd be happy to meet with you privately and go into more depth and discuss it with you if you're interested in that. But I would also say you don't know very many employers that have stop loss kind of insurance and work with those daily decisions through their Human Resources Departments, so your exposure may be a little bit limited. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions, comments for Mr. Bothwell? Thank you fir being here, Mr. Bothwell. We appreciate it. MR. ROTHWELL JUDGE TINLEY Do I get your apology, or -- Pardon? MR. ROTHWELL: Do I get your apology, or are you going to stand on your erroneous statements? JUDGE TINLEY: If you get my apology, I will give it to you, yes, sir. If you get it. MR. ROTHWELL: If I get it? Well, I'll look forward to your answer. That'll let me make my next decision. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I would suggest that you -__-G4 149 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 not hold your breath, please, sir. MR. ROTHWELL: Okay. Then I might as well start working on my decision, hadn't I? JUDGE TINLEY: We'll stand in recess until a quarter till -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait. Let's -- we left one out a while ago. That -- we did a public hearing on it. JUDGE TINLEY: Plat process? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, Number 7. And we can approve it, and they can get to work. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. MR. JOHNSTON: He's got two. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don`t care what he has. This one's in Precinct l; that's all I'm interested in. We did the public hearing on it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's a motion and a second. MS. ALFORD: Who did the second? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Me. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: To approve -- COMMISSIONER BP_LDWIN: I'll just shut up. JUDGE TINLEY: Let me call Item 7, consider _-~?-U4 150 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 approval of alternate plat process of Lot 83 and 84, Northwest Hills, Precinct 1. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: There was a motion and second. I do have a question, though. JUDGE TINLEY: Do I have a motion and second to approve the agenda item before it was called? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Any -- any questions or discussion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. What's the change? MR. JOHNSTON: It's a minor change to the lot line between those two lots. Lee could probably explain it better than I could, but you may recall the preliminary plat, he had kind of a little box in there, and this one he got by -- just by altering the angle, I believe. And -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that what caused all the calls to be different, when you changed -- MR. VOELKEL: That's correct. COMMISSIONER LETZ; Okay. That's -- I just couldn't figure out why all your calls were different. JUDGE TINLEY: Ar_y further questions or comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. -__-G4 151 1 ,-~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -^ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. I suppose you want to go -- to do Hermosa? Is that what you're talking about? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I'm through. I'm happy. MR. VOELKEL: Judge, on that issue, the owner of that property is here. He may have something out of town this afternoon that might keep him from being here. I can certainly be here, but if you wanted his benefit, he's here now. How about that? JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I'm just -- if we're -- if it's going to take a while, I'd like to go ahead and recess. If it's not, we'll go ahead and blow through it. Let me go ahead and call Item 9, consider concept plan for proposed subdivision Hermosa in Precinct 4. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is a concept plan. The owner of the property is -- is correctly following the rules and bringing a concept plan before he goes any further. Commissioner Letz, if I understand correctly, we're nct making any decisions about approving the -- the final plat plan; we're just accepting the concept plan? 1-12-0~ 152 1 ^ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ._ 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 action. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct. It needs no MR. JOHNSTON: This is a time, I think, to iron out any questions that the developer might have or we might have, to try to get them worked out before he does the preliminary plan. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The only comment that I saw was -- question, is the -- I noticed somewhere a little fine print -- oh, that the Lange Ravine Road, I presume, which is the access road to the subdivision, that has a 30-foot easement. However, I'm presuming that the road that goes into the development will have the standard 60 foot? MR. VOELKEL: Correct. Correct. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the zone -- the part referred to as "Zone X" is -- that's in the floodplain. MR. JOHNSTON: That's a 500-year floodplain, so it doesn't really have to show on the plat, but we just showed it for -- 23 24 lots. ..-_ 25 i-i~-o~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Size of road, size of MR. JOHNSTON: These are all 15-acre lots, COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MR. VOELKEL: That will not show up on the preliminary or on the final plat, the floodplain, because it's not -- like Frank said, that's 500-year. 153 1 "' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 and a hydrology study's not required for lots that take 15 acres or more, so they're exempt from doing that. Is the road a private or public road? We didn't -- MR. VOELKEL: Private road. Be a private road. County will not maintain the road. MR. JOHNSTON: Unpaved or paved? COMMISSIONER LETZ: It will be paved. MR. VOELKEL: Paved. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Based on the number of 10 lots. 11 12 isn't r- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. JOHNSTON: I think eight's the limit, COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. MR. JOHNSTON: There's more. There's 11. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Eleven lots. MR. VOELKEL: I had a question, if I could, of the Court. Cause 'I heard, maybe, from Mr. Letz, presently there's no certification -- neither the owner or anybody has to sign off that that plat has been done properly except for Frank Johnston, I think. Is that something that's going to change? Will you have -- you know, will this one be subject to the owner or engineer signing the plat that it's all been built to Kerr County standards? Or is that still going to be on his signature? COMMISSIONER LETZ: There is -- on this -- in ~~-i~-o~ 154 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ,~„ 2 4 25 our current rules, there's not a requirement for a drainage study because of the lot size, and that's the only -- I mean, I wound say that they're going to be -- and the road portion will be grandfathered under our current rules. MR. JOHNSTON: Our current rules, as far as roads are concerned, on 6.03.E.1, it says when submitted, a final plat will be accompanied by the following site improvement data, prepared by a registered professional engineer. Under Roads, it says three copies of drawings, construction. details, and test reports on all materials, verification of installed materials. So, that's already in our rules. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's already in our rules. I mean, I don't really see -- I nieaii, I don't think there's any, really, change in this part. It's the drainage area that we're really looking at some pretty significant changes. There may be, if there was a drainage study -- and as we continue adjusting our rules, we're looking at possibly going to a 25-year frequency on drainage, which would be a -- a whole lot stricter, because we seem to have 100-year floods on a very regular basis in Kerr County. So -- and, you know, it might be a little bit of -- you know, which would be a big change in that area. But, you know, I would -- I mean, I don't think there would be any difference under the -- really, under the new rules or old 1-1~-c~ 155 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 rules, but I think it would qualify under the old rules or current rules. MR. JOHNSTON: Really old rules do call for drawings; there needs to be engineered drawings on the roads that allow for the roadside drainage also. That's the major area, is up that ravine. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner Letz, we're not being asked to approve anything here today, I think. We're being asked to accept the concept plan? COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's accepting. I don't -- I'm not even sure we always even make a motion to that effect. I think on some -- most of them, we have not. I think it's just more of a -- it's just for us to be aware and for us to -- if there's a real problem, to let the developer know, hey, this -- you're way off base. And, to me, this is a -- looks like it meets -- is well above our minimum standards. MR. JOHNSTON: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you, Mr. Vlasek, for bringing us the concept plan. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Now are y'all through, for now? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm hungry, I know that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We could do one more -- nc. Do one more? 1 __-o~ 156 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~,,, 2 4 25 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. We'll stand in JUDGE TINLEY: Let me call the meeting back to order of the Commissioners Court scheduled for this date, Monday, January 12, 2004. We originally commenced at approximately 9 a.m. We were in recess until quarter till 2:00 in the afternoon, and it's approximately that time, so next item or. the agenda, Number 10, consider setting a public hearing concerning name changes, regulatory sign, and roads to be abandoned and discontinued and vacated. Yes, ma'am? MS. HARDIN: We have two road name changes: Roane Road to Wilson Creek; Sidney Baker North, from the city limits to the Gillespie County line, to Fredericksburg Road North. One regulatory sign, which is a stop sign at Hermann Sons and Lindner Branch that we would like to remove. I guess we have to revoke the court order that put that in place? Do you know? And -- (Discussion off the record.) MS. HARDIN: And then abandon, discontinue, and vacate from county maintenance two roads that are in Guadalupe Ranch Estates, one being Run Drive West, the other Gulch Ranch Road West. When we signed the county-maintained .-1~-U4 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 roads, we sent someone out to put a sign up on what was Turkey Run and change it to Run. That road had been gated off for nobody knows how long. And the Gulch Ranch Road, the homeowners that are on both sides would like to gate that off. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's in the same subdivision, Gulch? MS. HARDIN: Yes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the 23rd is the first date that -- best we can tell, that meets the requirements of the law? MS. HARDIN: That's correct. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move we set the public hearing for the items as presented. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. MS. SOVIL: February 23rd? COMMISSIONER LETZ: February 23rd at 10:30 a.m. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to set public hearing on requested agenda items for February 23rd at 10:30 a.m. Any question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 1-1~-09 158 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item, Number 11, consider private read name changes in accordance with 9-1-1 guidelines. MS. HARDIN: We have four private roads, all in Nicholson's Precinct 4. Three of theta are in the Y.O. Ranchlands, and the other is a private driveway that runs between Goat Creek and Wren Road. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move we approve the requested private road name changes in accordance with 9-1-1 guidelines. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the private road name changes in accordance with 9-1-1 guidelines, in accordance with the agenda item as presented. Any question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item, Number 14, consider registration/reservations for West Texas County Judges and Commissioners Association annual conference in Midland, Texas. Commissioner Baldwin. i-i?-o~ 159 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 .^- 2 4 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, sir. I just wanted to bring this up because when we go to these conventions, it's best, as we've all -- we all know, that we get -- get into the host hotel if we possibly can. It may be too late even now to do that. I feel like it -- probably it is. But, regardless, I think we need to get registered for it and get a place to stay out there as well. And I've asked Mrs. Sovil if she would be kind enough to make those reservations and take care of all this for us, so we need to -- I need -- we need to know who's going and who's not going. (All Commissioners raised their hands.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which is the host hotel? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The Midland Holiday Inn. JUDGE TINLEY: Isn't that the same dates as the juvenile conference that I have? MS. SOVIL: No, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: When is that? MS. SOVIL: Your juvenile conference is in February. JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, okay. I was looking -- February 17 to 19, the item up above the one you circled. Okay. 1-1~-0~ 160 L 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The dates of this are -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: March 23 through 26. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Baldwin, I'd like to spend my time in beautiful, downtown Midland. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: As I, sir, COMMISSIONER LETZ: As I. JUDGE TINLEY: So -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, there's five of us. Would you take care of that, please, Thea? MS. SOVIL: Yes, sir. Are we taking wives or are we getting five rooms? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Single size, no smoking. COMMISSIONER NICIIOLSON: Same with me. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Same. COMMISSIONER BALDG7IN: Same. JUDGE TINLEY: I don't care about smoking. Smoking's okay with me. If I take my wife, I want it to be a smoking room. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I am not taking my wife. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm taking Buster's wife; she wants no smoking. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No smoking, please. i-l~-~~ 1 '~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 161 JUDGE TINLEY: You've already claimed that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We definitely want no smoking, then. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I -- I'm just thinking, I don't think there's a good alternative to that Midland hotel. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We've got to go to Odessa. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I really don't know; it's been so long. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It hasn't changed. If you haven't been in a long time, it hasn't changed. But -- JUDGE TINLEY: Pulled down those 300 FHA houses, and that's about all they've done. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's a couple things out there by the airport. COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's some other hotels, but they're just not in the proximity of this hotel. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's probably true. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is -- is this Holiday Inn -- is that the same thing as the old Scarborough Hotel? Remember the old Scarborough downtown? COMMISSIONER LETZ: It used to be the old Hilton. Used to be the old Midland Hilton. 1-i,-o9 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 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That ought to be fun. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thea, would you find us a place to sleep, please? JUDGE TINLEY: May already have one lined up for you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Embassy Suites by the airport will work. COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we can't get this, let me know. I can try to -- I have good friends out there; I can call and find out what's the next best in this area. MS. SOVIL: I need somebody's credit card. JUDGE TINLEY: How much room they got? Jonathan has good friends out there; use their credit. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Buster has a county card. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I don't. Not any more. MS. SOVIL: He gave his county card up. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, that's done. Is that done? COMMISSIONER LETZ: She's waiting for who's going to put it on their credit card. Bill waved, said he would. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's okay with me. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any further action we need on that item? 1-i~-o~ 1 "'~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .-- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 163 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I just wanted to bring up -- if you remember, last time we talked about this, we talked about the County owning a new vehicle that we could ride out there in. You know, if there's -- I can see four of us getting in that thing, or maybe even five, but I don't see six cr seven. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or eight. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think I want to go on my own, Buster. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And you're going to go on your own. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd go, but you don't have room for my golf clubs, so I can't. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct, so we're going to go on our own. On the way back, I'm making a detour and going to Fort Worth to a track meet. So -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Took care of that idea, didn't it? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll take a county car, then. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're welcome to. All right. That's all, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Juvenile Probation has this -- it's about a '98 model Ford Taurus we'll be happy to let you check out. 1-~_-0= 164 1 `"' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ._ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was thinking of a Yukon that I've recently seen in the -- JUDGE TINLEY: I see. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I saw it driving out of here at lunchtime. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Is that it on that item, gentlemen? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 15, discuss and consider giving Commissioner, Precinct 1, authority to prepare a proposal to host the West Texas County Judges and Commissioners conference. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You see we have a memo here from Judge Allred of Oldham County. He will be the president in 2005. And, along with that, he has sent us some information that they want to be a part of the -- the package, and he's really interested in coming and bringing the convention to Kerrville. I've been visiting with him now for a couple of years on it. And so, if you would allow me -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Excuse me. Thank you. 24 .~-- 25 i-i~-o~ COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wait a minute. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to Second. 165 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 give Commissioner, Precinct 1, authority to prepare a proposal to host the West Texas County Judges and Commissioners conference. That is for what year? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 2005. JUDGE TINLEY: For two -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 2006, I'm sorry. JUDGE TINLEY: 2006. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is probably a companion item to that one. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Consider and discuss adopting resolution to host the 2006 West Texas Judges and Commissioners Association annual conference. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wait a minute. Okay, I'll second it. That's why I was holding my hand up. The i-l~-og 166 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ..._ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .--- 25 date's wrong on the resolve. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I saw that, mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER LETZ: 12th day of January? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, '06. JUDGE TINLEY: The paragraph before that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: '06, you're exactly right. I appreciate that; I hadn't seen that. I wanted to point out in the -- one, two, three -- third "Whereas," they estimate the economic impact about $650,000 in our community if we can bring this convention here, and I think that's a pretty good little chunk of change that the city makes off of it. And -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And we think we can do this without any cost to the taxpayers? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, we think we can. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner, will it be your idea to ask C.V.B. to help you -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- with preparation of the proposal? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, absolutely. No question. JUDGE TINLEY: You didn't think he was going to do all that work himself, did you? 1-1~-09 167 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I just wanted to confirm it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, absolutely. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe we should show one of the Schreiner University commercials to get their attention. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There you go. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It would, wouldn't it? Especially the one with the snuff on the mouth. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think an adaptation of that would be neat. I'm sorry, Judge. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I so move that we approve this resolution. Or -- MS. ALFORD: He already did. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I already did. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion and second. Any further question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Y'all are kind of breezing through mine, which I like, but I may want to stop in the middle of the resolution and talk about caliche or i-~-_-o~ 168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 something like that. So, slow down just a little. JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consider and discuss and take appropriate action on a request from Kerr County Republican Party to use the large district courtroom -- I assume that to be Number 1? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: March 27, 2004, from 8 a.m. till 6 p.m. for purposes of conducting Kerr County Republican Convention. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would be the Kerr County Biannual Republican Convention, Judge, and I meant to put that in here. And, you know, typically we do that every two years, so I would move that we give permission for that to be done. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. I just wonder why you have -- have to have 10 hours. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, they have preparations for refreshments to begin with, and some subcommittee meetings. They probably won't use all that time, but they'd like to be safe. JUDGE TINLEY: One thing I would pass on is, those courtrooms have signs clearly posted, "No smoking, food, or drinks in the courtroom." COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand. JUDGE TINLEY: Certainly, having them outside .-l~-o~ 169 1 "'_ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ..--- 25 is not a problem. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They've had refreshments in the past out there and in the lobby area. JUDGE TINLEY: I think the Maintenance people are -- have had a concern about that from past incidents. But -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sure. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or comments? A11 in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item is consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to approve contract between Kerr County and Alamo Regional Transit to provide transportation services to the citizens of Kerr County, including the indigent and elderly. According to the agenda item, that contract has been prepared by the County Attorney's office, and, of course, as we all know, funding is provided for in the budget. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is, as you know it, Judge, the agreement -- proposed agreement that was drawn up by the County Attorney, having satisfied himself that we have the authority to do that. So, I would move the 1-12-09 170 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ..- 25 adoption of the contract. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second it, but I have a couple of questions. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Any questions or discussion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How many -- how many vehicles do they have over there? I'm going to tell you, we had the discussion about all this a couple months ago, and I've gotten a phone call saying it's neat that we do all of this, but they're working us drivers to death, and -- and we have six or eight vehicles parked in the barn that are not used. And -- you know, do we -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They're actively looking for drivers. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that the problem, that there's no drivers? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They're looking for COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you looking for something to do on your days off here? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was thinking about it. You want to join me? I'll drive in the morning; you drive in the afternoon. That way I can play golf in the afternoon. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sounds good. All 1-1''-G4 171 1 right. 2 3 drivers. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .-. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They are looking for COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The number of vehicles, Buster, I'm not sure, but I think they've added some. They had acquired some of those that Dietert had. They brought the trolleys back over from Fredericksburg; they're based here now, and I am seeing some of the larger buses, the 15- or 18-passenger buses, I'm seeing those on the roads. I don't know the count, but I'll get the count if you want. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I drove by there and looked upln that barn; there were six -- six vehicles just parked there doing nothing. And, so, in the full contract here, I just -- clear up something for me. It talks about transportation and indigent residents and paupers and all those things all throughout here. You get down to the fifth "Whereas," it -- at the bottom on Page 1, the "County has determined that a program to provide general transportation services to county residents for purposes including recreational purposes by subsidizing a transportation program administered by ART, with the cooperation of Alamo Area Council of Governments, to promote local economic development and to stimulate, encourage, and develop i-.1,-0~ 172 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,~.. 25 business location and commercial activity..." Help me understand how we provide transportation to poor folks -- what econcmic development and developing business and all that -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It could be tied in to Workforce Development; if people needed a job or -- I mean, a lift to a job and return, that could be provided. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's economic development? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. It does tie into Workforce Development. And so, you know, if I'm one of those souls who lost his automobile -- or his transportation, and I had an opportunity to work at Mooney or Diversified, I needed a ride back and forth, I could qualify for that ride. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that's fine. I'm certainly not going to argue with it. My mind has to really stretch out there to grab ahold of economic development in all of that, but that -- that's okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, how about somebody that needs a ride to town so they can spend their -- spend their money? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That works, too. JUDGE TINLEY: At the local businesses. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I still don't see that i-iz-u9 173 1 ^ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 as economic development, developing economics. But -- JUDGE TINLEY: Increase business. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Whatever. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would agree it's a stretch, but -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's the County Attorney's language. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, that's fine. But I have a question also, if you -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That was the only one I had, was just that language there. COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question is, was there a reason it was so vague as to what they're doing? And the only thing that I see as to what we're getting is on Page 2, Item 2a, and it says all we're getting is general transportation services to those in need. I mean, you know -- and maybe that's intentional, but it's like we're not -- there's not a whole lot of accountability that they're going to do -- do something for us in the contract. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I don't mean to be flippant, but how else would you say it? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I guess, you know, if they're going to have buses up here and provide eight hours a day of transportation -- I mean, you know, something more than. they're going to provide general services. I 1-1'-0 174 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 mean, it doesn't seem very explicit to me. And maybe -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think -- and, in reality, I think it has to be kind of loose, because you never know how many buses or pieces of transportation equipment you're going to have in use on any given day, 'cause you don't know how many calls you're going to get for that transportation. And keep in mind these are not set routes. They're run on a schedule; they are as called for. And that's -- that's kind of a -- a nebulous and imponderable -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess, you know, and I -- granted, most of this is coming from federal funds. I mean, we're putting in x,000-something. I guess there's some report that we can look at to see how much is being used down the road or -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It just seems very vague to me, and maybe it needs to be that way. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There is a report, Commissioner, ar.d I'll be happy to provide the Court with it henceforth. It comes out monthly; I get them at the Board of Directors meeting showing the number of trips, number of miles and so forth. Rather detailed. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because, like, the -- when we do this at our next budget, I'd like to understand -__-u~ 175 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 what we're getting for our money, more than I currently understand. And the -- it just seems vague to me, but I figured it was intentional. Okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: My evolving concept about what a local government should do is probably changing a little bit, but I still really have a hard time about being in the transportation business and providing other social services. We'll -- maybe we'll get some time to talk about that before now and next budget. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? 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, consider and discuss setting a date and establishing procedure and selecting facilitator and/or other persons to participate in strategic planning session or workshop. I melded together some material from Commissioner Nicholson and some meager information that I put together on this. I had made contact, at the Court's suggestion and direction here a couple of months ago, with folks over at L.C.R.A., and we had a conflict on the proposed date, which would have been the 21st of this month, and looks like that's going to 1-1-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 176 be off anyway. But when I last talked to the individual at L.C.R.A., I told him that we were going to be reconsidering the matter this meeting, and in the event it became necessary for me to get back with him, I would. But I guess we need to at least light on a list of who's our first choice facilitator, azid if that one's not available on the date, who's our second, and come on down the list, as well as determining when and where and what the format's going to be, and -- and also what other resource persons that we may want to have there. I'm not sure what the Court's desires are, but -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, what are your -- from your -- I know you've talked to L.C.R.A. and, I think, TAC. I mean, have you -- what are they -- I mean, I know they couldn't make it the 21st. What was their schedule like, and have you talked to anybody else? JUDGE TINLEY: The information -- no. The -- my understanding of the direction from the Court was to contact L.C.R.A., and then, when it became apparent that we had a problem with this date, I -- I first worked through Mr. Pena, who, of course, all of you know. And then I had -- I was contacted by one of his superiors over there, and Roland had told me that they project these meetings out several mcnths out. And so, basically, that message was trying to give them, if they're going to facilitate, as much 1-iz-c~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~., 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 177 lead time as possible. It may well be that -- that their guy's not going to be available. If we want to look at alternate dates, certainly, I'll be happy to go back to him with those dates. But then Commissioner Williams came to me with another individual, a gentleman by the name of Chris Avery, who apparently is in management motivation, I'll call it, for lack of a better term. He's a consultant and professional in that field. And, subsequent to my contacting L.C.R.A., Commissioner Williams came back to me with -- he had made contact with Avery, and Avery said he'd do it gratis. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He did say he'd do it pro bono. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'd go with that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And one of my constituents. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He is. Yeah, he JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, he works out of Comfort, as I recall, yeah. Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Very nice man. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you know him? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, I know him quite well. Domino player. JUDGE TINLEY: Good domino player. Well, he 1-1~-i14 1 -- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 178 can't be all bad, then, can he, Buster? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm all in favor of it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it would be -- I mean, I didn't -- actually, I didn't know he did this. I talked to him at length not long ago about some other matters. He lives in Falling Waters Subdivision. Very nice wife; he's a very nice man. He has a personality, I think, that would lend itself to this type of work. I didn't know this is what he did. JUDGE TINLEY: That's his profession. COMMISSIONER LETZ: He's a -- you know, kind of a high-energy, articulate -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know him, but I've read his material and I've spoken with him twice, and he seems like a guy who would make this process move along. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah, he -- there's a lot of people that do this. I'il bet there are 50 in Kerr County who can do this -- do this well, and he can, 'cause I -- just from what you've told me about his background there. I don't know the mar., but if he can do it, I'd get him. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, especially for free. 'Cause I think he's -- JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- he's doing it as a -- 1-1~-04 179 1 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 the county as a public service. He does a lot of public service work. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If the Court's amenable to using him, would it be acceptable for me to call him up and ask him to give me maybe two or three dates in the month of February which he could do it? And then we can select a date. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or invite him to our next court meeting so we can -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or we can do that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- all meet him. Just so -- I mean, I think -- I'm glad to -- or you can give him a call, 'cause you already talked to him. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll call him back this afternoon. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And proceed with that. And then I -- from the -- from the format standpoint, I'd leave it totally up to him. I think, obviously, we want to do strategic planning for, you know, everything from, I quess, budget to airport to, you know, whatever. And I think we can probably go over that in court with him, and give him an idea as to the -- the format, but 1Pt him choose the format that's he's comfortable using. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, when I mentioned format, I didn't necessarily mean to dictate to him, whoever that 1 - 1 ? - ~ 4 180 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,--. 25 facilitator may have been. What I was talking about, are we going to do it in a -- in kind of a free-wheeling workshop-type setting, or are we going to have it in a formal kind of meeting? Either way, we're going to post, but insofar as taking any formal action is more what I had in mind. COMMISS preferable to do it at remote location, where courthouse. And if we it's more relaxed, and that may be available. others. The -- LONER LETZ: I think it would be a -- for lack of a better word -- -- I mean, we're out of our -- the can do that, I think we can, where I think Buster mentioned a facility I don't know if it is. There's some COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Storey Building. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The Storey Building in Center Point. They may or may not donate that, I don't know. But there's other places. There's, you know, small -- up in the western part of the county, I would imagine some of those B & B's/hotels/camps very well may -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll donate a place. JUDGE TINLEY: Casa Bonita, big house there. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Doesn't make any difference. You know, whatever's available, doesn't make any difference. But I think it would be better to do it at a location different than the courthouse. 1-~_-0? 181 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 i2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me see if we're all on the same page on what we want to do, what the product is. At the end of the day, we would have a -- a list of a few triings that we won't get around to -- that are critical, that are important, that we need to work on, that we won't get around to unless we have a meeting like this, do some prioritization, and establish some organization to it. So, at the end of the day, we're going to have a -- a list of three or four or eight or ten things we think we ought to be workinq on. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think -- the answer, to me, is yes, sort of. I mean, I see it as a -- a brainstorming-type setting, where we can kind of freely talk about, you know, what our views are of everything from the Ag Barn to the airport to the library, and based on that, somehow come out with a -- you know, some priorities for the county. But I don't want it to be exclusive. I mean, the fact that it's not on the list doesn't mean that -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSGN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know, I won't -- the fact that Hermann Sons Bridge is not listed doesn't mean we're going to stop Hermann Sons Bridge. So, it's -- I think it's kind of -- I look at it as a brainstorming thing for us to get some new ideas, some new ways to possibly do 1-1~-04 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1? 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 182 things in county government. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're real close. That's what I want to do, too. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just want to be certain -- I'm following up on that-. -- that just because it may nct end up on the list -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Doesn't mean -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- the final five, doesn't mean we're preempted, any of us, from bringing an issue that may have developed to the point that you can bring it to the Court at a later date. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Sure. JUDGE TINLEY: Even if it's not even mentioned there. Oh, no. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly. JUDGE TINLEY: Nobody's going to be cut off from anything. It's just a matter of trying to determine some general -- general priority items, is what I think it's all about. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think the other point that -- you know, that probably needs to be said is that, I mean, we've done similar things to this one other time since I've been a Commissioner, and, you know, while it's frustrating that, because we have a rotating doer of who sits cn this court, this is good for about a year, and -i~-n9 1 -~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ,.-.. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ...... 25 183 it's not true long-range planning, because we can't commit future courts. We can't talk about future budgets, really -- or we can talk about them, but we can't really set a whole lot. So, it's a good exercise, I think; kind of gets us focused on some things. But, you know, it's limited in how -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let's work on a two and a half-year plan. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, we're going to leave it. I'm going to call Mr. Avery and request three or four dates from him, invite him to court so the Court can meet him, and we'll set a date and so forth. JUDGE TINLEY: And I would suggest that if anybody has any thoughts or ideas about other persons in the way of resource persons that -- that you may want at this gathering, that you may start circulating that information. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's to be a one-day session, all-day session, I would think. Almost has to be. COMMISSIONER. LETZ: I would think one day, all day. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: From other re -- go ahead. JUDGE TINLEY: She had a question she was wanting to raise. 1-12-04 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2 "1 22 23 24 25 184 MS. SOVIL: Observation. That you need to post it, perhaps, as a workshop. That way, you don't have to take minutes and you wouldn't have to take a clerk along if you just had a workshop. If -- if you're going to a remote location, you have to remember, if it's a posted meeting, you got staff that is going to have to trail along. If you post it as a workshop, you would not necessarily have to have minutes, and -- and -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I think -- I really think, yeah, it's better if it is a workshop setting without minutes, and I think it's a -- the -- the intent is for us to be able to freely talk about things and, you know -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. The only reason you'd want it to be a regular, full-blown meeting is to make decisions, and we're not anywhere -- wouldn`t be anywhere near that, anyway. So -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If we were to end up, for example, in the Storey Building, would it not be appropriate for us to try to find an underwriter for lunch? Where we don't -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think that would be appropriate. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, yeah. COMMISSIONER BP_LDWIN: You don't know anybody i -1''-09 185 1 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 owns a whole bunch of orange-colored grocery stores around, do you? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, I do. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Isn't that amazing? We're talking about hauling along, like, maybe a County Engineer, like a County Auditor, if he's available, people like that, that can feed us information and be a part of the decision-making process? Is that what you're talking about? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or other outside resource people. You know, if I had somebody that's got expertise on sewers or water, we may want those folks too at some point. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that -- you know, I almost hesitate to say it, but possibly the City Manager of Kerrville. Because, I mean, we do have a lot of relations with them on a lot of issues, and I don't know how you focus -- I think we should possibly have maybe a session -- this is up to Chris Avery, but without anybody, and then maybe bring some other people in, possibly as part of it. But I think -- I think, really, I wouldn't heavily rely on what they think. We can kind of talk about this on -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: There's -- I think there's something to be said for -- if nobody shows up but the five of us, that's okay. 186 1 ,-, 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: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't see that we're going to be making any progress on solving -- on problem solving. We're just going to come up with what we want to spend our energy and resources on for the next few months. JUDGE TINLEY: Identify and prioritize. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah, the Ag Barn's going to be on there; at least two or three of us are interested in doing some work on the Ag Barn. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That may be the way to do it. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't think we're going to float any ideas about what the solutions are in any detail. We're just going to say we need to work on this, and these are the two or three -- the information we need. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the way I was seeing it, too. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That probably better, without anybody but us five, then. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the way I saw it. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We through thrashing this one out? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. ~-lz-o~ 187 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. We'll move on to the next item, then, consider and discuss adoption of Kerr County Indigent Health Care Policy, which would require persons seeking indigent health care status to register for work with Texas Workforce Commission, unless the proposed recipient is exempt from the registration under the Indigent Health Care Program guidelines. I put this on there as a result of a discussion I had with Ms. Judy Bledsoe, who's our Indigent Health Care Administrator. And if -- if we choose, we can -- we can require people who are not otherwise exempt under the guidelines -- and they're listed there; over 60, having a disability rating, have at least a claim pending on appeal, I think is what it's called, and some other exemptions. In order to maintain their status under our Indigent Health Care program, they've at least got to be registered with the Texas Workforce Commission, which apparently they are not now. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely. JUDGE TINLEY: And so I -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's good. JUDGE TINLEY: I think that's a no-brainer. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. So moved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. Welfare to work. .-~ 25 1 - 1 ~ - C 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 188 1 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 approval of the agenda item. Any further question or discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. At this time, do we have anything to gc into executive session about? It doesn't look like we've got any of the right folks to do that, anyway. Hearing none, we'll move on to the approval agenda. Payment of the bills. You showed up on a timely basis, Mr. Auditor. MR. TOMLINSON: I try my best. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's good. MR. TOMLINSON: I got inside information. JUDGE TINLEY: I see. One of those buzzers like they have in the upstairs courtrooms? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move we pay the bills. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. I've got some questions, though. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for payment of the bills. Questions or discussion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not a question. I just want to point something out that I think is a -- is 1-1~-04 189 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 wrong, and that's on -- that's on Page 2, down at the bottom, 198th District Court. Mr. Crider, the third and fourth item down. This guy has -- I went out and watched part of his trial. This guy has three attorneys, court-appointed attorneys that you and I pay for, and they don't do that for everybody. Any kind of indigent person doesn't come in, doesn't get three professional attorneys to represent them, but this guy did. JUDGE TINLEY: Who was the third one, Buster, besides Clay Steadman and -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Pickell. JUDGE TINLEY: -- and Steve Pickell? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, there was three of them sitting tYiere, and I can't -- I'm sorry, I cannot remember -- JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- remember who the third one was. I -- I think it was part of Clay's group. MS. SOVIL: Amos? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, may have been. But I'm not -- certainly not askinq to hold anything out. That -- that's wrong. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that -- is that decision made by the Judge? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think so, mm-hmm. 1-i~-o~ 190 1 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'll go to Page 7, about halfway down, you have Department of Public Safety, and then you have D.P.S. License and Weights. Department of Public -- and these are pagers that are leased. D.P.S. -- how many pagers do we have with the regular D.P.S., the regular highway patrol? Do you know? MR. TOMLINSON: I don't know how many we have. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That bill's $126. And then this one person has a pager for $233. And a pager is not like a cell phone, is it? I mean, the -- I mean, there's just a flat fee you pay. Why is it so different? MR. TOMLINSON: I think he holds his for -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What? MR. TOMLINSON: I think he holds his bills. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, I see. MR. TOMLINSON: One time. We pay them all at one time. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you reckon that's what it is? MR. TOMLINSON: I think that's what it is. Pretty sure it is. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Let's see, I've got a couple more, so don't go to sleep on me. On Page 16, Permanent Improvements, refrigerator. Just help me 1 - i _ _ ~ 4 191 1 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. I'm not saying it's the wrong thing to do. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I knew you were going to find that one. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A refrigerator is not a permanent improvement at my house. COMMISSIONER LETZ: If you put one in recently, for the price of them, they should be. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree, and I have. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It would have been if you were going from an icebox to a refrigerator. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm still in the icebox stage. So, Tommy what do you think? MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I'd have to -- I'd have to research that one to understand -- to know exactly what -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm sure there's a good answer. I just would like to have it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where was it? What department? MR. TOMLINSON: Are the bills in here? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 157949. (Discussion off the record.) JUDGE TINLEY: There's the man that got the refrigerator. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you the i-lz-~~ 192 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ~., 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 refrigerator man? MR. ARREOLA: Hmm-mm. (Discussion off the record.) MR. TOMLINSON: I remember that the -- that all the build-out that ~,ras for -- for their office was to come out of that line item. The bill -- I can't see where the bill says where -- where it went. JUDGE TINLEY: Miguel, did y'all get a -- a new little refrigerator down in your shop? MR. ARREOLA: Yes, we did. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, that's where it is. MR. TOMLINSON: That's what it is, yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. MR. TOMLINSON: And that's -- that's -- JUDGE TINLEY: I think you got a microwave, too, down there. MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. TOMLINSON: Moved moneys from -- from the General Fund. It was $10,000, gross amount, to pay for all -- for everything that we did down there. That was part of it. We had -- really had no place else to pay for this other than that $10,000. JUDGE TINLEY: I think there was -- they came in under, and so the -- these items, I think they -- they i-i~-o9 193 i 2 3 4 5 E 7 8 9 10 11 12 ^_ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~^-. 25 ended up taking out of the excess that they had. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't have any problem with it; I was just wondering where -- where it was coming from. Very next page, Number 17, the first -- Kerrville Daily Times, classified display notice, and Union Church, $1,090. What might that be? MS. SOVIL: What's the fund number? MR. TOMLINSON: What fund number? I'm lost. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It is -- JUDGE TINLEY: 450. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- 660. MR. TOMLINSON: Oh, okay. That -- that is the Historical Commission's money. That's not County money. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: County-sponsored, and the historical people come under County-sponsored. MR. TOMLINSON: We are the fiscal agent for -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The Friends? MR. TOMLINSON: -- for the Friends. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The Friends, that's what I thought. They ran a big ad about the church, didn't they? MR. TOMLINSON: Right. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So that's their money just coming through you? _-iz-o9 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. TOMLINSON: Alm their expenditures come through us. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the same with the calendars? MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what I thought. I had it marked, too. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Calendars was my next question. That's good. Very good, thank you. So, we're just kind of a pass-through on that? MR. TOMLINSON: We're just their agent. I mean, as far as paying them. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all the questions I had. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Took care of mine. JUDGE TINLEY: On the Constable, Precinct 2, it's shown as Vehicle Repairs, 2003 Crown Vic, to JDS Paint and Body. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page are you on, Judge? JUDGE TINLEY: Page 6, excuse me. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can answer that. JUDGE TINLEY: $392. Is that putting all the decals and that stuff on? I thought -- -1~-uq 195 1 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: No, sir. He had some actual damage. Someone, I think, at a football game keyed the rear and the front of his car. JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what that was. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay. Any further questions or discussion? All in favor of the motion to pay the bills, 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 amendments. Budget Amendment Request Number 1. MR. TOMLINSON: This budget amendment is to -- for the Sheriff's Office to transfer $1,285 from Capital Outlay to Lease Payments for the lease payment on his new vehicle. And, along with that, I need an authorized to -- authorization to write a hand check for $10,722.54 to Ford Motor Credit. COMMISSIONER cost more than we thought? MR. TOMLINSO] what -- what he anticipated COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is this because the cars V: Apparently. We budgeted for payments. LETZ: So moved. BALDWIN: Second. i-lz-o~ 196 1 -- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded -- is that his Capital Outlay, or is that somebody else's Capital Outlay? COMMISSIONER LETZ: His. MR. TOMLINSON: It's his. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Motion made and seconded to approve Budget Amendment Request Number 1, authorize hand check to Ford Motor Credit Corporation for $10,722.54. All in favor, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget Amendment Request Number 2. MR. TOMLINSON: Number 2 is for the District Clerk. Her request is to transfer $430.21 from Lease Copier line item to Bonds and Insurance. This is for the renewal on her surety bond. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move to approve. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve Budget Amendment Request Number 2. Any question or discussion? i-l~- 197 1 ~--~ 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: Just an oversight in the budget? MR. TOMLINSON: The premium went up. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, I see. MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good lord, that much? MR. TOMLINSON: From last year, yes. So -- so did the County Clerk's. We just don't have it yet. 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. Do we have any late bi11s? MR. TOMLINSON: No. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay I have before me the transcript of Commissioners Court Special Session on Thursday, December 4; Kerr County Commissioners Court Regular Session, Monday, December 8; Kerr County Commissioners Court Emergency Session, Wednesday, December 10; Kerr County Commissioners Court Special Session, Monday, December 15; Kerr County Commissioners Court Special Session, Monday, December 22, all in the calendar year 2003. 1-i~-o~ 198 1 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 I hear a motion that those be approved as presented? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. He moved and I seconded. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Motion made and seconded to apprcve as presented. Any further question or discussion? All in favor of the motion signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. (Discussion off the record.) JUDGE TINLEY: I also have before me monthly reports of the Sheriff's Department, Justice of the Peace Precinct 4, County Clerk, Justice of the Peace Precinct 2, and District Clerk, and the Youth Exhibit Center monthly report, and the Environmental Health Department, Kerr County O.S.S.F. monthly report for December '03. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we accept them. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to accept the monthly reports as presented. Any further questions or discussion? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got a question. 1-l~'-~~ 199 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,,,_ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2 :3 24 .-. 25 Miguel, please. The revenues for Fiscal Year '04 to-date are about double -- MR. ARREOLA: They are. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- on O.S.S.F. licenses. Is that an anomaly, or is this -- are there more? MR. ARREOLA: It is, yes. That's why I'm here. I want to talk to you about that. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. MR. ARREOLA: Can I keep going already? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Before you get into yours -- Josephina, are you here to find out about the use of the courtroom for the convention? AUDIENCE: Beg pardon? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was just asking if you were here to find out about the use of the courtroom for the Republican Convention. Or are you just visiting? AUDIENCE: I just was listening in. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Welcome. JUDGE TINLEY: Good to have you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good to see you. MR. ARREOLA: Okay. Got five reports. MS. SOVIL: Sir, do you want to take this up under reports from department heads, instead of monthly reports? JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, why don't we do that? 1-1~-09 200 1 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 would be a more appropriate -- I appreciate you bringing that to my attention. Just stand fast; we'll be right there, okay? Let me call, under the information agenda, reports from elected officials cr department heads. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Did you get those accepted? MS. SOVIL; You didn't vote on your monthly reports. JUDGE TINLEY: I didn't? MS. ALFORD: No. JUDGE TINLEY: Let me backtrack here. We have a motion and second to approve the monthly reports as presented. Any further question or discussion? All in favor, signify by -- MS. SOVIL: Who made the motion? MS. ALFORD: Letz. MS. SOVIL: Who seconded? MS. ALFORD: Baldwin. JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.} JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.} JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Now, let me call, on the information agenda, reports from elected -~_-u~ 201 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 officials and department heads. First one we have is from our Environmental Health Department Director. MR. ARREOLA: Okay. We had a very decent month in December. It was -- like Commissioner Nicholson said, the fund -- the inr_ome shows almost double from the prior month, and we compared that to last year's December. That's basically what you have on the graphic in there. That's last year, same month, and we're still a lot busier than what we were last year. So, that's good for the department; it runs more income. There's a lot more work. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Is that attributed to more construction going on? MR. ARREOLA: It is more construction, yes, sir. It's the transfer still; we're doing some transfers, but we're -- not as many. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. Where -- am I correct that we are no longer in the business of real estate transfer ir:spections? MR. ARREOLA: That's my next point here. We did receive the approval from T.C.E.Q. last Thursday or Friday -- Friday. They were stamped, signed, dated the 22nd, but we didn't receive it until Friday, so I'm taking my effective day as of Friday. Is that gcod? COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's good. MR. ARREOLA: Okay. And as of Friday, we had 1-1z-~~ 202 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 two inspections that day, and we canceled and returned the checks. We didn't do it Friday. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good. MR. ARREOLA: And we're not doing them any more. For that effect, I do have a draft new application that is riot going to reflect anything on the transfer. I have it also in your package there. It's not going to have anything with transfers. Now -- yes, sir? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. The Court order -- and I don't remember; I'm asking. MR. ARREOLA: I have it here. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The court order when we cancelled, went with the new rules, was there an effective date given there? MR. ARREOLA: No. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Was there any date? MR. ARREOLA: It didn't have an effective date. I think it was mentioned that the day we received it back from T.C.E.Q., that would be the effective date, but it's not in writing. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It was a meeting date. JUDGE TINLEY: And I gather, from what I've seen and what Mr. Arreola is telling us, that the date that i-i~-o~ 203 1 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 was approved by T.C.E.Q. on December 22nd of last year, that's the effective date of the new rules in Kerr County. MR. ARREOLA: In Kerr County, we didn't know of that approval, and we did some transfers during that period of time until last Friday. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I would -- I guess -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The date we received it at the courthouse. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think it makes that much difference one way or the other. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Seems like if you did the inspection, it's okay to charge for it. If the application was in, but the inspection wasn't done, give them their money back. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Common sense, sure. MR. ARREOLA: So, that's what we did. So, here's -- there's the new application for us, O.S.S.F. It doesn't show anything with the transfer, but there's some question -- some people want to have a transfer document, so we drafted a document or an application to do that for people who insist to have that type of document, and we're thinking about bringing a fee for those. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is this -- what's that i-l~-~~ 204 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ..-, 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,.-.. 25 look like? talking about? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which one are we MR. ARREOLA: Okay. It's going to be -- let me get it to you. It's right next to your application. It says Application for Kerr County Registration of On-Site Sewage Facility Transfer, just one page. One page. COMMISSIONER LETZ: First page, okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. License transfer? MR. ARREOLA: License transfer, yes, sir. And that is for somebody who wants to have that document. According to the rules, we don't have to do anything. That transfers automatically. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, we'd be providing them a service. If they've got some concern about -- MR. ARREOLA: Exactly right. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do we incur any liability doing that? I recall one of my constituents out in west Kerr County was -- had his inspected, and then it passed, and then it didn't work, and he was looking for somebody to sue. Let me restate my question. I think it would be a good and beneficial thing to do this. I'm just raising the issue, do we -- do we incur any liability by i ---o~ 205 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ._.. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~-. 25 doing it? MR. ARREOLA: The way we're presenting this -- and I also -- I don't know if I have it with me; I'll look for it. I have some forms from the past during a certain period of time, that the County was not doing those, those transfers. We used a form that it says there's no liability; this is just a paper transfer. This is just to reflect the new owner name. So, we're planning to use something like that if the Court agrees with it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think I would be in favor of a paper transfer, but I don't want to be inspecting anything. MR. ARREOLA: No, we're not going to be inspecting anything at all. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So we're not going to be on the ground -- MR. ARREOLA: No. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- trying to tell them whether or not their O.S.S.F. works? MR. ARREOLA: Not going to do just going to tell them you used to have the system now. It's in somebody else's name. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm JUDGE TINLEY: Your documents COMMISSIONER LETZ: Change of an inspection; -- this is your fine with that. go to -- ownership. 1-lz-o~ 206 1 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: Okay. MR. ARREOLA: And they don't have to do that. I mean, according to the rules, we don't have to. This is optional, if they want to have it. But we want to charge $50 to do that service. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That seems high. MR. ARREOLA: Seems high? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How much? COMMISSIONER LETZ: $50 seems high, to me. I think we encourage -- I mean, $10. JUDGE TINLEY: That's the figure that came to my mind. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm saying -- MR. ARRECLA: That will not reflect the work that we need to do. That's my problem. COMMISSIONER LETZ: All we're doing is changing address. MR. ARREOLA: Well, we have to take all the information and review it and make sure it makes -- it matches with what they're saying, and then provide a document for us to say that this matches the property that you're buying. We have to do some research, and we have to be sure that we're doing the right thing. So it's -- it's time-consuming. And that will be the only way. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why would we do it? 1-i~-og 1 --. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 207 Tell me again. why we want to do it if it's not required. MR. ARREOLA: That is if -- like, I had some people right in the office a few minutes ago; they wanted something from us saying it was this person, now it's this person's name. That's all they need, but something from us. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They want a supporting document if, as, and when they decide to sell their property, right? MR. ARREOLA: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well -- well, and, Commissioner, if it's aerobic, we want to know who to mail one of those ugly letters to. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: $50 -- I mean, I didn't understand how much work is involved. That seems high to me, and I think we would want to have -- price this -- I think we are better off as a county knowing the owners of all the septic systems, so we want to price it as cheap as possible to get people to do this. Basically, that's all we're doing, as I understand, we're basically updating our records. MR. ARREOLA: Yeah. Well, that be pretty good to have, like you said, but it will not reflect the amount of work we're doing. If you want to pay for that, then -- 1-l~'-U9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 208 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How about 25? COMMISSTONER BALDWIN: 25? I'll go with 25. MR. ARREOLA: Well, $50, it will pay for its own. But if -- you know, if we want to subsidize one, that be fine. You tell us. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wait a minute. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How long does it take you, all this hard work you're talking about? How long does it take you to do that? MR. ARREOLA; Well, say, just to research, about an hour. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $25 for an hour is fair -- pretty fair number, isn't it? MR. ARREOLA: It's more what they get for the hour. MS. SOVIL: What are you researching? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Files. Files. MS. SOVIL: What kind of files? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Their files. MS. SOVIL: It's always been in the person's name. My septic tank is -- is at 104 Joshua. Doesn't matter who owns it, the septic tank's at 104 Joshua. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Unless you had a leak, and one of your neighbors -- MR. ARREOLA: We have to verify the legal i-l~-og 1 .-. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,..., 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 209 description of the property, make sure it stays the same. Sometimes they subdivide the property. Sometimes it's just not two lots in there, and just be careful not to give them a document that doesn't show what really is there. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think we've talked about a goal on this -- this operation and some of them similar to that, of being self-sustaining; that revenues equal costs. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's kind of where I'm coming from. COMMISSIONER LETZ: If it costs $50 -- it just seems high to me, but if that's what it costs, we can do it. But I think the other side of it is, we want accurate -- MR. ARREOLA: You know, this is always -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- data. MR. ARREOLA: This is optional; they don't have to do it if they don't want to. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would we all agree that 35 is a nice compromise? COMMISSIONEF, NICHOLSON: Sure. At quarter of 3:00, I'll agree to anything. MR. ARREOLA: Yeah. I don`t know if we need to put an agenda item for this. JUDGE TINLEY: We would to set that fee. 1- 1~'-'J? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 210 COMMISSIONER LETZ: To set the fees, we'll have to have an agenda item. MR. ARREOLA: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Think about it. If it takes $50, recommend that, but let's try to get it as low as we can. I mean -- MR. ARREOLA: Okay. Now, a little -- coming back a little bit to that graphic, I would like to point to you the -- the difference with the applications, as that's not exactly shown in the report, the difference from last year to this year, and that is all new applications. That's all new systems, so that's new work coming to the county. That's growing. It's a lot of construction going on. So, we are -- we are having a lot. You can also see in the number of inspections we had to do compared to the last year, so we -- we are being pretty easy on the other side. We didn't have that much time to do paperwork; that's why licenses doesn't show as high. But we -- we are now making up for last month. It's been pretty consistent, pretty busy since November. Since last -- last half of November, it was starting to be pretty busy. So, it continues. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good. MR. ARREOLA: And it's not stopping. Going pretty hard. Let's see what else I have. I did call -- or Tish called the T.C.E.Q. We got in a letter that we didn't i-l~-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 211 receive for the approval, and they asked us why are we doing inspections on the U.G.R.A. jurisdiction. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why we what? MR. ARREOLA: Are we doing inspections on the U.G.R.A. jurisdiction. JUDGE TINLEY: The 1,500 feet? MR. ARREOLA: Exactly right. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 'Cause that's Kerr County jurisdiction also. MR. ARREOLA: Well, I did check their authorized agents in the county. They don't have us. They still have us as the U.G.R.A., and the U.G.R.A. having their own. I don't know if we need to contact them, call them or clarify this. COMMISSIONER LETZ: My understanding from talking with Ken Graber was that the reason for the delay in getting our order approved was waiting on U.G.R.A. to give up their authorized agent status. JUDGE TINLEY: That's that was my understanding also. And they just did that about mid-December, as I recall, early to mid-December. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I suspect the records haven't been modified to reflect the -- MR. ARREOLA: The day this was modified was December 19th, and I printed today. This did show it, so I 1-_~-0~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 212 don't know if we should wait just one more month. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You just might mention -- or send this to -- fax this to Ken Graber and say, "Update your records." MR. ARREOLA: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's new? MR. ARREOLA: Okay. And that's what I have. Just for your information, tomorrow I have a meeting with Scott Loveland at U.G.R.A. for the public education program that we have. COMMISSIONER MR. ARREOLA: COMMISSIONER Solid Waste into the same e MR. ARREOLA: COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good. Going to be starting with that. LETZ: Good. You might roll ~ucation program. The same? Get them together? LETZ: Get them together. WILLIAMS: Question. LETZ: Get U.G.R.A. to pay for it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One quickie question. On your third bar graph here, your income -- MR. ARREOLA: Yeah? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- it says KYTD. What is "K"? MR. ARREOLA: Thousands. Thousands. i-i~-o9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 213 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thousands of dollars? MR. ARREOLA: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wow. Okay. MR. ARREOLA: Is that correct? JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought it was kiero. Just teasing. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Miguel, how's it going? MR. ARREOLA: It's going pretty good. We haven't had any complaints that I know about, unless you know someone that I don't. We've been very busy, but we've been able to assist everybody. We haven't hold anybody up or miss any inspections. We are booked. We are booked all week, and part of next week. So, you know, if someone call in for inspection today, and they have no room until next week, you might hear about that, but we are very busy. JUDGE TINLEY: You're all settled in downstairs? Got everything you need to work with? MR. ARREOLA: We got all the equipment. We still need to move some stuff around. We haven't had time to move it, but we got what we needed to work. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ever get your parking spots? MR. ARREOLA: My what? 1-1~-,~~ 214 1 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: Parking spaces. MR. ARREOLA: Yeah, we did have -- we got them. We got them for the vehicles, so everything is working okay. I'm still working on -- I need some new tires for one of the jeeps and things like that, but -- and they're going pretty good. Pretty good. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, good. MS. SOVIL: Do we need to look at the interlocal agreements with the City of Kerrville and the City of Ingram for O.S.S.F. stuff? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know. Do we? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, they're interlocals between the cities -- the two cities and U.G.R.A. They need to be amended and corrected to reflect interlocals between those two cities and Kerr County. MR. ARREOLA: City of Ingram has their own program, so we don't -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Then that one goes away. MR. ARREOLA: Yeah, but we still -- we used to have the City of Kerrville and U.G.R.A. You know, we need to revise that and get with the County Attorney. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably ought to formally cancel the one with the City of Ingram. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't think we had -i~-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 215 one with the City of Ingram, did we? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: U.G.R.A. did at one time, and then they determined to do their own program, as Miguel said. MR. ARREOLA: Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And I guess the contract just stayed in the file or whatever. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. Their -- their Designated Agent is Wes Aiken. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Aiken. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MR. ARREOLA: Do you want me to contact the City of Kerrville, or do you guys want to do that? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. I'd say yes. MR. ARREOLA: Okay. And that is a no-charge contract? I haven't gone to the attorney's office or -- how do we do it? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I would -- I wouldn't go that far yet. I'd just find out -- let's just get -- you know, I don't even -- didn't even know you were doing this in Kerrville. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why don't we research, see what happened in the past? COMMISSIONER LETZ: See what we've been doing in the past. I mean, I don't think it's a no-charge i-lz-o~ 216 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 contract, in my opinion. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't, either. I think there was a fee. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I think that -- I mean, probably just talk to the City Manager and say, you know, this was -- we had this before. City had it with -- interlocal with the U.G.R.A., and do they want to continue? And if the answer is no, then we don't have to worry about it. If the answer is yes, we need to have a new contract. MR. ARREOLA: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The finance guy at U.G.R.A. could tell you the answer to that, going back in history for two or three, four years or whatever. MR. ARREOLA: Mm-hmm. (Discussion off the record.) MR. ARREOLA: Okay. Any other questions for me? JUDGE TINLEY: That's all you got for us, Miguel? MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. We appreciate it very much. MR. ARREOLA: Thank you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you going to be in your office the rest of the afternoon? 1-1z-~~ 1 .r., 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .--, 25 217 MR. ARREOLA: I got two inspections. Do you need me? I got two inspections, which -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's your extension number? MR. ARREOLA: Gosh, I don't know. MS. SOVIL: I just know the number, 896-9020. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I may want to put a message out to you after I've talked to you. MR. ARREOLA: I'll get you the number. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Miguel. MR. ARREOLA: You're welcome. JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any other elected officials that wish to give us reports? Obviously not. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Except me. JUDGE TINLEY: Reports from Commissioners, and/or liaison committee assignments. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I have a sort of report that -- that Commissioner Williams may want to join me on. I put a copy in your -- each of your in-box of the minutes of the last Joint Airport Advisory Board meeting. This is probably a -- as good a way as any to keep the rest of you updated as to what is going on in there. And one of the issues there in that meeting is that Commissioner Williams asked Dr. Davis, Chairman of the Board, and David 1 l~-„~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 218 Pearce, Airport Manager, to attend the Commissioners Court work session to brief the Commissioners on the Capital Improvement Projects that were approved by the Board. I -- I would like to see that happen. I'd like for everybody on this Commissioners Court to see what -- what the plan is. COMMISSIONER WILLTAMS: We'll probably come near getting David here -- Pearce here, because of availability, than we will Dr. Davis, whose schedule's pretty full. But, yeah. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I recall that some time ago -- some months ago, we asked our members of that group to visit with us, and that hasn't happened, so -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: One of them came to our last meeting. I think it's more appropriate for the Airport Manager to do the presentation. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Granger came. Granger MacDonald came. Getting with Dr. Davis is -- he's not going to be able to take away from his practice to come sit in Commissioners Court for two hours. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The other thing I wanted to say about the airport, I suppose everybody got a copy of this letter from Nelson Happy to Stephen Fine and the Kerr County Commissioners Court proposing a -- a contract. I think the right thing to do is get that on the next agenda. Or is there a better way to deal with it? i-,?-o~ 219 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought the contract was being worked from the City's side. That's the way it's been up to this -- to this moment. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All this time. And I got that, and I -- I didn't pay much attention to it because of -- looked like, to me, an information sheet, as opposed to some kind of legal document. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think that point's been one of my frustrations, is that I think that the City and the County need to meet, determine what those terms are going to be, and then set something forward and negotiate. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's the whole point. You know, I think that's the whole point. And Nelson Happy's letter brings it, again, clearly into focus that we have to settle the issue of who's on first and who's on second and how's it going to happen. 'Cause, you know, the Commissioner's right, we need to have our -- the person who's responsible needs to be the front person in terms of contract proposals and County proposals and responses and this and that. And that letter is nothing more than a rehash of what he has had on his desk, giving back to us as his idea, with some exceptions. So, I think, again, we've got to get the thing resolved. I know you've met with a couple City Councilmen. I, too, have met with them -- one i~ o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 220 of them; he was in court this morning. And he wanted to make the point that while your proposal to the Court, just -- whenever it was I did it. Last meeting in December? I don't remember when it was. Said it probably wouldn't fly in light of my interpretation of the Transportation Code. I said, "My proposal to Commissioners Court did precisely what it was intended to do, and that's to get people off of their rear end down here on the other end of the street to get something moving." And so it had -- I hope it had the desired effect. And then I asked him in return, would you please find out from the Assistant City Attorney when Commissioners can expect the document she promised that -- that gives us the basis of these discussions. COMMISSIONER LETZ: While we're on the airport, I mean, I did have a meeting with Councilmen Brown and Smith, and I did that shortly after it was in the San Antonio and Kerrville paper that the City spends $276,000 more than the County does. And I sent a memo to Ron Patterson the day after those articles came out asking him to gave me documentation to support that -- those numbers, because that was not what people said at our joint meeting, and this is the first I'd ever heard those -- such numbers. He -- I've been told now three times, those numbers are in the process of being created. JUDGE TINLEY: Created? i-lz-o~ 221 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I use that word very intentionally. In the -- I was told, as of this morning, it will be sometime next week, which is, interestingly, four weeks after they came up with this number. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which I, too, mentioned it to City Councilman Brown when he and I had lunch together, and he said essentially what you said, although he expected those numbers would be revised and available this week. My response to Zeke McCormick and anybody else who asked the question about those numbers is, they're bogus. That's absolutely bogus numbers. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, anyway, so that is -- is working is the -- I think some of the City Council people are aware of our frustrations, and I think that's the -- you know, the -- at least they're aware. I was hoping to meet with Ron Patterson this afternoon, but the length of this meeting's going to preclude that from happening. But, you know, I think we need to move forward on it. I'm trying to say that we're -- you know, I'm not going to let this thing die. We need to get it resolved. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Neither will I. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One of the interesting things in that document you have in your hand there, though, that Mooney wants to -- they want to cut out some of their rental space; they don't want to rent it any more, but they i-~2-04 222 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 would like to keep their equipment inside the building, if they could. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm not thinking about the merits of the proposal, but it is a proposal, and as co-owners, we should have some role in responding to the proposal. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, okay. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We have not delegated Ron Patterson to represent our -- our ownership interest. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's one of the bones of contention. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's put on it the agenda and respond to it. COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I suspect that if it's not up for discussion at Wednesday's meeting, there ought to be some way to broach the topic. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wednesday's airport meeting? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think that brings up -- we've been talking about this for almost a year now, because of this leasing situation, and we're back to the same situation that if -- you know, if the Airport Board i-l~-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 223 is not going to negotiate that lease, we need to go after competitive bidding, I guess, I don't know how you do it. Renew -- a renewal first. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We don't have to do it. That was our own County Attorney that told you you don't have to do it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: If the Board does it. If we do it, we do, as I recall. But, anyway -- COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What's going to happen next on this whole issue of -- of the City and the County's relationship on managing the airport? COMMISSIONER LETZ; As I understand it, we're waiting on the City Manager to give us a draft proposal. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what I was referring to a moment ago. Ilse Bailey told us in that memo she sent here that I provided to the Court last time out, she would have a document ready as a basis for discussion by mid-January. Well, it's coming up pretty close to mid-Januarv. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it needs to be on our next agenda to have the City Manager come up, present that proposal. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll be happy to put ..-~ 25 1-1"-04 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know -- it on. 224 1 .-. 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: Put this one on, too. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm looking to one of you two -- I mean, you two being one of the two Commissioners on the liaisons. Okay. (Discussion off the record.} COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have another topic, if I might. JUDGE TINLEY: Are you through, Commissioner Nicholson? COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just an update on Hermann Sons. I just wanted to keep everyone a little bit aware of -- on that. My recollection is that the Court kind of gave me -- told me to get the right-of-way done. I met with -- the issue came up on title insurance, and I might -- the County Attorney talked about this a little bit. He was a little bit -- you know, didn't have a strong recommendation one way or the other, whether we had title insurance on these new acquisitions. He chose -- County Attorney chose to use Fidelity Abstract, so I met with Jimmy Peschei on it, and I -- I pretty much made the decision and then told the County Attorney, I think we need to have title insurance on this. For -- even though, customarily, we do not on right-of-way acquisitions, but since we`re putting a 1-1?-04 1 .... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 225 $1.3 million bridge on these right-of-way acquisitions, that it was a little bit different. And also, TexDOT does require title insurance on all their right-of-ways, and since this is a TexDOT-funded project, I just went ahead and followed -- you know, it is -- be about $1,500, I understand it, additional cost. But I -- I didn't want to be the Commissioner that raised my hand to build a $1.3 million bridge on property that had issues. So -- JUDGE TINLEY: Title to. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Didn't have title to. So, that is progressing. We do have verbal agreement basically with everybody. JUDGE TINLEY: All of the -- all of the persons from whom we need right-of-way, you think we've got it nailed down? COMMISSIONER LETZ: We have -- Mr. Roarick, we have not, but we -- he's kind of said he didn't like the price. He's a -- he bought the property of Mr. Steen. But the -- the tract we've had a lot of difficulty with, Mr. Tijerina, has agreed to accept our original offer. And we're -- that's our priority, to get that one locked up first. And we will -- we're working with the County Attorney. We should hopefully have those deeds and the money within two weeks, prepared. That's it. JUDGE TINLEY: How about you, Commissioner -~~-04 226 1 ..,-. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Williams? What do you got? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just want to -- one quickie here. In terms -- nothing under 5.1, 'cause we just talked about that, with the -- except one caveat. At the Wednesday meeting, discussion of the governance has been placed on the agenda by Dr. Davis. So, there would be -- I would think, in terms of how they operate now, it's probably nothing more than to elicit expressions from the various board members about how they feel about the issue. I know that our board members that we've appointed are going to feel like we need tc get this thing straightened out. I was -- switching to 5.3, on reports, on joint projer_ts, one of my discussions with Councilman Brown had to do with the library, and I provided Councilman Brown a copy of my -- as I did you, a copy of my memorandum to County Attorney Motley regarding the things I think that need to be addressed in the renewal of the agreement, and so he's aware, and he'll do whatever homework he wants to do on his end with respect to that. There's nothing particularly earth-shattering in there, just things that need to be addressed, But, we did get off on -- he and I got off on the topic of long-range planning, again, having to do with the library facility. I think anybody that uses the library or knows about the cost of operations of the library and its utilization knows that that very fine facility that was 1-1~-04 1 ,.~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 227 given to us by Butt-Holdsworth folks way back when is overutilized. And, to complicate that, how you -- how you go about improving that facility, then you get involved with the Friends of the Library, who -- which is a very aggressive, energetic organization that has -- has a deep and abiding interest in the library and raises a lot of money over the years for the library. And they were -- they believe they were principally involved in getting the funding to purchase that piece of -- that facility between the library and the historical building. All of which is to say, the City's about to vacate that; that building is probably going to get torn down. There will be -- probably be a push to figure out how to utilize the grounds in the future for expansion of library facilities. That said, I saw your utilization step that said Councilman Brown and I are going to see if we can facilitate some discussions with the Friends and the Chair of the Library Board, with a view toward getting some planning sessions underway that will take a look at where the Butt-Holdsworth Library is to go in the future. Not -- not physically relocated, but how the facility can be brought up to its utilization, its requirement for utilization. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bill, on that, is -- either you or Commissioner Baldwin, please correct me if I'm 1-1~-04 1 .-. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ,.-, 25 228 wrong. I recall at a joint meeting several years ago, this came up about the utilization of that property, and it was clearly pointed out that that additional property is City property and the County has nothing to do with that. It is not going to pay a penny for anything on that property. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's true. I'm not suggesting that. I'm not suggesting that. But the utilization of the property, what's going to happen with it, is obviously going to be a topic of big discussion coming up, either between the Friends and the Library Advisory Board and so forth. And is the library going to expand? If so, how and where? How is that facility or that ground going to be used in the meantime? And if you have to look at it, a realistic view over the long haul, whatever happens down the line, whether we participate in capital expenditures for expansion/improvement of the library or not, is going to affect our commitment for funding on an annualized basis. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But what I'm saying is, if -- and I remember it because I talked about paving; you know, how they're going to keep track of paving their part of the parking lot versus our part. And the Mayor's comment was, this will be funded under a different fund. So, that property is not part of the library. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not right now, it's i-i~-04 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 229 not. It's titled to the City. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But there's no -- I mean, to my mind, it's going to be a big step for me to start doing much stuff on that piece of property, because -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't see us going there, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or doing anything. But -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I'm just saying, you're meeting with the City and the Friends. That property is not the Butt-Holdsworth Library. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not now. Neither the historical building -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not ever, in my mind. I mean, that's a different -- that's a City facility, and if they can do it -- the City can do what they want, but it has no impact on Butt-Holdsworth Library. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As you and I know Butt-Holdsworth Library today. I think you have to realize, as you and I know Butt-Holdsworth Library today. But we may know Butt-Holdsworth Library and its operations on a day-to-day basis differently in the future. COMMISSIONER LETZ: What I`m saying is, they can't do that without coming to us and doing that. They 1-1~-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 230 can't arbitrarily expand the library into a bunch of City property and expect to us pay half of it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think that -- I think all that has to evolve. I don't disagree with you. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I just want to make sure that they're aware that that property has nothing to do with the Butt-Holdsworth Library at this point, and it will not have anything to do with that property until this Commissioners Court says it does. Not when the City's -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Clearly acknowledged, that's true. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just want to make -- I mean, I'm not -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Your point's well-taken. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because I brought it up. And I'm not being argumentative with the City on this point, but that we`ve talked about it and they said, "No. No, this has nothing to do with the library." It's -- I said, "Okay, fine." COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At this point, it doesn't, that's right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, where does the Airport Board meet? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: City Hall. -~~-o~ 231 1 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: On Wednesday? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: City Hall at 4:30. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Incidentally, on -- a quick thing back on the airport. They said that, because of the -- of this being a created number, 376,000, it made sense to me -- I mean, I know that the -- or I shouldn't say -- I don't know it. I imagine that the City is using all kinds of numbers to create that number as big as it can be. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What was it, legal fees? And what -- JUDGE TINLEY: Administrative. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Administrative. That's something else. JUDGE TINLEY: Street department. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's Street Department, engineering fees, engineer -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Engineering and legal. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Engineering and legal. That's all it was originally. But, anyway -- but I think that the -- just from the standpoint -- I tried to come up with how many times we've had to deal with the airport in the last 12 months. It's been on our agenda 12 times, and considering we don't have the paid staff that they're lumping all their numbers into, I've kind of taken it upon 1-i~-~~ 232 1 „^ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 myself to come up with a -- a ballpark number as to how much money we contribute to the -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I reminded the City Councilmen that -- that we don't have paid staff to do all these things for us. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we say that; however, that doesn't mean that there's not taxpayer's money, being part -- a portion of our salaries and Thea's salary and the County Clerk and the County Auditor, that are spent in time administering that airport. And, conservatively, based on numbers I come up with, it's about $50,000. And I think that -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Great argument for us when we sit down to hash out what that number really is. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think we need to remember that. And, you know, because they are -- they cannot include their staff time and not include our time. That's just my point. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That'll be fun. JUDGE TINLEY: Is that all you got, Commissioner Williams? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Isn't that enough, Judge? JUDGE TINLEY: If you got more, we'll listen. Commissioner Baldwin? -i~-o~ 233 1 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: No, sir. No, sir, 9-1-1 is the only thing on my mind, and we took care of that in the agenda item. Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Any other -- any other report in connection with joint projects or operations? No Road and Bridge, no Maintenance. Unless some of you gentlemen got something that's on here that I missed, I don't see anything else before us. We'll stand adjourned. (Commissioners Court adjourned at 3:11 p.m.) i _~-u~ 234 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 STATE OF TEXAS I COUNTY OF KERR The above and foregoing is a true and complete transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 21st day of January, 2004. JANNETT PIEPER,~ /K~err County Clerk B Y : GZ~'LC~ Kathy B ik, Deputy County Clerk Certified Shorthand Reporter 22 23 24 .-_ 25 i~-u~ ORDER N0.28474 APPROVAL OF KERR COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT TO FILE A GRANT APPLICATION WITH ALAMO AREA COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS On this the 12th day of January, 2004 upon motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously Approved by a vote of 4-0-0, authorizing Kerr County Environmental Health Department to file a grant application with Alamo Area Council of Governments (AACOG) for funding under the FY 2004 Regional Solid Waste Grant Program to expand our existing Solid Waste Program to included Household Hazardous (HHW) collection, recycling, reuse and/or proper disposal. Approving the Resolution as amended that to "east Kerr County" designation as opposed to just Center Point and authorize the County Judge to sign same. ORDER N0.28475 AUTHROIZE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND COUNTY ENGINEER TO PURSE ANY LEGAL REMEDIES On this the 12`h day of January 2004 upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, on the issue of the floodplain, to direct the County Attorney and the County Engineer to pursue any legal remedies we have to make sure that the individual involved follows the law. ORDER N0.28476 AUTHORIZE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND COUNTY ENGINEER TO INVESTIGATE ALL ASPECTS OF THE LAW On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, that the Court instruct the County Attorney and the County Engineer to investigate all aspects of this with respect to the law and the full circumstances and report back to the Court at its next meeting as to what our remedies may or may not be. ORDER N0.28477 OPEN AND ACCEPT BIDS FOR ROAD AND BRIDGE DEPARTMENT On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to open annual bids and accept bids and refer them to the Road and Bridge Department for Equipment by the hour, Paving Aggregate, Asphalt Emulsions, Corrugated Metal Pipe, Black Base Type AA, Cold Mix Type CC, and Road Base Material to bring back to Court on January 26, 2004 to award the bids. ORDER N0.28478 AUTHORIZE THE SHERIFF TO DISPOSE OF 4 CARS On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to make the following 4 cars surplus: 1993 Chevrolet, 1995 Chevrolet, 1996 Ford and 1997 Ford and authorize the Sheriff to dispose of them. ORDER N0.28479 REQUEST MONTHLY REPORTS FROM KERR COUNTY CONSTABLES On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to request monthly reports from the Kerr County Constables. ORDER N0.28480 APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN KERB COUNTY AND APPRIS, INC On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, of agreement between Kerr County and Appris, Inc. to provide crime victim notification services to the citizens and residents of Kerr County. ORDER N0.28481 APPROVAL OF ALTERNATE PLAT OF LOTS 83 & 84 NORTHWEST HILLS On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, of alternate Plat process of Lot 83 and 84 Northwest Hills, Precinct 1. ORDER N0.28482 APPROVAL TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON ROAD NAME CHANGES, REGULATORY SIGN On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to set public hearing on February 23, 2004 at 10:30 a.m. to consider adoption of the proposed road name changes in accordance with the guidelines of Kerr 911, abandon, discontinue and vacate County maintained roads and install regulatory signs. Current Name Changed To Roane Rd. N Wilson Creek Rd N Sidney Baker N (from City Limits to Fredericksburg Rd N Gillespie County Line) Regulatory Signs Remove Stop Sign Lindner Branch Rd E at Hermann Sons Abandon, Discontinue and Vacate Kerr County Maintenance Run Rd W. Gulch Ranch Rd W ORDER N0.28483 APPROVE PRIVATE ROAD NAME CHANGES IN ACCORDANCE WITH 911 GUIDELINES On this the 12`h day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, private road name changes in accordance with 911 Guidelines as follows: Existing Road Name Unnamed Eland Trl NW Bambi Ln NW 5001 Requested Name Change Location Goodnight Trl NW Ridgeline Rd. NW Kudu Rd NW YO Ranchlands YO Ranchlands YO Ranchlands Williams Trl N (Runs between Goat Creek & Wren Rd) ORDER N0.28484 APPROVAL FOR COMMISSIONER PCT. #1 TO PREPARE A PROPOSAL TO HOST WEST TEXAS COUNTY JUDGES AND COMMISSIONERS CONFERENCE On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to authority Commissioner Pct. #1 to prepare a proposal to host the West Texas County Judge and Commissioners Conference for 2006. ORDER N0.28485 ADOPTING RESOLUTION TO HOST 2006 WEST TEXAS JUDGES AND COMMISSIONERS ASSOCIATION ANNUAL CONFERENCE On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, adopting a resolution to host the 2006 West Texas Judges and Commissioners Association Annual Conference. ORDER N0.28486 APPROVAL OF THE KERB COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY TO USE DISTRICT COURTROOM On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, for the Kerr County Republican Party to use District Courtroom #1 on March 27, 2004 from 8:00 a.m. unti16:00 p.m. for purpose of conducting the Kerr County Republican Convention. ORDER N0.28487 APPROVE CONTRACT BETWEEN KERR COUNTY AND ALAMO REGIONAL TRANSIT On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, the contract between Kerr County and Alamo Regional Transit to provide transportation services to the citizens of Kerr County, including the indigent and the elderly. ORDER N0.28488 ADOPTION OF KERB COUNTY INDIGENT HEALTH CARE POLICY On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, of adoption of Kerr County Indigent Health Care policy which would require person seeking indigent health care status to register for work with Texas Workforce Commission unless proposed recipient is exempt from such registration under Indigent Health Care Guidelines. ORDER N0.28489 CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS On this the 12`h day of January 2004, came to be considered by the Court various Commissioners precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are: 10-General: $246,560.15 14-Fire Protection: $10,416.66 15-Road and Bridge: $72,844.23 18-County Law Library: $2,464.30 59-General Contractual Obligation: $148,565.00 61-1998 Tax Anticipation Note: $16,595.00 70-Permanent Improvement: $235.53 80-Historical Commission: $2,934.45 TOTAL CASH REQUIRED FOR ALL FUNDS: $500,615.32 Upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to pay said Accounts. ORDER N0.28490 BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE SHERIFF' S DEPARTMENT On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to transfer $1,285.21 from Line Item No. 10-560-570 Capital outlay to Line Item No. 10-560-462 Lease payments and issue a hand check in the amount of $10,722.54 to Ford Motor Credit for lease payment on 2003 Ford Expedition in the Sheriff s Department. ORDER N0.28491 BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE DISTRICT CLERK On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to transfer $430.21 from Line Item No. 10-450-461 Lease Copier to Line Item No. 10-405-206 Bonds and Insurance in the District Clerk. ORDER N0.28492 APPROVE AND ACCEPT MINUTES AND WANE READING On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to waive reading and approve the minutes of Special Commissioners Court Meeting on December 4, 2003, Regular Commissioners Court Meeting on December 8, 2003, Special Emergency Commissioners Court Meeting on December 10, 2003, Special Commissioners Court Meeting on December 15, 2003, Special Commissioners Court Meeting on December 22, 2003. ORDER 0.28493 ACCEPT MONTHLY REPORTS On this the 12th day of January 2004, upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to accept the following monthly reports: Sheriff s Report Justice of the Peace Pct. #2 & #4 County Clerk District Clerk Hill County Youth Exhibition Center Environmental Health Department