X
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Regular Session
Monday, February 14, 2005
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
`~
v
~~
1
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
February 14, 2005
--- Commissioners' Comments
1.1 Order securing payment of "Kerr County, Texas
Certificates of Obligation, Series 2005" by
authorizing levy of an annual ad valorem tax;
Readopt order approved February 4, 2005, and
provide for immediate effective date
1.2 Resolution approving application for Violence
Against Women Act grant to hire special prosecutor
to prosecute cases (25o match required)
1.3 Approval of annual accounts deposited into Court
Registry pursuant to Texas Probate Code
1.4 Approve Paula Rector's resignation from the Board
of Directors of Kerr Central Appraisal District
1.5 Consider advertising for annual bids for road base,
cold mix, black base, trap rock, emulsion oil,
corrugated metal pipe, and equipment by the hour
1.6 Preliminary Plat of Waugh Acres, Pct. 2
1.7 Consider rescinding Court Order 28660 requiring
platting of property in Precinct 2 owned by Rickert
& Bettac; approve new court order that does not
require platting in accordance Subdivision Rules
1.8 Consider notification of Road name changes
1.15 Consider approving Commissioners Court Employee
Evaluation form
1.16 Discuss approval of the Child Welfare Board of
Directors
1.9 Public Hearing - alternate plat process for
Grotto Springs Ranch, Lot 5, Precinct 3
1.11 Consider approval of alternate plat process for
Grotto Springs Ranch, Lot 5, Precinct 3
1.10 Open bids for Information Technology Services
1.12 Consider renewal of lease for West Kerr County
Annex and increase in rental for that facility
PAGE
4
6
11
16
17
19
20
28
40
50
53
59
60
62
64
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)
February 14, 2005
1.13 Consider renewal of commercial lease for 216th
Adult Probation offices at 431 Quinlan Street
1.14 Status of the new roof on the Hill Country Youth
Exhibit Center
1.17 Authorize advertising for bids to clean out
debris & trash deposited in Flat Rock Lake, take
down dead trees, remove submerged stumps, etc.
1.18 Authorize County Judge to sign placement contracts
and other agreements on behalf of Kerr County
1.19 Consider expanding scope of engagement of
Pressler-Thompson & Company to perform an
in-depth audit of Kerr County Juvenile Detention
Facility for the years 2002, 2003 and 2004
1.20 Consider discrepancy of salaries between County
employees and Juvenile Detention Facility
employees and make appropriate adjustments
1.21 Discuss, review & authorize budget for Kerr
County Juvenile Detention Facility
1.22 Consider waiving OSSF plat reviewlinspection
fees for Center Point Independent School
District's trade school building project
4.1 Pay Bills
4.2 Budget Amendments
4.3 Late Bills
4.4 Read and Approve Minutes
4.5 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports
5.1 Reports from Commissioners/liaison committee
assignments
5.2 Reports from elected officials/department heads
--- Adjourned
PAGE
69
74
80
92
109
111
123
156
159
163
168
169
170
171
176
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 Monday, February 14, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., a regular
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the
Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville,
Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, ladies and
gentlemen. Let me call to order the regularly scheduled
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court posted for
this time and date, Monday, February 14th, 2005, at 9 a.m.
It's that time now. Commissioner Letz, I believe you have
the honors this morning.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Please stand and join me
in a moment of prayer, followed by the pledge.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. At this time, if
there is any member of the public or audience that wishes to
be heard on any matter that is not a listed agenda item,
they're privileged to come forward at this time. If you
wish to speak on an item that is a listed agenda item, we'd
ask that you wait until that time, and if you would, if you
would fill out a participation form so that I won't miss you
when it comes to that item, I'd appreciate it. It's not
essential, but it's helpful to me. But if there's any
member of the public that wishes to be heard at this time on
any matter that's not listed on the agenda, please come
2-14-05
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
forward at this time and tell us what's on your mind.
Seeing no one moving this direction, I'll assume there are
none. And, Commissioner Letz, what do you have for us this
morning?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think I have
anything. I'm just -- it's nice to see the sunshine for a
couple of days. That's it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Everybody in
Precinct 4's healthy, happy, and wealthy. That's all I've
got.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's good to hear.
Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Yesterday,
I had the great honor and opportunity to visit with Bubba
Hierholzer, Rusty's boy. He's just fresh back from
Afghanistan, and I thought maybe he'd be here today, but
they were heading off fishing. You know what boys do when
they start fishing, so, obviously, he didn't make it back
today. But his comment -- I asked him -- I said, "Well, how
are things?" And his comment was, "I love the United States
of America." That's all. Good to see him. If y'all see
him -- he's a big old cowboy. If y'all see him, hug on him
a little bit.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can't miss him, huh?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, you can't.
2-19-05
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
6
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner
Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A good time was had
by all, including the County Judge, the County Attorney, and
yours truly, at the Center Point Alliance Club pancake
supper on Saturday. I noticed the County Attorney came back
with two big bags of pecans, and I don't know what the Judge
came back with except a full stomach. But it was a good
time, raised a lot of dollars for the scholarship fund, and
it's a good community activity.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I didn't get my free
tickets, or I'd have been there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know. That's why
you weren't there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. (Laughter.)
Won't be there next year either, I guess.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Commissioner.
You're right, a good time was had by all, and you're exactly
right, I did have a full tummy when I left there. Let's
move on with the business at hand. The first item on the
agenda is consider and discuss an order securing the payment
of Kerr County, Texas Certificates of Obligation, Series
2005, authorizing the levy of an ad valorem tax, readopting
the order approved on February 4, 2005, which originally
authorized the issuance of such Certificates of Obligation,
2-14-05
7
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 providing for immediate effective date. Mr. Spurgeon.
Good morning, sir.
MR. SPURGEON: Good morning, Judge. It's
good to be here this morning. Judge, this item is really
sort of the second part of the certificate order that you
all approved on February the 4th. There is a provision in
Texas law that says that the County is not allowed to levy a
tax unless it's during a regularly scheduled meeting of the
Court, and the meeting that occurred on February 4th was not
that; it was a special meeting, and it had been moved a
number of times and those type of things. So, we had
revised that certificate order so that it did everything in
terms of authorizing the issuance of the C.O.'s except for
levying the tax, and -- and did that in this second order.
And we had talked with the Attorney General's office about
that procedure, and it's something that has been done in the
past and those type of things.
Now, in -- actually, sort of subsequent to
that, the A.G. did ask that we go ahead and just readopt the
order, frankly, for reasons I still don't completely
understand from their -- from their standpoint. But since
we were coming back to the County with it, it was a very
simple process to add that to part of this order. So,
really, the real effect of this is to implement the -- the
security or the payment procedure for the C.O.'s, and that
2-14-05
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
is that this would have been something that was in your
original order that would authorize the levy of a tax on an
annual basis, and so that's what this is doing. This is the
final step. The bonds are -- or the C.O.'s are ready to be
approved by the A.G. this morning, and the C.O. approval
will be delivered around 11 o'clock this morning if this all
passes. And, Judge, I do have for you a full, originally
executed copy of the Consent and Release.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. SPURGEON: For your permanent record.
You have --
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
MR. SPURGEON: You have a copy that you've
certainly seen with all the faxed signatures, but those are
all the original signatures for you to keep in your -- in
your permanent records.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Spurgeon, we
would be adopting an order -- I see it as a draft dated
February 7, which it includes the re --
MR. SPURGEON: Readopting.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- readopting the
original resolution regarding the Certificates of
Obligation.
MR. SPURGEON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And then setting the
2-19-05
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
9
tax, appropriating the appropriate amount of tax for that
purpose; is that correct?
MR. SPURGEON: Yeah. It's actually sort of
levying a tax on an annual basis, and --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand.
MR. SPURGEON: -- you would actually come in
in September -- August or September to actually levy the tax
itself, but this is authorizing the annual levy of a tax in
order to secure this type of indebtedness.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: While you're not the
right person to direct this question to, I think you
probably remember. The financial people indicated that the
first coupon of this issuance would not be due until fiscal
year '05-'06?
MR. SPURGEON: That's correct. That's right.
There is -- the first interest payment on this debt is
February 15th of 2006.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And it's a five-year
obligation?
MR. SPURGEON: It is a five-year obligation,
yes, that's correct. That's right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval of the
agenda item.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
2-14-05
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
10
approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Help me with my Tax
101. What this means is that in my next year's property tax
bill, I'm going to see another line item on there?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, what it means, as I
understand -- let me see. It's a good question to make sure
I understand it. It means that this Court is obligated to
allocate a portion of our tax for this amount. It doesn't
mean we change the total tax rate, necessarily. It means
that we are obligating --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- whatever the amount --
percentage is into our total list of taxes, of which the
jail bond is a separate line item. They're all -- there's a
number of separate line items that make up our total tax
rate.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All lumped up into
the current rate.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, and it is
anticipated that there will be no change in the total tax
rate. Or no increase in it, anyway.
JUDGE TINLEY: No, it merely provides that
tax revenues are dedicated for the repayment of these
C.O.'s.
MR. SPURGEON: Right.
2-14-05
1
"~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
11
JUDGE TINLEY: And that the -- the actual
amount of tax that's imposed annually will be determined
each year during the budget and tax rate setting process.
Any further question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(Commissioners Letz and Williams voted in
favor of the motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nay.
(Commissioners Baldwin and Nicholson voted
against the motion.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Chair votes in favor of the
motion. Motion passes. Next item on the agenda is a
resolution -- consider and discuss a resolution approving
application for Violence Against Women Act grant to hire a
special prosecutor to prosecute cases for both County
Attorney and 198th and 216th Judicial Districts, indicating
that a 25 percent match is required from the County for this
purpose. Good morning. How are you, Mr. Emerson?
MR. EMERSON: Good morning. I'm doing very
well. And y'all? The -- we're here to present the
application today for the Violence Against Women Act. It's
a grant that's sponsored by both federal and state
government, and what we propose to do with this grant is to
hire a special prosecutor to represent Kerr County in
disposition of not only misdemeanor, but felony cases within
2-19-05
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
the county. What this encompassed last year is, in 2004,
there were 92 assault/family violence cases filed in the
misdemeanor court system. There were 23 sexual assaults
investigated by Kerrville Police Department, and 16 sexual
assaults investigated by the Kerr County Sheriff's
Department. Those numbers do not include injury to children
and other cases that would be related to this. With the
approval of this grant by the -- with the approval of the
VAWA grant, what that would do is allow us to have a special
trained prosecutor that could specialize in that area that
would represent all three jurisdictions, and thereby move
the cases through the court system faster. This would
result in better care for the victims, more allocation of
resources for the victims, and should reduce the cost to
Kerr County in jail time.
Historically. What has happened is a
significant case like that would be filed, and many times
the defendant does not have the money to get out on bond or
there is not bond allocated by the court because of the
nature of the case, and that individual may sit in jail for
anywhere up to a year in time waiting to go to trial. This
should significantly speed that up, thereby reducing the
County's cost. There's been a cooperative working agreement
signed by Hill Country Crisis Council and the Juvenile
Probation Department to work on this. There's also letters
2-14-05
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
of endorsement which I believe the Commissioners have from
both the 216th and the 198th District Attorneys. The
in-kind allocation that we would use for the match is office
space, equipment allocated, and investigators that are
already employed by this county through the District
Attorney's offices. As such, the only real cash expenditure
for the County would be the retirement and the -- or, excuse
me, the health benefits that go with the position of
approximately $6,000 a year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is the amount of
the grant you're applying for, Mr. County Attorney?
$24,000? Would that be the case?
MR. EMERSON: No, sir, it is $70,879.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: $70,879. Okay, thank
you. Move approval of the resolution.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Couple comments. First,
one of the comments you made is that this is going to help
things move through the legal system quicker?
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can we track that? I
mean, the Sheriff's been here several times, and he puts a
lot of the delay on the court system, not on the District
2-19-05
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Attorneys. And I think we need to clearly identify where
these delays are. Clearly, we have too many people staying
too long in our jail, so we need to be able to -- I'd like
to track this and see if we are getting these type of --
this type of offenders through the system quicker than we
had in previous years. I know this can't go backwards, but
certainly it can go forwards in the tracking. And the --
that's really my only comment.
MR. EMERSON: For what it's worth, if I may
respond to that, there is a meeting at 1 o'clock today
between the District and County Court at Law judges,
prosecutors, and defense attorneys to talk about how to move
cases through the court system faster.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Super good.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Glad to hear that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good news. Maybe we
can furnish coffee. The 25 percent match is the total of
that in -- in-kind?
MR. EMERSON: All except the $6,000 for the
insurance.
22
23
°"' 2 4
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wait. But where's -- the
2-14-OS
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
question I have is, where's the $6,000 coming from in the
budget?
MR. EMERSON: That's for the Commissioners to
decide.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, you can't get
it out of your budget?
MR. EMERSON: What we're proposing for this
to do would be to kick in on the next budget year, and I --
I would presume, although I hate to speak for the two
District Attorneys, that between the three of us, I'm sure
we could find some allocation for it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This won't start till the
next budget year?
MR. EMERSON: Correct, if it's approved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This special
prosecutor, is this a -- a new employee, or is it somebody
currently in -- on your staff or in the -- is this an
unidentified new lawyer?
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. And --
MR. EMERSON: What we would Nape to do is
either recruit somebody from, say, San Angelo or San Antonio
who already has training in that area.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, it's got --
requires specialized training. Is this a full-time job?
2-14-05
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
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir,
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON; Okay. So, it's
not -- I think you answered my question. But it's not going
to give you some flexibility to use this person in different
kinds of law?
MR. EMERSON: They would primarily be
restricted by the grant to any crime involving children or
women.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But indirectly, it will
free up, because the prosecutors are doing that work.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah, so you'll have
a little more flexibility.
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Thank
you, Mr. Emerson. The next item on the agenda is approval
of the annual accounts deposited into the court registry
pursuant to Article 887(b) of the Texas Probate Code.
2-14-05
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
MS. ALFORD: This is an annual thing that you
do every year by approving them. They've already gone out
to the people that have accounts deposited with us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval of annual
accounts deposited into the court registry pursuant to
Article 887(b) of the Texas Probate Code.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion?
All in favor of that motion, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Thank
you, ma'am. The next item on the agenda is to approve the
resignation from the Board of Directors of the Kerr Central
Appraisal District. Ms. Rector, good morning.
MS. RECTOR: Good morning. I will read the
resignation. It says, "I respectively submit my resignation
to the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Kerr
Central Appraisal District. I've built my career of 27
years with Kerr County and have served on the board since
1994 with honesty and integrity. The faith and trust you
have placed in me I hold with the highest regard, but I feel
2-14-05
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
I can no longer work with the current board. Per Section
6.03 of the Property Tax Code, I will remain on the Board as
a nonvoting member. Perhaps my time and energy will be
better spent in that capacity. I will continue to focus my
efforts on the needs of the district and the taxpayers of
Kerr County." Any questions?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would move
acceptance of your resignation, Ms. Rector, with thanks and
appreciation for the job you've done on behalf of Kerr
County. I know your service has been on behalf of the
taxpayers, and I commend you for that and thank you for
that.
MS. RECTOR: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second it, with a
ditto. Thank you very much.
MS. RECTOR: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, Paula. And
also, I'd like to visit with you about your replacement,
possibly, see if you have any ideas and thoughts on that.
MS. RECTOR: Okay, I appreciate that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
acceptance of Ms. Rector's resignation, with profound thanks
to her for her many years of service on behalf of Kerr
County. Any question or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
2-14-05
19

1
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: That motion does carry. Thank
you, Ms. Rector. The next item on the agenda is to consider
advertising for annual bids for road base, cold mix, black
base, trap rock, emulsion oil, corrugated metal pipe, and
equipment by-the-hour. Mr. Odom, good to see you this
morning, sir.
MR. ODOM: Thank you, sir. Good morning.
This is our annual bid, and I've come before the Court to
ask permission to go out for bid. Sealed bids will be
received at the courthouse here March 11th and be opened at
10 a.m. on Monday, March 14th, and that you would consider
having myself review the bids and bring -- award
recommendations to the Court on March 28th, 2005.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item, to advertise for the bids as
specified. 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.)
2-14-05
20
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: The motion carries. Next item
on the agenda is to consider preliminary plat of Waugh Acres
located in Precinct 2.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. We have before us,
Commissioners -- we have met with the surveyor. We have
before you a blue line of the preliminary. It has met all
the criteria that we have. This is off Witt Road. It's in
Precinct 2. It is an unrecorded area. This is being
platted, subdividing a little bit over 10 acres of land into
three lots. We also have an Area A touching these three
parcels, of which the B.F.E. and -- well, finished floor has
been established on this plat. And it is to be a country
lane design for three lots. It's under 15 lots, so a
country lane is -- is acceptable, and to be constructed to
subdivision standards. We -- I have no problems with it,
and I recommend that you accept the preliminary plat.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval of the
preliminary plat for Waugh Acres in Precinct 2.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there a water system?
2-14-05
21
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
MR. ODOM: Sir, there is a well, and --
there's an existing well and pump house there, and the
proposal is to be able to tie that into the three lots. It
will be a -- like a community water system. They have to
get, you know, permission to do that or have it designed,
but that was in the discussion with -- with the surveyor,
and the property owner wasn't there, but that's to be
conveyed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there a note on the
plat that no wells can be drilled on these lots?
MR. ODOM: Yes. As long as these lots are
supplied with a public or community water system, they shall
not -- they shall be prohibited from drilling individual
water wells.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion? All in favor -- I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a question. Where
is that verbiage you just read to me there? Is it --
MR. ODOM: This is in the general notes,
Notes and Restrictions. It is about a third of the way from
the -- from the bottom up.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that needs to be
changed. As you read it, it sunk in, what you said. It
says as long as these lots are supplied with a public or
2-14-05
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
community water system, they shall be prohibited from
drilling individual wells. Well, if they're not supplied,
they're still prohibited from drilling individual wells.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Look up about three
paragraphs. Each lot will be served with fresh water from
this type of -- from the existing fresh water facility.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, but I still think
that it needs to be changed. I mean, if that --
MR. ODOM: It says, "Authorization to drill,
replace, alter, equip, plug, or transfer ownership of a
water well, public or private, or any beneficial use must be
obtained from the Headwaters Groundwater Conservation
District prior to drilling and producing water therefrom."
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd just hate to be in a
situation where Headwaters is put in a bind that they're
being grandfathered because we approved lots in this
situation. This is not like a -- I mean, it's a community
system, but it's not a community system in the normal
fashion. And the way that I would read that, that would say
that all those -- that if they decide to abandon that
community well, they can all drill their individual wells,
and that's not the intent.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think Commissioner
Letz' point is good. That should say that it -- that it
shall not be permitted in any case.
2-14-05
23

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~^ 24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. ODOM: If -- then the Court would mean
that if this wording is put in, added to this, that the
preliminary plat be contingent upon that wording?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where do you want to
make a wording change?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It would be under -- I
don't know that adding the "not" where Commissioner Number 4
said works. I just think it would need -- in the verbiage
here, it needs to state that there -- this is a -- these
lots must be served by a community water system. That's --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It says that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, but it says that if
-- as long as they're served by it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But it -- up in the
middle, it says each lot --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- will be served
with fresh water from the existing water facility located on
Lot Number 1.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But what happens if that
well gets plugged?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Then they have to get
authorization to do something different from Headwaters.
MR. ODOM: From Headwaters.
2-14-05
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But our rules say that
they cannot drill individual wells on there, on these lot
sizes.
abandoned that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought we just
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. It's a minimum
5-acre lot size.
two weeks ago?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What did we just do
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's water
availability; it has nothing to with this. Our minimum lot
size is under 5 acres unless you're under a community water
system. I just want to make sure the language in these
restrictions are -- reflect our rules that say that these
lots shall be furnished -- use a community water system,
period. There's no other options as to, "as long as this
well," or --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It says that as long
as these lots are supplied with a public or community water
system, they shall be prohibited.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, "as long." But
what if they're not? It says as long as they're served by
it. I'm saying they shall be served by it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And I -- if I owned
one of those lots and suddenly it was not supplied by the
2-14-OS
25
e

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
public community system, I would argue that that sentence
gives me the right to drill a well, and we don't want that
to happen.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the verbiage
needs to say these lots shall be served by a community water
system, period.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand your
point. But what would happen if these lots were sold under
the assumption that the water is provided by the well on Lot
Number 1, and it is for a period of time, and they're all
sold, dwellings are built, water has been provided, and
suddenly that well goes bad or gives up? What then? We
have three dwellings without water?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, and they need to
drill a new community well somewhere on those three lots.
What I'm saying is, all the verbiage about the well that's
in there, to me, is irrelevant. What it needs to say is
that these lots -- one requirement needs to be set that
these lots shall be served by a community water system. And
that's all it needs to say, without a reference to where the
current well is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, then -- then
the paragraph -- or the sentence should say each lot will be
served with fresh water from the existing -- from the
existing fresh water facility located on Lot Number 1, or --
2-19-05
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: It says authorization to drill.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- or another
community well located on Lots 1, 2, or 3.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you delete that
paragraph, the next paragraph, and the "as long as," and
replace it all; say, "These lots shall be served by a
community water system." I think it's a lot cleaner, and
get rid of all the references to the existing well.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And it's not unique.
There are other places around the county that have the same
situation.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I mean, it's not
changing the subdivision. It's just saying that --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, your proposal
would be to delete the paragraph that says, "Each lot will
be served..."?
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
"Authorization to drill..."
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
subdivision shall be occupi
supply" --
LETZ: Right.
WILLIAMS: Next paragraph says,
LETZ: Right.
WILLIAMS: And, "No structure in
~d until the individual water
2-19-05
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, that one can stay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That one can stay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The next one can be
deleted, though.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it should be replaced
with these lots -- or all lots in this subdivision shall be
served by a community water system.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine.
MR. ODOM: Do I need to bring this back to
the Court, or just contingent upon that wording being
changed and the preliminary go forward?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Domingues is
here. Make certain he understands.
MR. ODOM: Mr. Domingues, do you have a
problem with that?
MR. DOMINGUES: Oh, yeah.
MR. ODOM: You do?
MR. DOMINGUES: Charles Domingues. We have
no problem with that at all. And all that verbiage is
really on there just to show what we're going to do on the
final plat.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You'll make the
changes for the final plat?
2-14-05
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. DOMINGUES: The final plat will be
contingent upon that new verbiage.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. The motion incorporates
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- that wording? All right,
thank you. 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: That motion does carry. Thank
you. The next item is to consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action to rescind Court Order Number 28660,
dated May 24, 2004, which required platting of property
located in Precinct 2, owned by Rickert and Bettac, and
approve a new court order that does not require platting in
accordance with Section 1.03.G of the Kerr County
Subdivision Rules and Regulations. Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This one would be
categorized in the "Here we go again" category. We've
visited this one on at least three occasions that I'm aware
of, and I think it's been visited in other venues as well.
Be that as it may, I think what my agenda item backup
2-14-05
29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
statement says is -- is pretty accurate. The County
Attorney and Mr. Odom and I all met with the owners and
representatives of the owners, and we determined in that
discussion that the prior memorandum which supported the
platting process we believe to be incorrect. And a new
memorandum -- if you can look at the map, you'll see exactly
which one we're talking about. Right in the center in the
shaded -- the top part is shaded; the bottom part is
unshaded, right in the middle of your little map there. And
there's a -- a road that comes off of Highway 27 that goes
to that property. So, Mr. County Attorney, would you -- do
you want to speak to the issue? Anybody else want to speak
to the issue? What we're doing is correcting what we
believe to be incorrect. We believe that Paragraph 1.03.G
of the current Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations
is applicable in this case.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: As I -- I'm searching my
memory as to the last time we went through this. I thought
that was something -- what triggered the platting was
something to do with the road.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it was the
then-County Attorney's position, if you read his memorandum
dated March 30, that the sale of the property -- and that's
what this is all about, is the sale of the property from one
of the two owners to another owner. It was his position, I
2-14-05
30
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
believe, that that triggered the platting and the road
reconstruction process. We revisited it, looked at it very
carefully, and concluded that that's not the case. Rex,
would you like to speak to this, please?
MR. EMERSON: Sure.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: While he's on his way
up, my memory says that I believe it was Mr. Colvin that was
in here the last time, and he wanted this ruling so that he
could go on to district court.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He's out of the
picture totally now. And it --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, but was anything
done in district court?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't believe --
well, there's the attorney for the owner.
MS. GARDNER: If I can, there was a lawsuit
by Mr. Colvin. And --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Identify yourself,
please.
MS. GARDNER: Sorry. Kimberly Gardner, and I
represent Polly and Curt Rickert, the co-owners of the road
that we're talking about. Mr. Colvin sued the Rickerts, and
the Bettacs were brought into the lawsuit. He lost the
lawsuit. He is in the process of filing a motion for new
trial, so it's still -- whatever. But, actually, the sale
2-19-05
31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of the property was not what the previous County Attorney
said triggered the platting requirement. The previous
County Attorney said that because a road was laid out and
the 200 -- the total 200 was partitioned into two tracts,
that's what triggered the platting. And we argued, but
y'all didn't agree at that time, that it was exempt because
the owners of the original property still owned the now two
pieces of property. But the County Attorney now, which I
totally agree with, we discussed it, and he believes it's
excepted under the 1.03.G.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, no roads are involved
and have been involved to get to these lots? That road
existed as a public road --
MS. GARDNER: It certainly did. It certainly
did.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- all along? That's
what I thought the issue that would trigger the platting
last time, was something with the road being built.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think it was a public
road.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, not public. Could
be private.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's right on a
private driveway, if you will, that takes you to both
parcels of ground.
2-14-05
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 LETZ: But the road --
MR. EMERSON: It falls under the exception,
if I may expand on that, in my opinion, on two premises,
basically. Number one, one-half of the property is still
owned by the then-current owner at the time, and number two,
the fact that the new owners -- there's no intention to
further subdivide that property. Now, it was clearly
stated, and I think we have that in the proposed order, that
if the new owners do anything at all to change the use of
that property or subdivide it in any way, modify it, then
they will be subject to grading the road to county
standards.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the -- I mean, the
road -- the access to this property is already in existence.
It is not being changed in any way.
MR. EMERSON: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct. Let
me read into the record what the new court order would say
and see if there's any problem with it. "Commissioners
Court Order. Commissioners Court Order Number 28660,
entered May 24, 2004, in connection with the Bettac/Rickert
property located in Precinct 2, and said property further
described on the attached Exhibit A, is hereby rescinded,
along with the opinion expressed by -- in the County
Attorney's memorandum dated March 30, 2004. Further,
2-14-05
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
pursuant to Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations
1.03.G, the Bettac/Rickert property is not currently subject
to any platting requirements. Further, the Bettac/Rickert
road tract is in compliance with Kerr County Subdivision
Rules and Regulations in connection with roads, and said
road tract does not have to be upgraded or modified in any
manner. In accordance with the conference between the
parties and pursuant to Kerr County Subdivision Rules and
Regulations, it is hereto noticed that -- that including,
but not limited to, any future property transfers, changes
in use or development, the property owner at such time may
be subject to upgrading the road to comply with Kerr County
Subdivision Rules and Regulations." That would be the basis
of the new court order. I move the court order.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have one question
before -- I'd be willing to second it if I can qet the right
answer to my question. Possible litigation doesn't affect
this action here today? I'm asking the County Attorney;
excuse me just a moment.
MS. GARDNER: Oh, okay.
MR. EMERSON: I don't think it would. I
mean, it's pretty cut-and-dried under the Subdivision Rules
that this does fall under an exception. And, just for the
Court's information, we did talk to -- or I did talk to
David Jackson, who, as this Court knows, is a well-known,
2-19-05
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
very experienced real estate/personal property attorney in
the county, and he concurs with the opinion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He represents the
other people?
MR. EMERSON: He does represent the Bettacs.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was more supportive
until I heard the last thing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWTN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That attorney also finds
loopholes in our rules.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The very one. I
second the motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item, for the new court order. Any
further question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. The question is,
why don't we just rescind the former order? I guess I'm
uncomfortable with this in that we're -- we're saying that
it doesn't -- and what is not said in here specifically is
that we're relying on what's being told to us, you know.
And I'm not saying this is not all true and correct, but
we're kind of saying that we've made a determination as to
this, and I'd just rather rescind the former order. And
because it's -- you know, there are issues in this, and it's
been -- it's obviously been in -- in litigation once, and
2-i4-os
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
probably going back to litigation again.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm more comfortable
with that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd just rather rescind
the former order and say that it's -- you know, we see no
reason to require platting.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What if -- I
understand where you're coming from, and I think probably
this Paragraph 3, that -- that may be troubling. What if we
just did Paragraph 1 and 2? Paragraph 1 rescinds.
Paragraph 2 states that it is in compliance with 1.03.G.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: See, I'd rather do --
that's what I don't like; I don't like making a
determination that it's in compliance. I'd just rather
say -- you know, I'd just rather rescind the order. If it's
not -- if it's not subject to platting, we -- we normally
don't take an action to say that it's not.
MS. GARDNER: If I may speak again, we'd like
to have it -- or the owners of the property would like to
have it to make it clear. And we've asked -- I believe if
you ask the Commissioners Court for a ruling on whether or
not, you know, a piece of property is subject or is not
subject to -- you know, we just want it clear so that we
don't start all over again.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think that's
2-14-05
36
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
a point -- that's a valid consideration. This thing has
been before the Court now at least three times in the past,
and it's been upstairs. Those folks are trying to sell the
property and get out of it, and so, you know --
MS. GARDNER: But, you know, that really
doesn't have anything -- you know, that's true; they'd like
to sell the property. But even though they kept the
property, even if the Bettacs and the Rickerts -- or the
Rickerts kept the property, they still want to know, or they
still want it, you know, to be interpreted that they don't
have to upgrade that road as it exists right now; that the
sale of the property is not really -- I mean, it's --
it's --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If it wasn't
germane --
MS. GARDNER: -- it's going to happen, but
the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If it wasn't germane,
why are you here?
MS. GARDNER: Well, the -- the issue that
Colvin posed and the question he had was, as it exists
now, --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
MS. GARDNER: -- that road should have been
upgraded at the time of the sale to my clients and the
2-14-05
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
Bettacs.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, how about
this? How about if we just leave the first sentence of that
second paragraph, "Further, and pursuant to Kerr County
Subdivision Rules and Regulations 1.03.G, the BettaclRickert
lot is not currently subject to any platting requirements,"
period.
	COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:	That's fine. That's
fine with me.	Taking out, "Further...	"	
	COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tha	t takes out the	-- and
that really -	- the second sentence in	the paragraph is	what
I had the most problem with, if it's i	n compliance. I	don't
know if it's	in compliance or not. I'	m just saying th	ere's
an exemption	for that, and you seem to	qualify for it.	
	COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:	What about the	third
paragraph, which states -- which goes	to the future?	
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's fine. I don't
have a problem with that. It's really the second sentence
of the second paragraph that I had an objection with.
MS. GARDNER: So, your -- your -- you would
like to keep the first sentence of the second paragraph that
includes Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations
Number 1.03.G?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
MS. GARDNER: Okay.
2-19-05
38
1
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: And taking out the
second sentence. So, the amended motion would be to approve
the court order as read, which, you know, would include
Paragraph 1, the first sentence of Paragraph 2, reading,
"Further, and pursuant to Kerr County Subdivision Rules and
Regulations, Paragraph Number 1.03.G, the Bettac/Rickert
property is not currently subject to any platting
requirements." And the remainder of that paragraph deleted.
And the last paragraph would be incorporated, which deals
with the future. Are you cool?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. GARDNER: And just so that I'll be clear,
you don't want the road language in there because?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't like the language
about that this tract is in compliance. I mean, other
things can happen that would make it out of compliance. I
just don't want to say that. You know, I mean, we're saying
that it's -- you know, that we rescind the current -- the
first order, and basically pursuant to 1.03.G, period.
That's, I mean, what we're doing. I get uncomfortable if we
start saying that -- us saying that this is in compliance
and other issues. I don't know that.
MS. GARDNER: Okay.
(Discussion off the record.)
2-14-05
39
I
~C ,---
t
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. GARDNER: Pardon?
MR. EMERSON: The first sentence alone, I
think, will take care of the issue that you're trying to
address, 'cause if it's not subject to the platting
requirements, then it falls outside the Subdivision Rules at
this time, and that will eliminate any issues.
MS. GARDNER: If that's the understanding,
that's okay with me. But that --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My understanding is
if it's not subject to the platting requirements, you're not
going to be dealing with the roads. Am I correct,
Commissioner?
MS. GARDNER: Well, actually, is that your
opinion? Since you're the County Attorney.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. If it's not
subject to platting, we have no say on the road.
MS. GARDNER: Okay. That's just what we're
concerned about. 'Cause we've got a very litigious person
involved, and I just want to make it as clear as possible.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, if -- based on --
and I -- I agreed with this the first time around, that it
was exempt under 1.03.G.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I recall that, yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And -- you know, and I
still think it's exempt under that, but that's all I want to
2-14-05
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
say about it, is that it's exempt under that 1.03.G.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's where we're
coming from.
MS. GARDNER: Okay, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on the amended motion? All in favor of that
motion, please signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Thank
you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We appear to be rather
picky this morning.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is this the last time
this will be in front of us?
MS. RICKERT: Well, all I can say is it will
be the last time as long as we own the property. I can't
comment for any new owners.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fair enough.
MS. RICKERT: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: The next item, consider and
discuss notification of road name changes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh. I'm trying to figure
out --
2-14-05
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
41
JUDGE TINLEY: Which one of you guys want to
run with this?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda,
and it was -- and we tried to have backup, but we couldn't
find the backup.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I wondered about
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There is a -- a
disconnect somewhere in the system right now about everyone
getting notified, be it EMS and all the other people that
used to get notified by the Clerk's office; that's not being
done right now. And I thought it was stopped in late 2003
when we put a moratorium on all road name changes. I'm not
sure if that was the case. And we tried to find that, and
we can't even find that we did a moratorium, so I'm not sure
how I got that idea. But somehow we tried to get back into
the system that everyone that was originally on the list is
notified again, because currently, dispatch is not being --
getting the word on road name changes. And I'm not sure
when the last time they were notified, so I'm not sure how
far back we need to go to do this.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There are a lot of
road name changes that they do not have.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A lot.
2-14-05
- ~ ~~ ~
42
c
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So I don't -- and I know
Truby has a list of all of them that we've done, but we
don't --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All emergency
services.
MS. ALFORD: I don't know when it stopped
either, so --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there a way that the
Clerk's office can determine -- I mean, look -- I think
these are done by fax. Isn't that right, Truby? They used
to fax these out?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner, why
don't we just examine the process to see what they do now?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's not being done.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Period?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where is it -- where
does it start and where does it --
MS. ALFORD: That's the problem.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who's dropping the
ball?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It used to -- at some
point, it was after we did the court order and it was
approved by us, then it got faxed out to everyone that
needed to know it, basically. And dispatch is the most
2-19-05
43
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
important, but I think it went to other people as well.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, it went to all
emergency services.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The fire trucks run
around with maps and -- and road names on those maps. Well,
there are a lot of roads that they're running around trying
to put out fires, and ambulances going to that don't have
names. So, we need -- what we need to do is, what -- I
can't remember -- the 9-1-1 folks said that if we did
something, that they would do the sending out with the maps.
What was that the other day?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, from visiting with
Truby, at one point I think it was an issue of who had
authority to send this out, and somehow it was --
historically, it was the Clerk's office that was the -- they
were the ones that had authority to send on it these road
name changes. I don't know why that -- I don't clearly see
why the Clerk's office should be involved in that process.
Maybe Truby can enlighten me on that; I see her laughing as
I'm going through this. But my concern, after talking with
9-1-1, is that somehow we get this fixed. We go back in
time to figure out the last time this notification was done,
and everything since that time be done at one time, either
through the Clerk's office or through 9-1-1; doesn't make
2-14-05
44
1
"' 2
3
I
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
any difference to me.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where does it
originate? Road and Bridge?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It originates at Road and
Bridge and we approve it.
MS. HARDIN: No, it originates with y'all.
It's not a responsibility --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why isn't it up to
Road and Bridge for dissemination?
MS. HARDIN: It is not a responsibility of
Road and Bridge Department. It is Commissioners Court, and
I just organized it for the -- for the members of the Court
because I was there all day and I had contact with the 9-1-1
and with the mapping. It stopped -- the notification
stopped because the Post Office could not keep up with --
with the volume that was happening. And then we did, like,
a 45-day wait on private roads. I think the simplest way to
fix it would just be to take the list that I have, and
this -- I didn't have time to print them all out; there's 41
pages, but these are just a few pages of it, a sample page
so you can see what it looks like. Want to pass that down?
Give one back to them, too. And it gives the date, the
court order number, what precinct it's in, if it's in a
subdivision, and a general location. It's 41 pages.
There's 438 that have been completed, and if the Court just
2-14-05
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
sent this list -- or whoever's going to notify them gave
them a list -- this list, then we could start from that
point on.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But after we do -- I
mean, this -- all the names on this get generated, we pass
the court order and change the road name, whether public or
private, and then you add it to the list? Or you've added
it just to keep track for yourself. But in the future,
also, once -- this clears up everything in the past, but we
need to get a process for this to, you know, move it forward
for any time we make a road name change, that the Post
Office and the EMS -- all the EMS services, dispatch, et
cetera, all get notified. So, I mean, I guess the question
is, who should do that notification? Who should send that
out? And I guess it was felt for a long time, since it was
a court order that did it, that it should come out of the
Clerk's office.
MS. ALFORD: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But somehow it got --
that stopped happening. And I don't know if it -- you know,
when it stopped. So the question is, is this something the
Clerk's office thinks they should do?
MS. ALFORD: We can do it. I mean, we have
all the fax numbers to the fire departments, and we can send
it all out to them. And -- or if Truby would rather do it
2-14-05
46
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
with her list like this or some -- that's -- we can handle
it. That's fine.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the Court think?
9-1-1? Clerk? Or --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, 9-1-1 has
offered to send it out electronically if we will get them
the information.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But not in the future.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. But in the
future, that won't work.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It won't work?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. They're not --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Plus they're not -- to
me, it makes sense that it's either the Clerk's office --
because we pass the court order, and they're the ones that
are aware of the court order. And it's basically
implemented, send out the information in the court order.
I'd just as soon let the current listing go to the Clerk,
too.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If Road and Bridge can
get the Clerk's office, you know, a copy that we can send
out, they can send that out all at one time, and then all
future ones, the Clerk's office will send out.
2-19-05
47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
MS. HARDIN: We could also --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Clerk's office is
going to send it to each First Responder, each fire
department?
MS. ALFORD: Each fire department, dispatch,
Kerrville dispatch. I have a whole list of --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They have a list, 'cause
they used to do it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So it goes to
everybody?
MS. ALFORD: Yeah, each post office; Hunt,
Ingram, Center Point. I think even Comfort gets one.
Comfort Fire Department does.
MS. HARDIN: Any party that was interested in
getting it at that time just called the Clerk's office and
got added to the list.
MS. ALFORD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think you send it to
dispatch -- 9-1-1 dispatch. Then they get it to the fire
department, the Kerrville Police Department --
MS. ALFORD: Yeah. If --
23 they do
24
25
2-14-05
MS. ALFORD: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then we have to
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I mean, I think that
48
1
''~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
get it to Rusty and each volunteer fire department and each
post office, and not much more than that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I'll make a motion
that we --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Crank it up.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- authorize the County
Clerk's office to begin again informing everyone on all road
name changes. Road and Bridge will furnish a list --
historical list, and then moving forward, all new name
changes, and that the Clerk's office will coordinate with
9-1-1 dispatch how that should be done.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One of the other
things, though, that -- the reason I was trying to involve
the 9-1-1 system at this point is that they can provide the
map with the road name on it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think the -- and
the Clerk certainly can visit with 9-1-1 and ask them to
disperse one if they have maps. They can deal with it. I
mean, I don't -- you know, as long as it's done in the most
efficient manner, we'll let the Clerk's office figure out
how to do it.
MS. ALFORD: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the only reason I
made a court order is 'cause last time we tried to find
something, we couldn't even find a court order on this
2-14-05
49
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
topic. All right. Did I make a motion? Yes, I did.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think you were in the
process of making one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think I made one.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not sure what it
was, but I'll second it.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. We have a motion
and a second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you remember what
it was, Judge?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Want me to restate it?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, if you wouldn't mind.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My motion is that we
ask -- or request that the County Clerk's office coordinate
all road name changes -- or provide all road name changes to
the proper EMS and others. That was probably a horrible
motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Emergency service providers.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it, emergency
service providers and others.
JUDGE TINLEY: And you seconded that motion,
correct, Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, but don't tell
anybody.
2-14-05
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
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Do we have any
questions or discussion on that 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: The motion does carry. Let's
move on to Item Number 12, if we might. Mr. Holekamp?
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Correction. We need to move
on to Item 15, consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action to approve Commissioners Court employee evaluation
form. Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Last time we
discussed this, I indicated to the Court I would bring back
a form for approval and adoption to be used in employee
evaluations by Commissioners Court employee evaluations.
This is the form. If there are any suggested changes by
members of the Court, now's the time to make them known.
Otherwise, I would move adoption.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second the motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the employee evaluation form as submitted. Any
questions or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just have a comment,
2-19-05
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
Judge. This is very nice to have something like this, but
if you don't use it, it's a waste of time.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER BALDWTN: When are we going to
evaluate folks?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe we
indicated that we'd -- now is the time to do it, and be
completed by end of June? Isn't that what we said last
time?
JUDGE TINLEY: That's my recollection,
generally.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Now is the time.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the process that
we're going to use -- I mean, obviously, I know we're going
to fill out the form, but what's the next step after we fill
out the form? Are we going to have everyone come in and
meet with us?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In front of the whole
Court, or individually? I think the whole Court is what we
decided.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, in -- during the
month of June, we're going to do these -- schedule these.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Complete them, and
2-19-05
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
then I would suggest that the last -- near the second
meeting in June, we go through the evaluations in executive
session.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the -- and we're
going to -- and all the employees that report to the Court
will qet a copy of each -- of all five forms?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly. Every
employee who's evaluated gets a copy of it for their
personal use, and one will go in their personnel file.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're speaking only
of the employees -- excuse me -- that report directly to
Commissioners Court?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Handful, seven or
eight or something?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know. I was
going to ask you if we could get a list.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, we can do that;
we can put together a list. But I think, off the top of my
head, of course, it starts with Ms. Mitchell, the reporter.
It would be Collections. It would be Maintenance. It would
be Environmental Health. It would be Information
Technology.
JUDGE TINLEY: Animal Control.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon?
2-19-05
53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Animal Control.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Road and Bridge.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Road and Bridge.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Juvenile Detention.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Juvenile Detention
Center.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bill, don't go to
sleep on me.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: J.D.F., Juvenile
Detention Facility, right. We can reduce that to writing,
but essentially that's it, I believe.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Item
16, discuss, consider, and approval of the Child Welfare
Board of Directors.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We had -- we had a
notification from the State that they would like to have a
copy of the Board of Directors, and I don't know if this is
an annual issue or not. First time we've seen it in a long
2-14-05
54
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
time around here, and Kathy and I have been working on this
Board of Directors. We thought they were going to have a
meeting over the weekend to give us a -- a clean slate. Did
not get that done, so I am going to pass you a list of
members that I'm asking you to adopt today that are proposed
Kerr County Child Welfare Board members. I will read them
into the record at this time, and there may be additions
later on; there could possibly be deletions. This is -- as
you all understand, this is a very, very important board.
I've been around it for a number of years. It's hard to
explain the issues that are involved in this thing, but it
can get very, very, very emotional, 'cause you're dealing
with hurting kids. And so -- and the thing -- it's been
difficult to keep a board together over there for some
reason. It's just -- people float in and out. I think our
County Attorney served on the board for a while. I was on
it for a while, and it's a very difficult thing to keep this
thing together.
So, I have taken it upon myself to add three
new names to it today to get the numbers up, and -- and
folks that I know and I trust to get this thing -- get the
board off the ground and running again, and functioning like
it should. So, I'm going to read the names that I'm
presenting to you today: Laura Singletary, Daletta Andreas,
Louise Blalack, Alice McDaniel, Debbie Baldwin, Kathy
2-14-05
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
Mitchell, Thea Sovil, Lynn Meng, Pam Traver, and Sandra
Yarbrough. I move for adoption of that list.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir?
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
adoption of the list as the Board of Directors of the Kerr
County Child Welfare Board, as submitted by Commissioner
Baldwin.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Two questions,
actually, Commissioner. Have all of these individuals
indicated a willingness to serve?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And, secondly, do we
name a chairman?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They make --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They'll do their own,
yes. There is a -- a president, vice president, secretary,
treasurer, I think is the way it's laid out.
JUDGE TINLEY: Which they select from among
their own.
his hand up.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: County Attorney had
2-19-05
56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-- 13
14
15
16
17
18
MR. EMERSON: Just for the Court's
information, the way the board was originally approved by
the Court, I think it was in 1996, it -- the Child Welfare
Board has rotating terms. And so, although you've not seen
this list in a while, theoretically, annually, there should
be a new list presented to the Court based on the expiration
of terms on an annual basis.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we appoint different
lengths of terms to get a staggering -- I mean, does -- or
do we let them decide how they want to do that initially?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They're going to
decide that. We're going to appoint the people and let them
run their board. But there is an outline for staggering,
yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we appoint, like,
three each year?
19
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hopefully. That's
been the difficult part.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is to get that done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other question I
have is, what is the purpose of this board? I mean, I've
'' 24 read through this, but it doesn't really go through -- what
25 are they supposed to do, by statute?
20
21
22
23
2-19-05
57
1
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. EMERSON: What they do is coordinate
local, state, and federal funds for the care of children
that are in protective custody. Typically, what that
involves is children under C.P.S. care, although it's not
necessarily limited to that. It's clothing, birthday
presents, you know, anything that could be deemed beneficial
for the child for their emotional or physical well-being. I
realize that's a pretty broad definition, but that's --
that's the way it's worded.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the county
taxpayers -- for our part, you know, we budget money there,
and we help in areas that the State does not. I'll give you
an example. If C.P.S. goes into a home tonight and removes
a child from that home, I mean, the police go in there and
get the kid out of bed and into the car immediately. We
will assist in some pajamas, toothbrush, toothpaste, that
kind of thing. If a kid graduates from high school, we'll
help them with a cap and gown. Christmas gift, you know,
those kinds of things is what our taxpayers participate in.
It's one of those things that, where C.P.S. stops, we kind
of pick up a little bit.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So this is the board
that, several years back, we used to get a report that we
bought birthday presents --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct.
2-14-05
58
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- and things of that
nature?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's exactly the
one. And they have failed to come in, and that's -- and
that is what we're correcting today.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, great.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do we have money
currently budgeted for this?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, mm-hmm.
I'll give you an example of what kind of people -- or young
people we're talking about. I was a Santa Claus one time
for their annual Christmas party, and there was a young lady
that came to old Santa for her Christmas gift; she was 13
years old, and has never -- because of abuse when she was a
baby, had never spoken a word. Not one. That's the kind of
people we're dealing with here. So, in my mind, that's what
-- that's what government is about, is helping people, that
kind of people.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on the motion before the Court? 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.)
2-14-05
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: I will now recess the
Commissioners Court meeting and open a public hearing for
the alternate plat process for Grotto Springs Ranch, Lot 5,
in Precinct 3, which was scheduled for 10 a.m. on this date.
It's a few minutes past that now.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was
closed at 10:01 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 to be heard with respect to the alternate
plat process for Grotto Springs Ranch, Lot 5, located in
Precinct 3 of Kerr County? Any member of the public wish to
be heard on that matter? Seeing no one indicating a desire
to be heard, I will close the public hearing for the
alternate plat process for Grotto Springs Ranch, Lot 5,
located in Precinct 3 of Kerr County.
(The public hearing was concluded at 10:02
a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court
meeting was reopened.)
JUDGE TINLEY: And I will move to Item Number
11, consider the approval of the alternate plat process for
Grotto Springs Ranch located in -- I think I announced I
reconvened the Commissioners Court meeting. If not, that's
2-14-05
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
what I've done. And we'll move to Item 11 and consider the
approval of alternate plat process for Grotto Springs Ranch
located in Precinct 3 of Kerr County, particularly Lot 5.
MR. ODOM: I've reviewed the final in the
alternate platting. I see no problems; all the items have
been met for alternate platting. And also, I looked at the
restrictive covenants that were in there. That meets those
covenants. Can be no less than 25 acres. So, I move that
the Court accept this alternate plat.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the alternate plat process, Grotto Springs
Ranch, Lot 5, located in Precinct 3. Any question or
discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question.
Mr. Voelkel?
MR. VOELKEL: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How far is that
subdivision from Highway 16? Going -- going through Whiskey
Canyon?
MR. VOELKEL: Two and a half miles, something
like that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is it -- and you can
access it as well from the Comfort side, through the old --
2-14-05
61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You could if you could
get permission to come across Mr. Holzer's property.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Whose property?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mr. Holzer. But he won't
give you permission, so you
COMMISSIONER
if that was that same road.
MR. VOELKEL:
COMMISSIONER
entrance off 16, CommissionE
can't.
BALDWIN: I was just wondering
Yes, sir, it is.
WILLIAMS: This is not -- the
=r, is not the one that takes you
into Whiskey Canyon?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, it is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The gated community?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. That's how you
get to this subdivision.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's a trick.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I guess it is. If
you don't know the combination, it really is a trick.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Basically, they're
dividing the lot -- one of the lots in the back part of the
subdivision that they're not part of Whiskey Canyon
property.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
2-19-05
62
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. I'll
now move to a timed item that was set for 10:05 this
morning. It's a couple of minutes past that now. That's
the opening bids for information technology services. The
first bid that I have is presented by Gazelle PC
Corporation. I'm not sure I'm in a position to give the
apples-to-apples specifics.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The next one is from MIS-QS,
LLC. Looks like there are -- appear to be at least four
alternative proposals, or it may be that there are just four
copies of it. I think that may be the case, yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What's the address
on that proposal?
JUDGE TINLEY: This one is located on 218
Quinlan Street. Gazelle is located at 733 Hill Country
Drive. The -- here's another one from Gazelle PC
Corporation. I'm not sure if this is an alternative
proposal or the same proposal as previously submitted.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I make a motion
2-14-05
63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that we accept all proposals and refer them to Mr. Trolinger
for review and recommendation back to the Court.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
acceptance of the proposals and submission to Mr. Trolinger
of our I.T. department for review and recommendation. Any
further question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Question. Have --
we've already set a date for him to come back and give us a
review and suggestions and recommendations, have we not?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought -- yeah, I
thought it --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second meeting of this
month, I believe.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second meeting of this
month, so that's when he will come with this information?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, that's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
2-14-05
64
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We'll
now move to Item Number 12, consider and discuss renewal of
lease for the West Kerr County Annex and increase in rental
for that facility. Mr. Holekamp?
MR. HOLEKAMP: I apologize ahead of time. I
may start coughing and may have to leave, but I'll try to
get through this here. On -- back in '99, we started
leasing the property from a Mr. Priour for the Ingram annex,
and it was renewed one time in 2001 with a $50-a-month
increase, from $400 originally in '99 to $450. The lease
was up also in 2002 -- 2003, and it was on the agenda, and
it was to be negotiated by Commissioner Precinct 4 at that
time, and nothing came back into the Court for approval of a
contract. It -- but the man has got $50 more a month for
his rent. So, what I'm asking -- I'm not -- I'm not saying
that $500 isn't fair. I'm just saying that we have a lease
that needs to be updated, and I would really like either the
Court or myself to get with the County Attorney and try to
get a document that we can get sent to this man so we can --
see, we have some roofing issues, and the roof is the owner
of the property's responsibility. And without a lease, I --
I really feel uncomfortable with trying to -- to get him to
change -- I mean fix the roof, because we don't have a
contract.
25 ~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
2-14-05
65
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. HOLEKAMP: So I would really like to get
that one cleaned up, and that's where I'm at right now, is
trying to see if we could -- y'al1 could authorize the
County Attorney to work with me on trying to get a lease
written up and --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's no lease at all
right now?
MR. HOLEKAMP: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is the current
rental right now?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $450.
MR. HOLEKAMP: $500 -- well, it's supposed to
be $450 per what it says in here, the last court order back
in 2002. But when we go back to 2003 -- October of 2003, we
started paying him $500 a month.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And there was no
court order with that?
MR. HOLEKAMP: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Dealt with at budget
time, perhaps?
MS. NEMEC: It was approved in the budget
process.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, that's what happened. It
was approved during the budget, but there was no court
2-19-os
66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
order, so he's under the assumption he doesn't have a valid
lease.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's probably correct.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move that we
authorize Mr. Holekamp and the County Attorney to negotiate
for a new lease for that facility, and to bring that back to
the Court for approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is it going to be $500
a month in the lease?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I want to hear from
them. I've got some more comments on it, too.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second it, just
to get the comments heard.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
authorize the Facility Director and County Attorney to make
efforts to negotiate a lease on that facility, and to bring
the same back to the Court for final approval.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Aside from the term
and the length of the lease and the -- and the amount, I
think that we need to give some thought to the suitability
of the facility for our use. I know that -- that the
occupants have talked to me, and I think they've also talked
to the County Judge about not only the problems they're
having with the roof leaking, but grade-level water problems
coming into the facility. It's a very good location for
2-14-05
67
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Precinct 4. It's right there at the "Y" of 39 and 27 in
Ingram. It's pretty centrally located and handy to
everybody in the precinct, so from that standpoint, it's a
very desirable location. I think we need to -- and you know
that too, Mr. Holekamp.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm not telling you
anything new. We need to look into the condition of the
building.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ms. Rector's in the room.
Ms. Rector, do you have any comment on the facility? I
mean, is it -- would you recommend, I guess, doing this? Or
is there a better facility?
MS. RECTOR: I agree with Commissioner
Nicholson. The roof is -- it's like Niagara Falls when it
rains. We have to literally wade through inches of water in
the back of that building. There's a lot of records back
there that are being ruined. I think that problem with the
roof has been addressed with Mr. Priour before. They were
going to put some type of a temporary or a freestanding roof
over the top of it. That did not happen. Now, it is a good
location. Very good location, but I think the building is
in terrible shape.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are there not -- it's in
Commissioner 4's precinct. Aren't there other locations in
2-19-05

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
b8
-- I mean, pretty close to that in Ingram?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I would see that
within the scope of their work; that if the building is not
suitable, that they come back with a proposal for something
else.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. RECTOR: One more comment. My side of
the office, we're kind of outgrowing that. It's very small.
We're -- the traffic that comes through there, the customers
are having to wait outside because that little waiting area
is so small. So I think, in the future, we might want to
start looking at something a little bit larger to
accommodate both offices.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would just -- you know,
I have no problem with the motion as it's really worded, but
I would really recommend that the -- the maintenance,
Paula's office, and J.P. 4 first get together and figure out
what they need short-term and long-term before they bring
the County Attorney in to negotiate a lease. I think make
sure this is the right facility for us, and then also get a
good idea what the exact needs are of that building and the
problems with it, and then proceed.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let's change that
motion to a motion that authorizes Mr. Holekamp to study the
needs of the West Kerr County Annex and come back to
2-14-05
69
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Commissioners Court for -- with a proposal.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd second it.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second.
Any further question or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If I can help you
with that, Mr. Holekamp, let me know.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I'll be calling. Yeah, I've
already done some of the legwork on that, but not in-depth
enough to discuss it here at this time.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 13, if we
might, consider and discuss renewal of commercial lease for
216th Adult Probation offices located at 431 Quinlan Street.
MR. HOLEKAMP: As y'all are all aware, that
is a -- that's the Ziegler building. It's, I guess, the
north portion of the Ziegler building. Here's another one
that we -- we have -- it's a good commercial lease that we
have on it, but it's expired a couple of three years. It
needs to be redone, and I'm -- I'm asking for the Court to
-- we had a contract that was signed by the County Judge --
excuse me -- two years ago, and I found it in some
2-14-05
70
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
paperwork. It was -- never got to the owner of the
property, which is in San Antonio, and so the dates need to
be changed. It's a -- it's -- I believe it's just a
standard commercial lease, that which you normally do. It's
one of those approved ones, and I'd like the County Attorney
to also look at it, but I would -- I would really try to
stay at that location if we possibly can. We've spent quite
a bit of money through probationers, community service, in
remodeling the interior of that, which we get credit for,
basically. And we finally got most of the kinks worked out
of the building, so I'd like not to move if we could help
it. We just need to get a current lease signed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Appreciate you bringing
this to us. I certainly have no problem with your
recommendation, but I think this is beyond -- or should be
beyond your scope as Maintenance Director, to --
MR. HOLEKAMP: It is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I really think I'd like
to refer this to Adult Probation and have them coordinate
the lease coming back to us, and work with the County
Attorney to get a form. I mean, I just don't think it's
a -- a maintenance issue.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, facilities use, maybe.
I don't know. This -- this was brought to me, and I --
every time we have had an issue with the roof or something,
2-14-05
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
71
I feel -- or air conditioning, that is their responsibility.
And I -- I started thinking, what if they tell me no?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. HOLEKAMP: And I really don't want to get
us into that position.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just -- what I'm saying
is, I don't think lease negotiations should be something you
need to be burdened with. You have enough to do.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Okay. Well, whatever. I
mean, I'm willing to do it so we can get some things done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, that's fine.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Tomlinson, you had some
question or issue?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I just want to remind
the Court that -- that the County has to furnish a building
for Adult Probation, so I think it's the County's lease.
It's -- the money from the Probation Department can't pay
for a lease, so I think it's the County's responsibility
to -- to negotiate the lease.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I think Commissioner
Letz' comment was that he didn't feel like the actual
negotiation for the lease space was something that -- that
the Facilities and Maintenance people ought to be getting
involved in; it ought to be more the Probation people, and I
agree with him.
2-19-05
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
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, it could be, but
they're negotiating with our money.
JUDGE TINLEY: I understand.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that's --
JUDGE TINLEY: Ultimately, this Court has to
approve it.
MR. TOMLINSON: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that my feeling
is that Adult Probation should, you know, work with the
County Attorney -- or it should come to us on terms and work
-- you know, negotiate the lease through the County
Attorney's office. That's -- I mean, it's -- that's all I'm
saying. I'm glad -- if Glenn wants to help them, I have no
-- I have no problem with that, but I don't think it's a
maintenance responsibility.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, I'm the one that
normally has to call them when there is a problem, and I'm
the one they always ask, "Well, do we have a current lease?"
And so I feel real uncomfortable with that position right
now that we're in, and I'd like to get it corrected.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You also work with
them on leasehold improvements, do you not?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think the suggestion,
Mr. Holekamp, is that you pull in the Probation people and
2-14-05
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
get them a little bit more actively involved --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Oh, yeah. Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- in this whole process.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Be glad to. Be glad to.
JUDGE TINLEY: There's no motion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll move we ask Glenn
Holekamp to get with Adult Probation and work on renewal of
the commercial lease for their offices, and bring back a
recommendation to this Court.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: With the County
Attorney?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think the terms
come back to us and then -- I mean, it's okay either way,
and with the -- and approve the terms of the lease with the
County Attorney if there's a change in terms.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Any
question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of that
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Item 14, status --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Before we leave that one,
this loss of lease situation has been corrected by our new
2-14-05
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
filing system, correct? I'm asking our administrative
assistant. It seems that we have a problem with these
leases.
MS. MITCHELL: It does in
don't know about anybody else's. I keep
it. I give the originals to the Clerk's
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I
record system, we will know when all our
MS. MITCHELL: That's rig
our office. I
a copy of the -- of
office.
mean, in your new
leases are --
ht.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- expiring?
MS. MITCHELL: That's right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we can make sure
they're all current.
MS. MITCHELL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's see if we can take care
of Item 14. Status of the new roof on the Hill Country
Routh Exhibit Center. Do you want to --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Did everybody get a copy of
the drawing that we did? I think Commissioner Letz had a
question on that, and I believe this answers it as best as
I can. This -- the angle will be behind the -- the facade
front, and it blends into the existing roof at the heighth
that it -- it goes -- transitions. And there's drainage
addressed on the top side and the bottom side.
2-19-05
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What do you mean, top
side and bottom side?
MR. HOLEKAMP: On here, right here, there's a
drain where it comes off of this roof to here. There's a
drain that takes this to the alley, wash rack area where
those big drains are. There's also drainage down here,
which will be about a third of what was coming off the roof
before, because this was a 4-inch drain that was catching
all of this water, so everything was being dumped on the old
flat roof, which created a lot of our problems. So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, what are we going to
have -- when you come off of the arena, we're basically
putting a gutter where the new roof starts?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That gutter will take all
that water off the arena --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- and drop it in the
wash bin area?
MR. HOLEKAMP: That is correct, to the big
drains that go across the road to Riverside.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Riverside.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What happens to the
flow on -- on what would be the western side of the exhibit
building?
2-14-05
76
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. HOLEKAMP: There are roof drains that
take it from where it currently was to the existing hog
barn, to the edge there. It'll take it down to the -- below
the exhibit center.
JUDGE TINLEY: And you say the volume of
drainage is calculated to be approximately a third of what
was coming off the west side previously?
MR. HOLEKAMP: That is correct, because of
the way it was designed originally to just take the water
off of the new roof of the exhibit -- the hog -- the indoor
arena, and just put it on that flat roof.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Glenn?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. This area right
here, right now is the -- what I call the shed area,
correct? So, the -- my question is, right now, that facade
that's in front of the exhibit hall doesn't extend all this
far over, correct?
MR. HOLEKAMP: No, sir, it will be raised up.
No, it -- it goes all the way. It goes all the way, but it
just is not that high on that one end, on the middle.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So -- but is that facade
going to -- the whole facade going to be raised, that metal
-- dark bronze metal color?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes.
2-14-05
~~

1
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: All the way across is
going to be raised?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sa it will be --
MR. HOLEKAMP: So it will look straight.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Straight all the way
across?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it'll -- okay. Do
you know what the timetable is?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Best I could get this morning
is -- you know, the weather hasn't been the most cooperative
for us, but the air conditioning people, I'm -- I'm guessing
they're probably 75 percent done. And the roofing people
have really got -- just now getting a good start. But once
they get going, it shouldn't take very long. He is -- he is
pushing. The reason we had to slow down, we had a couple
events in the building that we had to kind of stop for and
work around. We did get lucky on the rain on -- on one of
them. And -- but a timetable, I would -- weather is such an
integral part, because the guys will not go on the roof with
welders if it's raining.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Did we budget money
for the facade?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir, that's part of the
2-14-05
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
roofing.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Oh.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where will the air
conditioner units be located?
MR. HOLEKAMP: They're in the ceiling,
basically. The condensing units are going to be on the hog
barn roof, and the units themselves are in the ceiling.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The air handlers are
in the ceiling?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the -- and my last
question; T know you -- sounds like you need to go home and
go to bed.
MR. HOLEKAMP: No, I'm all right. I'm okay.
Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the warranty on
the roof? Or is there a warranty on the roof?
MR. HOLEKAMP: I don't have that in front of
me, I don't think.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Most new roofs have a --
MR. HOLEKAMP: There should be something on
that document there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's standing seam,
right? Metal?
JUDGE TINLEY: Metal, I think, is 20 or 25
2-14-05
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
year on materials.
MR. HOLEKAMP: 20 or 25.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 20, 25 years. I was just
curious.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. HOLEKAMP: I'll have to look that up.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's fine.
MR. HOLEKAMP: We had a couple issues. We
had to do some patching on it temporarily, 'cause there was
some penetrations that people almost fell through, and that
roof there was in pretty bad shape. So, needless to say,
it's long overdue that we get something done on that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Holekamp.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I'll get that information for
you on that, but it should be on that engineering thing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. That sheet I have?
MR. HOLEKAMP: You still have that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, I still have it;
it's on my desk. Hope you feel better.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Oh, yeah. I do too.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Holekamp.
We'll stand in recess for 15 minutes.
(Recess taken from 10:29 a.m. to 10:44 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, we'll reconvene the
2-14-05
80
1
2
3
4
5
6
Commissioners Court meeting scheduled for this date. Let's
move to Item 17, consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action to authorize advertising for bids to clean out debris
and trash deposited in Flat Rock Lake, take down dead trees
that present a hazard, and remove submerged stumps and et
cetera.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Et cetera.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: About a year ago,
Judge, you remember you and I took a ride on Flat Rock Lake
at the invitation of Mike Bell. We viewed firsthand the --
the hazards in the water and the hazards above the water,
not the least of which are two big pipes that belong to Kerr
County sitting out there in the middle of the lake. We
talked about it at budget, and we budgeted money for the
purpose of cleaning up Flat Rock Lake to the extent
possible. This agenda item would authorize the advertising
for bids to do that work. I've spoken with the County
Attorney and I've provided him with a lot of information so
that we could properly structure an advertisement that would
accomplish that job, and so it's time to get on with it.
Can't -- can't do a lot of the stuff when the water's pretty
cold, but it's getting close to that time when the water's
going to start warming up, so I'm asking the Court for
approval to authorize advertising for bids to clean out the
23
.~..
24
25
18
19
20
21
22
2-19-05
81
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
lake. And that's a motion.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I second it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: One can go first.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you have -- of
course, we have intentions of draining the lake?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're not -- okay.
All right, that's all.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, sir, not draining
it. I don't know who's going to win the bid, but the -- the
bid is structured so that the work takes place from the
water, not from the shore. And so whoever is awarded the
bid would have to be able to work from the water, take care
of the submerged stuff, take care of the overhanging stuff.
It does not require draining the lake.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So you're not talking
about loading up all the trash into a dump truck and hauling
it somewhere else?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We are talking about
loading that -- the stumps and limbs and all that kind of
2-14-05
82
t
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
stuff will be loaded in and brought to shore so it can dry
out later and be chipped up or burned, whichever.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can't wait till the
bids come in. It's going to be interesting.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question is, I'm
unclear as to what the scope of the project is specifically.
I mean -- and I don't see how we can go out for bids based
on what's here. And, I mean, I don't know how much we
budgeted. $50,000?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 58, I think.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: $58,000. But I guess my
question is to -- well, one is to, what is the scope
exactly? I mean, I know we need to get rid of two pipes,
and I know we're going to get rid of some stumps and some
other debris that -- but that's kind of broad on as large a
lake as that is. That's the first part of my question. And
the second part, after we put this in our budget and
discussed it last time, I had calls from several U.G.R.A.
Board members about concerns as to exactly what the scope of
the project was as well, and I would ask that you visit with
U.G.R.A. just -- and get input from them as to how we
proceed and what the scope should be. They were concerned
about us going into -- even though they don't have direct
authority over that lake, as stewards of the Guadalupe River
throughout the county, they did have concerns about what our
2-14-05
83
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
project would entail.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I did, in fact, talk
with Mr. Etter early on in the process, because we asked
Mr. Etter if he would consider asking his board to
participate in this project, and his response back at the
time was, we might participate a little bit in cleaning up,
because we are about cleaning up the water, but we don't
think that's really our mission. Now, maybe something's
gotten lost between the time he said what he said and other
board members contacting you; I don't know. Our scope is
merely to take out the safety hazards that are under -- are
submerged and the safety hazards that are above. I asked
the County Attorney to review the material I had. Rex, can
you assist me in how we talk about the scope of the work
with respect to the advertisement?
MR. EMERSON: Well, my understanding is that
the idea was to -- I mean, it's probably worded "stumps" and
so forth, but the idea was to take everything and cut it
down below an average boat level. Not necessarily rip all
the stumps out of the bottom of the river, but it was take
the ones that were at water level or maybe a foot below and
cut them down to 3 or 4 feet below the water level on the
average mean line. The proposal is written for removal from
the water so that we do not have to pay anybody for
right-of-ways or easements or anything like that to move
2-14-05
84
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
along the edge of the river. We're not worried about
destroying private property along the edge of the river.
Everything can be done from the water and removed to the
County's property along the river for disposal by County
personnel.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We would also
identify fish habitats so as not to disturb spawning
locations and so forth. We had talked to Mike Bell about
that, who is -- I guess is the preeminent fisherman of that
lake, and we would identify that so as not to disturb fish
habitats.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess my question comes
in -- and I think this is part of what I can't remember. I
think it was -- well, two board members; it was quite a
while ago when I talked to them about it, was that the
stumps are dangerous, but if we start cutting them all down,
are we encouraging more high=speed boat traffic on that
lake? And that's, I guess, you know, one of my questions,
is that -- that we don't have any rules to prohibit much
traffic, or much on that lake right now, as I recall. So if
we go down and cut all the stumps to 3 foot, is that going
the encourage jet skis, a lot more recreational use of that
lake? And what happens if we miss a stump? I mean, and
we've gone out and said that we, you know, are out here; all
the stumps have now been cut off. And I don't know how you
2-14-05
85
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
find all the stumps. So, I guess I'm just concerned -- I
mean, cleaning up the lake I'm totally in favor of. Getting
this big -- those big pipes out and some other big trees and
things like that that have washed up, and general cleanup, I
think we should do. But when you start cutting stumps and
trying to do that, I'm just -- I'm worried about -- well,
those two things.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I don't -- I
don't know about encouraging or discouraging recreational
use. You might recall, two or three years ago I brought a
set of rules in here that had to deal with slowing up boat
traffic on that lake, and the Court was not predisposed to
do anything about that, so we didn't do anything about that.
But my -- I guess I would respond, Commissioner, by saying I
think we have an obligation to do our best to clean up that
lake, because the safety issues are there, and they're
greater today than they will be after we finish. And there
is a liability with respect to what's under the water,
what's hanging over the water, and Kerr County property
that's in the middle of the water, and I think we have an
obligation to do our best to clean it up. I don't think
we're making any representations that we're going to get
everything out of it, but we're going to sure try to get
what we can within the scope of the dollars we have
available.
2-19-05
86
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I'm in favor of
getting rid of the debris, which would include those big
pipes and maybe, you know, some -- you know, those dead
trees hanging over, things like that. But I'm not really in
favor of going into the body of the lake itself and doing a
whole lot of cleanup.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think -- I just
can't picture you doing all these things which I think needs
to be done. And I don't care what U.G.R.A. thinks or says.
Couldn't care less. But the -- it needs to be drained some.
I mean, the water level needs to be lowered, doesn't it? I
mean, what are you going to do, get down in 6 feet of water
with a chain saw? I don't --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I don't know
that you're going to get down 6 feet, but you might be able
to get town 2 and a half, 3 feet without -- you know, from
the surface of the water. What were -- the information we
have available does not contemplate lowering the lake level.
Does not. The folks that we know can do a job like this
indicate that with the proper equipment, you can do it off
the surface.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Now, I -- I, for one,
don't want to lower the level. We've been through that
argument before, and what it does to people on the shore.
2-14-05
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
So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: See, I'm kind of with --
I don't know if he wants to lower the lake, though I'd be in
favor of lowering it 2 feet and getting all the garbage out.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I was
thinking. I just don't see how you're going to do this
thing without lowering the water some. I know that's a
difficult task out there. I understand that there's a --
some kind of ball in the drain pipe that has -- you have to
use explosives to blow it out and all this stuff.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Kind of tough to do.
You might recall when the City did its project at the
current Schreiner Park -- the city park now, and they came
in with their contractor, and their first idea was to lower
the lake. They put huge siphons over the top of the dam,
and they couldn't do it. They couldn't --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Didn't work.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They were unable to
keep up with the in-flow. And so the bottom line was, the
lake didn't get lowered.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The last time that
thing was drained and cleaned, some friends of mine
literally went up into the pipe and set explosives.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: To blow that thing
back in?
2-14-05
88

1
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: To blow the ball out
of the hole. Only way it could come out, 'cause it's so
much force, and it's buried so deep in trash that a tractor
can't pull the thing up. So -- but I -- I just can't
picture in my mind how you clean anything up without getting
in the water. I just don't see it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're going to get
in, but you're going to get on top of it. You're going to
walk on water.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don`t -- you're
right, I do not. I know a guy that does, though.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One comment. The
price of my support is money in the budget next year to
drain and clean up Ingram Lake.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We've been there
before.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. It's time to
go again.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We have been there
before.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is -- what
authorities do we have about eliminating motors on a lake?
2-14-05
89
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We11, that's a good
question. And we -- we dealt with it, what, three years
ago? I brought a set of proposed rules in that would have
made Flat Rock Lake a no-wake zone along the south shore --
essentially along the south shore, where all the homes are,
at the request of all those folks who like that notion. The
Sheriff was one who really didn't like the idea, because he
was -- wasn't quite sure how he was going to enforce it. He
said he wasn't going to get water wings or wasn't going to
get flippers and he wasn't going to get in there and do the
job. So, I think we have the authority if we have a mind to
do so, but we didn't have the will to do so.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I don't know
about this no-wake on the south side thing. I still
disagree with that, because I don't know how you control
that. The Sheriff is right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the deeper
side.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But you could take
motors off of the lake.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You could.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Trolling motors only.
Then you see daddies and little boys out there paddling
around catching fish.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You could, and make
2-14-05
90
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it a fishing lake, just like the former U.G.R.A. lake. You
could do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct. So we
have the authority to do that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe we do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the issue we had
last time -- I think Commissioner, Precinct 1 is correct; it
came to an enforcement issue. And on all the park rules, it
came to an enforcement issue as much as anything, and the
Sheriff said he needed a boat.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, he's got guns.
Shoot them from the bank. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, but I think -- you
know, I think you still get into an enforcement issue if you
put a horsepower limit or something, or trolling motors
only, something like that. You know, I don't know how you
go about that. I'd probably defer to the County Attorney.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's just like
U.G.R.A. lake. There's no gasoline-powered engines on that
thing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's right,
sailboats or fishing motors.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There is none.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that's -- but they
have a different statute because it's drinking water, and
2-14-05
1
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
you can't -- and the fumes -- I mean, their legal ability to
do that, I think, is different than ours.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Doesn't matter. You
know, they --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could be.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If a boat goes on the
lake, they get arrested.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tell you what --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Boat goes on our lake,
they get arrested.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can bring them
back again, and we'll -- we'll witness this courtroom fill
up with all the sports enthusiasts who like to use the lake.
So, happy to bring it back again. In the meantime, I'd like
to advertise for bids.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bids for what? Long
chainsaws? Waterproof chainsaws?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The equipment
necessary to do it. Whoever does it or gets the bid has to
have the equipment, and you have to work from the water
side. That's the way it works. Can't work from the shore.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My only other question
is, you have included in your verbiage, "restroom facility."
Were you talking about doing that as well?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not this time, not on
2-19-05
92
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
this agenda item. I'll come back with that at another time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Only -- this only
deals with cleanup of the lake.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. If there's a
motion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Already been a second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on the motion? All in favor of that motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I believe the
Auditor has the information, so we can now advertise for
bids; is that correct?
(Mr. Tomlinson nodded.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: The next item, authorizing
County Judge to sign placement contracts, memorandums of
understanding for contract services and other agreements on
behalf of Kerr County. Ms. Harris.
MS. HARRIS: As you know, previously, the
2-14-05
93
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
chairman of the Juvenile Board -- since the Juvenile Board
and the Hill Country Corporation were the official
operators, which no longer exist, Judge Tinley was
authorized by both of those entities to sign contracts,
memorandums of understanding, any types of agreement that
the facility has with any type of entity, so I needed to
come to you today for you to authorize the County Judge to
sign those same types of documents on behalf of
Commissioners Court, since Commissioners Court is now the
official operator of the facility.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question.
MS. HARRIS: Yes?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are these the same
contracts, in terms of form, that we've been using prior --
prior to the County taking over the facility?
MS. HARRIS: Yes. And they do not state
in -- in the contracts; i.e., placement contracts for
residents -- it never did state in those contracts any
mention of Hill Country Juvenile Facility Corporation. It
was Kerr County.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. My second
question is, have we dealt with reimbursement to the County
for health care? To me, that's an issue, as to how we deal
with reimbursement to the County for dollars expended by us
on health care. Have we dealt with that issue?
2-14-05
94
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. HARRIS: It states in the contract that
at no time is the facility ever responsible for medical
expenses in regards to the residents. If we did have to pay
for any medical expenditures, that is billed to each county,
and it states it in the contracts that they will be billed
for medical.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand that,
and I think that's what the current scenario is.
MS. HARRIS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But I'm given to
believe -- I'm not sure whether it was a conversation with
you or a conversation with the Auditor.
MS. HARRIS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WTLLIAMS: Or you both, that
there are instances where we get hung out to dry.
MS. HARRIS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We front the medical
care, as we should, --
MS. HARRIS: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- to take care of
the emergency situation or whatever the situation is.
MS. HARRIS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We forward the bill
to the county who placed the -- the youth, and then they
start dilly-dallying around with it, saying it's the
2-14-05
95

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
parents' responsibility.
MS. HARRIS: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or the parents have
insurance, and the insurance has got to take a look at it.
So, what I want us to deal with is a more forceful way to
make certain that we are reimbursed up front, bingo, --
MS. HARRIS: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- for the dollars we
expend, and the sending county can deal with the parents
and/or insurance issues on their own, but they pay us first.
MS. HARRIS: I agree.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How do you deal with
that?
MS. HARRIS: I would think that perhaps, with
the County Attorney's -- County Attorney's assistance, that
we could draft a new contract and put that verbiage in that
new contract. The timing that we're looking at right now,
we're coming up where contracts are going to become
renewable again in August. The contract cycle ran from
August to August. Now, I know that the County Judge has
already expressed an interest in changing the way the
verbiage of the contract -- that it's automatically
renewable, so we don't have all the administrative hassle of
renewing these contracts every August. Certainly, I can get
with the County Attorney and we can come up with some
2-14-05
96
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
verbiage by which it states that any medical expenses that
the facility pays for up front will be the responsibility
for reimbursement from the placing county, period.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can we do that by --
Mr. County Attorney, can we do that currently with just a
letter addendum to the contract, in which we would ask for
their signature acknowledging that for now, until the
contract is redone?
MR. EMERSON: T think it's going to depend on
the response you get from the placing county. You know, if
I were in that county, I think I would respond that you're
changing the essential term of the contract. In other
words, we can try it, but I can't promise you it'll fly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- I agree with
what Commissioner Williams has said, but I guess I'm
confused as to why this is on the agenda like this. I mean,
I look at this as the -- as similar to what we do with the
jail, and those contracts come to the full court, and I
think these contracts should come to the full court.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. Contracts,
MOU's, and other agreements need to -- need to be approved
in here. And I don't have any problem with the Judge
signing off on them.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Are you saying
approve the form, or approve each individual contract?
2-19-05
97
1
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: Well, I think in the
case of the jail, they're approved as to form. He doesn't
bring in each individual one, does he?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe so. I believe
we have ones with various counties. When he gets a new
county, he brings the new county contract to us. I think, I
mean, especially for the first -- initially, you know, I
want this Court to be pretty intimately involved with the
operation of that facility. Bringing these contracts to us
will insure that. Now, I think there are --
MS. HARRIS: There's going to be some time
issues if we do that, and I just need for y'all to
understand that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, time is on our
side, though. We're going to approve -- oh, yeah.
MS. HARRIS: What I'm saying is, sometimes we
get counties that want to come on board because they've got
a kid that's ready to come this week, and it's a county that
we do not have a current contract with. So, it's -- time is
of the essence to get that contract to the county -- to that
placing county, get proper signatures, get it back here for
our proper signatures so we can legally take that kid within
that week.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. If --
JUDGE TINLEY: You're just speaking of the
2-14-05
98
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
residential services contract?
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: For which we have an accepted
format at this point?
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is the only ones you're
talking about?
MS. HARRIS: Yes, that's what I'm talking
about there. Now, of course, the memorandums of
understanding with contract entities, I certainly understand
that you would want to bring that to the Court.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- I mean, I
don't have a problem, I guess, with form, as long as it's
the exact same form; let the County Attorney approve the
form and authorize the County Judge to sign as needed. I do
understand the timeliness --
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- concerns, but on the
rest of it, I'd really prefer they come to the Court.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you -- on this
particular agenda item, Ms. Harris, are you asking for
specific contracts today, or just this as a generic --
MS. HARRIS: Just as a generic, yes, sir.
Just generic.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Has the County Attorney
2-19-05
99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
approved the form for the -- what did you just call that?
The placement, residential --
JUDGE TINLEY: Residential services.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Residential services.
MR. EMERSON: I haven't seen one, no, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think as soon as we get
the County Attorney to approve that form, then I'll be glad
to vote on this.
MS. HARRIS: Okay. Because I've got a county
that's wanting a contract right now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, you need to get
the contract in here. My understanding is, like, the adult
facility -- and the juvenile may be different; I know they
are in some areas. But if we don't have a contract, Rusty
sometimes takes outside prisoners in without that contract
and then comes along later. He's done that before.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What would be wrong
with, like, on an emergency-type basis -- am I talking to
the wrong person here?
JUDGE TINLEY: I --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, Mr. Stanton's
out here. He can address it, too.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I'm talking -- I
think these are legal questions here. What would be wrong,
2-14-05
100
1
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
on an emergency basis, for Del Rio to send a kid up here and
we accept him until we can get the contract into this room?
MR. EMERSON: My initial answer to that would
be I don't know if there's anything statutorily in the care
of juveniles that would prevent that or not.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Permit or prevent?
MR. EMERSON: Either word will work.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, I see. Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What has been the
practice up until now?
MS. HARRIS: The practice --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A new county coming
on board.
MS. HARRIS: The practice has been that we
have the approved contract form. We have blank contracts.
We, of course, type in that particular county's information
on the contract; we send it to them. They get their
authorizing entities to sign that contract. They send it
back to us. We have forwarded it on to Judge Tinley; Judge
Tinley has signed that contract, and each entity gets an
original signature contract that we keep on file.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Are all the
contracts identical in terms of per diem rate?
MS. HARRIS: Yes. They're all identical,
yes.
2-14-05
101
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So the only
difference between one contract and another one is the
entities involved?
MS. HARRIS: That's correct. Now, you need
to understand, too, that there are some counties -- Bexar
County is one -- that they do not use our contract. They
use their own placement contract. El Paso's one. Tarrant
County is another one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And those, I think it's
even more important the County Attorney look at them.
MS. HARRIS: Naturally. Naturally.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think the -- you
know, I think the County Attorney needs to sign off on these
contracts.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You haven't seen this
contract?
MR. EMERSON: No, sir.
MS. HARRIS: It was an approved -- my
understanding it was a contract form that was approved by
the previous County Attorney.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Want to shed some
light on this, Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: She's correct. It was
previously approved by the prior County Attorney, and we
just use the same format. That's what we've been using.
2-19-05
102
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is a new day.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How long does it take
to get the thing reviewed by the County Attorney?
MR. EMERSON: I would tend to think we could
do it rather quickly. Put it on the top of the list.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that six months?
Eight months? (Laughter.) Two hours?
MR. EMERSON: Day or two.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Huh?
MR. EMERSON: Day or two.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Day or two.
MS. HARRIS: So, you want new contracts to --
new -- a new form, or if he approves the existing form, so
therefore, I do not get any signatures on any contracts
starting today until you get -- until y'all approve the
form?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's my stand.
MS. HARRIS: And we won't meet again until
two weeks from now?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We can meet any time
we want to.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can -- I don't have
any problem with approving it subject to his approving as to
form. I mean, I --
2-14-OS
103
1
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: Yeah, I don't either.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Between now and our next
meeting. But I'd like us to -- it would all come to us, and
let us look at that at our next meeting, which is the 28th,
I believe. But, I mean, I don't have any problem at all
with, you know, giving the County Judge the authority to
sign if the County -- well, the County Judge to sign if the
County Attorney has signed off as to form of the contract.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Make that in the form
of a motion; I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know what I want
to make a motion to now. I'll make a motion to approve
residential placement contracts at Kerr County Juvenile
Detention Facility, subject to County Attorney form
approval, and authorize County Judge to sign the same, and
that all contracts -- well, and the form contract will come
back to the Commissioners Court at our next meeting along
with any other contracts.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second it with a
comment. Dealing with the health care issue, I think we can
defer that until we are looking at -- we can defer it at
this time. We'll get it in place for new contracts, as
opposed to these that you'll be submitting on a renewal
basis, but it is an issue that I think needs to be
addressed -- strengthened.
2-19-05
104
1
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: If I understand that
motion, that means that once the County Attorney approves it
as to form and the Judge signs it, then there's nothing
holding up Ms. Harris from making deals for placement.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And this is back on the
agenda the 28th for us, the whole Court, to look at the
contract form.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That seems
reasonable.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. When is the
renewal, now? Did you say September?
MS. HARRIS: Some of -- some of the
contracts, from what I'm researching right now -- let me
back up and say this. The bulk of the contracts are
renewable in August.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: August, okay.
MS. HARRIS: Yes. Yes. There are some
contracts that are out of sync in that schedule, for
whatever reason, but we can certainly put them on the same
cycle. And if you want the verbiage in there that they
would automatically be renewable unless either entity wants
to change anything about that contract, if they -- that they
would be automatically renewable every year, it's up to the
2-14-05
105
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Court. That's neither here nor there, and it doesn't really
matter to the placing counties, I don't believe. It's just
an administrative technique by which we wouldn't have to do
this every year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Automatically
renewable. However, it presupposes that the per diem rate
stays the same.
MS. HARRIS: If we put the verbiage in the
contract by which the per diem could possibly fluctuate
according to whether T.J.P.C. changes or amends or adds to
or decreases their reimbursement rate to the placing county,
you could put that verbiage in there that our per diem could
fluctuate according to whatever T.J.P.C. is doing with the
per diem reimbursement.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That language is not
currently in there?
MS. HARRIS: No, sir, it's not in there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that would be
part of a reworking of the contract, I would think.
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This would get -- my
motion would get us through the next two weeks.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, get you past
this hump.
25 ~ JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
2-14-05
106
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think Ms. Harris has a
question.
MS. HARRIS: Yeah. What would you like to do
about memorandums of understanding with contracting entities
such as Dr. Quintanilla? And any other --
JUDGE TINLEY: They would need to come to the
Court.
MS. HARRIS: Okay. So, you want to look at
that one too?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
MS. HARRIS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. The only thing we're
talking about here is the residential services.
MS. HARRIS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Under -- under the existing
current format.
MS. HARRIS: But be advised --
JUDGE TINLEY: Only after it's approved as to
form by the -- by the County Attorney.
MS. HARRIS: Be advised that, legally, I can
not offer substance abuse until I get an MOU signed by Dr.
Quintanilla and the Court.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's good. What
2-14-05
107
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
other agreements?
MS. HARRIS: Like, with Dr. Meriwether, the
dentist that we use. I'm trying to think.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We don't have -- do we
have agreements with them now?
MS. HARRIS: No, but we need to.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would -- would Bexar
County come into Kerr County with its youth, would it -- it
would be predicated on having Dr. Quintanilla's services
under contract?
MS. HARRIS: Yes. Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MS. HARRIS: Because I cannot offer substance
abuse treatment -- since he is going to be the person that
would provide the individual counseling sessions required by
D.S.H.S., Department of State Health Services, I cannot
legally advertise that I'm offering substance abuse
treatment today, since we do not have a signed memorandum of
understanding, and we are -- we were waiting for the Court
to become the official operators of the facility while we
were drafting the memorandum of understanding -- the County
Attorney. While we were drafting that, we needed to wait
until the County became the official operators. Now that
that has occurred, we can move forward.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is the County
2-14-05
108
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Attorney currently drafting a memorandum of understanding
with Mr. -- Dr. -- with Dr. Quintanilla?
MR. EMERSON: We're working on the rough form
for presentation to the Court.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could we include that
in the current motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's not ready now, so
we can come in at our next meeting.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you not have it
ready yet?
MR. EMERSON: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. We can come
back when we need to.
MS. HARRIS: Okay, that's fine.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think what you're
hearing here, Ms. Harris, is the desire on the part of the
Court to be intimately involved in the management of the
facility for some period of time, both on the cost side and
the revenue side. We'll probably be micro-managers for a
while until we get some level of comfort with -- with the
financial picture.
MS. HARRIS: I understand.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm speaking for
myself, but I think I hear some of the other Commissioners
saying the same thing.
2-14-05
109
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.-. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. HARRIS: I understand that. That's fine.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And there's nothing
that precludes you -- if you have a situation that needs to
be brought to the Court quickly, nothing precludes you from
contacting either Commissioner Baldwin or myself and asking
to schedule a meeting -- post a meeting.
MS. HARRIS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're quite used to
meeting on a weekly basis on this topic.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're almost staying
here 24 hours a day, 7/24.
MS. HARRIS: Okay, that'll be fine.
JUDGE TINLEY: If you have a need, we can
meet to take up whatever matter is pressing.
MS. HARRIS: Okay, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Next
item is consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
authorize expanding the scope of the -- of engagement of
Pressler Thompson and Company to perform an in-depth audit
2-14-05
110
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of the Kerr County Juvenile Detention Facility for the years
2002, 2003, and 2004. Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Baldwin and I spent an enlightening two hours
with representatives of Pressler Thompson on Friday. Right,
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And we reviewed a
list of questions that the Court has been earlier made aware
of, and other questions that popped into mind. The bottom
line is that, at this point, we're not going to ask the
Court for authority to proceed because we don't know what
the cost would be, and we're not certain exactly how
Pressler Thompson would propose to proceed with an audit to
flush out questions that the Court has. We left it, after
the two-hour meeting, that they would get back to us so that
we could place this back on the agenda at our next meeting
in February, and tell us exactly how they believe they could
proceed and what the cost might be. Have I left anything
out, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So that's all there
is for that one right now.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. If no one else has
anything further on that, we will move on to the next item
2-14-05
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
on the agenda, discuss and consider the discrepancy of
salaries between County employees and Juvenile Detention
Facility employees and make appropriate adjustments. I
would note that we have a participation form that's been
submitted to the Court. Mr. Scott Pope.
MR. POPE: Thank you, Judge, Commissioners.
My name is Scott Pope, and I'm here today on behalf of
Taxpayers' Watch for Kerr County. And we feel that every
position in the county is deserving of a large salary
increase, and if we ran things, we'd start with the
Commissioners. However, that situation doesn't exist and
those funds don't exist, and therefore, we would like the
Court to consider, if there's any additional surplus funds
to increase salaries in the county, that the first thing we
do is move to restore the health care benefits to County
employees prior to raises to management positions within the
county. We think that would serve the leadership properly
in this county, and will serve the best interests of the
citizens. Thank you very much.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I brought this
to the Court, and I know there's probably some that think
that I'm trying to throw up a roadblock in the process here,
and that's not -- that's not -- that's the furthest thing
from my mind. What I'm dealing with here is an issue that
2-14-05
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
has to be dealt with somehow, at some point, and it should
have been done prior to purchase. But we have to get the --
the Juvenile Detention Facility employees in line with the
rest of the County family. The more I dug into this thing,
the worse it got. I mean, this is one of the -- one of the
bigger messes that I've ever encountered. And, to give you
an example, the cooks at the juvenile facility, in order to
bring them in equal to cooks in the jail -- cooks are
cooks -- you're talking about a pretty hefty little increase
in salary there. And that's the way it is across the board
with the juvenile facility, all of those people out there.
The -- what I call "jailers," Becky has a section here,
control people. All of those people, in order to bring them
to the same level as what you have in the adult facility,
you`re talking about a pretty hefty sum of money to bring
them up to. Now, I'm assuming this is Becky's proposal
here, these -- this is all I have, is --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's all I got.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- the handwritten
numbers. And --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we have that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's under the next
agenda item, actually.
JUDGE TINLEY: 21.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh.
2-14-05
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's where I found
it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This chart is --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Becky, I'm going to
steal some of your thunder here.
MS. HARRIS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Her handwritten notes
that she wants to create for the control people -- and
correct me if I'm wrong; you're talking about just those
people that sit inside the booth and turn the knobs that
opens doors.
MS. HARRIS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And things like that.
MS. HARRIS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In the adult facility,
I think we consider those people as jailers. She wants to
have a separate section as controllers, and she wants to
create a Pay Grade 10. Well -- and then, for cooks, create
Pay Grade 11. Well, we've -- this Court's decided that
we're -- we're going to start at Pay Grade 12; there won't
be anything below Pay Grade 12. And the cooks is -- again,
is a perfect example. To me, a secretary is a secretary and
a cook is a cook. So, if you're going to put cooks on the
same level as cooks, then they need to go up to the 14 level
2-14-05
114
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
like they are in the adult jail. And it's that way
throughout -- throughout the group out there. It's -- it`s
a mess. But I think that we can do that, but we're -- we
cannot do it today, unless Barbara has a magic wand that she
can wave over this thing. So, my suggestion on this issue
is that Commissioner Williams and I have been appointed as
liaisons between this Court and the Juvenile Detention
Facility; that we sit down with the personnel officer,
Ms. Nemec, and Ms. Harris for the next couple of months and
try to work out these issues, and bring them back to this
Court, probably -- in my mind, probably around June, so that
collectively we can decide what to do with all of this, and
build it into the budget to crank up October 1. I don't
know how we can make -- I just don't see how we make changes
-- all the changes that need to be made. May not be enough
money in the whole wide world to do it; I don't know.
But --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is kind of
interesting, and I just wondered, Commissioner -- I guess
I'm asking the question to Ms. Harris through you. We have
more than just two categories of folk out there, right? We
have control, which I'm looking at, and you're proposing 10,
and we have cooks, which you're proposing an 11.
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But we also have
2-14-05
115
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
other categories of employees.
MS. HARRIS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And we'd be dealing
with all that, would we not?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. I
haven't --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't see them
here -- I don't think I see them here.
MS. HARRIS: No, sir, because I could fit all
my present categories of employees -- when I did the budget
for this next eight months, I could plug in all my other
categories of employees with the existing matrix that the
Court approved, the '04 and '05.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, so that's not
an issue.
MS. HARRIS: It was only the cooks and
control people whose present salary that I pay does not fit
in with the '04-'05 salary matrix, so that's why I had to --
I had to create Step 10 and Step 11 just to plug -- have a
place to put them on a grade/step increase matrix for this
next eight months, 'cause I didn't have a place to put them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MS. HARRIS: So that's the only reason why I
23
"" 2 4
25
created that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And your proposed
2-14-05
116
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
budget, which is another agenda item --
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- has them placed
I where?
MS. HARRIS: Has them placed on that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's 10's and 11's?
MS. HARRIS: 10's and 11's.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And are they
currently earning these dollars?
MS. HARRIS: Earning -- that's correct.
I COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: These are the
I dollars?
MS. HARRIS: Those are the dollars that they
are presently earning. And that's why I created those two
grades/steps, 'cause that's all --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. So your
budget --
MS. HARRIS: I needed a place to put them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- doesn't reflect an
increase?
MS. HARRIS: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's the right
approach to take. I mean, I think it's -- I mean, to go in
there and try to do, you know, a quick fix here and quick
fix there is not the way to do it. And we need to get it
2-14-05
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
worked into our budget process. I would look to this as
to -- you know, in the private sector, of one business
buying another business. It takes time to assimilate them
in. That's basically what we've done here. I think it's a
-- you know, I'm ecstatic to see Number 1 and Number 2 take
this task on, 'cause it is -- you need to look at everyone
and look at the job descriptions, and with both Ms. Harris
and Ms. Nemec. It's --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think it's a
logical approach. Commissioner Baldwin and I have talked
about it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, do you need any --
you don't need any action?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we have --
Ms. Nemec, do you want to -- she has -- we've asked her to
make a presentation to show us some things here to kind of
prepare us. Thank you.
MS. NEMEC: You're welcome. Here's one for
you.
MR. EMERSON: Thank you.
MS. NEMEC: When I spoke
Baldwin, he asked me to do this compari
was, based on positions in the Juvenile
in the Law Enforcement Center, I listed
that doesn't mean that when we get down
to Commissioner
son, and what I did
Detention Center and
the salaries. Now,
to working on this,
2-14-05
118
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that these are the positions that should be compared to one
another, because without job descriptions, I don't know that
they should even be compared. But I thought this would give
you all something to look at, and kind of qo from there.
Now, keep in mind when -- for instance, in maintenance, --
well, no, not maintenance, but, like, juvenile detention
officers, they're at a 12-1. Jail officers are 14-1. The
Sheriff's Department has a different position schedule for
their deputies and their jailers, so when Ms. Harris and I
got together to simplify her department, she only went on
the current step and grade schedule that we use within the
courthouse, not -- she cannot use the jail position
schedule. So, like, shift supervisor, she has 17-1 for her
shift supervisor. That's 24,271. And the sergeants under
the Law Enforcement Center are 17-1 but their salary is a
little higher. It's because they're on a different position
schedule, so that may be something we want to look at also.
Do y'all have any questions? Support staff, I wasn't real
sure if she just had them listed as support staff, so I just
compared them to the secretary and the clerk. I'm not real
sure what the 25-1 is, what position that is or what they
do, so I wasn't able to compare that to any other position.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is it?
MS. HARRTS: Training officer. She's also
the certification officer. She's also the food service
2-14-05

1
119
manager, and she's also the person that takes care of our
N.S.L.P.
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 WILLIAMS: Several hats.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- Barbara, is there
a reason that law enforcement is on a different schedule?
MS. NEMEC: Because the Sheriff asked for
them to have a separate schedule, and the Court approved it.
MS. RECTOR: How long ago did we do that?
MS. NEMEC: I want to say it was about two or
three years ago. Not only are they on a separate schedule;
they have one for deputies, they have one for jailers, and
they have one for nurses. And then they have their clerks
on our schedule, so -- yeah. I wish we would have just
moved their step and grade higher than everybody else, and
not --
MS. UECKER: It's been that way longer than
that. Been a long time, 'cause I complained about it
several times.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Seems that -- actually, I
believe it was before Rusty.
MS. NEMEC: No, it was him that wanted this
done.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, it is Rusty; I
remember that. I just don't remember when we did it.
MS. UECKER: I think Sheriff Kaiser did it.
2-14-05
._
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
120
MR. TOMLINSON: It was when Sheriff Kaiser
was in office.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Really?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah.
MS. NEMEC: I don't think so.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Either way, I think it
would be a good exercise to relook at that, 'cause all that
does is complicate everything.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It does.
MS. NEMEC: Well, it's not fun for me during
the budget process, I'll tell you that. And there's a lot
of room for error, because we're dealing with five different
position schedules.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I would -- if
it's possible to incorporate into one, that would make more
sense to me. But --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Am I hearing that
you're asking Commissioner Baldwin and I to -- tasking us to
do that?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, he's not saying
that at all.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, good.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, I was asking that the
County Judge, during the budget process, bring this up with
the Sheriff.
2-14-05
121
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There you go. Okay.
MS. NEMEC: I can get with the Sheriff, and
the Sheriff and I can work on it.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's a better idea.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's an even better
idea.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. But I --
MS. NEMEC: If y'all will just tell him that
that is what y'all wish for us to do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Unless there's a good
reason not to do it. Maybe there is, and I don't know.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't remember why
we did it, honestly.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But my proposal today
is that -- is we just stay on the same schedule as we're on
today, and let us see -- let Bill and I and the two ladies
work out a route to go and come back in here, and I think
probably in June, and build it in the budget process. And
then, whatever we come out with, it can start October 1.
Just let it run through -- till October 1.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we need to create
positions 10 and 11 so they -- you know, for --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's where they are
today.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we just leave them?
2-19-05
122
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
We don't have to take any action?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. Their dollar
amounts are equivalent to a 10 and 11, so we just leave the
dollar amounts alone.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I'm
saying; just leave everything like it is right now, and not
worry about it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Need any court action?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I also think that's
a good plan. We've -- we've done some work in the last few
years looking at internal equity and external
competitiveness. I think we've made some good progress
in -- for example, with our Sheriff's deputies and our
jailers, curing undesirable turnover. You know, if you can
look at -- if you can determine that, for example, detention
officers and jail officers are in the same -- same job
family, similar jobs, then we have to look at curing those
differences.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I also think it's
important that we consider a decent wage, a fair wage, a
living wage, whatever the right terms are. I have a -- I
have a belief that our lowest paid people in the county, our
lowest paid job classifications aren't paid enough. And
we've had -- and you didn't disagree with me on that; we
2-14-05
123
1
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 couldn't find money to cure it. But I think we need to
keep it in mind and make progress with our current county
employees, as well as some of these lower paid --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- Detention Center
employees. If they're eligible for food stamps, they're not
paid enough.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further on that
particular agenda item?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Of course,
Commissioner, with the purchase of the Juvenile Detention
Facility, I don't know if anybody's going to get a raise.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I hear you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move on to Item 21,
consideration of the budget for Kerr County Juvenile
Detention Facility; discuss, review, and authorize.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Welcome back.
MS. HARRIS: Thank you. Well, in light of
what you have just decided in regards to the salaries, and
that we postpone the salary discrepancies, that we postpone
that, I -- I'm going to ask that you postpone any approval
or adjustments or anything to the budget while -- while
Commissioner Williams, Commissioner Baldwin, Ms. Nemec, and
myself work on the salary schedule, because that's an
2-14-05
124
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
integral part of this budget. So I'm asking you, maybe --
perhaps we would want to postpone doing anything with this
budget, other than the fact that if you have any questions
in regards to any line item, I'll be more than ample -- more
than willing to answer any questions that you have.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I appreciate that
offer, 'cause I have one.
MS. HARRIS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: By postponing the
budget, aren't there some -- oh, well, nevermind. I won't
go there. Contract Services, what does that include?
MS. HARRIS: That includes our nurse. That
includes Dr. Quintanilla, the -- the psychiatrist. It
includes Dr. Lisa Watts, who is the psychologist. It also
would -- I did put it in there for a possible contract with
the sex offender treatment provider. However, after putting
it in the Contract Services line item, I have learned that,
due to licensing restrictions by D.P.R.S., she would not be
able to be in the category of a contract; she would have to
be an employee, but a part-time. And so there's a
possibility that I would have to transfer the money that I
budgeted for her from the contract line item to the
part-time staff line item, but I did put her money in here
under contract. But those are the contract people.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, that's something
2-14-05
125
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
else that we can work on. Is it required by law that you
have a psychologist and a -- and a psychiatrist?
MS. HARRIS: The psychologist does all of our
psychological testing, which is required by the State for
placements. She -- she does -- her firm does the
psychological testing for any kids that Kevin has;
consequently, that comes out of Kevin's budget. I have to
have a health -- I'm sorry. I have to have a mental health
professional that is on-call to do suicide assessments
anytime that we have to place a kid on suicide alert.
Dr. Quintanilla does not do that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, that is a
psychologist?
MS. HARRIS: That is the psychologist that
does that, and she is on-call. She comes out within 48
hours after we put a child on suicide alert to do a suicide
assessment. We have to do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is -- I'm trying to
get to a place. Dr. Quintanilla is -- does some mental
health things?
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is he -- is he there
primarily for- the alcohol and drug --
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He doesn't do anything
2-14-05
126
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
--, 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
else, actually.
MS. HARRIS: He can -- he can do medical
evaluations on kids that come in on psychostimulants,
psychotropic medication, where Dr. Watts cannot do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Is that -- does
that happen occasionally?
MS. HARRIS: It happens quite often, yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The reason for all
those questions was, I'm not real clear why we want to have
a psychiatrist on board when there is a state agency here in
town, the Hill Country Council on Alcohol and Drug Abuse,
that is capable of doing, I would think, individual
counseling as well as group counseling, if needed. I
understand your staff does the group --
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- counseling-type
thing.
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But what -- is
Dr. Quintanilla that person that does the individual --
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- counseling?
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And these folks could,
as well -- the TCADA people could -- they can't do
2-19-05
127
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
individual counseling?
MS. HARRIS:
do the groups, but I alread
COMMISSIONER
MS. HARRIS:
COMMISSIONER
MS. HARRIS:
They do the groups. They could
y have staff that does that.
BALDWIN: Okay.
And they require a fee.
BALDWIN: So they don't do --
No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They can't do
individual one-on-one counseling?
MS. HARRIS: Correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They're licensed to do
group counseling only?
MS. HARRIS: Now, I don't know what their
licensure is, but the licensure that I have requires so many
hours of individual counseling per resident.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
MS. HARRIS: By a list of people that -- or a
list of professionals that I have to choose from. And my
understanding is that TCADA, when they approached me to
offer group counseling services, they are not able to do our
individual counseling because of the time requirement that I
require. Plus they also charge a fee. Granted, it's
probably cheaper than what Dr. Quintanilla is charging me,
but I can also use Dr. Quintanilla for medical evaluations.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How much does he --
2-14-05
128
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
does he charge?
MS. HARRIS:
$1,000 a month retainer fee
COMMISSIONER
any time of day?
MS. HARRIS:
substance abuse kids goes i
another -- on another child
no.
He's charging $150 an hour, plus
for program development.
WILLIAMS: He's subject to call
No, sir. Now, if one of his
Ito crisis, yes. But on
that is not on his case load,
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A $1,000 retainer fee.
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a monthly fee?
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We pay him a thousand
bucks whether he does anything or not?
MS. HARRIS: Correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. HARRIS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then how much per
hour?
MS. HARRIS: $150 an hour.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $150. Sounds like a
lawyer, $150 an hour. And, boy, I wish these folks here
could do that, because they charge $30 an hour.
MS. HARRIS: Mm-hmm. If they could do the
2-19-05
129
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
individual counseling, and they have the right professional,
licensed person, but then when it comes to psychotropic
medication evals, we'll have to go outside their scope,
'cause they can't do that.
COMMISSIONER
you're saying. It's just -
needs to be looked at a lit
MS. HARRIS:
COMMISSIONER
avenue or possibility here.
MS. HARRIS:
COMMISSIONER
MS. HARRIS:
BALDWIN: Well, I hear what
- in my mind, I just think this
ale bit closer.
Well, they did approach me --
WILLIAMS: See if there's some
TCADA approached me --
BALDWIN: She already has.
-- and came out came to the
facility to offer their services as far as group counseling
is concerned. And I had -- I explained to them I already
have -- my staff that's already on board does that group --
does those groups. So...
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you done?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, right now.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I probably won't get
these kind of questions answered today, but I want to let
you know some of the things I'm thinking about, and it has
to do with fixed versus variable costs.
MS. HARRIS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I see we've got a
2-14-05
130
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
budget here that's approximately $160,000 a month. Is it
$160,000 a month whether or not we have 50 children versus
20 children?
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: All of our costs are
fixed costs?
MS. HARRIS: No. Let me back up and correct
myself. No, 'cause your food costs would fluctuate.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: How about people
costs? Employee costs?
MS. HARRIS: I'm not -- I can't think that it
would. Now, it's going to fluctuate when I get more kids,
'cause I have to have more staff to meet ratios.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ratio-driven, just
like the jail is.
MS. HARRIS: Correct.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But this budget,
what census level is it based on?
MS. HARRIS: It's based on 48 in the old
building. As you will see, I gave you an attachment on
additional staff costs if we were to have to staff the new
building. I put that in that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: "If" we were to have
to?
MS. HARRIS: Mm-hmm.
2-14-05
131
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: "When" we do. Huh?
It isn't -- it's when we do.
MS. HARRIS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When it becomes
necessary.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Which is very soon.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're hoping.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm thinking.
MS. HARRIS: As soon as we get the Bexar
County contract approved by the County Attorney.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, if you can get
these guys to agree to the contract stuff.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is based on a
census of 48?
MS. HARRIS: Yes, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the full load -- I
mean, I'm just going to hop on board here with his
questioning. If you filled up the whole facility, which
we're -- when we fill up the whole facility, then we're
talking about adding on another $297,000 for employees to
take care of that load?
MS. HARRIS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Uh-huh. So, at what
point does -- are you going to ask for the $297,000
increase?
2-14-05
132
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. HARRIS: When I get referrals to the
number that I would have to start using the new building,
and I would have to staff accordingly to that ratio. As we
increase the population in the new building, consequently, I
would have to increase staff, until we're to full capacity
in the new building.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, you lost me
there. No, she did not lase me, but I think my -- are we
talking -- let's say that she gets -- let's say that we fill
up in July. We get Bexar County in here and all these other
counties in, and the place fills up, and we need to go hire
$300,000 worth of new employees. Where -- where does that
money come from?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: From the revenue
coming in from those per diems they charge for those
individual placements.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Shall we just take
Bexar County's money and just lay it over there and --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Have to budget for it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A portion of it,
yeah. It goes in -- we receive the -- we receive the per
diem rate per child, and that goes to offset the expenses.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Offset.
MS. HARRIS: 24 kids in the new building
times $83 a day, 365 days of the year, is over $700,000 in
2-14-05
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
revenue.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, to answer your
question, though, it comes out of the General Fund. Well, I
presume this is operating just like everything else. It
goes into the General Fund, and we -- we increase the
budget.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, it comes out of
the reserves. That's what -- I just wanted to hear you say
it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: County Auditor is
sitting back there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, it's not reserves.
If the revenue -- if the revenue stream is going into --
you're increasing the revenue, increasing the budget.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But you're increasing
the revenue by not -- not this much.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It could be
increasing it more.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: She just said it could
increase annually by $700,000.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, but you're
dealing with salaries here. Once you increase the number of
people, you have grocery bills and electricity bills and all
of that is going to add up. We don't know that it's going
to -- it's going to be a wash at all. But if there -- if
2-19-05
134
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~-~ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
there is more --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, if it's not a wash,
we're not filling it up. We might just want to leave it
empty. But I think it will. I mean, I don't think, based
on what Ms. Harris is saying, that it will offset that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're not going to go
from zero to 24 overnight.
MS. HARRIS: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But we're going to
get there.
MS. HARRIS: Yes, we are.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the -- okay. You
have other questions? I think I got sidetracked on that.
Any more?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah, I -- for now.
I'm -- it's still hard to understand that staffing levels
are not sensitive to the activity level, number of
residents, but I think I'm beginning to see it a little bit.
You got to -- you got to have a cook for every meal, whether
or not you got 25 people or 50 people, I guess. Is that the
answer?
MS. HARRIS: Correct. You've got to have
somebody to cook the meals whether you've got one resident
or 76.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just like in the jail, we
2-14-05
135
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
^' 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
staff in increments of 48 prisoners, whether we have, you
know, five or --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or 48.
MS. HARRIS: And we staff --
JUDGE TINLEY: Different ratio.
MS. HARRIS: Exactly. It's a totally
different ratio.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ratio-driven.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, it is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Back to your -- you made
-- your first comment was to hold off on this until they do
their magic over at that end of the table. I disagree. I
mean, I think you plug in the current salaries into ail the
slots, the 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, and 108. Then
all the FICA, group insurance, retirement based on what
current salaries are.
MS. HARRIS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then the rest of it
we need to discuss and approve.
MS. HARRIS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I don't think we
can operate without having an approved budget.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's basically what
we said in the previous agenda item, is the -- the salaries
remain the same. But you're right, we need to move forward.
2-19-05
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They need to be -- I
don't know what numbers are in here. Whatever numbers are
currently being paid need to be plugged into those slots
here, and then we need to reapprove it. The question I have
is on overtime, $20,830. In every other department, we
pretty much don't have much overtime.
MS. HARRIS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why do you -- why do you
think you need that much?
MS. HARRIS: Based on historical data that I
can -- that I have retrieved, the overtime has been quite
large at the facility. I've got a new policy that I've -- I
put in place almost two months ago in order to curtail the
amount of overtime. Based on the last quarter is what I'm
basing part of this on, my estimation of -- of what we had
to pay in overtime. I'm hoping that next quarter, that when
we have to pay out the overtime, it's going to be
substantially less than what it's been in the past, since I
put the new policy in place. I'm having people -- I'm
short-handed on the female J.D.O. side, and so some of my
female J.D.O.'s are having to work some overtime in order
for us to meet ratios. However, as we can, I'm trying to
let those people off to eat up that comp time. Sometimes I
can do that, sometimes I can't. It's a scheduling thing.
I'm about to be one male J.D.O. short come the end of
2-14-05
137
t
r
I ,..,,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
February. I'm having one male J.D.O. resign; he's going to
another county department, so I will have to fill that
position. I'm also, at the present time, trying to get
part-time people hired to fill in those gaps on a part-time
basis until I can get the facility financially more stable;
i.e., creating this budget for the next fiscal year, so I'm
trying to utilize part-time people just as much as I can. I
have a cook who had emergency medical surgery, so I'm down
to one cook, and she's working a lot of overtime. I have
another J.D.O. who's -- she's out on maternity leave.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess what I'm saying,
though, is everything you're describing, just about, you can
put overtime to zero, and we can transfer money out -- or
not to zero, but to a lesser amount; we can transfer money
out of salaries, 'cause you're not using -- you have an
unused salary portion. If you have someone who quits all of
a sudden, you're freeing up that salary slot.
MS. HARRIS: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that money we can
move into overtime, which is what we tend to do in other
departments.
MS. HARRIS: And that's fine if you want me
to put that line item to zero.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't mean zero. I
just think -- I mean, the -- I think it's a more -- you
2-14-05
138
h
i
f
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
know, I guess more in conformity with the way we're
operating the other county budgets to have the minimum
amount of overtime, and then we transfer money in from the
salaries that's unused. And I think it -- 'cause otherwise,
we're budgeting more than we need to budget, and that's just
a -- you know, that -- the other question I had, what is the
state supplement support?
MS. HARRIS: What that is, every certified
juvenile detention officer receives $59.37 per pay period
through the State. There are only 21 juvenile detention
officers that it's allotted for, so I have more than 21
certified juvenile detention officers, so their
supplemental -- their $59.37 every pay period supplement has
to come out of a line item budget, because I exceed the 21
juvenile detention officers. I called the director of
Fiscal Department for T.J.P.C. You cannot increase your
allotted number of slots for state reimbursement unless
another county gives up their slots, and the likelihood of
that is not very likely.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. With that being
said, when you are doing your magic down there, that's
something that needs to be included or taken into account.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We need to know more
about it.
MS. HARRIS: That's why I created a line
2-14-05
139
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But for the part coming
from the State, the group that we're not having to pay for
locally, that also needs to be included in their salaries,
and the adjustment. Because if you -- I mean, we look at
total salaries.
MS. HARRIS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Like, for the Judge, we
certainly look at his.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Certainly tried to.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We certainly try to look
at the state supplement every year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We don't always get a
clear picture of it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Be nice. I think it's
very clear now in the budget. We have every line item.
Travel, $5,000. Whose travel is that?
MS. HARRIS: That's mine, Skeet's.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You going skiing, you
said? You said you're going skiing?
MS. HARRIS: Skeet.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Skeet.
MS. HARRIS: If it meant I could get some
kids in there, I might. Travel expenses for myself, for
Skeet Wilbanks, placement officer. Transport --
2-14-05
140
1
E
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
transportation when we have to transport kids, traveling for
legislative conferences or legislative sessions, things of
that nature. That's what travel is. But I put --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That travel doesn't
equate to the travel involved in marketing, does it?
MS. HARRIS: The marketing expenses, like,
for hotel, food, printing up our brochures, P.R.
paraphernalia, such as our little tablets -- our little note
tablets that we hand out to conferences.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we need to
differentiate between the travel a little bit as to the part
that -- especially the part that's gone to pick up kids and
do that kind of stuff. I mean, I think travel that you do
going to conferences and things of that nature is --
anything that's your travel or your staff's travel kind of
on the marketing side, or going to conferences and all that
is one item. But anything related --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Education, marketing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, educational type is
one item, and travel related to picking up kids, that is a
different line item, in my mind.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
MS. HARRIS: So, you want a Transport Travel
line item?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would make it
2-14-05
Y
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
141
clearer.
MS. HARRIS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then, under the
maintenance, there are -- you have two line items, one
Building and Grounds Maintenance for 31,333, and then
under -- under 572-105, there's a maintenance line item.
MS. HARRIS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That upper one is a
salary?
MS. HARRIS: Yeah -- yes, that's a salary for
my maintenance-slash-janitor person. He does both.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That person's going to --
long-term under the new plan, is going to start working for
the Maintenance Department.
MS. HARRIS: No. I've already discussed this
with Mr. Holekamp, and it's not in his budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mr. Holekamp hasn't
talked to this Court about that, so -- so I think that may
be on the table still. For right now, it's fine, but I
think long-term, maintenance is maintenance. That needs to
be run through the County. That's my personal feeling.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Does he do something
unique that Mr. Holekamp's staff would be unable to do?
MS. HARRIS: Well, his budget does not allow
for that person at this point in time.
2-14-05
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
142
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're not changing it
now. I'm talking next year's budget. Maintenance is done
in the jail, and every other -- and every other building is
run through the Maintenance Department, and I think it needs
to -- that slot probably needs to get moved to Maintenance.
That's just -- I'm telling them down there so they can --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you talking about
in the main budget beginning October 1?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: October 1 budget. That
probably needs to get shifted into Maintenance Department.
The grounds -- Building and Grounds Maintenance, what is
that for?
MS. HARRIS: That's for upkeep of the
buildings, any repairs that my maintenance person does,
supplies. It also included the compressor for the
refrigerator that we just had to buy, and the new coil, the
new air conditioning units on top of the building. And
that's what it --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we need to
probably separate that out into repairs as one item. I
think it's how we kind of do most of the other departments.
And then a maintenance item --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just a second. Just a
second. Tommy, what is Line Item 450 in other budgets?
MR. TOMLINSON: It's just -- it's general
2-14-05
143
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
maintenance for -- for plant and equipment.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which is custodial?
That's kind of -- I think there's some confusion here. Is
custodial cleaning up the interior of the building and the
restrooms and this and that and all that kind of stuff?
Would that be your 105 -- 572-105? That's really custodial?
(Mr. Tomlinson nodded.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's salary?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's a salary.
MS. HARRIS: That's a salary. The 105 is a
salary.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Got you, okay. But
custodial, then, is mixed in with your 450 line.
MS. HARRIS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that the way we
normally do it, Tommy?
MR. TOMLINSON: Essentially, yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we have repairs
broken out as a separate item.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, not really. I mean, if
there's major repairs, we have, because we have a -- in the
Courthouse Maintenance budget, we have two line items. One
of them is for major --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
2-14-05
144
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
MR. TOMLINSON: -- repairs. The other one's
just for normal, everyday maintenance.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We operate them by
major versus routine?
MR. TOMLINSON: And that's the same -- same
issue, I think, with the -- with maybe the Ag Barn. However
-- but the jail, maintenance of the jail, it has a separate
budget for -- just for maintenance, 'cause we have a -- we
have a person that works in that Maintenance Department.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. TOMLINSON: And I think it's just
entitled Jail Maintenance. So I don't -- I don't think we
differentiate.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. So -- but -- but
on major repairs, the things that we approved at our last
meeting or meeting before, the freezers and all that, the
way we handle that county-wide is that comes out of the
Commissioners Court budget? Do we have -- or
Nondepartmental budget? We have that Major Repairs item.
MR. TOMLINSON: No, it's in Courthouse
Maintenance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Courthouse Maintenance
budget?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
2-14-05
145
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, that -- but it would
-- it's not in the individual department budget, is what I'm
saying. So in next budget year, that needs to be included
in the big maintenance budget, and not in your specific
budget.
MS. HARRIS: So I don't have to put major
repairs in?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You would -- you
would advise us what you think it's going to be, what you're
anticipating, and it'll get lumped in with our majors.
MS. HARRIS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It will come under
Maintenance as opposed to under you personally. But it's --
okay, those are my comments.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question,
Becky, with respect to 205, Step Increases. Is this what
you anticipate for staff between now and the end of this
year?
MS. HARRIS: Correct. Correct. People that
have been either with -- with the County or with us at the
facility one year, or their third anniversary step increase,
one of the two.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As per our current
policy?
MS. HARRIS: Yes, per your policy.
2-14-05
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
MR. TOMLINSON: I'd like for that to be moved
into --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Salaries.
MR. TOMLINSON: -- to salaries, where --
where they belong.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, I agree.
MR. TOMLINSON: Just from a payroll
standpoint, it's kind of a mechanical thing. It would be
difficult for the payroll system to work correctly with --
by trying to take salaries from numbers of line items.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, typically, when
we do the real -- the real annual budget in October, all of
these lines that Ms. Harris has identified, 101 down through
whatever, are going to be salaries.
MR. TOMLINSON: Oh, yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One line, just
salaries, right?
MR. TOMLINSON: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would include
the steps?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You've just broken
them down now so we can see --
MS. HARRIS: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: For our purposes, we
2-14-05
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
can see what we've got out there.
MS. HARRIS: I wanted you to know, without
any confusion, exactly what I expect expenditures to be
between now and September 30th.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And for what purpose.
MS. HARRIS: Yes, and for what purpose,
exactly. 'Cause I didn't want you to see large salaries and
not understand that some of those are based on their
anniversary between now and then -- now and September.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Barbara, are these
step increases, are they -- are they actual numbers?
MS. NEMEC: They are actual numbers, and the
way those are handled with every other department, depending
what position and what line item that position is charged
to, the step increase is built into that number. So, when
we get together for next year's budget, we'll have to figure
out when the anniversary dates will come due and whose
position, and then put that number in there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which is typically
what we do now for all of the departments.
MS. NEMEC: Yeah, the way I do it for every
other department.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You and I don't do
that.
2-14-05
148
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I mean the
corporate "we."
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ms. Harris, I -- my last
comment would be, I would ask that you bring this back at
our next meeting so we can approve it, but I think that you
can lump 205 and then 106 and 105, 104, 103 and 102, and
part of 101 -- not your salary, but any other administration
costs -- into one line item as salaries, and then just give
us a position schedule, the number of employees that you
have currently, what it is. Doesn't that work?
MS. NEMEC: No, I think the way she has it
broken down up to 107, all those are good, because they're
like the other departments. The different positions, like
clerks, are out of one line item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. NEMEC: Jailers are out of another. So
she's got the right idea up at the top. The only thing is
that 205 needs to be divided into 101 through 106 --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. NEMEC: -- accordingly.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let's keep in mind,
this is an interim budget until we get to October.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But, I mean,
we're still going to have something that we're going to
approve at our next meeting. When this -- maybe we can
2-14-05
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
approve this one, the way it sounds like.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we could.
MS. NEMEC: Like, in the jail, the cooks,
they have their own separate line item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. You're right.
MS. NEMEC: And on and on.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Either --
MR. TOMLINSON: That's helpful for --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon?
MR. TOMLINSON: Keeping it by the type of
function helps the Treasurer with -- with worker's comp
compensations, because our worker's comp is based on the
type of employee. And so if we already have it broken out
in the budget, then we don't have to -- she doesn't have to
go in and extrapolate what types of employees are in -- are
in Item 102, for instance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So the only --
MR. TOMLINSON: It's already done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The only thing that needs
to be done is, then, the step increase needs to be put into
the rest of it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Into the lines where
it belongs.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The rest of it's okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we need to
2-14-05
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
150
give Ms. Harris the ability to operate with -- with this
budget. It's an interim budget between now and October.
The Commissioner and I will be working with her to get these
things nailed down for future.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy?
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't -- I don't know if
the Court wants to do this or not, but I would like to see a
-- a revenue budget.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was just going to
get to that. We need to see a revenue -- a monthly revenue
stream, what's coming in. This is what's going out. We'd
like to know what's coming in.
MR. TOMLINSON: And the reason for it is, if
we could go ahead and predetermine how much we need to
transfer from -- from the General Fund over to this fund,
rather than do it piecemeal every court date, I'd like to
see us do that if we can. Or -- or make an estimate of what
it'll be from now through the end of this fiscal year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy, does this
department operate differently in that the revenue stays in
this department, as opposed to going to the General Fund?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, it will stay in the
department. It's -- I treat it -- I would treat it as a
special revenue fund. Because --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
.,
2-14-05

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
MR. TOMLINSON: Because the revenue is -- is
specifically for this purpose. And so that's the way we
treat all funds other than the General Fund.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, for example, I mean,
in the jail, the money we get for the jail inmates that come
in, that goes to the General Fund, correct?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So this is --
MR. TOMLINSON: But it -- but it's -- the
primary source of funding for that department is ad valorem
taxes also.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's the reason.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do we also have a
capital budget in addition to these line items that we've
talked about? Are there major capital expenditures that
aren't part of this budget?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We should have for a
full budget, but do you anticipate any this year?
MS. HARRIS: Not at this time, I don't.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, two weeks from
now we ought to have a good idea of what our costs are,
including -- well, we don't -- we're not going to have any
coupons to pay this year. Going to have a good idea what
our costs are, what our revenues are, and what the net
2-14-05
152
I
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
impact on Kerr County is through the end of this budget
year?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think you just --
did you bring a revenue sheet?
MS. HARRIS: Yes, I did.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ms. Mitchell has it.
MS. HARRIS: Yes, she's making copies for
you. It's the billing that we sent out for January.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: While we're waiting,
tell us what new counties came online.
MS. HARRIS: We have Swisher County, which is
Tulia. Hood, Moore, Gray -- and I don't have my list;
there's two more, and I can't think who they are. There's a
total of six. Total of six new counties that are coming on
board. We have an Upshur County kid that'll be going to
court the -- end of this month. Thank you, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What time would you guess
we'll be pretty close to 48 occupancy?
MS. HARRIS: We -- by the way, over the -- on
Friday, we broke our -- in the 20's population; we were 30
on Friday, and today we're 29. So, the answer to your
question -- I'm not going to predict. I believe it's going
to be soon, with these new counties coming on board, and
when we get everything approved by the Court and get
2-19-05
153
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
everything signed for the Bexar County contract and they can
start sending us kids. They are very interested in the
substance abuse program. But here is your revenues for the
month of January.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Becky, of those 29,
how many are Kerr County kids?
MS. HARRIS: Four, of the long-term. Four
long-term kids.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How many Kerr County
kids are elsewhere, Kevin?
MR. STANTON: Four, at this point.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: January, we had
somewhere the high 20's census?
MS. HARRIS: January -- we averaged 23 kids
in the month of January.
JUDGE TINLEY: 23?
MS. HARRIS: 23.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, the second page
adds the 2,700 to 58,000?
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Roughly 60,000 -- be
61, 000.
MS. HARRIS: That's -- 'cause your second
page is your medical. That would be reimbursed.
2-14-05
154
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, I see it, yeah.
MS. HARRIS: We're trying to arrange it with
our different medical providers to bill the counties
directly; take us completely out of that loop.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That'd be nice.
MS. HARRIS: But there are some of our
medical entities that will not do that. They want their
money up front, rather than have to bill and wait 30 to 60
days for a county to reimburse them that -- pay their bill,
so they won't do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can't blame them. I
don't blame them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, let's see if we
can make something happen here.
MS. HARRIS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would move the
proposed budget with the changes and suggestions for the
Kerr County Juvenile Facility, all functions for the period
2-01-05 through 9-30-05, with all of the suggested changes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Be approved?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Be approved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Suggested changes
meaning moving --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The things --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- janitorial
2-14-05

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
services?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The suggestions that
were -- yeah, that came up.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Overtime and all that
stuff that we talked about?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not sure what we
said. I mean, my preference would be to bring it back in
two weeks, or approve it as it is, almost. I mean, I
don't -- the changes -- I'm reluctant to do one with changes
unless we have the changes specified.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Then I move approval
of it as presented.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, --
MS. NEMEC: It's my understanding that if
there isn't a budget in place, then I don't have authority
to pay those employees that are out there, so we at least
need to approve the salaries.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's a savings.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So we could approve
this now and modify it in two weeks.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's right.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
2-14-05
156

1
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 as presented. Any further question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it -- you'll make the
changes that you think you heard us say and bring them back
in two weeks?
MS. HARRIS: I'll give you a copy of it in --
day after tomorrow.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Thank
you, Ms. Harris.
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Next item is to consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action to waive O.S.S.F. plat
review and inspection fees for the Center Point Independent
School District's trade school building project.
Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Arreola brought
to my attention that the project was underway, and if we
didn't waive the fees for C.P.I.S.D's trade school building
project, we'd be sending out some bills. So, I'd like for
2-14-05
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
the Court to consider waiving the fees and allowing them to
move forward on their project.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does -- let me ask you
a question. Does waiving the fees mean that there will be
no inspections at all?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No.
MR. ARREOLA: There will be inspections.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm all in favor of
waiving the fees.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would that be a
second to my motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, sure. I didn't
realize you made one.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I'm thinking -- I'm
trying to go through in my head as to what fees -- you know,
I don't know that -- anything that we're out-of-pocket, I
think we should be reimbursed by the school district. I
mean, I don't think we should make money on it, but I'm not
-- I'm trying to figure out, you know --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I agree with
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- what would be
out-of-pocket.
2-14-OS
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's out-of-pocket?
MR. ARREOLA: For the plat review process,
it's $220.
COMMISSIONER
MR. ARREOLA:
COMMISSIONER
MR. ARREOLA:
what we charge normally.
COMMISSIONER
LETZ: But I have no problem --
That's the normal fee.
WILLIAMS: Pardon?
That's the normal fee. That's
WILLIAMS: What expenses are we
out-of-pocket?
MR. ARREOLA: Oh, just the time we take.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just your time? That's a
fixed cost, basically. Is there anything in the Clerk's
office that --
MS. ALFORD: The recording fee for that
application to be filed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have any problem
waiving that. I was hesitating -- I wanted to think -- to
make sure we weren't spending taxpayers' dollars for Center
Point School.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We could send the bill
over to Headwaters for them to pay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, we can do that.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think you can just leave us
a check here today, can't you?
2-14-05
159

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. MORGAN: Sure.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Personal check.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, I'm ready to vote.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Does
any member of the Court have anything to go into executive
session about? Hearing none, we'll move on with the
approval agenda. Payment of the bills.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move we pay the
bills.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second that emotion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
payment of the bills. Do we have any -- have any questions?
I've got a couple of questions on Page 8 and on Page 10.
Last two items of the County Jail budget, and then on Page
10, those same two items appear, from the same invoice
apparently, on the Sheriff's Department budget. Invoices
065 and 066.
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't -- I don't recall a
bill, but I'm sure that we split the bill between the two
2-1.9-05
160
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
departments. It says half, so -- I have to look at it to
see.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What's the number?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 172 --
MR. TOMLINSON: 172066.
JUDGE TINLEY: 065 and 066.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where does it appear
to begin, Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: Page 10 and Page 8.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How'd you catch that?
I'm impressed.
JUDGE TINLEY: Eagle eye.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Can't sleep at
night.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 065 -- oh, wrong --
I'm sorry, Tommy.
MR. TOMLINSON: Must be in the back.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Five miles back.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. TOMLINSON: It's right here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I knew where it was.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What was the total?
MR. TOMLINSON: Total's $240. So --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay. You split it,
2-14-05
161

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
then. All right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's go to Page 10,
then, and 172144.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where are you?
JUDGE TINLEY: Down -- about two-thirds of
the way down the page.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, I see it.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think that has to do with a
198th case.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Juvenile Probation.
Which line?
JUDGE TINLEY: 172.
MR. TOMLINSON: Who's it payable to, Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: King.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Pamela Rae King.
MR. TOMLINSON: Probably does.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did you say 144?
JUDGE TINLEY: 172144, correct.
MR. TOMLINSON: That -- that's not -- that
number -- case number is not a 198th case number, though.
Yeah, okay, it is -- it's a district court. We've got the
wrong number on it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Go on up to 171995. I
think that's a County Court at Law case.
2-19-05
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 BALDWIN: 995?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, mm-hmm.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, that is too.
JUDGE TINLEY: County Court at Law case?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, appears to be.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We pay them, but we
move them to the right spot?
MR. TOMLINSON: We can do journal entries to
fix that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: On Page 10, Juvenile
Probation, what is that item -- last item under Juvenile
Probation, $800 for parenting classes?
JUDGE TINLEY: That's a transitional living
program that is taught by that psychologist -- that
counselor to the parents of children that are in a placement
situation. It's a group course.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Actually, we get reimbursement
of state funds for those to continue, don't we? Any further
questions or discussion? With those corrections, all in
favor, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
2-19-05
163
r
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 1.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 1 is for Road and
Bridge. We need to transfer $448 from Group Insurance line
item to Vehicle Insurance line item. I have a -- and I have
a late bill attached to this to J.I. Specialty Risk
Insurance Agency for $2,854.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of Budget Amendment Request Number 1 and payment of
a late bill and hand check to J.I. Specialty Risk, $2,854.
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. Budget
Amendment Request 2.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number -- Number 2 is for our
J.P. Precinct 4. His request is to transfer $100 from
Miscellaneous to Machine Repairs.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move to approve.
2-14-05
164


1
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 for
approval. 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: That motion does carry.
Budget Amendment Request 3.
MR. TOMLINSON: I want to change this. After
reviewing her budget, I did find a place to move that $1,000
from. It's Software Maintenance. It's Line Number
10-403-563, so I would recommend we move the $1,000 from
that line item to Notices.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of Budget Amendment Request Number 3, as modified.
Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Question. I'm
assuming if -- if you came along and did something like that
to my budget, I'd be mad at you, without you talking to me
about it first.
MR. TOMLINSON: I cleared it with her deputy.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good. That was
2-14-05
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
my question. That was just a question, thank you. I would
still be mad.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I knew -- I knew that
this wouldn't fly, this surplus thing. So --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, you're right.
You did a good job.
MR. TOMLINSON: So that's why I cleared it.
I do -- I do have another request.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We11, just let us clear
this one up. Or is it in connection with this same thing?
MR. TOMLINSON: No, it's not. Okay, go
ahead.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on that particular 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 pass. Do you
have another budget amendment?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, we need to transfer
cash from the General Fund to pay the Juvenile Detention
payroll for tomorrow. We have 47,000 -- $47,600 in cash as
I speak.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Didn't we just do that,
2-14-05
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
though?
MR. TOMLINSON: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We approved the -- her
budget, put the money in all those funds.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, that would include for
the -- it started beginning February 1.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We just did it.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, but we don't -- I don't
have the cash to make the payment.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I -- I --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What do you need?
MR. TOMLINSON: I need $36,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, what are you
saying? We need an emergency transfer to --
MR. TOMLINSON: I need authority to transfer
the funds from -- from the General Fund to Fund 76.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which would be in
keeping with the budget we just did?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second, I think, but let
me ask a question.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the request.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, since this is a
2-14-05
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
dedicated fund out there, once you get the revenue in -- we
have the budget for that. Once we get the revenue side of
it, then we'll make a lump-sum transfer in?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's my --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is part of that lump
sum?
MR. TOMLINSON: That was my request a while
ago. That was my purpose for asking that question.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is strictly
salaries?
MR. TOMLINSON: This is for salaries. The --
the fund requirements for -- for this fund today -- or the
bills today was 22,234. I estimate the payroll to be
60,000. That -- the negative cash flow or cash amount
needed was -- I estimate to be 35,634, so I'm asking for
36, 000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we're declaring an
emergency and going into reserves?
MR. TOMLINSON: No, because you approved the
budget. We did -- we are -- we increased the budget already
by -- by the action today. All I'm asking for is a transfer
2-19-05
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
of cash from -- from one place to the next.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: A11 opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Do you
have any late bills?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I have here before me
transcripts, Special Session, Saturday, January 1, 2005;
Emergency Session, Monday, January 3, 2005; Emergency
Session, Wednesday, January 5, 2005; Regular Session,
Monday, January 10, 2005; Special Session, Monday,
January 24, 2005; Special Session, Wednesday, January 26,
2005; Special Session, Thursday, January 27, 2005; Special
Session, Friday, January 28, 2005. Do I hear a motion that
these transcripts be approved as presented?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the named transcripts as presented. Any
question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify
2-14-05
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
by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Also,
I have before me monthly reports from the Sheriff, Justice
of the Peace Precinct 4 for December '04, Road and Bridge,
Justice of the Peace Precinct 2, County Clerk, Justice of
the Peace Precinct 3, Justice of the Peace Precinct 1,
District Clerk, Environmental Health Department, and Justice
of the Peace Precinct 4 for January 2005. Do I hear a
motion that these reports --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, there wasn't --
there were -- Constable 1 wasn't in there? I turned it in.
JUDGE TINLEY: It's not with these. I recall
also seeing one from Constable 1, but it didn't make it to
the Clerk to get included.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that what I need to
do, is get it -- that's generated through the Clerk's
office?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. All right.
JUDGE TINLEY: And we can do that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How about Constable
2? Did he --
2-19-05
170
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. ALFORD: No, I don't have one for him. I
don't think I have any from any constables this time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Did I hear a motion that these
reports be presented as approved?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to make one.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
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: That motion does carry. Do we
have any reports from any of the Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any reports from
any of the other Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a very quick --
I'll do it at our next meeting. Region J has some things to
report on how we're doing some things that are sort of
leading the state once again.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's excellent. Why
don't you report on our 9-1-1 meeting? I mean, we could
2-14-05
171
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
probably have lunch about 3:00 this afternoon.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- you didn't
want to report on it. I won't either.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you,
Commissioner. I appreciate that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any reports from elected
officials?
MR. EMERSON: Just myself, given that I
didn't know I could submit a written report. I'll do that
next time and save the Commissioners Court time, so I
apologize for that. In the month of January, our Hot Check
fund, we currently have the audit in progress as approved by
the Court; anticipate getting results back this month. The
new sub-account in the county treasury is set up and
functioning, as I understand it, and we transferred
unclaimed funds to the county treasury of $392.22 for last
year.
again?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What was that number
MR. EMERSON: $392.22. And that's basically
funds that are allocated toward merchants for reimbursement
and restitution, and they're unclaimed for three years, so
we move them to the county treasury. County Court at Law,
we filed 247 cases. Juvenile court, we filed approximately
20 cases. And we filed six protective orders in the month
2-19-05
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
of January, as well as covering all the Justice of the Peace
courts. We've also implemented changes in procedures in the
County Court at Law and juvenile court system to try to
expedite the transfer of cases and facilitation thereof.
Computer issues -- unfortunately, John stepped out, but he's
been doing an excellent job down in our department. We're
on a separate server, as this Court's aware, and there's
been a little bit of a rough transition trying to learn what
was inside that server and how it's programmed. And since
he's been on board, he's done an excellent job getting our
computers back online and facilitating that. Our backup is
in place and working. We're storing the tapes in the County
Clerk's vault, with her permission, so those are in a
fire-protected location.
Law enforcement, we're issuing disposition
sheets on all the disposed cases now, which was not done in
the past, so the officers don't have to go back on computers
and try to figure out what happened to their cases. This
includes not only the ones that are disposed of in court,
but if we decide not to accept a case, we're putting
detailed explanations on there why so that the officer can
learn from the case and adjust accordingly next time. Crime
Victims Coordinator, she's working with 26 new victims in
the month of January. Anticipate a lot more. We finally
got the bugs out of the system between us and Kerrville
2-14-05
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
Police Department, and those cases are flowing smoothly now.
We have a conference that we've scheduled in March with the
Attorney General's office that we're sending invitations to
all the local law enforcement, school district officials,
and it concerns search and seizure in the schools, and that
should get Kerr County a little exposure. And that's all I
have, unless y'all have some questions.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. County Attorney,
I want to say to you, that's the first time in six-plus
years I've heard a report on the activities of the County
Attorney, and I thank you, and I appreciate it.
MR. EMERSON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hear, hear.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Hear, hear.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Do we have
any other reports from any other elected officials?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any reports from
any department heads?
MS. HARRIS: The only thing I want to say is,
I just want to concur with what the County Attorney said
about our new I-Tech person that the Court hired. He has
already come out to the facility, assessed our computer
system, and has made several really good, valid suggestions
on getting us where we need to -- need to be
2-14-05
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
technology-wise, and I just want to say he's already been
out there and done a very good job.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm glad to hear
that. That's good news.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is good news.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: There's a lot of
ways that we could -- in the information age, that we could
learn to do things differently. I don't even -- I don't
have any idea what they all are. I think about the costs of
advertisements and notices and things like that. If we
could require every resident of the county to have an e-mail
address, well, then we could probably do something there.
Things like the library; I can access the library in
Cleveland, Ohio, and look at original documents that they
have, and do that from my home. There's probably lots of
different ways that governments can save money by -- by
leverage in the information age. I don't know how, but
there is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If Mr. Trolinger
pursues one of the items that he told me he was looking at,
we may find a way to stop chasing our tail with respect to
fixing computers that are down temporarily. He's looking at
a way to be able to do that locally through some software,
and he can fix it and access it over here and take care of
it.
2-14-05
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
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And be done.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would be nifty.
MR. EMERSON: Can I make one comment? And
this is just informational. The Sheriff's not here, but
just so y'all know, they confiscated gambling machines that
were confiscated in the raids. My understanding is that he
has bids for 100 of the machines.. The other 25 that were
there were set up for sweepstakes gambling over the
Internet. It's my understanding they're currently
investigating that, instead of selling those machines, they
may be able to go into them, remove the computer systems out
of them, and basically trash the machine and keep the
computers as usable, hard drive computers, saving the County
a bunch of money.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why not?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If we sell them --
if you sell them, they'll be back out in Ingram in two
weeks.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for
adjournment.
JUDGE TINLEY: What -- where is the Sheriff?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Probably fishing.
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be my guess. Out on
Bear Creek.
2-14-05
176
,~-~
1
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: Do I have to second, or
are you going to adjourn us?
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other reports to be
rendered today? If not, we'll stand adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 12:34 p.m.)
STATE OF TEXAS ~
COUNTY OF KERR ~
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as
County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County,
Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 18th day of February,
2005.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
BY : __ I~~~GrK.~
Kathy B ik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
2-14-05

ORDER N0.29022
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, SALE AND

DELIVERY OF
CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION
` Came to be heazd this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
r Commissioner Letz seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court approved by a vote
of 3-2-0 to re-adopt the order approved on February 4, 2005, which originally authorized
the issuance of such Certificates of obligation Series 2005 and authorizing the levy of an
r
ad valorem tax and providing for immediate effective date.
ORDER N0.29023
RESOLUTION
Came to be heazd this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 the application for Violence Against Women Act grant to
hire a special prosecuting attorney to prosecute cases for the County Attorney and 198th
and 216th Judicial Districts. With 25% match required from the county.
ORDER N0.29024
ANNUAL ACCOUNTS OF THE TEXAS PROBATE CODE.
Came to be heard this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 the Annual Accounts deposited into the Court Registry as
pursuant to Art. 887(b) of the Texas Probate Code.
ORDER N0.29025
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE KERR
CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT.
Came to be heard this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to accept the resignation of Paula Rector from Kerr Central
Appraisal District.
ORDER N0.29026
ROAD AND BRIDGE
ADVERTISING FOR ANNUAL BIDS.
Came to be heard this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to advertise for annual bids for: road base, cold mix, black
base, trap rock, emulsion oil, corrugated metal pipe and equipment by the hour.
..--
ORDER N0.29027
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF WAUGH ACRES.
Came to be heard this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 the preliminary plat of Waugh Acres contingent upon
changing the language on the final plat that pertains to the water well.
ORDER N0.29028
RESCIND COURT ORDER N0.28660.
Came to be heard this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0, Commissioners' Court Order No. 28660, entered May 24,
2004 in connection with BettaclRickert property located in Precinct Two, and said
property further described on the attached Exhibit "A"; is hereby rescinded along with
the opinion expressed in the County Attorney's Memorandum, dated March 30, 1994.
._- Further and pursuant to Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations No. 1.03G, the
Bettac/Rickert property is not currently subject to any platting requirements.
ORDER N0.29029
NOTIFICATION OF ROAD NAME CHANGES.
Came to be heard this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz and seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to request the County Clerk's Office coordinated all road
name changes and provide all road name changes to the proper Emergency service
providers and others.
ORDER N0.29030
EMPLOYEE EVALUATION FORM.
Came to be heard this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 the Kerr County Commissioner's Court Employee Evaluation
form.
ORDER N0.29031
APPROVAL OF CHILD WELFARE BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
Came to be heard this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to appoint the following people:
Laura Singletary
Daletta Andreas
Louise Blalack
Alice McDaniel
Debbie Baldwin
Kathy Mitchell
Thea Sovil
Lynn Meng
Pam Traver
Sandra Yarbrough
ORDER N0.29032
REVISION OF PLAT
LOT 5 GROTTO SPRINGS RANCH
Came to be heard this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 of revision of plat Lot 5 Grotto Springs Ranch, Precinct #3.
.--
ORDER N0.29033
OPEN AND ACCEPT BIDS FOR
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES
Came to be heard this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to accept all bids for information technology services and the
proposals as submitted be referred to Mr. Trollinger for recommendation.
ORDER N0.29034.
LEASE FOR WEST KERR COUNTY ANNEX
Came to be heard this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Nicholson seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to authorize Mr. Holekamp to study the needs of the West
Kerr County annex and come back to Commissioners' Court with a proposal.
.--
ORDER N0.29035
RENEWAL OF COMMERCIAL LEASE FOR THE 216TH
ADULT PROBATION OFFICES
Came to be heard this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to have Mr. Holekamp to get with Adult Probation, work on
renewal of the commercial lease for their offices, and bring back a recommendation to
Commissioners' Court.
ORDER N0.29036
ADVERTISING FOR BIDS FOR FLAT ROCK LAKE.
Came to be heard this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to authorize for bids to clean out debris and trash deposited
in Flat Rock Lake, take down dead trees that present a hazard, remove submerged
stumps, etc.
ORDER N0.29037
APPROVAL OF RESIDENTIAL PLACEMENT CONTRACT
AT KERR COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY
On this the 14th day of February 2004, motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by
Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, the
residential placement contracts at Kerr County Juvenile Detention Facility, subject to
County Attorney form approval, and authorize the County Judge to sign the same, and
that all contracts and the form contract will come back to Commissioners Court at our
next meeting along with any other contracts.
ORDER N0.29038
BUDGET FOR KERR COUNTY 3UVENILE
DETENTION FACILITY.
Came to be heard this the 14th day of February 2005 with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 the Juvenile Detention Facility's budget subject changes to
be presented to the Court on 28th day of February.
ORDER N0.29039
APPROVAL TO WANE OSSF PLAT REVIEW AND
INSPECTION FEES FOR CENTER POINT ISD
On this the 14th day of February 2005, upon motion made by Commissioner Williams,
seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0,
to waiver the fees on the OSSF plat review and inspection fees for Center Point
Independent School District's trade school building project.
ORDER N0.29040
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
On this the 14th day of February 2005, came to be considered by the Court, various
Commissioners Precincts, which said Claims and Accounts ar:
10-General - $155,451.75
14-Fire Protection - $10,416.67
15-Road and Bridge - $40,893.54
18-County Law Library - $2,856.09
19-Public Library - 426,944.08
26-JP Technology - $1,018.64
50-Indigent Health Care - 45,158.48
70-Permanent Improvement - $25,085.00
76-Juvenile Detention Facility - $22,230.00
80-Historical Commission - $102.78
TOTAL Cash Required: 4290,157.03
Upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin,
the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to pay said Claims and Accounts.
ORDER N0.29041
BUDGET AMENDMENT AND LATE BILL
IN ROAD AND BRIDGE DEPARTMENT
On this the 14th day of February 2005, upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-
0, to transfer $448.00 from Line Item No. 15-611-202 Group Insurance to Line Item No.
15-611-480 Insurance -Vehicles and payment of late bill with hand check to J.I.
Specialty Risk in the amount $2,854.00.
ORDER N0.29042
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE #4
On this 14th day of February 2005, upon motion made by Commissioner Nicholson,
seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to
transfer $100.00 from Line Item No. 10-458-499 Miscellaneous to Line Item No. 10-458-
456 Machine Repairs in Justice of the Peace #4.
ORDER N0.29043
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE
COUNTY CLERK
On this the 14th day of February 2005, upon motion made by Commissioner Letz,
seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-
0-0, to transfer $1,000.00 from Line Item No. 10-403-563 Software Maintenance to Line
Item No. 10-403-430 Notice - Replat in County Clerk.
ORDER N0.29044
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN
JUVENILE DETENTION FACILTY
On this the 14th day of February 2005, upon motion made by Commissioner Williams,
seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, to
transfer $36,000.04 cash from Fund 10 to Fund 76.
ORDER N0.29045
APPROVE MINUTES
AND WAIVE READING
On this the 14th day of February 2005, upon motion made by Commissioner Williams,
seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, the
transcripts of the following meetings: Special Session, Saturday, January 1, 2005;
Emergency Session, Monday, January 3, 2005; Emergency Session, Wednesday, January
5, 2005; Regular Session Monday, January 10, 2005; Special Session, Monday, January
24, 2005; Special Session, Wednesday, January 2b, 2005; Special Session, Thursday,
January 27, 2005; Special Session, Friday, January 28, 2005.
ORDER N0.29046
MONTHLY REPORTS
On this the 14th day of February 2005, upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin,
seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, the
following monthly reports:
Sheriff
Justice of the Peace Precinct #4 -December 2004
Road and Bridge
Justice of the Peace Precinct #2
County Clerk
Justice of the Peace Precinct #3
Justice of the Peace Precinct #1
District Clerk
Environmental Health Department,
Justice of the Peace Precinct #4 -January 2005