>~
1
3
9
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, September 12, 2005
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas

v
CS"
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. 9
1
--- 2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
.--. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
I N D E X
September 12, 2005
Visitors' Input
Commissioners' Comments
1.1 Consider/discuss accepting maintenance of
Scenic Ridge Road upon completion of construction
that meets county standards
1.2 Announce October as Texas Archeology Month in
Kerr County
1.4 Consider/discuss authorizing Kerrville Area
Chamber of Commerce to coordinate Kerr County
Sesquicentennial Celebration in combination and
consultation with Commissioners' Court, Historical
Commission, and representatives of cities and towns
within the county
1.3 Approval for League of Women Voters to use a
District Courtroom for voter education the evening
of September 20, 2005
1.11 Consider Final Plat of River Road P.anch, Pct. 9
1.13 Set a Public Hearing for Revision of Plat for
The Reserve of Falling Water Lots 34-37
1.5 Public Hearing for Revision of Plat for Whiskey
Ridge Ranches, Section 2, Lots 17 & 18, Pct. 3
1.6 Consider Final Revision of Plat for Whiskey Ridge
Ranches, Section 2, Lots 17 & 18, Pct. 3
1.14 Consider a Resolution of non-compliance pursuant
to 3.04 of Kerr County Subdivision Rules and
Regulations to be posted in the Deed Records
1.7 Public Hearing for Revision of Plat for Kerrville
Country Estates Section Two, Lot 34A, Pr_t. 1
1.8 Consider approval of Final Revision of Plat for
Kerrville Country Estates, Section Two, Lot 34A
1.9 Public Hearing for Revision of Plat for Mosty
Pecan Grove, Vol. 7, Page 295, Pct. 2
1.10 Consider Revision of Plat for Mosty Pecan Grove,
Vol. 7, Page 295, Pct. 2
1.12 Consider letter to Headwaters Groundwater
Conservation District concerning compliance to
Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations
1.15 Consider/discuss procedures for the paying and
reporting of expenditures involving penalties,
fees, interest, or other costs associated with late
payment or other administrative system failures
1.18 Consider Interlocal Agreement between Kerr 911
and Kerr County
1.16 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
Library Contract with the City of Kerrville
PAGE
4
11
16
35
36
43
45
47
49
49
50
55
56
57
58
61
63
69
72
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
^- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
3
I N D E X (Continued)
September 12, 2005
		PAGE
1.17	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on	
	Animal Control Services Contract with the City	
	of Kerrville 92,	227
1.19	Consider authorizing expenditure not to exceed	
	$5,000 for Professional Services to meet the	
	requirements of TWDB for Regional Wastewater	
	Facilities Planning Grant for Center Point	99
1.20	Consider appointing a Board of Directors for over-	
	sight of Kerr County Juvenile Detention Facility	103
1.21	Consider adopting Policy and Procedure Manual for	
	Kerr County Juvenile Detention Facility	107
1.22	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to	
	reaffirm County's support of development of the	
	Hill Country Shooting Sports Complex	113
1.23	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on	
	FY 2005-06 budget 122,	235
1.24	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on the	
	organization of Maintenance Department	228
1.25	Reports from the following departments:	
	Information Technology	239
	Road and Bridge	246
	Facilities and Maintenance	253
4.1	Pay Bills	258
9.2	Budget Amendments	262
4.3	Late Bills	273
4.4	Approve and Accept Monthly Reports	274
5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee
Assignments 275
--- Adjourned 276
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
,~
23
24
25
4
On Monday, September 12, 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 this regularly scheduled
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court scheduled for
this date and time, Monday, September 12th, 2005, at 9 a.m.
It's just a bit past that now. Commissioner Williams, you
are up this morning.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Will you please rise
and join me in a word of prayer followed by the pledge of
allegiance.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. At this time, if
there is a member of the audience or the public that wishes
to be heard or to tell us something that's on their mind
that doesn't relate to a specific agenda item, feel free to
come forward at this time. If you are wanting to speak on
an item that is a listed, specific agenda item, we'd ask
that you wait until that item is called, and then you'll be
recognized, and in that event we'd ask that you fill out a
participation form. The forms are at the back of the room,
or should be. If not, if you'll give us a holler, we'll get
~?-i_-as
C
J
1
.'- 2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
some ba~~k there. It's not absolutely essential that you do
that; it just helps me to not miss you when that agenda item
comes up. But at this point in time, if there's any member
of the public that wishes to be heard on any item that is
not listed as a specific agenda item, feel free to come
forward at this time. When you come forward, if you would,
if you'd give your name and address so that the reporter can
take that down.
MS. HOLEKAMP: I'm Wanda Holekamp, 121-A
Barnell Road, Comfort, Texas. I'm here to speak on behalf
of the FCS agent position, the County Agent for Kerr -- for
Kerr County, whom we haven't had one for over a year, and
we're sorely missing the leadership that this person
provides	for the people --	members	of	the Education
Extension	Association, as	well as	the	youth of this
community. We need that position. There's another function
this position serves, and it's for those people who fall --
do not have health insurance and are not covered by other
plans of insurance. It does a lot of work for nutrition and
for helping those people manage their lives and to live a
better life, and I feel that this County needs to support
those people as well as the position. And -- and so far as
cost of the position, it's only -- the County only pays a
small part of that salary, so I wish you would consider
retaining that position. Thank you.
e-iz-os
1
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, Ms. Holekamp. Is
there any other member of the audience or the public that
wishes to be heard on any item? Please come forward, ma'am,
and if you'll give your name and address?
MS. LINDNER: My name is Ruth Lindner, and
I'm from Comfort. I live at 314 Holiday Road, and I'm here
to speak on the same issue that Wanda Holekamp is. I was
born in Kerrville, I graduated from Tivy High School, I went
to Schreiner for a year, and then I went to the University
of Texas where I received a Bachelor in administration --
Business Administration, BBA degree, and I married Harvey
Lindner from Comfort. We lived in San Antonio for a long
time, and I taught school for 20 years, and then I'm now a
retired teacher, and I'm still interested in education, not
just for myself; for my family and for the community. I
feel that one of our big goals on the nationwide level is to
promote good health and teach us to not just eat a good
diet, but to exercise so that we are healthy people. We
have a big, wonderful program in Medicare, but it's going to
flounder with all of our obese people in the United States,
and we need to address the issues that are in our county.
We should look at Louisiana. Some of us have
watched on TV what was going on. They were given money to
build a safer town for New Orleans. They spent the money on
other things, and because of that, they got flooded in a
G- 1 2- 0 5

1
~° 2
3
9
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
-~ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
'° 2 4
25
very bad way, and it had something to do with decisions that
were made by their leaders. And I think we should learn
from that, that we need to make the right decision, keep
someone in the position of County Agent who serves the
community, not just these clubs that we belong to. I'm a
member of the Cypress Creek Club and have been for 22 years,
and my interest in the club is not just to have a good time.
We are an education organization and we do wonderful things.
And when I say "wondertul things," the healthy aging
conference that was held the past three years; we had it
here in Kerrville, then we had it in Fredericksburg, and
this year we had it again in Kerrville, and the County
Agents in Fredericksburg and Kerrville were the ones who
organized it and put it on. It was very worthwhile. It was
for the community, not just for a few select people, but it
certainly was helpful.
And recently we had this appear in the
Express News, and it has to do with children, teaching them
the right foods to eat and how they can live their lives so
that they will be healthy when they get older, when they're
adults and when they're senior citizens. We have lots of
senior citizens here in the Hill Country. We have a lot of
senior citizens in Kerrville, and we want to have healthy
people as young people grow up and get older. We all need
to address that, and we feel that Amy Chapman did a good job
y-~z-a,
8
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in that position, and I assumed that you all were going to
replace her. And I would be happy if you hired he r_ back.
But I don't like to hear that you've decided not to hire
someone in that position, that you could use the money for a
better purpose. I don't think you could use it for a better
purpose than to have someone in this position. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Ms. Lindner. Is
there any other member of the public or the audience that
wishes to speak on a specific agenda item that is not listed
as a specific agenda item?
MS. CALCOTE: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Calcote?
MS. CALCOTE: Y'all probably don't want to
see me. I'm Hazel Calcote, 1701 Calcote Road, Kerrville,
and I've lived here 54 years. Love it, and I'll die
fighting every last one of you for it. And first I want an
answer from y'all; I got a question. Why have you all not
hired someone to replace Amy? I just learned it's been
nearly two years since we've had a female County Extension
Agent. Why are you-all's requirements more important or
better than A & M's supervisory district's recommendation?
Is y'all's agenda 36-24-36? Why haven't you hired
something? Can you answer that, sir?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we're not permitted on
this portion of the agenda to interact. We're certainly
a-zz-o5
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
willing to listen to anything you have to say. When it
comes up for that specific -- when that specific item comes
before us, of course, we'll enter into discussion and
dialogue and be happy to talk with you about that
specifically at that time, but on this portion of the
agenda, we are privileged to listen but not respond.
MS. CALCOTE: Okay. That's your Fifth
Amendment, in other words.
JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon?
MS. CALCOTE: That's your Fifth Amendment, in
other words.
JUDGE TINLEY: I -- in a sense, Hazel, that
would be correct.
MS. CALCOTE: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: In this portion.
MS. CALCOTE: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Now, later on, if we get into
a specific item dealing with that, we don't have that Fifth
Amendment available to us.
MS. CALCOTE: Okay. Just at some point in
time, I want y'all to answer my questions. Not -- in a
courtroom, not on a corner somewhere. And the next thing
is, I'm here for the kids. I've always loved kids and
horses, in that order, and I want to know why we don't have
this female County Extension Agent. Because, granted, we've
a-lz-os
10
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
got a super good male Extension Agent who takes care of the
ag part, but you all don't realize -- if you've never been
in 9-H, you have no concept of how much you learn from it.
The female teaches the girls and any boys that are
interested gardening, home economics, cooking, sewing, home
beautification, nutrition, whole ball of wax. And I'm
interested in saving kids, not waiting till they get in
trouble and then try to bail them out of the trouble or
retrain them, because some kids, it's so imprinted, you
don't get them retrained. And, as I understand, y'all
didn't want to hire one of them. One of the reasons was
that you didn't have enough money in the budget. Prune
juice! I suggest that each one of you all, Judge included,
deduct an amount from your salaries each month to pay an
Extension Agent to make up the difference. As I understand,
you only pay 25 percent -- the County only pays 25 percent
of her salary anyway, and you all wouldn't miss enough to
give her a salary so we can hire one, and so I'm asking all
of you to try to help us save kids. If we just save one,
we've saved a lot of money. So, please -- immediately,
tomorrow, quick -- hire a new County Extension Agent. If
Amy -- get her back or someone. And you all were elected to
represent your constituents, and not each other. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Ms. Calcote. Is
there any other member of the audience or the public that
~-12 n5
1
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Zl
~~
23
24
25
11
wishes to be heard concerning a matter that is not a listed
agenda item? Seeing no one else coming forward, we will
move on. Commissioner Williams, what do you have for us
this morning?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nothing right now,
Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll address all threw of
the ladies that spoke a little bit just briefly on this.
AUDIENCE: There's more of us here; we just
didn't speak.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: As I said, the three that
spoke. We have been tryinq to fill that position. We have
not had what we felt was a qualified candidate up till now,
and I don't know that we have one right now. The last -- I
think we -- is it one we've turned down, Judge? Is that
correct? Two? But there were -- I mean, we have looked at
quite a few, and for reasons of not suiting our community,
not living in the community, we didn't think it was a good
match. So, we have tried to fill that up until the current
time. And the decision last week was to not cancel the
position, but just not fill it for a while, and I certainly
will reconsider that. I think that the budget will be on
the agenda several more times this month, and that change
can be made to try to hire someone right now, but that's

1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~3
24
25
12
kind of where we are. It's not that we have not. For the
last year, we have tried to fill it. We just haven't been
able to find a qualified candidate that everyone agreed
with. And I when I say "everyone," I mean the Court, other
representatives out at the Extension Office, and also the
district -- I guess district administrator, whatever,
Mrs. --
JUDGE TINLEY: Mapston.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- Mapston out of Uvalde.
We've discussed it several times. So, that's on that issue.
And I had another issue that I forgot what it was; I got
sidetracked.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Your bridge?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, sir. The
Hermann Sons Bridge is open right now for traffic. The
official opening will be on the 14th at 10 o'clock in the
morning. We will have -- not done it in a long time -- the
first Commissioners Court posted meeting at that location.
We won't be deliberating anything, but we will be meeting,
and we'll officially open it at that time, and the Court
will be there. We invited some representatives from the
Kendall County Commissioners Court as well, and some other
people that had some involvement in getting that project
underway, including TexDOT, contractor, and others. That's
all I have.
~-tz-us
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
1J
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Got some good rain
out in west Kerr County yesterday and the day before, and we
had -- had brush fires, so rain is timely. I've got a
different view on that County Agent position. I don't think
it's proper use of county taxpayer funds to fund that.
That -- that teaching nutrition and house beautification and
how to set a pretty table and those sort of things are not
hot on my list of priorities, and I would prefer that we not
fund it. That's all.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you saying that
you're not willing to give up some of your salary?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Oh, for something
else, but not for that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ms. Calcote has her
hand up.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? Commissioner
1?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir, I don't have
anything, other than I watched a lot of great football over
the weekend. Man, fun time. Fun time, beginning Friday in
San Angelo with our fighting Tivy Antlers. Had a great
weekend. Great weekend. That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We've had a couple --
couple of the members of the Court weigh in and waive their
9 _ _ G 5
14
1
2
3
4
5
H
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Fifth Amendment. Are you wanting to waive someone else's
Fifth Amendment, Ms. Calcote?
MS. CALCOTE: No, sir. I would like to
answer his question. May I do that?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we're --
MS. CALCOTE: Add on to the end of my speech?
JUDGE TINLEY: We're already finished with
that portion of the agenda. And what I'm about to say may
be of some interest to you. I suspect that -- as I
indicated, we've had at least two members of the Court that
have waived their Fifth Amendment privilege that was open to
them in the visitors' section of the agenda. I suspect that
that and a number of other items may come up during our
budget discussions later on today, since we do have a
general budget section. I -- I think I'm already on record
as being somewhat in support of that FCS position, and as
recently as last week, I was in conversation with
Ms. Mapston concerning an applicant that we have been
discussing. As Commissioner Letz said, there have been
several applicants, and for one reason or another, they were
not thought to be the proper fit, but that's not something
that's been left by the wayside. With regard to the issue
of economics concerning that position, I'm not sure which
one of you ladies mentioned it, but we only -- the County
only pays a portion of that position. It's something less
~ i_ cs
1
.,~
3
4
G
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-~-. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
"` 2 9
25
15
than 50 percent. I'm not sure it's 25; may be closer to
somewhere between 30 and 40 percent, but the bottom line is
we only pay a portion of that, and it's less than
50 percent.
The other thing that I would note from an
economic standpoint is, one of our largest employee costs,
of course, is our health insurance, health benefits program.
We do not fund the health benefits portion of that employee,
so we also save those funds. With regard to potential
benefits from the -- from the FCS position, I think -- I
think we stand every chance -- in fact, a probability that
we will make up those funds by savings in our Indigent
Health Care program, by virtue of the educational services
that are provided by that position, and which educate folks
that are susceptible to a number of different conditions,
Type 2 diabetes and things of that nature, so that, properly
edu~~ated, those costs can be held down rather than them
utilizing the emergency room and the Kerr County treasury to
take care of their health insurance costs. But I suspect
that issue will be debated some more later on today when
that -- when that issue comes up.
So, if you'd like to stay around and
participate in that, Ms. Calcote, or any of the rest of you
ladies, why, we invite you to be here. I would note that it
is listed as pretty close to the tail end. In fact, it may
y-~>-ns
16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
be after lunch. It's either going to be late this morning
or after lunch, one or the other. That's the best guidance
I can -- I can give you at this point. It's listed as Item
Number 23. So, let's move into the agenda, if we could, and
Item 1, consider, discuss, and take action on the County's
acceptance of maintenance on Scenic Ridge Road upon
completion of construction that meets county standards.
Commissioner Nicholson?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I want to introduce
Mr. Johnson, who is a representative of the residents on
Scenic Ridge Road.
MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What do you want us
to do, Mr. Johnson?
MR. JOHNSON: Commissioner, what we'd like to
do is just have a resolution or statement from the
Commissioners Court that, upon reconstruction of this
roadway to county standards, meaning the -- I think it's
20-foot-wide road base, 16-foot-wide travel lanes, the
4-inch crown, the typical country lane county standards for
the roadway itself, that the Commissioners Court agrees that
upon the property owners financing and providing that
reconstruction of the roadway, that it then be accepted by
the County for maintenance.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We did not do that in
9 1 J O 5
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
17
our previous conversation?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Baldwin, in our
previous court order, we -- we said yes, if you'll bring it
up to county standards, we'd like -- we'll accept it, if it
passes the inspections and all. At that time, we asked for
a 40-foot right-of-way.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And what we see now
is that's not practical.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 40 foot would put
the right-of-way almost on the corner of -- of the
foundation of a couple of the houses. And it was originally
accepted as a 30-foot right-of-way, so we're proposing to --
to confirm that a 30-foot right-of-way, 4 foot on either
side and 16-foot pavement, is sufficient. And they
correctly point out that the feeder road for this is also a
30-foot right-of-way road, so it's not in any way changing
traffic patterns or inhibiting egress and access. So, I
make that motion, that we -- that we will, upon inspection,
accept Scenic Ridge Road for county maintenance once it's
brought up to county standards as a 30-foot right-of-way
road.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second that motion,
but I'd like to have a comment from Road and Bridge.
y i~~ ~;5
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
~5
18
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second.
Questions or comments? Discussion?
MS. HARDIN: The only comment I have is that
in the past, when we did West Hi-Line, we made those people
on West Hi-Line do 40 feet. The road didn't necessarily
take up the whole 90-foot right-of-way, but the right-of-way
was dedicated by each -- property owners on each side.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that's in the same
neighborhood, is it not?
MS. HARDIN: Same subdivision.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And it was a 40-foot
right-of-way?
MS. HARDIN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's being proposed
here is a 30-foot right-of-way; is that correct?
MS. HARDIN: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not real familiar
with, I mean, the terrain out there. Never been on the
road. But the reason for 40-foot right-of-way is not the
road; it's the maintenance of the road. And if there's --
even if you can't get it on the whole road, any part of that
road that -- where, you know, it's possible to, you know,
get to 40 foot, it certainly is preferable, just because it
does cause a lot of, you know, drainage and other issues,
q-i~-o
19
1
J
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and that's the reason for the 40 foot. The road wouldn't
have to change as long -- I mean, the road -- the same
requirements. But the other question I had, Truby, is, as I
read on this list, there's six families. Is that country
lane? Or is there -- is that -- what's the cutoff for
country lane? I know there's a number.
MS. HARDIN: 15.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, so it meets that.
That was my only comment. We need to look at the terrain.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, if we
could fit a 40-foot right-of-way in there, I think that's
what we ought to do, even though it comes out off of a
30-foot right-of-way, but it just can't be done. It
wouldn't have any use. You'd have your equipment up there
against a house.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You get up next to a
house? I mean --
COMMISSIONER. NICHOLSON: At 40 foot.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: At 40 foot.
MS. HARDIN: Are you talking about doing the
road in the existing footprint it has now? Or with the
cul-de-sac at the end? Or --
MR. JOHNSON: May I respond to those? We're
talking about the roadway as it is now. The property owners
that I represent abut the road on the side. They don't have
~ -~'~s
1
'Y" 2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
m-- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
20
any capacity to require or suggest or participate in a -- an
extension of the road into what's Lot 6 now at the end of
the road. They're asking the Commissioners to -- let's keep
this discussion to accepting the existing roadway. We're
not setting out a new county road. The subdivision
standards were already dealt with back in '79 when this plat
was accepted and dedicated roadway was made, so that's --
it's not extending the road. The platting may be something
that needs to be done, but that's for the owners of Lot 6 to
do. That's not a part of this offer -- presentation. All
we're asking is that the existing right-of-way, existing
road, if we reconstruct it, be accepted for maintenance.
We're not laying out a new road, and so the elements that
are in the statutes about roadway width for right-of-way or
drainage or all of those things are all part of the
subdivision process. We're not in the subdivision process.
We're just asking for an acceptance for maintenance.
We're asking to allow the continuation of the
You know, there's the legal that
we're not laying out a subdivision, but the three practical
are, it's off an existing 30-foot road and -- and maintained
county roadway, Caitlin Drive, so this is no wider, no
narrower, just the same as Caitlin, which is already a
county-maintained road. Second, where the houses are -- and
4- 1 G- i 5
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
c L
23
24
25
they've been there for a long time -- to go 40 feet would
put right-of-way right up against the corner of one -- at
least one and very close to one other of the houses, and
it's just not a practical, safe thing to do. And I guess
the -- and the third element is, this is only 575 feet long.
We're not talking about a road that goes over the hill and
back down and up and, you know, serves large acreage. None
of these lots is larger than about ~ or 3 acres, and the
smallest is a little over 2 acres, but it's -- this is a
short road. It's already an et:isting, accepted public
roadway with houses that have been there for a long time.
We're asking that it be limited -- that this part of this
process be limited to just reconstructing the roadway and
accepting it for maintenance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's -- this is a
dead-end road?
MR. JOHNSON:
COMMISSIONER
MR. JOHNSON:
COMMISSIONER
around when we have a maint
MR. JOHNSON:
It's a dead-end.
LETZ: There's no cul-de-sac?
No.
LETZ: How's the County turn
liner on that road?
Well, if we were designing a
new road that --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We are, in my opinion.
MR. JOHNSON: Well --
~~ ~a-n~,
zz
1
2
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Letz, the --
MR. JOHNSON: It's an existing public
right-of-way. It was accepted by the Commissioners in '79.
That's, you know, the -- you can't -- I don't think there's
a requirement that when the roadway design requirements
change, that you can go back in history and tell everybody
else they have to change their roadway or they're not valid
any more. So that's --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The Lot 6 issue I
see as a separate issue. It's certainly connected to it,
and I'm asking Road and Bridge, with the help of the County
Attorney, to notify the owners that subdivided Lot 6 without
approval that they have to come into compliance, and at that
time, when they -- when they do that, we'll want to look at
-- at their subdivision and determine what they need to do
about either roads or cul-de-sacs.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's a
concern, because we have -- we have a similar one that's
goinq to be -- is on the agenda for reconsideration, and one
of those considerations in that was creation of a cul-de-sac
at the end of a 30-foot right-of-way for the purpose of
turning around emergency vehicles and maintenance vehicles.
So, it is -- it is a concern.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just think it .all needs
to be dealt with at one time. I mean, I just -- I think
~-iz-~„5
z3
1
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 this is going totally contrary to where the County is
trying to go if we accept a road that -- you know, that this
county would not build if it was, you know, building a road
itself. And that's kind of the general standard, is that we
don't want to require any developer or any individual to
construct a road to a higher standard than the County. But
the standard of the road is -- to me, is the cul-de-sac,
right-of-way, and things of that nature. Right-of-way, we
have given variances on for reasons like this, and I don't
have any problem with that. But you know, a cul-de-sac is
pretty important from an emergency standpoint and vehicle
standpoint, and also from a maintenance standpoint. I mean,
if we get a maintainer or chip spreader down there, what do
you do, I mean, if you can't turn it around? I just think
that issue has to be resolved. The rest of it, I can -- as
long as it's built to the standards I think they're
proposing, I can go along with it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think what I need
to do is to withdraw my motion and ask Road and Bridge and
the County Attorney to -- to take whatever steps are
necessary to -- to cause the Lot 6 subdivision to be brought
to the Court for approval.
MS. HARDIN: Our instructions from the Court
are to go back to December 11th of 2000 for plat -- this lot
was divided in the early '80's under family members.
9-12-~~5
29
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Meaning?
MS. HARDIN: Meaning that we don't -- we're
not -- y'all said you weren't going to go back and do any
replatting or have the County Attorney look into anything
that was platted before December 11th of 2000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: People on Lot 5 aren't
willing to work with y'all?
MS. HALL: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are they local? Are
they there, or just a vacant lot, or what's the status of
the property?
MS. HALL: I live on Lot 6.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon?
MS. HALL: I live on Lot 6.
MS. HARDIN: There's two ladies here that
live --
MR. JOHNSON: Ms. Green and Ms. Hall.
MS. HALL: There are two roads that have been
maintained by the County, Looker and Hi-Line, that don't
have turnarounds.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And you have -- I may
have missed something, so if I accuse you of something,
forgive me, but you have an illegal piece of property?
MS. HALL: I don't know that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, if you do,
ti-1~-us
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
you're in trouble.
MS. HALL: I will see to that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. HALL: 'Cause I am not aware of that. We
just moved there in April.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Lines are out in the
county right-of-way and those kinds of things? Or what is
the problem with Lot 6?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Lot 6 --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And not being able to
put a cul-de-sac there?
MS. HALL: We would allow emergency vehicles
to turn around and use it; fire trucks, ambulances, anything
like that. I mean, it's open for emergency vehicles. It's
just not part of the road. It comes up to our property, but
it's definitely used for emergency vehicles.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is the -- let's
see. 1980 -- '70 -- '89. Was it '89 when the road was
adopted? Is that --
MR. JOHNSON: No, '79.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: '79.
MS. HARDIN: Before there -- there were no
subdivision rules in place in 1979.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can't remember. if
that's something I did or not. What is the distance? What
s iz-~~ ,
z6
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
1~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
is the distance of the road?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN:
MS. HALL: 575 feet.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN:
gets to Lot 6.
500-some-odd yards.
500-something feet?
So, it stops before it
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It stops at Lot 6.
And Lot 6 has been subdivided, and I don't know -- is it one
or more properties?
MS. HALL: It's two. But if we put it up to
standards of 30 feet, it would be at our front door. We
could not get in our door; the road would be right there.
MS. GREEN: I'd like to speak to that if
could, please. I'm the other owner.
JUDGE TINLEY: We need for you to identify
yourself --
MS. GREEN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- if you wouldn't mind,
please, ma'am. Come forward.
MS. GREEN: Sure. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Give your name and address,
please.
MS. GREEN: Carol Green. It's 114 Scenic
Ridge Road West. My husband is George Green, and we're the
owner of the other two lots. The Halls own two lots and we
v-!_-os
L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
own two, and in what you're calling Lot 6. And first I'd
like to say that the reason we bought the property -- and I
think it was in December -- was for the privacy that it
offers, and we're not willing to call that a cul-de-sac.
It's not a cul-de-sac. It's a private drive for two
residents. And if emergency vehicles need to enter there to
turn around	or	to	service	somebody else,	we're not	opposed
to that, but	it	is	private	property, and	-- and we	really
don't want to give up that privacy and have everybody coming
in and circling in that -- what is being called cul-de-sac,
because it comes right up past my front door. You know, and
the reason we bought the property was for privacy.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- you know, I
understand your willingness to let people do it, but if the
County goes up there and turns around, we're trespassing.
That's my problem, is that it's a trespass issue. I mean,
unless you go out there and give permission; I guess we
could do it.
MS. GREEN: It's my contention that there are
a number of other streets that have the same situation that
they have on Scenic Ridge Road West, and they manage quite
well. And I don't know of any reason why we should be --
feel inclined to have to do that, when privacy is really
what we came here for, and we like the place. And one
neighbor has already been forced to move because of the
9 - '.. ' - U 5
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
hassle over this. Judy Kinsman, I'm sure you all remember
her. But she just couldn't take the hassle any longer, so
she moved away, and -- and the Halls bought her plar_e. But
we don't intend to move, but we don't want to give up our
privacy either.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. And -- I mean,
the map I have is pretty basic. Lots 2A and 3B, would they
be willing to give up property for the cul-de-sac? Or is it
not possible on those two lots?
MS. GREEN: They're further up the street,
right? Do you have the owners' names?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Palmer and Furr.
MS. FURR: I'm Mrs. Furr.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You're up toward
the --
MS. GREEN: My husband and I really don't
care whether the County takes over the street or not. We'd
actually just as soon they didn't, because there are only
six of us on that street, and we're all our age or older,
and we really don't have a lot of traffic in there. There's
no big parties, there's not a lot of -- of traffic of any
kind in there, and any vehicle that came in there to service
that road could easily back out. And we have had concrete
trucks; we've been making a garage, and the Halls are making
a garage. We've had big concrete trucks, big 18-wheelers
y-ia-os
29
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
unload loads of rock and that sort of thing. They have no
problem negotiating the -- the turn, which is our front
yard. And we're not opposed to people doing that for an
emergency, and we'd be willing to sign and write up to that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 2A looks like it's
Palmers, and 3B is Mr. Alford and Ms. Mefferd. Are they
here?
MR. JOHNSON: Yes, I'm here representing trie
Alford and Mefferd --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would they be willing to
give up -- or can they physically give up enough property to
put the cul-de-sac back more on their property?
MR. JOHNSON: No. Both those houses are
close enough that -- those are the two houses that -- and
particularly the Palmers -- that would make it extremely
difficult for it to even be 40 feet wide rather than the
er.isting 30 feet wide.
MS. GREEN: Really, the best thing for people
to do is just leave that street maintained by the people,
and for the same amount of money that we could bring it up
to county specs, spend that money to bring it up to specs,
and the thing will last 25 more years. It's been there for
25 or 30 years now, and has never had any maintenance of any
kind on it, to my knowledge. Maybe I'm wrong. But the
street is still passable. It is now in dire need of repair.
-t u4
30
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
But if we're going to have to bring it up to specs, why
don't we just do that? Leave everything like it is, and
let's all stay happy.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you.
However, I'm going to leave my second to the motion in
place.
MS. GREEN: Could you repeat that second
motion for us? I don't remember exactly what that was.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't remember
exactly what it was either. (Laughter.)
MS. GREEN: Sorry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It was to approve the
agenda item.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's to approve
acceptance of the road for county maintenance upon
inspection with a 30-foot right-of-way.
MS. GREEN: But then later, you're going to
come back when the County's in a position to maintain that,
and the County's going to discuss to replat 6, and they're
going to ask for that to be a cul-de-sac, and we're very
much opposed to that because it would take away what we
bought the property for, and -- and that's my position.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You are Lot 6; is
that correct?
MS. GREEN: Yes, sir, I own E and a quarter
9- 1 7 n 5
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
acres in Lot 5.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: From the little plat
diagram I'm looking at, that's about a 10 and three-quarter
acre piece of ground.
MS. GREEN: The entire plat is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But_ what you're
telling us is that you're close to the property line? Is
that what you're saying?
MS. GREEN: Well, the road dead-ends into the
front of my property line.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, that's what I'm
seeing.
MS. GREEN: You call it a cul-de-sac, but it
never has been a cul-de-sac. You couldn't even hardly get
around that when we moved here, and we've widened the street
around, you know, for our own use and the Halls.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioners, the
county surveyor is also here, and I know he's intimately
familiar with that. He and I have been out there three or
four times, I think, so if you need any confirmation about
the physical characteristics of the road and community, he
can give them to you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- I mean, you
kncw, I don't want to come across as being hard-nosed, but I
understand the people want the -- you know, or may want the
~ i -un
1
2
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
7~^
23
24
~5
32
county road, but with that comes some standards. And you
all can't meet those standards. And I -- you know, it seems
that your proposal makes the most sense to me, is to upgrade
the road and leave it private -- leave it a public, but a
privately-maintained road.
MS. GREEN: Just curious. If we're going to
have to spend the money anyway to bring it up to specs, why
not just spend it and keep it --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My standpoint is, it's a
precedent. On any given situation, I can rationalize and
justify making a waiver, but what I look at is that the --
we're opening the door for next time, and next time the
road's 1,000 feet and there's a cliff at the end of it or
something. I mean, you just get in a situation that you
can't turn emergency vehicles around and things happen.
And -- and we can't say yes here and then arbitrarily say no
sometime else.
MS. GREEN: Another problem that we have on
our lot is that the prior owner built a road from our place
down the hill to Roddy Tree Bed and Breakfast, and a lot of
the people in the community are familiar with the road.
It's now ours and it's private, and we don't want people
goinq through. And, true, there's a fence at the end of it
down at Roddy Tree, but if people can come around that
cul-de-sac and it becomes public, it just makes that
a iz-oe
1
2
3
4
5
b
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
lfl
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
33
wide-open for people to see that road, and they just go
right through our property and have to turn around down at
the fence. So, there's another issue we face.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Help me understand
one thing, just -- I'm sorry, Jon. I'm looking at Article 2
of the -- of the document that was prepared. I believe you
prepared it. Three, tour, five -- six property owners.
You're listed as one of them, as an applicant. Is that
correct?
MS. GREEN: I'm sorry?
MR.. JOHNSON: They had signed the petition
that was in the backup materials. That's the reason they're
listed there. There was a petition; I think it's Er>hibit A.
MS. GREEN: On that petition, I think in
signinq it, we indicated that we did not want the cul-de-sac
made public; that it was not a cul-de-sac,
MR. JOHNSON: Yeah. And this application
doesn't -- it's just asking about the existing county road
of Scenic Ridge Road as it exists. We're asking that it be
accepted for maintenance upon reconstruction, Sut there's a
petition in Exhibit A that's signed by all six of the
abutting property owners.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I see that.
MR. JOHNSON: Including the Halls and the
Greens.
~-1,-n;
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
ZU
21
22
23
24
25
34
MS. GREEN: Since that time, we found that
it's opened a whole new bag of worms that was not presented
to us with the original things. And the way it's developed,
we're not interested in having the County take over the road
and have to change everything. We'd like to just leave it
the way it is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, then, you really
-- you're telling me that you and your husband, as property
owners in Lot 6, are -- are withdrawing your support of the
petition for county maintenance?
MS. GREEN: Yes, sir, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct?
MS. GREEN: That is correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, let me see where
you are exactly. I -- I understood you as having withdrawn
your motion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm not going to
vote for my own motion. Should I withdraw it? (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Did you not indicate you were
withdrawing your motion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess the other -- it's
just a -- I just read the original court order that was
referred to. My understanding of our subdivision rules and
~,-ia-o5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
35
state law is that onr_e that plat gets revised, it's under
the rules at that time. If that -- if Lor 6 has been
divided, we're under current rules, not the rules of '79.
MR. JOHNSON: Well, but we're not
replatting -- this is not an application for replatting.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it needs to be,
because those lots have been divided.
MR. JOHNSON: Well, our property owners don't
have any rapacity to control whether or not they replat Lot
h. We're just asking that this be accepted for maintenance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. JOHNSON: And, you know, there's
documentary evidence that it was already accepted for
maintenance when the plat was done, but we don't want to --
you know, we don't want to get into that. We -- we're
willing to pay for it, recognizing the County's tight on
money right now. But once it's reconstructed, we'd like it
to be listed as a county-maintained road.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't think that's
going to happen, Mr. Johnson.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir, Does any
other member of tkie Court have anything further to offer on
this? If not, we'll move to a highly controversial item;
Item Number 2, consider, discuss, and announce October as
Texas Archeology Month in Kerr County. Commissioner
'? :_-..s
1
3
4
5
6
7
A
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
36
Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. As you
notice in the letter in your backup, they simply ask us to
announce October as Texas Archeology Month in Kerr County,
and I move to do so.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second,
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Third.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. 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.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Kathy, you would send
the court order to these folks? Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: We`11 move to Item 3,
consider, discuss, and -- e::cuse me. We have a timed item
for 9:45; it's slightly past that now. We'll move to Item
4, consider and discuss authorizing the Kerrville Area
Chamber of Commerce to coordinate the Kerr County
Sesquicentennial Celebration in combination and consultation
with Kerr County Commissioners Court, Kerr County Historical
~;_i__~~
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
Commission, and representatives of the several cities and
towns within the county. I put this on the agenda at the
request of representatives of the Chamber of Commerce and
Mr. Joe Herring, Jr., who is with us here today.
Mr. Herring?
MR. HERRING: Hello.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, sir.
MR. HERRING: My name is Joe Herring, Jr. I
reside here in Kerrville. As you know, the county will have
its 150th birthday in 2006. I serve on the Board of
Directors of the Kerr -- Kerrville Area Chamber of Commerce.
A group of us formed a task force to see if it would be
appropriate for the Chamber to produce an event celebrating
the 150th birthday of the county. I prepared a handout for
you guys. Is that enough, guys?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. Joe, does
this mean that we all need to grow our beards? Say yes.
I'm wanting to, and I need a reason to do it.
MR. HERRING: That is one of the events
that's been discussed, a beard growing contest.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
MR. HERRING: However, our board has not
voted to have this event. We felt it was probably more
appropriate to come and ask you, before we plan anything, if
y'a11 had something planned. And if you do not have
~-i_ os
38
1
G
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
'0
21
2 2
23
2q
25
something planned, maybe then we could qo ahead and produce
such an event.
JUDGE TINLEY: Essentially, you're here
asking if it would be appropriate from our viewpoint that
you guys take the lead in it?
MR. HERRING: Correct. But I don't think we
want to expend a lot of time and effort if y'all are
planning something too. I think one event's probably
appropriate, and not several.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We've had a lot of
discussions about it in the past, and -- and we've set the
date with General Schellhase, who heads the Historical
Commission.
MR. HERRING: Who's here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Had an outline of
some plans. We thought the plans were good, but the
problem, where we got hung up, was who was going to lead the
event -- lead the effort, and funding for the effort. So,
it -- at this point, I think it would be safe to say it has
sort of floundered.
MR. HERRING: Yes. We -- as you've seen, we
have done some initial just research. The actual event is
in January. However, during the 1956 centennial
celebrations, they celebrated in April, merely because the
weather is usually better in April than January. We would
i_ ue
39
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
propose something similar. I've talked with Clarabelle.
I'm afraid I haven't talked with General Schellhase about
dates, but researching the community calendar, we feel an
April date might be appropriate for such a celebration.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The date -- the April
dates were set by the Court at the recommendation of, I
believe, the Historical Commission, I think for the reason
you just noted; it ties to what happened 50 years ago.
MR. HERRING: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In terms of the
celebration time.
MR. HERRING: It could be a lot of fun. The
event could be a lot of fun, but I think we're at an awkward
point. Do we proceed? If -- if y'all are going to do
something, we don't want to step on your toes. If you're
not going to do anything, I think we're willing to jump into
the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I can clear that up
for you right quick by offering a motion that you folks be
-- take over the development and everything that's
associated with the sesquicentennial.
MR. HERRING: I intended to introduce the
President of the Kerrville Area Chamber, Brian Bondy.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Before I get a
second, why don't you do that?
9-.~- 5
40
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
MR. HERRING: Only other comment I'd make is,
we don't anticipate this being a Kerrville event. This is a
county event, and so we will be actively seeking partners in
the other chambers and in the other communities of our
county. However, it ought to be a lot of fun.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Appreciate y'all takinq
that on.
MR. HERRING: Sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second
for approval of the agenda item for the Kerrville Area
Chamber of Commerce to take the lead, as it were, as listed
on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Bondy may have
some comments.
MR. BONDY: No. I think the bottom line from
our perspective, and with the -- any of the organizations in
the county, is we only turn 150 once, and it's a great
opportunity for many organizations to come together and put
something together. What that is at this point is really
too soon to tell, but with -- with at least an initial step
from -- from you all, we can get into that mode really
quickly and put something together.
MR. HERRING: Right. We do not have
authorization from our -- our board yet, so we're -- we're
U-lz-ns
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
G1
~~
23
~4
25
41
doing this and then getting authorization.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you want us to
give you a qualified approval?
MR. HERRING: PSo, no, I want to you say go.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what we're
saying.
JUDGE TINLEY: Personally, I appreciate your
willingness to take the lead in this thing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I do too.
JUDGE TINLEY: Because it's needed. And, as
~ Mr. Bondy said, you only turn 150 once,
MR. HERRING: That's right,
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Comment before we vote on
that. General Schellhase? You like this approach?
GENERAL SCHELLHASE: You bet.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The general, as I'm sure
you -- I don't know if you've talked to him, but he's done a
lot of work on this and has a lot of information, which I
don't know if y'all are -- certainly, I'm sure you can --
MR. HERRING: The initial letter to Judge
Tinley said we would work in consultation with the
Historical Commission. I've already contacted every
historical commission in the state and every main street
program in the state to find out what they've done in their
communities.

42
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER, WILLlAM5: We thank you for
stepping forward.
MR. HERRING: You're welcome. There was a
vote, then?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There will be.
JUDGE TINLEY: Will be. Any further
questions or comments? Mr. Emerson?
MR. EMERSON: I have one comment. I don't
think the wording on your agenda item allows you to take a
vote.
JUDGE TINLEY
MR. EMERSON:
doesn't say take action.
MR. HERRING:
date.
Authorizing?
Consider and discuss
It
Maybe I can do that at a future
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure, that will be
great.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll put it back on
for the 22nd; it will happen.
MR. HERRING: Do I need to return on the
22nd?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, you do not.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What does
"authorizing" mean?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- I think he's
9-i2-u5
43
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~1
22
23
24
~5
saying because it says "discuss authorizing," as opposed to
saying just authorizing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He likes the
]anguage, "and take appropriate action." I found that out.
I'll have it on for the 22nd, Joe, and it will -- it will
take place.
MR. HERRING: Our next Chamber board meeting
is not till October, so --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Be plenty of
time for that.
DODGE TINLEY: Mea culpa. I'm the one that
gave the language for the agenda item. My apologies,
gentlemen,
MR. HERRING: I used to make agendas. I
understand.
JUDGE TINLEY: The next item that we will go
to is -- let's go back to 3; consider, discuss, and approval
for the League of Women Voters to use one of the District
Courtrooms for voter education on September 20th, 2005, in
the evening. Ms. Pieper?
MS. PIE PER: Well, gentlemen, the League of
Women Voters evidently want to do a voter education, and
they need a place to do it at, so they have called and
checked. The courtroom is available that evening, and they
want to start at 7:00, I`m presuming they're wanting it a
v-~~-os
44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
little bit early to set up registration or whatever. I'm
not real sure. I did receive their agenda today, and it
seems like I'm most of their agenda. With the -- the
process of provisional ballots and voter ID and just voter
education stuff. So, I'll be here to open the building
or -- of course, it will probably be open at that point, but
I'll also be here to close.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Question. Is it just
for the League of Women Voters, or is it going to be open to
the community?
MS. PIEPER: I think it's open to the
community.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And have you cleared
this through the -- or someone has cleared this through the
court coordinator?
MS. PIEPER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 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.)
„ ,~__,,
45
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~3
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry.
MS. PIEPER: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move on down to -- looks
like -- I don't see -- is Mr. Motheral going to be present,
Ms. Hardin?
MS. HARDIN: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 11,
consider final plat of River Road Ranch in Precinct 4.
Ms. Hardin?
MS. HARDIN: And all of you know Mr. Odom is
on vacation this week. He approved all of the plats before
he left, and actually signed them. Any questions?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Help me understand. I
see this cute little map here, but I'm not real -- I'm not
real positive I know where this is.
MS. HARDIN: It's on Hunt River Road,
Mr. Chapman's property.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mr. Chapman's
property?
MS. HARDIN: Mm-ham.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is a case where
he transferred ownership of one of the lots, and it's not
quite a relative relationship, and it's cleaning that up.
MS. HARDIN: He gave one lot to a relative.
~-iz o~
46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
The next lot he gave to a godchild, and so that triggered a
replat, and he's come back to try to clear that up.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I know exactly where
it is. Used to -- the Marlboro horse used to live there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is the one -- as I
recall, we looked at it and made a bunch of changes to try
to get it into compliance.
MS. HARDIN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The gentleman was it
before, wasn't he?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, not Mr. Chapman.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Somebody was.
MS. HARDIN: Pardon?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Somebody was in on
this before.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mr. Motheral was here, I
believe.
MS. HARDIN:
vacation today too.
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
it, they have done everythi
MS. HARDIN:
they need is their signs.
COMMISSIONER
Bruce Moth
WILLIAMS:
NICHOLSON:
~g we asked
Their road
LETZ: O.S
=_ral. He's on
I remember it.
I -- the way I see
them to do.
is completed. All
.S.F. has approved it?
~~-iz-os
47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
zz
23
24
25
MS. HARDIN: Yes, sir. All fees are paid and
all.
	COMMISSIONER	NICHOLSON: Where	in the
process -	- this is final pla	t approval?	
	MS. HARDIN:	Yes, sir.	
	COMMISSIONER	NICHOLSON: I move	final plat
approval	of River Road Ranch	in Precinct 4.	
	COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN: 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 raisin	g your right
hand.			
	(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
	JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
	(No response.)
	JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's
move to Ite	m 13, if we might. Set a public hearing for the
revision of	plat for The Reserve of Falling Water, Lots 34
through 37,	as set forth in Volume 7, Page 215, Plat
Records, lo	cated in Precinct 3.
	MS. HARDIN: The only thing I have on that is
the little	-- the sketch that ynu have, but really, all we
need today	is to set the public hearing for the next --
	COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're not really
changing --	you're just changing the configuration of lots
y i_-o=
48
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
around that cul-de-sac.
MS. HARDIN: Right. My suggestion for the
court order date -- I mean for the public hearing was
October the 24th at 10 o'clock. Is that okay, Kathy?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and se~~onded to
set a public hearing for the revision of plat for The
Reserve of Falling Water, Lots 34 through 37, for
October 24th -- at 10 a.m.?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: 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: That motion does carry. I
will now recess the Commissioners Court meeting and I will
open a public hearing for the revision of plat for Whiskey
Ridge Ranches, Section 2, Lots 17 and 18, located in
Precinct 3.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was
closed at 10:00 a.m., and a public hearing
was held in open court, as follows:)

9 1 ? U 5
49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
c~ 2
23
24
25
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 concerning the revision of
plat for Whiskey Ridge Ranches, Section 2, Lots 17 and 18,
located in Precinct 3?
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Seeing no one seeking
recognition or coming forward, I will close the public
hearing for the revision of plat for Whiskey Ridge Ranches,
Section 2, Lots 17 and 18.
(The public hearing was concluded at
10:01 a.m., and the regular Commissioners
Court meeting was reopened.)
JUDGE TINLEY: And I will reconvene the
Commissioners Court meeting and call Item Number 6, Item 6
being consider the final revision of plat for Whiskey Ridge
Ranches, Section 2, Lots 17 and 18, located in Precinct 3.
MS. HARDIN: This is Mr. Lindley's homestead.
He's just asking that the two large lots be put into one,
which is 146 acres.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Comment. I really
9-l:'-n5
50
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
14
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
thought maybe somebody'd be in here from the shooting
facility to oppose that. That's a joke, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Just couldn't resist.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sut wouldn't it be a
classic?
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or
comments? 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: That motion does carry. Let's
move to Item Number 19, if we might, consider a resolution
of noncompliance pursuant to Section 3.04 of the Kerr County
Subdivision Rules and Regulations to be posted in the Deed
Records of Kerr County. Yes, ma'am? We're catching you
unprepared, 'cause I'm jumping around like a kangaroo?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which one are you on?
JUDGE TINLEY: 19.
MS. HARDIN: This property is off of Town
Creek Road. I'm still not quite sure whether it's in 1 or
3. I was going to go back and look at a map, but forgot.
The first call we had on this was from Gary Kersey. The
second call we had on it was from Environmental Health, for
whether or not it met the current subdivision rules. I gave
9-i.-as
51
1
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-- asked Mr. Emerson to look at it, and he suggested that we
put it on the agenda for today.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you -- can somebody
explain?
MS. HARDIN: It is a family division of
property; however, it is five lots, not four lots, as the
subdivision rules say it should be, and there's no road to
access the properties.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think this is a case
that -- I mean, it's state law. That exemption is under
state law, and which we adopted, and I don't see how we
can --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What exemption?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, if you divide it
under family members, it's four or fewer parts. This is
more than four. And also, the road issue would trigger
platting even if it was four, in my opinion. But, I mean, I
think the exemption that they're seeking, they didn't fall
under that exemption, so I would think it needs to be
platted. And the -- and the road -- there's a road that was
built or not built?
MS. HARDIN: No, there's a driveway that
meanders through it. I think there's a little drawing back
in the packet -- looks like this -- that a surveyor has
done.
q-i~-os
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: When was this done?
MS. HARDIN: I'm not really quite sure. This
one says July 25th of this year. However, some of the
division goes back to earlier, but I'm not sure of the exact
date.
COMMISSIONER
shows August of '95.
COMMISSIONER
MS. HARDIN:
down here that -- on this 1
date on it. Do you know?
MR. VOELKEL:
WILLIAMS: We11, this diagram
NICHOLSON: Yeah.
And then there's another one
ittle one that I can't read the
I don't know where the property
is.
MS. HARDIN: Okay.
MR. VOELKEL: Not familiar with it.
MS. HARDIN: Delgadillo property off of Town
Creek.
MR. VOELKEL: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, it's -- to me,
it's pretty straightforward. I mean, if there's -- they
need to plat it and they need to provide a -- you know, road
to county -- to subdivision standards to access all the
lots.
MS. HARDIN: Okay. Would you like to speak?
MR. EMERSON: Just to state you have the same
~3-i: os
53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
L 1
~~
23
24
25
problem on this agenda item that you did a couple items ago.
I don't think you can pass an order under the wording.
MS. HARDIN: I thought I worded it the way
you asked me to. I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, we can
still discuss it and give direction. But I don't -- I think
it's got to be brought into compliance.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, there are
definitely -- let's see, there's one, two, three, four, five
lots there. They're definitely all family; there's no
question of that.
MS. HARDIN: It seems to be. I haven't
talked to all of the family. The people that called t_o ask
if it met approval was a lending institute that was selling
it to another person with the same last name.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't think you
need a court order to -- to administer the subdivision
rules. You tell them they have to come into compliance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And even -- I mean, the
issue on the road, you'd have to -- they can't divide it and
not give access, even if it's to a family member.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what it looks
like. That's what it looks like.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Even if it was four
people, you can't get to the back lots. There's no road to
~-iz os
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
54
it, so they still -- I mean, because --
MR. EMERSON: If I can clarify, the court
order itself is not for enforcement of the subdivision
rules, ner_essarily. The court order is to place notice in
the public records that these lots are not in compliance
with the subdivision rules, and then we'll proceed on from
there.
	JUDGE TINLEY: As proposed, it would not be.
	MR. EMERSON: Correct, or as it exists. I
mean, I'm no	t sure how much of this has taken place.
	JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
	COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we can do that,
but I think	if the lending institution asks for us to sign
off on it --	is that what you're --
	MS. HARDIN: No. We -- we've notified them
that it was	not in compliance.
	COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
	MS. HARDIN: But Mr. Emerson asked that we
put this res	olution to put in the Deed Records.
	COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. We'll put it back
on and say "	consider and take action to approve resolution."
	COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See, actually, I agree
with Number	4. I don't think that any action is required.
	COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't either.
	COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Subdivision rules are
9 1 2 O S
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
there, and life goes on.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think what the County
Attorney is saying is just to put the lenders and everyone
else on notice that it's not --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand, to make
it cleaner.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But just put it back on.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further on that
particular item from anyone on the Court? If not, we will
move to Item Number 7. I will recess the Commissioners
Court meetinq and open a public hearing for the revision of
plat for Kerrville Country Estates, Section Two, Lot 34A,
located in Precinct 1.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was
closed at 10:05 a.m., and a public hearing
was held in open court, as follows:)
P U B L I C H E A R I N G
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any member of the
public who wishes to be heard concerning a revision of plat
for Kerrville Country Estates, Section Two, Lot 34A?
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Seeing no one rising to be
recognized or otherwise come forward, I will close the
public hearing for the revision of plat for Kerrville
Country Estates, Section Two, Lot 34A, and I will reconvene
the Commissioners Court meeting.
U 1 L i i 5
56
1
G
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2q
25
(The public hearing was concluded at
10:06 a.m., and the regular Commissioners
Court meeting was reopened.)
JUDGE TINLEY: And we will move to Item 8,
which is consider approval of final revision of plat for
Kerrville Country Estates, Section Two, Lot 34A, located in
Precinct 1.
MS. HARDIN: This is -- go ahead.
MR. VOELKEL: I just want to make one
comment, and especially for Commissioners Baldwin. This is
an ETJ plat, so we have already been to the City of
Kerrville. The Planning Commission has approved the replat.
And, for Mr. Baldwin, his neighbor is Von Evans, just so
you'll know that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. Tell me
about Zone X.
MR. VOELKEL: You see that on there
somewhere? Zone X means that it's outside of the 100-year
floodplain.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. VOELKEL: It's in areas of 500-year or
greater.
MS. HARDIN: That's on the hill, correct.
MR. VOELKEL: Well, this one's actually kind
of down in the bottom, but it is out of the floodplain.
S 12 os
57
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. 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.)
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No, I was voting
for, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I thought you were. I
will now recess the Commissioners Court meeting and open a
public hearing for the revision of plat for Mosty Pecan
Grove, as shown in Volume 7, Page 295, Plat Records, located
in Precinct 2.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was
closed at 10:08 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
publi~~ that wishes to be heard with respect to the revision
of a plat for Mosty Pecan Grove as shown in Volume 7, Page
295 of the Plat Records, located in Precinct 2?
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Seeing no one seeking
~-i~-us
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
58
recognition or ~~oming forward, I will close the public
hearing for the revision of plat for Mosty Pecan Grove, as
shown in Volume 7, Page 295 of the Plat Records, located in
Precinct 2, and I will reconvene the Commissioners Court
meeting.
(The public hearing was concluded at
10:09 a.m., and the regular Commissioners
Court meeting was reopened.)
DODGE TINLEY: Item 10, consider revision of
plat for Mosty Pecan Grove shown in Volume 7, Page 295, Plat
Records, located in Precinct 2.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can't do this one
either.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's see. J.J. Lane.
Where have I heard that before?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Been here before.
What do you got, Mr. Voelkel?
MR. VOELKEL: What we've got on this plat, of
course, you all remember this. When we -- the original plat
was approved with different lot sizes, and what we've done
for this replat is to move the lot line between the two
lots. There are still two lots, but I'm making Lot Number 2
a larger tract. And what we have done, with some direction
from the Court on previous meetings, we have added 10 feet
v iz us
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
59
of additional right-of-way off of this property off of both
Lots 1 and 2, so that J.J. Lane, even though it's still a
private road, will now be a 40-foot right-of-way, as opposed
to a 30-foot right-of-way.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can't. Doesn't say it.
It says "consider." County Attorney's been -- it says
consider; it doesn't say --
MR. EMERSON: I think you're stuck again.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to say
something about that. I appreciate Re r, doing that. We need
to -- we need to clean our act up, and I appreciate him
holding our feet to the fire on this issue. Although we
don't like it at all. You need to understand that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only -- I don't disagree
with that. I do differ with Rex a little bit about the word
"consider." I think "consider" leaves room to move, but he
gave us a memo and took the dictionary definition and all
that, but that's tine. We can come back and do them, then.
MS. HARDIN: I apologize; I didn't know there
was a memo.
MR. EMERSON: Sounds like what I need to do
is send it to all the department heads, too.
JUDGE TINLEY: A standard inquiry, "You
didn't receive the memo?"
~ iz us
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
MS. HARDIN: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further to be offered
by any member of the Court on that agenda item?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just let me say for
Don's benefit in the back, this is a language problem; has
nothing to do with -- with the -- the matter in terms of its
approval or disapproval. It's following the law in terms of
how we style agenda items, and we'll correct that at the
next meeting.
MR. VOELKEL: Excuse me, sir. Does that mean
it will not be approved for two more weeks? Is that --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
MR. VOELKEL: Okay, I just need to know. I
think they have a closing set up for this week. That will
probably, then, have to be postponed. I think they were
waiting for the replat to be finalized to transfer the title
of the property.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand.
MR. VOELKEL: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When is the closing?
MR. VOELKEL: I was under the understanding
it was this week. I'll have to check on that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you know, Don?
MR. EICHLER: Hasn't been finalized, but
tentatively set for Friday.
U-1z-..5
61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
-~
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's a tentative
date? Can it be -- could it be rescheduled?
MR. EICHLER: I'm sure it can. You'd have to
talk to the title company.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I apologize. There
was a styling --
MR. VOELKEL: Just trying to get some
clarification. So, we'll come back for approval in two
weeks?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, second meeting.
MR. VOELKEL: I'm going to leave these with
you, if that's all right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further from any
member of the Court on that particular agenda item? Let's
move on to Item 12, consider a letter to Headwaters
Groundwater Conservation District concerning compliance to
Kerr County Subdivision Rules and standards.
MS. HARDIN: I'm sorry, what number?
DODGE TINLEY: 13.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 12.
JUDGE TINLEY: EYCUSe me, 12.
MS. HARDIN: I'm totally lost here. Have we
already done -- we've already done 13.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, we did 14 -- we did
13. This is 12.
9 i2-U5
62
1
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
L 2
23
24
25
MS. HARDIN: Oh, okay. We've had several
calls from the employees of Headwaters, and Gordon Morgan
called and asked if we would write a letter stating what it
is that the Commissioners Court would like for them to do
when they find a property that is in noncompliance. So, I
drafted this letter as an idea, and I'm hoping for any
suggestions you might have.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we're in the same
situation; we can look at it and discuss it, but we can't
vote on it.
MS. HARDIN: That's fine.
MR. EMERSON: I'm not sure Ms. Hardin's
looking for a vote. If I understood correctly, she's
looking for a little guidance.
MS. HARDIN: Looking for direction, whether
this is what you would like for me to --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, what I'm picking
up from the letter is that we're not asking them to deny any
permits or do anything other than to notify the County of a
problem?
MS. HARDIN: Yes, sir, that's it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I like.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's what we
have -- what I think our intent is, is that we want to be
notified of it, but we don't want to stop development, stop
4 1 ~ - n 5
63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
'0
21
22
23
24
25
wells. I think we're getting on shaky ground -- or they are
if they start denying permits.
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: Yeah, absolutely.
MS. HARDIN: So the letter is --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; I like the letter.
MS. HARDIN: You like the Letter? Thank you
very much.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think one suggestion. The
next-to-last paragraph dealing with the deed, supply a copy
of the deed. May be difficult to supply the original.
MS. HARDIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further from any
member of the Court on that particular agenda item, Item 12?
Let's move to Item 15, if we might, consider and discuss
procedures for the paying and reporting of expenditures
involving penalties, fees, interest, or other costs
associated with the late payment or other administrative
system failures. Commissioner Nicholson.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSGN: What I'm seeking
here is a -- it says a court order; I might not have the
right language. What I'm seeking here is to either discover
that there's a process in place to keep these kinds of
errors from occurring in the future, or that we establish
one. And then the second thing I'm looking for -- I don't
think Tommy's here -- is to learn whether or not there are
y-iz-~~s
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
25
other opportunities to make these same kinds of errors in
our county government pay -- system of paying. What we have
is a -- we have a series of four errors. It started back in
200?, I think it was -- yeah, January 2002, that resulted in
payments Erom Kerr County in excess of a total of more than
52,000 that were neither budgeted nor approved as an
I expenditure. And you get to that by the -- by the penalties
or interest or late fees or whatever it is; it's simply an
add-on to the payments that you're already making in the
retirement fund, so it seems to be a loophole in the process
of checks and balances on -- on spending.
And what I see is that it occurred in January
of 2002, and I presume the only officials that were aware of
them were the County Judge and the Treasurer, And I don't
know what action they might have taken, but it occurred
again the same month, so if they took any -- or next month,
so if they took any action, it was ineffective. And, again,
neither the Auditor or Commissioners Court were aware of it.
Occurred again later in September of 2002, so three times
that year, the same mistake being made, and apparently not
learning much from it. It occurred again in 2005, and it
came to the attention of the Auditor and the Court at that
time. So, what I'm asking is that -- two things. That we
get a court order that instructs paying officials to notify
the County Auditor when a -- when a procedural failure
e-~a-os
ti5
1
0
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
occurs and spends money that's not authorized. And I'm also
asking the County Auditor to tell us if there are any other
situations in the bill-paying process where payments can be
made without either being budgeted or having the prior
approval of the County Commissioners Court.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you a
question. Who would you be ordering to report to the
Auditor?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Whoever has the
information. Whoever causes the error to occur and an
expenditure to be made.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, okay. I agree
with you. I'm -- I can't quite see how that completely
works, but in prior -- prior to this -- you're talking about
in 2002. I never received any notification of anything
wrong; I can tell you that. Now, I think in your notations
here, the County Judge received a copy, and I'm assuming
that the County Judge automatically receives a copy from the
agency or -- retirement agency, whoever it might be, but I
don't know that the Commissioners receive -- I have not, or
the Auditor. But I -- so, in -- in this case here, you're
saying that a court order would order the County Treasurer
to notify the Auditor when there's late fees or any -- any
kind of change in the budget issue?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir. And
`+-11-~ S
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
potentially any other official who could -- I don't know if
it would be the Tar. Collector/Assessor that's making
payments to the state, or Environmental Health that makes
payments. Any other situation -- similar situated issue
would be reported.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, I
think I don't have any problem with -- the Treasurer is
here. But, procedurally, it seems to me that the Treasurer
and/or the Auditor -- no disbursal is made from any county
funds without their approval. I mean --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Both of them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Both of them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That was the case
here; there was no expenditure from -- direct expenditure
from county funds. It was a penalty levied by T.C.D.R.S.
against our account, so there wasn't -- it wasn't something
that turned up on the bill list. I understand where you're
going, Commissioner, and I'm -- I don't have any problem
with it, but this is the result of -- this is a little
different than the Auditor coming and reporting a late bill
to Bank of America and interest penalty for which he has to
draw down, for example.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: All I'm saying is
that other officials may have occasion that a similar kind
of error could create the same situation. I don't know
l - 1 _' - i ~ 5
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
that. This may -- this may be the only --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sheriff has a comment.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You do have that
occurring, and some of it, gentleman, I -- my secretary
agrees, there needs to be a solution to this, because we
have cutoff dates for bills to be turned in to the Auditor,
and if a bill comes in right after that date, then it's the
next time before it comes up, and it's going to be a little
over a month before that bill actually comes up on the
agenda to be paid, at which time it's already late and you
may incur late fees. We have had that happen on telephone
bills and on gasoline bills, to where it didn't get -- get
through there, and that does occur. And I don't -- with the
schedule of events, the way they -- the Court and Auditor
schedule things -- 'cause Mindy's got to have time to get
all the bills entered.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But in those situations,
though, the bills -- even though there may be a late fee,
they're still presented to the court.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The bills are presented,
but there's still a late fee that the County's paying. And
it's kind of bad when you get a call from the gas company
saying why haven't they gotten paid yet.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They look at -- well,
~,-iz-ua
68
1
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it's because of the date it came in.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Is this worded in a
way that we can get a court order?
JUDGE TINLEY: County Attorney is shaking his
head.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: If I understand you,
Commissioner, what you're -- where you're going is, any time
there's any sort of an administrative fee or penalty or
surcharge imposed, irrespective of whether or not it takes a
direct expenditure of funds or whether or not it's charging
on something that's in existence, the Auditor needs to be
informed of it?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY; Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That`s based on a
system we've got that says if you make a $5 expenditure
that's not budgeted, you got to bring it in here and get
approval for it, and I don't think we ought to be making
$2,000 expenditures.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't disagree with
that.
DODGE TINLEY: You'll -- you'll place that on
the agenda?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir, for the
y-iz-os
69
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2 '~
23
24
25
third time.
JUDGE TINLEY: With appropriate action
language?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll be back, and if
I'm nor on my deathbed, I'll be in here and present it
again.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's go to Item 18, if
we might. Consider approval of the interlor_al agreement
between Kerr 9-1-1 and Kerr County. I gather the -- the
approval aspect of that agenda item will allow us to go
forward; is that correct, Mr. County Attorney?
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon?
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: I thought I'd go there first,
rather than wandering through the woods and finding out that
we had to come back.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We11, this --
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Amerine?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is -- yeah,
I'll -- Mr. Amerine, start walking this way.
MR. AMEP.INE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The -- we've been back
and forth with -- with the County Attorney a couple of
times. Mr. Amerine wrote up an agreement, and -- and Rex
-i,-us
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
70
worked on it and came back, and we worked on it and went
back, and now this is the -- the one that has been approved
by both parties. And it's -- it simply says -- bottom line
is that 9-1-1 will continue their services and act basical]y
as our agent at no cost. And it looks like a good agreement
to me. Mr. Amerine?
MR. AMERINE: I think you said it as well as
I could. It's essentially --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not sure about
that.
MR. AMERINE: Well, thank you. It's
essentially just an agreement that states what we've
currently been doing on behalf of the county for rural
addressing since the effort started in earnest in 2003.
What our concern was, as I stated last time I visited with
y'a11, I think the interlocal agreement does the appropriate
legal transfer of authority from the county Road and Bridge
down to our organization. And we did adopt quite a bit of
language from the version that the County Attorney put out.
For instance, if the Court decided to come to 9-1-1 for a
special project, then that language is in there for sitting
down and setting up a special agreement compensation, if it
was due. So, I -- I'll answer any questions about the
agreement, if you have any. But --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just have one.
3- 1 G- n 5
~1
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
'1
22
23
24
25
MR. AMERINE: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is the Force Majeure
clause new, or was that in there in the old agreement?
MR. AMERINE: We never had an agreement prior
to this one being proposed.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Then it's good to
have a Force Majeure clause in, based on what we know that
can happen and is r_urrently happening.
MR. AMERINE: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval of the
agreement.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second the motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agreement. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just want to make a
comment, Judge. This is one of those issues, or one of
those areas in government that we need to remember where we
were three or four years ago and where we are today. We
have come light-years. Mr. Amerine and his board has
brought -- brought the 9-1-1 system into compliance and
where we're supposed to be, and -- and just a tremendous
amount of distance that we've come in the last few years,
and I wanted to say thank you to Mr. Amerine for that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I would
certainly echo that, with thanks.
-ice ~5
~2
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further 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: That motion does carry. We're
about to 10:30, so why don't we take a recess for about 15
minutes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Works for me.
(Recess taken from 10:26 a.m. to 10:43 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to
order, and back in session at our Commissioners Court
meeting. We will go to Item 16; consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action on the library contract with the City of
Kerrville. Commissioner Nicholson?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Looking for my
library contract. I met with the Interim City Manager and
the Assistant County -- Assistant City Attorney and the
Library Director, and we talked about some issues, and then
I believe the Assistant City Attorney and County Attorney
got together and redrafted a contract that -- that
approved -- that would meet their approval as to form, and
we got those contracts this morning. And they don't -- I'm
4 iz u~
73
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
talking -- I said "contracts." I'm talking about library,
and then later we'll talk about Animal Control. The library
contract doesn't appear to contain the provisions that we
approved. For example, I don't find the $6,000
administrative fee in Item 6. I find that 50 percent
payment, but --
MR. EMERSON: Talking about the library or
Animal Control?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Oh, I'm sorry, I got
that on the wrong page.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The wrong contract.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Here's library,
okay. Changes from what we talked about earlier that have
to do with the constitution of the Library Advisory Board.
I think we talked about a commissioner and a councilman and
seven members, and now this has got a commissioner and a
councilman and five members. I'm okay with that number.
The -- the earlier contract that we drafted and approved
said that the at-large members -- that is, the members other
than the councilman and commissioner -- would be nominated
by the councilman and commissioner and submitted to the two
government bodies for approval. And this one has -- we
talked about these issues. I didn't necessarily agree to
it. It was -- it was on the table when we quit talking.
Two board members shall be residents of Kerr County and
~-iz-o e.
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
shall be appointed by the Commissioners Court. I'm a little
sensitive about that language. Maybe I know what it means,
but -- but everybody that lives in this county are residents
of Kerr County, including the City Councilmembers and the
people that live in -- in Kerrville. If they mean by that
language that they shall be residents of Kerr County and not
reside in the city of Kerrville, then that's a little bit
different thing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- that
language needs to be cleaned up on C and D, 'cause I agree
with that. And based on the -- you know, the way I look at
it, I really think it should be switched a little bit based
on that, because, I mean, I -- it's almost like it's forcing
the Commissioners Court to not pick residents of the city of
Kerrville, and I disagree with that, because there's -- I
mean, just by the way it's broken out, I think the
Commissioners Court's probably responsible for three members
and the City two, because our constituency is far larger
than theirs, and ours are also the City's. But, anyway,
it's not --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I have constituents
in the city limits of Kerrville that I might want to
nominate.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, the history of
it is that that has happened.
9-1_'-~5
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 LETZ: Riqht.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it's just the way
it's worded. I think it needs -- the distinction should be
more -- you know, I'd like to try to get a resident from the
county and a resident from the city, but -- as opposed to
who appoints them.
MR. EMERSON: May I comment on that one
point? The reason the wording says Kerr County is that
leaves it wide-open to anybody in Kerr County.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You could read it
that way. But very often, Rex, when we talk to -- they talk
about their constituents and our constituents. And they
don't have any constituents that aren't constituents of one
of these four Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Also, another
question comes to mind, Commissioner -- and I don't know if
it was referenced in your discussions, but historically,
that advisory board has had one person who represented the
Friends of the Library organization. Would it be your
understanding, then, that -- that that would be one of the
City's three appointments, or what do we know about that?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Nothing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just curious.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Was there a reason in
u i ~ o s
~6
1
2
3
4
J
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
your discussion why the City felt they should have three
appointees and the Court two?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 'Cause they own the
place.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't think that
was in our discussion, but that's probably a good
assumption.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would be the
only reason I could offer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have not read through
it as thoroughly as I should have, but the question I have
is -- I know at first, the operational expenses were split
fifty-fifty. Does it address non -- or I guess capital
improvement-type items, repair or things of that nature, as
to how they should be paid for? Because --
MR. EMERSON: Paragraph 8.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Eight?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Eight.
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir, the last sentence.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which was a bone of
contention, I always thought. I'm glad that's clarified.
'Cause we were -- in the past, we have provided 50 percent
or more of elevators to go in a building that is not owned
by Kerr County. We have provided significant funding for
air-conditioners to cool a building that doesn't belong to
y i~-~~~
77
1
2
3
4
5
H
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Kerr County, so I'm glad that's clarified.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we have a budget?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes -- oh, no, we
don't have a budget. We have budgeted an amount of money.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I mean, and I'm
wondering -- I mean, historically, they have put capital
items in their budget that we've paid for.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I asked that
question, and yes, there are some capital items. It may not
be important to us, since we've specified how much we're
going to pay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, but -- and that
gets me to the point of, this contract kind of undoes that
because we've specified an amount. But the contract says we
pay halt of the operation expenses without any input into
it?
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
provide that we pay half.
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
pay an amount approved by t
COMMISSIONER
WILLIAMS: Excluding capital.
LETZ: Excluding capital.
NICHOLSON: This does not
LETZ: Yes, it does.
WILLIAMS: No, it doesn't.
NICHOLSON: It provides that we
~e Commissioners Court.
LETZ: No, it says in Paragraph
9 11 n 5
78
1
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
9, the parties agree that the proposed operational expenses
for fiscal year shall be divided -- or evenly divided
between the parties.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's unacceptable.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It goes on to say,
and shall determine amount that each party shall budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, that's
contradictory, then.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah, it's
contradictory.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me throw out something
else here. By implication, I think in Paragraph 8, where it
excludes capital expenses for the library, are there any
other expenses that would not fall under either operating or
capital expenses for the history center? Cause --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: History center?
JUDGE TINLEY: Why do we even mention the
history center in here?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 'Cause there's
personnel costs there, Judge, and that's never been a part
of the library, as such.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's an extra --
the funding for which came about totally out of the realm of
either budget, I believe. And there are -- there are
9-1 OS
79
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
L2
23
24
25
personnel expenses in the day-to-day operation of that
history center.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- and this is why I
have a problem with never having a budget from them that we
can look at. The -- as I understand it, the library manager
oversees the history center.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But yet we're asked to
pay half of that salary, you know. I mean, this contract,
to me, is meaningless until we can get a copy of their
budget.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, another thing
I object to is the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good point.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- bylaws. They're
weak. They're so weak, you might as well not have an
advisory board. What we approved and what we intend is the
Library Advisory Board, rather like the Airport Board -- not
the same, but same direction -- will provide oversight of
the operations, and it would be at the strategic level;
planning, budgeting, policies, not day-to-day operations or
scheduling of people to work or anything like that. But
that -- and that the Library Board will develop the budget
as part of their strategy and policy planning, and present
it to the -- to the governing bodies.
e-i -us
80
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
~l
22
~3
" 24
~5
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I kind of like
that direction, but I think -- beyond that, I think if
you -- well, I'd like to get to that, where the board is
directly in control. I think there's an intermediate step,
if the City's willing to go down there, and they may not, is
to do it more like the -- have a management agreement
between the library and the City, and the City provides the
services. And this -- I'm not so sure that's really real
helpful. I think the advisory board needs to have,
certainly, some budget input.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's a point
I wanted to raise, too. The language change is intended
to -- to deal with a concern that the Commissioner raised
and I raised in the past, but it really doesn't, because
historically, the Library Advisory Board has never been a
part of the budget process. That was nanalea -- tnat nas
been handled directly between the Library Manager --
Director, whatever he's called, and a representative of City
staff, Finance Department. And the Library Board is "hear
no evil, see no evil, do no evil." They don't know about it
until -- in the past, they never even saw a copy of it, so
we're gaining on it in that regard, and I've seen a copy of
it, but it's all eY post facto, all after the fact.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, what I
hope to see is that we would establish this new Library
G ~_-ns
81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
Advisory Board, and it would be staffed with people who care
about literacy, but also care about good business practices.
And the next budget period, before this time next year, they
would have participated with -- and that includes a
Councilman and a Commissioner -- participated in the budget
process and would have a budget ready for us and the City
Council that they can defend and rationalize.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm with you. It's
an improvement; there's no question about it. I'm not beinq
critical. It is an improvement in that regard. I'm just
saying, historically, it's never happened that way.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No, you're right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And Article 10 takes
care of until we get all of the events -- everything worked
out, some of the sticking points, 'r_ause that keeps the old
budget in place until a new one is drafted -- approved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I guess, you
know, my biggest concern is not -- it's -- you can't look at
this document without looking at the budget with it.
Because I need -- I mean, you just have got -- I've got to
see how they're dividing things out, based on working with
the City on some other contracts recently as to how they're
proportioning their costs, what they're considering
operational costs. And until -- you know, I really think it
almost has to be -- has to be a part of it.
a-iz-os
82
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
]1
12
13
19
15
1F
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. EMERSON: May I provide some insight on
discussed between Ilse Bailey and myself, was that it was
our understanding, through direct and indirect
communications, that the County was going to budget 300,000,
period, despite the fact that the City wanted 400-something,
and this contract was created basically blind to this year's
budget. Now, it does allow specifically for next year, that
your library board, which theoretically would have a
councilman and a commissioner on it, would provide input to
the budget itself. And that budget that's -- that's
prepared in cooperation with the Library Director is what
would be presented to City Council and the Commissioners
Court. So, you will have direct input into next year's
library budget based on this contract, but where you are
right now is you're kind of stuck under the old contract
that was originally formulated in 1991.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So -- so there's no
reason to approve this budget. I mean, I guess we could do
this after October 1st, 'cause then it's for the next year.
MR. EMERSON: You mean this contract?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It has nothing to do with
the current -- with the operation of the 'OS-'OF year. It
-- I mean, with the -- I guess the development of the '06 --
the budget for '05-'06, but it doesn't go into how the
-_~-ns
83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
'06-'07 budget will be put together.
MR. EMERSON: The contract does. The old one
doesn't allow for that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR.. EMERSON: But you're either approving
this money under the old contract or a new contract.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it seems --
MR. EMERSON: I don't think you can just
gratuitously give the City $300,000 without having some kind
of formal arrangement.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We11, I agree with
that. In fact, if we don't have a contract, I don't think
we should make our first monthly payment. I may also say
that in my conversations with the Interim City Manager, our
approach to saying the library may be too expensive and we
need to analyze those costs may be taking place. He told me
he was considering recommending to the City Council that
they set a $600,000 budget, and the Library Manager find a
way to meet that budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I'm -- I'm a
little confused now as to this contract doesn't -- is not
for the '05-'06 budget?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
MR. EMERSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is.
-i.-os
84
1
....
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
"'~ 13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: As proposed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I've never seen that
budget to start with. And based on the way I read it, it's
contradictory, because it talks about us paying half of the
operational costs, and yet we've -- because we had to move
on with our budget process, and we haven't received anything
from the City, we just blindly budgeted 300,000. Well,
that's potentially contrary, and I don't see how we can
enter into a contract that says we're going to pay half of
the operational costs when we don't even know what the
operational costs are, and our budget's set.
MR. EMERSON: The only other -- other than
what I just told you, the only discussion we had to that
effect was I specifically asked, if -- if the Commissioners
Court approves 300,000, and their operational budget is
signifi~~antly more than that, is the City going to
immediately start screaming "breach of contract"? And for
that, I was told no, that they were -- they were under the
understanding that the County was going to budget 300,000
maximum, period, and similar to what Commissioner Nicholson
just told you, that the City was going to budget accordingly
and basically tell the library to deal with it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, why don't we add a
paragraph in here that says that? That says that for the
'05-'06 year, the County's budgeting this, you know,
a-1_ US
85
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
300,000. The City's going to budget whatever they're goinq
to budget. And then, for future years, it's handled under
the, you know, terms of Paragraphs 8 and 9.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It does seem in
Paragraph 9, Rex, the second -- the second sentence in that
paragraph, is -- is in conflict with the first sentence.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes.
MR. EMERSON: Are you talking about in
Paragraph 9?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. The first
sentence says, We agree the proposed operational expenses
for the upcoming fiscal year shall be evenly divided between
the parties, and this shall determine the amount of each
party's budget and so forth. Then it goes on to say, second
sentence, The County's approved budgeted amount shall be
paid by Commissioners Court -- blab, blab, blab -- in 12
equal installments.
MR. EMERSON: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We could approve less
than -- than what is half of the budget. As a matter of
fact, we probably have.
MR. EMERSON: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or are about to.
Which suggests to me that sentence two is in conflict with
the intent of the first sentence.
-1~-u
86
1
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: All sentence two designates is
how you're going to pay your budgeted amount. Instead of
one lump sum, you're paying in one-twelfth each month.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, it's the first
sentence.
MR. EMERSON: The first sentence?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The problem.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But it's the first
three, four, five, six words, "the County's approved
budgeted amount." That's what gets me. The County's
approved budgeted amount. Then it tells how we're going to
pay it. That can be in conflict with the first, because
it's not -- may not be 50 percent of what's been sent to us.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The problem is,
Commissioner, the second sentence is my language, and the
first sentence was superimposed on it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The first sentence
determines -- the first sentence determines how much is
budgeted by each.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: And that shall determine the
amount budgeted.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I like the
direction we're going. I'm not trying to throw a roadblock
~~-i~-as
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
~~
up; I'm just trying to get the language to work.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No, it's not a
simple contract. Again, I saw it this morning, same time
you did, and I want to go back and address the -- the issue
of not having a budget. The fact that we haven't seen a
budget is not an indication of negligence on the part of the
County. We -- as you recall, we offered to follow the
contract where -- where a County Commissioner gets together
with the Library Director and develop the budget. They said
no, we're not going to follow the contract. That was
followed up by the Library Board trying to be more proactive
and help out, writing a letter to the City and saying the
City and the County need to get together as required by the
contract, and we'd like to participate in that and help you
out. That was rejected also. So, both us and the Library
Board have made a good effort, going back over several
months, to try to develop a contract that we could -- I mean
a budget that we could look at and understand.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I look at it --
until the City is willing to give us a copy of the budget,
we're -- we won't fund it. We can't blindly just put money
out when we don't have a contract and when we don't have a
budget. I mean --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, we can approve
a number in our budget, but just not make any payments until
~ i. -~,s
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
88
we get this thing set.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And we've done that based
on the, you know, best information we had, which was none.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, but the first
sentence in Number 9, though, won't -- won't fly --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- with that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's why I said --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my problem.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- we need a new
paragraph for this year, and then this is a contract for
future budget years.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How can do you that?
How can you plug in that one year number and then remove it
after the --
MR. EMERSON: We can add a qualifying
paragraph for this year only.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, that's what we
want to do.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is the
termination clause of the existing contract? Current one
that we're operating under.
MR. EMERSON: Let me find it in here. It
shall continue automatically for each successive year unless
either party gives notice in writing by June lst of any year
y iz o=
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
89
that they want to terminate the agreement at the end of the
then current year or renegotiate said contract.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that notice was
given, correct? Yeah, notice was given by the Court.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They quarrel with
the form that we gave it a little bit, but it was given path
forward on this.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a question on
that, before we get -- Rex says we haven't given notice.
MR. EMERSON: I don't think the letter that
was sent would hold up if it went to litigation for notice.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: For what reason?
MR. EMERSON: It's not specific. Let me find
it in here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did you write the
letter?
MR. EMERSON: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whoa, whoa, whoa.
Which letter are we talking about, the one you sent?
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think it's a
letter from Judge Tinley.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 'Cause we sent one --
we sent one two years ago, and then another one.
MR. EMERSON: Well, if you want to get into
y-~_-n~,
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
technical legal terms, the problem you get into, and we
haggled over this for a while, is we went back and forth on
letters that went out two years ago, the material breach of
contract with Ron Patterson's letter, but didn't -- they
basically have an argument that we waived it when we turned
right around and funded the agreement again.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- I mean, I --
you know, I'm frustrated that the City doesn't -- is not --
I see no attempt from the City trying to work with the
County. We want to fund a library. We want to have a
library, but the City won't give us the basic information
that we require under Open Records requests, which I think
is a ridiculous way for us to have to operate with the City,
is to file Open Records requests, and I don't want to go
down that road. I mean, I don't know -- I don't understand
why we're having a problem on this contract. We want to
fund it. We want input. We want to know what's going on.
We want to have a contract. We want a library, but the City
says no, basically. I'm just -- I don't understand.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: How -- let's talk
about path forward. I don't see that we need to take any
action on this contract we negotiated. Further action is
needed to clean up this contract to bring it up to being
acceptable to us, and to have a budget that we can look at
in connection with approving it. So, it seems like the path
o i? o=
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
91
forward is more negotiations.	
	COMMISSIONER	LETZ: And the c	opy -- and, Rex,
is there	a formal way that	we should request	the budget?
Maybe we	haven't done that	properly up till	now.
	MR.. EMERSON:	I think you've	requested it
every way	short of standing	on your head.	
	COMMISSIONER	LETZ: I thought	we had. I just
wanted to	make sure that we	've requested the	budget
properly.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner, have you
seen their budget, the City's library budget?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No. At a meeting of
the Library Advisory Board maybe three months ago, the --
after they refused to follow the contract and meet with us,
the Library Director handed out a work -- a stack of 45 or
50 pages of worksheets that the City hadn't seen. It wasn't
complete, didn't have any rationalization or anything. So,
that's what I've seen. Doesn't have any totals on it. I
can't tell you without going through 50 pages of information
and total it up how much money we're --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Was there a
cost-of-living adjustment and things of that nature included
in it?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So you have not seen a
9-iz-ns
92
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
l5
16
l7
18
19
20
21
??
23
2q
25
budget.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: General Schellhase,
how in the world does the taxpaying public keep from getting
outraged over this? I mean, how does --
GENERAL SCHELLHASE: Commissioner, why are
you asking me?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS; 'Cause you live next
door to the library.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Because you live next
door to the library. (Laughter.) Thank you, Bill.
JUDGE TINLEY: Does any member of the Court
have anything further to offer in connection with Item 16?
Let's move to Item 17. Consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action on the Animal Control Services Contract
with the City of Kerrville.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is kinder and
gentler?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Must be.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Marginally. I've
got at least -- and, again, I saw this the same time you did
this morning, so I haven't studied this as carefully as I'd
like to. I immediately see two issues. Under Paragraph 6,
I can't tell what the administrative costs are in that
number. I think the $136,000 and change is the 60 percent.
9-i~-o~
93
1
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l2
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~3
24
25
MR. EMERSON: They're built in.
MS. MITCHELL: They're built in.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They're built into
that?
MR.. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay, that satisfies
that. And then under -- I think it goes under Part 5, the
contract -- draft contract we submitted for approval had at
least two things in it that are no longer in here. One is
that we're not going to pick up -- provide dead animal
service in the city of Kerrville, and the second thing is it
excluded some provisions of their animal control order --
they don't call it an order. What do they call it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ordinance.
COMMISSIONER NIr_HOLSON: Ordinance that we
were not going to administer.
MR. EMERSON: The exclusions are still there.
It's just they've changed all their ordinances, and it's in
l.b. Instead of stating numbers, it says except chickens,
pigeons, livestock, and rabbits, which is the same animals
that were in the exclusions.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Where is it? Onder
S.b.?
MR. EMERSON: l.b., front page.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Did you tell me they
-~~ us
94
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1 L
13
14
15
l6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~~
L J
approved a new ordinance?
MR. EMERSON: That's what I was told, is that
their new ordinance was Chapter 18, and that was the
corresponding reference.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. That refers
to a document that's been in existence for a year or so and
hasn't been approved. There's a whole lot in there that
we're not going to -- to enforce. They got pooper-scooper
laws; they got all kinds of issues that we're not -- not
staffed to enforce, so I don't think this -- I don't think
Part 1 is sufficient, either. It doesn't include the dead
animal issue.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How many dead animals do
we pick up in the city?
MS. ROMAP~: I didn't bring that with me,
but --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, just a ballpark.
MS. ROMAN: We don't pick up any in the
county, all -- any and all dead animals. I can't give you
the exact amount; I didn't bring that with me. Rex, I faxed
that to you the other day. Do you, by any chance, have that
with you?
MR. EMERSON: I think it's 365.
MS. ROMAN; It was in the 300's.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are those mostly big
y-ZZ-~,J
95
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1L
13
14
15
l6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~5
animals or little animals?
MS. ROMAN: Large animals, deer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- you know, I
really don't have a problem, unless -- Janie may have a
problem with picking up dogs, cats, small animals, but I
think there's another issue when you get into wild animals.
It's one thing picking up pets, another thing picking up
wild animals. Pets, I can see that as being a part of this
department, but this is not a wildlife department. It's a
-- it's -- basically, it's a --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So you want language
that says "domestic animals"?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, if they took it
out altogether, I would say -- to me, that makes a lot more
sense. I mean, I just think that --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, with
me it's a matter -- I agree with you on the big animals; we
don't need to be lifting or handling those, bur it's a
matter of how you operate more efficiently out in the
county. We got Road and Bridge, we got TexDOT out there
doing these kind of things. In the city, they've got the
Road Department that ~s around the city all the time. It's
a burden -- time-consuming burden on us to go out and look
for these, to even pick up these small animals, but I'm good
to go either way.
-__-ns
96
1
2
3
4
5
F
7
8
9
10
11
12
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, it's not that big
of an issue if it's just a little bit of domestic animals.
I notice -- I still have the safety and the health concern,
some of those concerns, but also, you know, the City seems
to pretty much go along with the rest of our modifications.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Are you okay with
that, Janie?
	MS. ROMAN: That's fine. Because the
majority of	domestic animals are -- are pets, what we
normally do	is we normally -- if they're the property
owner's pet,	then it's their responsibility to dispose of
the animal,	not ours.
	COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that the city's
ordinance, o	r is that just our policy? Or is it --
	MS. ROMAN: That's been the -- the agreement
between the	-- I mean, it's not in the ordinance, but that's
an agreement	that we all came to years ago.
	COMMISSIONER LETZ: We probably ought to --
that ought t	o be addressed. I mean --
	MS. ROMAN; That --
	COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- in the contract, ii
seems to me.
MS. ROMAN: I just don't see picking up dead
animals as a Rabies and Animal Control issue. Our main
priority is rabies and animal control. A dead animal does
-ice-o,
97
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1U
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
<1
?3
29
25
not fall under that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's true, too.
MR. EMERSON: Just need your guidance on what
the limits are going to be.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Say it again?
MR. EMERSON: Need to know, I mean, if we're
not picking up any dead animals. Are we not picking up
nondomesticated dead animals?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd like to know what
we have done in the past.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Roman?
MS. ROMAN: I did speak with Ilse Friday, as
a matter of fact, and she told me that that was not an
issue; that they had someone that would -- that was willing
to pick up dead animals, period.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And that was my
understanding also.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Then take it out
of the contract. I think Janie's right that that's not a
function -- it's not a purpose of the Animal Control
Lepartment. I think that's very valid.
MS. ROMAN: Believe it or not, it does take
up a lot of our time. A whole lot of our time.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're stretched

98
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
]2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~3
29
25
pretty thin on time. We got a lot of territory to cover.
And it seems that, as a matter of efficiency, they could
handle this issue easier, less expensively than we can, and
down the road we won't have to be adding trucks and staff to
take care of them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It seems that the only
issue other than that, then, is the -- the ordinance --
well, we don't -- even if they -- I guess you need to find
out if Chapter 18 on l.b., if that's been approved by
Council. But we're not required to do anything else under
that. I mean --
MR. EMERSON: It's easy enough to go back in
and take the specific language out of the old ordinance and
just put that in there as exclusions. And it's -- I don't
mean this bad, but it's their problem to relate it to the
correct ordinance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess what I'm saying
is that if they have adopted a new ordinance and their
intent is that we enforce that ordinance, we need to know
what that ordinance says. Because iE there's things that --
as Commissioner Nicholson is saying, that we need to do,
that's not contemplated under our agreement. So if they're
referring to -- you know, but I think that that needs to be
understood by both sides, as to what ordinance --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah.
9-1~' U5
99
1
7
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
]4
]5
16
17
18
19
20
L1
L L
~3
~4
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- they've approved.
COMMISSIONER. NICHOLSON: Okay. So we're sort
of in the same place on this contract with the other one.
We need further discussions and negotiations.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we're a lot closer on
this one. This is basically --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah, just got the
one issue.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- just one issue.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, the scope of our
servLCes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Scope of services,
exactly.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other member of the Court
have anything further to offer on that particular item?
Let's move to Item 19, consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action to authorize an expenditure not to exceed
$5,000 for professional services to meet the requirements of
Texas Water Development Board for a Regional Wastewater
Facilities Planning Grant for community of Center Point.
Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. As
I noted in my agenda item statement to the Court, our first
application for T.W.D.B. was not funded because,
essentially, they ran out of funds in the small communities
-~_ os
100
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Gc
~3
24
25
and the hardship programs, and the Texas Legislature has not
refunded those two programs or given authorization to fund
those two programs for the next biennium. Where that puts
us is applying for revolving funds. And, basically, the
sense of all that's included in the -- in the backup
material, but the one that's entitled Page 1 of 4, Texas --
T.W.D.B. Regional Water Supply and Wastewater Facilities
Planning Program, that's in the back part of your handout,
and the Water Development Board does offer grants to
political subdivisions of the state for studies and analyses
to evaluate and determine the most feasible alternatives to
meet regional water supply and wastewater facility needs.
What we have before us is a need to go
forward with preliminary planning and -- and design,
engineering and design and all that stuff, a lot of which
was done for us in the original application by Tetra Tech on
a pro bono basis. As I noted to you in the statement, the
amount of the work that was done had a value of about
$7,200. The rules have changed, however, for the
application, and it now requires that we have an engineer's
seal, and my understanding from most engineers, you do not
get that seal without -- without some support -- financial
support for them to do that. And a lot of other things are
included in it, and I'm asking the Court to help me move
this forward for a second application to the T.W.D.B.
-iz-us
101
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
L 1
G 2
23
29
25
Last month, about the third week of last
month, I met with representatives of the T.W.D.B., and they
encouraged us to come back with this application, 'cause
this is the beginning of the new biennium and they have
plenty of funding, and they like the project. And the
amount of dollars that we're asking for in terms of a grant
is about $62,000, and in terms of their budget and their
ability to fund, that's a piece of cake. But I have to get
certain things done. The County doesn't have the ability to
do these things; it requires an engineer's seal, et cetera,
et cetera, et cetera. And that's what this is all about,
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is -- is this the only
step that we will -- that we participate in financially?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is the only step
at this juncture. This gets our application before us.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So that we know what
the scope of the project is and what the overall costs are
going to be. I'm not as}:ing for anything beyond what's
necessary to get the application back to T.W.D.B.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's $5,000
budgeting?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Up to $5,000.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do we have the
~-~^-os
102
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
?3
24
25
budget?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is -- it is --
there are funds available in 10-401-486 under Professional
Services -- I believe Nondepartmental, Tommy? And in the
current budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is a -- this comes
under our current budget?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, comes under
the current budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have -- as it turns
out, the former project manager for Region J has just moved
into this department and is going to be handling this, and
he -- he sent me an e-mail, unsolicited by me, that he is
looking forward to working with us on this project.
COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: I met with him --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's a good
indication.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He was one of the
three people we met with, and he was very forthcoming that
he thought it was a good project.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would move approval
of the budget request for expenditure of up to $5,000 for a
design of preliminary engineering to satisfy the
requirements of a second application to T.W. D.B. for funding
a-iz n~,
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
1L
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
FO
21
22
23
29
25
103
for the Center Point wastewater project.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JODGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item, the expenditure not to exceed
$5,000. Any 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.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: We'11 move to Item 20,
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to appoint a
board of directors for oversight of the Kerr County Juvenile
Detention Facility, as provided for in Human Resources Code,
Title 3, Facilities and Services for Children, Chapter 63,
Residential Facilities for Certain Delinquent Children,
Paragraph 63.004, Eoard of Trustees, Single-County Facility.
Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As the Court
remembers, in a special session with the Juvenile Probation
Board, we had agreed that our operation of that facility
would come under Title 3, Chapter r3 of the Texas Human
Resources Code. That code, as I have provided to you,
requires certain actions by Commissioners Court, one of
~-lz-~;s
104
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
which is to appoint a board of trustees. That board of
trustees can be either the Commissioners Court, minimum of
five, or it can be, I think, a combination of Commissioners
Court and persons from the general electorate, or it could
be up to nine people, all of whom are not members of
Commissioners Court. My personal preference would be for it
to be a board either solely of Commissioners Court, or
adding some members of the general public to assist us in
that action in governance required. The board makes rules
to govern, and it holds special meetings. It's subject to
the provisions of the Open Records and Open Meetings Act.
The board of trustees is responsible for the administration
of the facility. The board of trustees shall develop
policies consistent with the rules and regulations and
standards of the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission. The
board may appoint advisory committees if it determines to do
that. The board shall appoint the e..ecutive director of the
facility, and et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Has the County Attorney
looked at all this?
MR. EMERSON: From -- I'm sorry, I came in
halfway through. From what perspective?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, from the standpoint
of is this the -- is this what we need to do, or is this an
option for us to do that we need to get to?

1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~5
105
MR. EMERSON: To appoint the trustees?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, appoint the trustees
and --
MR. EMERSON: I think you need the trustees.
The question is whether it's just purely Commissioners
Court, Commissioners Court and community, or a combination
thereof.
COMMISSIONER BALDWLN: Personally, I think we
need to appoint the Commissioners Court, and let's watch
this thing as it unfolds for a few months before we make any
kind of change at all.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree totally. I think
that for this first year, we definitely -- maybe beyond
that, but I think it's --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I'm cool with
that. I think that's fine.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only question is, and I
don't -- I don't see how it would be a conflict. Is there
any conflict, Judge, that you see serving on this board and
the Juvenile Board, potentially? I mean, it doesn't seem
that there's a conflict, but --
JUDGE TINLEY: Certainly, with regard to the
policies and procedures, I know there's a requirement that
the Juvenile Board approve those, and presumably that'll be
the same one coming before the Court.
-12-'.i5
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
l7
18
19
20
~1
22
23
24
25
106
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Seems to me it's good to
have a person on bcth. 7 mean, to me, it's a positive to
have --
JUDGE TINLEY: I haven't really -- I haven't
really -- don't really have a definitive answer one way or
the other, commissioner.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Obviously --
JUDGE TINLEY: I can't, off the top of my
head, think of something that would pose a conflict, but
that's not to say -- I haven't tried to think through every
reasonable contingency or alternative.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think that the --
the law wouldn't allow for something that would put you in
conflicting roles, 'cause, obviously, the law requires you
to be on the other board, so I would think that they have
thought that through.
DODGE TINLEY: I'm not willing to engage in
that assumption, Commissioner, but you may.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It would be your --
be your sense, Mr. County Attorney, that if the Court
approves naming itself as the board of trustees, five
members, if, at some later date, we decided we wanted to add
to that board, that would be an appropriate action?
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. I would move
-1~-u°,
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
107
that Commissioners Court approve the members of the Court as
the board of trustees for the Juvenile Probation Facility,
as provided in Chapter 63.004 under Title 3, Human Resources
Code of the State of Texas.
JUDGE TINLEY: You said probation; did you
mean detention?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Detention.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second.
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: The motion does carry. Let's
move, if we might, to Item 21, consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action to adopt a Policy and Procedure Manual
for the F:err County Juvenile Detention Facility as provided
in Human Resources Code, Title 3, Facility and Services for
Children, Chapter E3, Residential Facilities for Certain
Delinquent Children, in Paragraph 53.009.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I spared the county
the expense and you the trouble of reading this voluminous
e-~z-us
1
_ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
l4
15
16
17
18
19
2p
21
22
23
` 24
25
108
document, which is entitled "Kerr County Policy and
Procedure for the Kerr County Juvenile Facility." It is in
place. It is a document that was put together, and I
believe blessed by the Juvenile Probation Board; has already
been. Under the Human Resources Code that we're operating
under now, we are required Lo have in place a -- a policy
and procedure manual. For the Court's benefit, this is a
living document. It can be changed, amended, added to,
taken away from at any time the board of trustees, you know,
deems -- with the Facility Administrator, deems it
appropriate to do so, forwarded and approved to -- sent up
to the Juvenile Probation Board for its consideration, and
then on to the T. J.P.C. for its consideration as well.
So, what we're doing now is just putting in
place -- with the Court's approval, we're putting in place
what exists, the policies and procedures that exist, so we
can continue to operate under the policies and procedures.
If we determine at a later time that amendments are
necessary by reason of circumstances or changes in T.J.P.C.
procedures or	whatever, whatever, we	can	amend it
accordingly.	So, I would move that	Kerr	County
Commissioners Court adopt the existing policy and procedure
manual for the operation of the Kerr County Juvenile
Facility.
COMMISSIOPIER 41ICHOLSON: Second.
5-iz-ue
109
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you want to read
the --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- of the agenda item.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not right now.
JUDGE TINLEY; Adoption of the existing
policies and procedures for the Kerr County Juvenile
Facility. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER. NICHOLSON: Question.
Appreciate your not asking me to read that, Commissioner
Williams. Do you have a feel for whether or not that's a --
pretty much of a template policy guide that would be rather
1Lke the other 51 in the state of Texas?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think the Judge
could better handle that question, Commissioner.
JUDGE TINLEY: Basically, these have been
adopted by the Juvenile Board. There's an annual
requirement that the Juvenile Board approve the policies and
procedures in place for the facility. And your specific
question, I would answer yes; it's very much a template,
because you've got quite a large number of standards and
policies and procedures and regulations that have been
issued by the Juvenile Probation Commission that control
these various policies, so it's basically a takeoff on -- to
y-i^ r,s
110
1
2
3
4
5
F
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
incorporate all of those.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is an annual --
an annual event?
JUDGE TINLEY: The Juvenile Board is required
by statute to annually approve the policies and procedures
of the facility.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And now we're
required to, being --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The board of
trustees.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- trustees?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe we would be
required annually, or at the very least, any amendments to
it. What's your thoughts, Mr. County Attorney?
MR. EMERSON: It doesn't specify a time
frame, but I would presume annually would be in the best
interests of the facility.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And this particular
document that's laying before us is the present document
that you all have approved for this coming year?
JUDGE TINLEY: No, it was approved last
January. It is in place now. It's the current version
that's in place right now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And when --
e-i~-nti
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2 G
23
24
25
111
when is that annual time up?
JUDGE TINLEY: January.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, we --
JUDGE TINLEY: So, come next January, it will
be before the Juvenile Board again for consideration and
approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And it will be back
before Commissioners Court, acting as a Board of Trustees?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: First.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If there's a change to
it, it would have to come before us, too.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or recommended change.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But if there's not a
change, will it come before this Court?
JUDGE TINLEY: That's a question of the
County Attorney, whether or not -- I'm not sure Chapter 63
requires that -- that there be an annual approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm just trying to
figure out what we're doing in the loop here. I rani quite
see that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, clearly, that if
there's a change to it, we have to get back in the loop at
that point. If there's not a change, there wouldn't be.
y-iz-u~
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
And we may want to recommend a change, in which case, then
it goes back up to the Juvenile Board. So --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then did I hear
you say that after it's approved here in the county, then it
goes to Austin for their sign-off?
JUDGE TINLEY: Any changes in the policies
and procedures must be submitted to T.J.P.C. for approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 63.009 says, "The
board of trustees shall develop policies consistent with the
rules, regulations, and standards of T.J.P.C." Doesn't say
it has to be done every year. Just says you have to put it
in place.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think what I'm
hearing is we're doing it now for the first time; we're
approving the existing document. First time it's got our
approval. And then if there -- in the future, if any
changes are proposed, that would have to come back to us for
reapproval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my
understanding, Commissioner.
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.
n 12-P~5
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
29
25
113
(NO response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll
move to Item 22, consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action to reaffirm Kerr County's support of the development
of the Hill Country Shooting Sports Complex, and the funding
to provide -- to be provided by the Kerrville Economic
Improvement Corporation and Texas Parks and Wildlife. I put
this on the agenda in conjunction with Commissioner
Williams. The Kerrville Economic Development Foundation, as
some of you may be aware, last week issued -- unanimously
issued -- their board did -- a statement of support for that
shooting sports center operation out there, and the E.I.C.
funding which was approved by the Kerrville Economic
Improvement Corporation, after E.I.C. approved their funding
and sent the matter forward to City Council for the
Council's -- City Council's consideration of the contract to
handle the administration of that funding, it was announced
that Texas Parks and Wildlife had approved a grant for -- my
recollection, as well as Commissioner Williams', is $300,000
of that project. And Commissioner Williams and I believe
that, based upon some things that have occurred during the
interim period of time since the initial approval of that
$200,000 by the Kerrville Economic Improvement Corporation,
that it would be appropriate to come back to this Court for
a reaffirmation of the support that this Court was required
9-1L US
114
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
]0
11
12
_. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~' 3
~° 2 4
25
to give in order for the shooting complex -- shooting center
to even ma}:e the application to the Economic Improvement
Corporation. And that's why it's before you here today.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The comment I'd make is
that I still support the facility, though it's in my
precinct, and there are a lot of concerns by neighbors of
that facility of how the impact's going to be. And I don't
want to withdraw my support that I've given, because I think
it's good for the community, but before I'm going to go
further, I want to see -- and I've talked to Jack Burch
about it; I know what his plans are. I'd like to see a plan
before us in writing as to what the -- exactly that
facility's going to be used for. There's a lot of -- and I
think it's more for the pubic. There's a lot of -- I hear
a lot of things from -- and phone calls to me that are not
what Mr. Burch has told me, though these people tell me
that's what they've been told by various people,
who-knows-who, and I'd like to know really what the -- see a
written plan, which we've never really -- there's no reason
for us to get it up till now, as to what the scope of the
facility is. I know that they're going to have some Olympic
trials there, which I think is very good for our community.
But I've also heard that he wants -- you know, this is not
from him, but from others; that his long-range plans are
putting in a Thunder Ranch-type operation, which I'm not so
9-12-OS
115
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~4
~5
sure that is -- it's not what I had envisioned earlier.
He's told me it's not his immediate plans to do anything
like that, but I really would like to see a -- because of
the amount of focus. And I will say, it's not one or two
people that have complained about the facility; it is a
large number. And I think that it's appropriate to see
exactly, in writinq, what the scope of that facility
long-term is.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've gotten -- I had
conversations about this more than I would have expected. I
thought it was a -- when we voted for it back in July, I
thought it was a slam-dunk. It brings good business into
Kerr County, and it's economic development. I've gor the
same concerns you just expressed that are coming from --
from constituents -- some of them are your constituents and
some of them are mine -- and about noise and about
pollution. And I've also got -- heard considerable
expressed about using public funds for a private enterprise.
Now, that -- using E.I.C. money is not my business; I know
that. But state and city funds that are being derived from
taxpayer dollars are being put into a -- a for-profit
operation. Those two things together makes this issue
trouble me a little bit.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, the -- the
Economic Improvement Corporation, which authorized the
~ - L ~ - , ~
116
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1z
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
,~
23
24
25
expenditure of $ 00,000, one hundred in each of two years,
this year and the next year -- those are 4B sales tax
dollars which are specifically designated for economic
improvement or economic enhancement, and that's what the
statement of support -- reaffirmation of statement of
support is predicated on, is the economic development that
this project -- the positive economic impact that this
project has for Y.err County and the City of Kerrville. I've
not heard what you might have heard Commissioner, in terms
of the replication of a Thunder Ranch.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think that's
true. That's not the reason for my questions here. I just
-- Mr. Burch told me that's not his plan, and I believe him.
I just think that -- you know, I just -- you know,
originally this came before us, and I still think it's a
good idea. It's good for the community; it's good for the
youth of Kerr County to have a shooting place, but it is
not -- there are -- there is a down side to it that I didn't
envision early on. And I think that I -- you know, that
it's appropriate for the Court to know, at least, what the
-- in writing, what the plan for that facility is, which
we've never been given. And I just think that -- you know,
I just think that it's a -- what I would like to see. And
I -- unless there's something that really jumps out at me, I
would still be in support of it.
y-i_ os
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
23
24
25
117
But -- you know, and I've talked to -- like I
say, I've talked to Mr. Burch numerous times and offered to
help in any way I can. I've also talked to numerous
residents in the area and offered to help them, and I think
-- and I have encouraged the two sides to get together, you
know, to accommodate each other as much as possible. That
may not be possible, and that's not my business here or
there. But I think the -- you know, that it is -- if we're
going to, you know, go back out again and give support, I'd
like to know what we're supporting, and right now I don't
really know in writing what the plan for the facility is,
other than what I've verbally talked with Mr. Burch about.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff, you had a comment?
SHERIFF HIEP,HOLZER: Only comment -- I can't
Ranch-type deal, whether it be open to the public. A lot of
the Thunder Ranch-type talk, I know, probably comes from
agencies such as ours or the police department, 'cause both
our agencies use that range out there for yearly
qualifications and needing every-siY-month qualifications.
And a lot of the talk about that is the Thunder Ranch-type
concept for qualifying law enforcement officers, okay? Not
necessarily for -- open to the public. They had some setups
out at Thunder Ranch which made qualifications a lot better
and training a lot better for law enforcement officers.
e ~_-ns
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
Now, both the County and the City do pay for qualifications
or qualifying officers out there for the biannual training
that we have, but I haven't heard of a public-type Thunder
Ranch like they had. But when people talk about Thunder
Ranch, especially in our area, they talk about the type of
facility they had for law enforcement.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just think -- I mean, I
think that the -- obviously, there has to be a written plan;
you can't get grants without written plans.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was going to ask,
would you like to see what was presented to Texas Parks and
Wildlife?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd just like to know the
plan for the facility, you know, what -- what the scope is.
I mean, it's -- I hear a lot, but I don't know the -- I
don't know what the plan is. I've never asked Mr. Burch for
it; I'm sure he would give it to me. I had no idea this was
going to be put on the agenda, that we give our support for
it. All of a sudden, it's back on the agenda again, and,
you know, because of the concern in the community on both
sides, you know, I think that we should have, you know,
what -- know what we're supporting.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I -- as I read
the agenda here, it's to reaffirm our support of the
development of the shooting sports complex. Now, what he
y ,=_n=
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
119
has in mind to do out there long-range I have no idea, but
the way I understand it, what I'm supporting is moving
toward this Olympic issue, this shooting -- the contest; the
actual shooting contest, and I'm in support of that. I -- I
think it's a little bit goofy here that we're asking to
support the Kerrville E.I.C. issue, but I, as a
Commissioner, am in support of what I know is going on out
there. Now, if he moves toward a Thunder Ranch, I don't
care. That's his business. That's his property. And I --
then it becomes a civil issue, I think, between whoever.
So, as far as I'm concerned, I'm willing to vote for this
agenda item today. Vote for it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, the Olympic
thinq, from what Mr. Burch has told me, that's, like, once
every two years, you know, and that's a small part of his
plan.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm telling you what I
think I'm voting on here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: General Schellhase,
do you have any comments about the --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The library.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- the -- not the
library. (Laughter.) About some of the environmental
issues that have been raised?
9-i~-us
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
120
GENERAL SCHELLHASE: As you know, this was
brought before the U.G.R.A. Board in July. We appointed a
special committee to take the hearings and listen to the
input, of which I chaired that committee. We did do that.
The issue initiated as noise. It came before the board as a
pollution issue, because the noise issue didn't go anywhere.
The people in Whiskey Ranch Valley tried to get the people
south of I-10 involved from a pollution standpoint, because
that's where the water flow goes. It turns out we had a
benchmark in there. In March, water tests were made on both
of the outflow areas from the rifle range. There was no
detectible lead or arsenic in the water. We made additional
tests in early September/late August, again found no
traceable amounts of lead or arsenic, and took the position
that U.G.R.A. has no opposition to what's going on, found no
pollution. However, we'll continue to monitor the water
from both of these outlets over the next several years, four
times a year, to determine if there's any pollution
generated. We were told by Mr. Burch that he is installing
settlement ponds from the outflow of his operation leading
into both of these waterways to collect any sediment that
might generate a deterioration in the lead -- separation of
lead from arsenic that might settle into the sediment, so I
think he's doing his due diligence in that area. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any questions?
~-i,-us
121
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~?
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I offer it as a
motion, that we reaffirm our support.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
DODGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second.
I assume to reaffirm in accordance with the statement of
support attached?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I have a motion and a
second. Any questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only comment I'll make is
that -- you know, is that I'm being forced to vote against
something that I'm ir. favor of because I don't have the
information that I've requested.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I'd like to
just offer that we should invite Mr. Burch here, and provide
us with -- provide us with whatever it was that he provided
to the E.I.C and to the Texas Parks and Wildlife so that the
Court knows exar_tly what it's all about.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
comments? All in Eavor of the motion, signify by raising
your right. hand.
(Commissioners Baldwin and Williams voted in
favor of the motion.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(Commissioners Letz and Nicholson voted
against the motion.)
a-;--~s
1~2
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Z3
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Vote's two to two. The Chair
votes in favor of the motion. Let's go to Item 23, unless
you want to come back to that item. What's the Court's
preference? Try and hit 23 or 24 before noon?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, 23 -- I mean, you
can call it. I mean, I think the next one's probably -- we
may need to go into executive session.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go ahead and take up
Item 23, consider discuss and take appropriate action on
Fiscal Year 2005-Oh budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This, I mean, is a
preliminary comment. My preference probably would be to
come back and do this after lunch, but I put it on the
agenda because we had a marathon meeting last week when we
went through a lot of things. We were trying to get the
budget dollars to a point that we could settle on a tax
rate, which I think we did, but there's things that we left
undetermined. We have requests from a number of departments
about change -- merit changes and -- you know, that are
fairly plain, or in salary. There are some -- I haven't
gone back through all of my notes, but there may be some
other equipment and things left a little bit unanswered, and
I just thought that we ought to -- you know, I just put this
on the agenda so that we could, as much as anything, get on
the -- find out what the Court's plan is for finalizing a
-ia-us
123
1
2
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
~~
23
29
25
budget so we don't end up in a situation, like we have in
other years, when something comes to be expended and we
didn't adjust the budget. That's the only reason I put it
on the agenda. I really -- if we want to go through it now,
we can. I'd really rather wait till after lunch. We're
going to be back; I think we can do it at 1:30.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I do too. I'd like
to wait.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And on that subject,
I'd like to ask Tommy, do we have a current budget summary?
MR. TUMLINSON: No. The -- the Treasurer is
working on the position schedule, and we can't finalize that
worksheet until that's done.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The last one I have
doesn't include some of these changes that we made in that
marathon session; it doesn't have a proposed tax increase in
it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it had a bigger
tax increase than the one -- that had a two -- Tommy, the
one you have has a 2 percent increase?
JUDGE TINLEY: 2-cent.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 2-cent. We approved a
one and three-quarter.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
9- 1 2- U 5
124
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
<0
21
22
23
24
,~
LJ
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One question I have is
-- and I'd like to have this number so I could chew on it
with my cheeseburger. The figure -- the shortfall figure
before we started eliminating positions and raising taxes,
what was that figure? Does anybody -- surely there was
something. There was a piece of paper, much like what --
like that piece of paper right there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There probably is one,
but it will be the one before this one. This one has a
2-cent tax increase. This is --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; I understand. But it
would be -- I would thinY it would be one of those
documents.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know that there
is one that had everything in it before.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't think there
is.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it didn't have the
COLA's in there, for example. It wouldn't have had the
COLA's.
COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: Didn't have juvenile.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't have one that_
has --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Really accurate
number?
[A - i _ - U ~
1~5
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
l0
11
12
13
14
l5
16
17
t8
19
20
21
G <.
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- an accurate number.
JUDGE TINLEY: No, I don't think so.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just as a general
observation, while you're having your cheeseburger, trying
to make some sense of what's happened over the past few
weeks, what I see is that we -- we got a substantial amount
of new revenue, tax revenue and non-tax revenue, from -- and
most of it coming from higher appraisals. And -- and we
lost 140,000 due to enacting the senior and disabled thing,
and 190,000 is not anywhere near the volume of the new tax
dollars that we had coming in. And even with that, even
with a lot of new tax dollars, more new tax revenue, we
couldn't -- and working on the cost side of it pretty
vigorously, we couldn't -- couldn't make a budget work
without a tax increase. That's just -- it's hard for me to
understand that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the issue -- you
have to go back to the Juvenile Detention Facility. I mean,
the -- it's -- what drove this was our reserves getting
lower than I was comfortable, and that goes back to the --
largely to that facility. I mean, that's -- you know, the
-- the tax freeze and other things, I mean, those are
certainly -- when you start getting into a bind, every penny
starts counting a whole ]ot more than when you have a 30 --
y t~ os
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
b'
9
10
11
l2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
<5
126
have a 30 percent reserve. You can be a lot more, you know,
lax. And -- which isn't good, but it's just what happens.
When you get down to below a 20 percent reserve situation
like we found ourselves, you have to start looking at every
penny really closely, and that's where I think we found
ourselves this year. And I think, you know, the -- you
know, I'm sure we all read things in the paper that have
been critical of some of our decisions. I think the one I
take the most offense to is the fact there's some
implication by some of them that we didn't care about the
employees.
And that bothers me, because I think that
anyone that comes to this Court ever in that area, that's
the furthest thing from the truth. This Court, more than
any court that I've been on, has fought for the employees.
We've given them raises across the board where we can,
COLA's that are -- that are real COLA's, as opposed to
picking an arbitrary 2 percent number that didn't usually
meet. We`ve tried to eliminate the lower pay grades where
possible and push people up. I think we've done that
county-wide. We certainly have done it in the Sheriff's
Department. We've done it -- which has been a tremendous
improvement; there's no more turnover of deputies. And 1
think -- so I think that -- you know, that this Court has
done a great job in looking after the employees. And
9-12-OS
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
~5
that -- and doing that is also part of the reason we got
into trouble. We establ5shed a longevity policy and other
policies that we've stuck by our guns to help existing
employees. Yes, it meant that this year we had to do a
little bit of trimming, but -- and that's unfortunate.
Certainly, I don't think any of us enjoy saying that we have
to lay off a person in this department or that department.
But I think, overall, this Court has done a great job
that -- I'm very happy to be part of looking after our
employees and helping them on the financial side.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I want to comment
again about what almost seems to be a gender warfare going
on out in the community about the over-65 tax freeze. I'm
reminded again that almost nine out of ten of the voters
that voted in that referendum said yes, we want a tax freeze
for seniors and disabled. And nine out of ten, there's qot
to be old people and young people voting for it, poor people
and rich people. So, I wonder when -- where -- at what
point in a representative government you say we're going to
ignore the will of nine out of -- of nine out of ten people
and not do what they want us to do. And the other thing I
want to say about it, it will -- it will become more money,
but the $140,000 is not -- not a small amount in our budget,
but it's not the main source of our budget ills this year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to comment on
g-iz-ns
12R
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that. You remember we had a Commissioners Court meeting
that called -- to call the election. And we had that, and
it was almost like a hearing kind of a thing.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Lot of people showed
up.
COMMISSIONER BALDWiN: Lot of people showed
up. Not one person here under E5 to speak against that
thing. Not one.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWtN: And we go to the
people to vote, and very, very few people under 65 voted on
the issue. So, to answer your question, at what point, as a
representative government, do we say no? In hindsight, if I
had the opportunity again, I would vote no.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I know you would.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That would never, ever
reach the -- the public to be able to vote on that thing, in
my opinion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- you know,
on that point, I thin Y. -- you know, personally, we need to
quit talking about it. Whar_'s done is done. I think that
the -- you know, and we did it. Sut I think that the -- the
argument that I had back at that time that I would put
forward -- I know nine out of t_en voted for it, but wha*_
they voted for was to put it to aii election. They didn't
_l_~,t
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
vote for the freeze. And that's the point that I tried to
raise, and I think it should have been a county-wide
election. I think it likely would have passed; I don't
think it would have changed the results, but I think it
would have given -- put it on the forefront more than it
was. And -- you know, but we did it. We got to move on.
We've made, you know, unfortunately, bad decisions at times,
and we just move forward. I think that's one of them that,
whether you think it's bad or not, it's done. Let's go.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Only comment I would
have, and I didn't even deal with that, is I think you're
right; we've stretched that one about as far -- rubber
band's about to break. But the reality is, in past budgets,
it wasn't -- our past budgets have not been balanced against
the ad valorem and the non-tax revenue. They've been
balanced knowing that our reserves were sufficient to create
a balanced budget for purposes of moving forward in our nest
fiscal year, and that our -- historically, there is always
sufficient within the reserves not used up in the budget
year, and it comes out at the end of the year the same or a
greater amount of reserves. What happened this past year
was that the Juvenile Detention Facility, which was not
included in our budget, provided us with about 800,000 or
more dollars worth of red ink that we had not budgeted for,
and that is the difference really in terms of where we were
y-iz ~s
130
1
7
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
last year with a tax rate -- with no tax increase into the
rate -- no increase into the rate, as opposed to this year.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Why don't we be in
recess till 1:30.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Two people with their
hand up.
MR. TOMLINSON: I was just going to make a
comment that we do need to have -- there needs to be a
public hearing on the budget, and it needs to be the same
day as the -- as you adopt the tax rate. So, to move
backwards 10 days from the right day, we need to finalize
the proposed --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Didn't we set those
dates?
JUDGE TINLEY: No, that was on the tax rate.
We got time to do that.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: We got time to do that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only comment T'd
like to make, because -- and the reason I'd like to make
this now is I do have a funeral I have to go to at 2:00 that
I may not get back. I just would like for the Court --
after we went back and after the decisions last week, in
trying to work a patrol schedule and that, I didn't mind
giving up the three, or even the one other one that's on
9- 1 ~ U S
131
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
??
23
24
25
military, nonfunding, but I would truly like the Court to
reconsider the two other patrol deputies when you finalize
this budget. I don't like going down to any shifts that I
could end up with only three working, and if two of those
positions were back, I wouldn't have to do that. And I
would just like -- that would still cut four employees out
of i_he Sheriff's Office, but I would just like the Court to
reconsider that so we can effectively cover the county.
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll be in recess --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'll try to be here, but
I may not be.
JUDGE TINLEY: We`ll be in recess till 1:30.
(Recess taken from 11:58 a.m. to 1:34 p.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order
to our Commissioners Court meeting of this date. We were in
recess for lunch to resume at 1:30. It's a bit past that
now. We're back on Item 23, consider and discuss and take
appropriate action on Fiscal Year 2005-06 budget. I have a
number of items earmarked to go through, and --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, before you get
into that, can I say something right quick?
JUDGE TINLEY: Surely.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There was -- don't
call me Shirley. There was several items that we had
y .~ us
132
1
0
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
misworded and couldn't take care of today, and it's -- and
some folks' business hinges on that, and I was wondering if
we could call a new meeting with these particular agenda
items on it either Friday, or we're in here Monday anyway.
Monday would be a good time to do it. Just put together a
rnini Commissioners Court meeting and take care of those
items so these people can do their business and go on down
the road with their life.
JUDGE TINLEY: Right after we broke for
lunch, I asked the County Attorney if it would be
inappropriate to -- since we're going to be here, for
example, next Monday, to have an agenda of the Court -- a
special agenda of the Court itself, and the response I got
was that as long as it's properly posted 72 hours, he saw
nothing to prevent that. If there's a posting before
whatever time Friday you want the meeting, before that time
tomorrow, it could occur on Friday. I'm scheduled to be out
at a county judge's meeting this Friday.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's just do it
Monday.
JODGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're ~n here at
10 o'clock -- scheduled in here at 10:00 on something; I
can't remember what it is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tax rate.
a z-..s
133
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
L 2
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Tar rate.
COPIMISSIONEP. BALDWIN: Tax rate, yeah. And
so we can come in a few minutes before and --
JUDGE TINLEY: Start at 9 o'clock and start
putting these items on, and there may be some additional
items that we have to take a look at.
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN; I'm sure there is.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Appreciate the
Commissioner bringing it up, but I think the Court ought to
be aware, there are some inconsistencies in what we did
today in terms of some of the -- a couple of the stylings.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: True.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We approved a couple
that the styling was not totally to the County Attorney's
satisfaction, and we rejected one that we'd already
conducted -- or didn't reject it; we just didn't take any
action on one where we'd already conducted a public hearing
and knew what that was all about, so we were a little
inconsistent.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The reason we
slipped those in is to check and see if Rex was going to
sleep through the meeting or be awake.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, I see. And he
did.
v-i~-us
134
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2~
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we got him.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He did. Well, Don,
do you want to say anything?
MR. EICHLER: Just tell me what day.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon?
MR. EICHLER: Just tell me what day y'all are
going to --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Next Monday.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 9 o'clock.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It'll be on that
agenda, styled correctly.
MR. EICHLER: All right. And the notice in
the paper will be worded correctly?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Don't need a notice;
we already went through the public hearing.
MR. EICHLER: Okay. All right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let me start hitting, if
I might, some of these individual items. We had a -- the
need for a reader-printer under the County Clerk's budget.
That's going to be on Page 5 and 6. Ms. Pieper, is that
under 569, Operating Equipment? Is that included there?
MS. PIEPER: I believe it was under 570, the
Capital Outlay, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY:
31 August, it's not included
On the run that I have dated
Were those figures included
9-i~-us
135
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Z4
25
in -- or taken into account? I think it would have been a
total of $3,400. It was $250 a month for 12 months, plus a
$400 maintenance factor, and that would have made $3,400.
Was that included in the -- in the run that was made?
MR. TGMLINSUN: I don't remember. I'm not
sure. I remember that discussion, but I don't --
COMMISSIONER N7CHOLSON: What are we doing
here?
MR. TOMLINSON: I thought we were going to
have a lease on that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't think it is.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Are we going back
through the budget to audit it to see that the changes we
made were included?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that's part of what
we're going to do, yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What are you looking
at?
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm looking at a run dated 31
August that the Auditor provided to me, and I've got several
pages tabbed that I think there are outstanding issues on.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do we have that same
run? Or is that --
9-ia ~;~
136
1
G
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONEP, LETZ; Is it that run right
there that Commissioner Baldwin has? Is that --
JUDGE TINLEY: What's the date in the upper
right-hand corner?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; August 9th.
JUDGE TINLEY: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't have that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's all right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: August 9th.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I got 18 July in my
book.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 1 have no problem -- I
mean, that's the most recent run, and I -- that needs to be
in the budget.
MS'. PIEPER: That kind of worries me. Now
I'm worried, what else is not going to be in there that I'm
expecting?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, the reader-printer that
we talked about, I think the consensus was during the
workshop that we need to --
MS. PIEPER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- add that in. Okay, I just
wanted to confirm that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What was the cost of
that again?
y-iz os
137
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
c 2
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: 3,400. That includes a
maintenance factor of 400 on it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree, it ought to
be in there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And based -- one comment
in general. I think every elected official needs to look at
their budget after Tommy runs his next run and make sure
that things are in there. I mean, that's just a notice to
everyone that a bunch of them were in the audit.
JUDGE TINLEY: The Nondepartmental, and
that's on -- well, if y'all don't have the run, it doesn't
make any difference what page it's on, does it?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Tab 2.
JUDGE TINLEY: Nondepartmental, it was
brought to my attention that 9-1-1 postage was not included
in that. Ms. Mitchell mentioned that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct. And also some
office supplies, additional, I think, for the last mailout
were not included.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Why are we paying
for 9-1-1 postage?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is the final mailout
for addressing that we approved -- or discussed in -- I
guess we approved to do it about a month ago, just to go to
i;-os
1
2
4
5
6
7
R
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
_^1
22
23
24
25
138
the final -- final time that the County's going to try to
get people to get a 9-1-1 address.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; There's still several
hundred -- or a couple hundred folks out there that have not
responded at all, and we're going to take one more shot at
it. But I don't --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's a good thing
to do.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; I don't remember the
cost.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: lt's -- I believe that
$723.80 is the amount. I have $225 for envelopes and $500
for postage. $725.
JODCE TINLEY: So, you need about $750 --
additional $750 in the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: $500 for postage and $25C
in office supplies.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Not a lot of money,
but there may be a principle involved. We have the duty or
the authority to name roads. We don't assign addresses.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe that we have
the authority -- the duty and responsibility for addressing,
not 9-1-1,
MS. PIEPER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: House numbers?
5-iz-ns
139
1
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; Yeah. That's the
County's -- that's the County's authority. We've given it
to 9-1-1 and they've done it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay, I'm wrong.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, postage is going
to be added. How much?
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN; $750.
JUDGE TINLEY: Total of $500 postage, $250
office supplies.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Information Technology,
the -- the title cf the specialist -- the manager needs to
have his employee deleted out of there, But in doing so,
the consensus of the Court seemed to be that -- that he
needed to be brought up to the 42, 42,5 range. That was the
understanding Commissioner Nicholson and I had when we gave
the info to the Auditor for the run.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I thLnk he should be
paid more like other senior -- not other; he should be paid
more like senior elected officials. That's going up to
around 45 or so, thousand. So, stepping him up to 41 or 42,
something like that, would at least be directionally
correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the current
salary?
s;-iz-vs
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
l~
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
140
COMMISSIONER NICHGLSON: 35,181 plus COLA.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, 36,181 included
the COLA from the past budget year.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, I agree with you.
I think his performance merits consideration. So, what's
the number?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 42.
COMMISSIONER. NICHOLSON: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: 42 even? Or whatever's in
that range for -- do we even want to --
MR. TOMLINSON: The note that I have that I
received at the last meeting was 42,5, and that's in the
budget,
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's in there?
JUDGE TINLEY: That's already there?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How does that work
out in the grid, Barbara?
MR. TOMLINSON: He's not.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He's not.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not in the grid.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not in the grid.
MS. NEMEC: When you give us these amounts,
are we supposed to add the cost-of-living? Or that's just

141
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
the new amount, and that includes --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's the new --
my feeling is this is the new amount; that's the amount for
this year.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Put 92,5 in.
DODGE TINLEY: Okay. Let me -- I think we
added him in the summary. Let me make sure that we've got
the two different categories of Court-appointed criminal and
Court-appointed civil in both the 216th and 198th.
MR. TOMLINSON: They're in there.
JUDGE TINLEY: They're in there. They're in
the summary, I know.
MR. TOMLINSON: They're in the budget.
DODGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: On those two, we
also reduced the amount for special trials?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's in there, too.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's in the current
summary?
DODGE TINLEY: Okay. I think the special
trials was reduced all the way down to -- what, 10,000 in
the 198th?
MR. TOMLINSON: 10,000.
JUDGE TINLEY: And 50 in the 216th?
i_ ~~s
142
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes.
MR. TOMLINSON: No.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think it was opposite
that.
MR. TOMLINSON: It's 10 in the 216th, and I
think we left the 198th like it was.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Fifty, because it was
felt that the Seard trial had a -- not much of a likelihood
to come to -- correct?
MS. UECKER: We should know pretty soon,
because Feaselman's been reset for the first week in
November, I think.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, we can't wait
till then. We have to do something now.
MS. UECKER: No, but what I'm saying is we
should know early in the budget year whether or not that's
goinq to be sufficient or not.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Or too much.
MS. UECKEP.: Or too much, yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm worried about
the too much.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's keep rolling through
here.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got a question
y-~~-us
193
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
on 216th District Attorney. Probably pass that on, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Page 22 on mine.
Tab 8. It appears to be an increase from a hundred -- I
mean from 93,000 to 134, and I don't remember getting an
answer why that's increased so much.
MR. TOMLINSON: I know one reason. He's
added -- he's added an assistant prosecutor, another
assistant prosecutor.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Wrong direction.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's not totally all our
cost, though. That -- his -- his office expenses are
partially paid by the State, and partially paid -- well,
they're paid by all four counties in the district.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We -- here we are
trying to squeeze every penny out of this budget we can, and
we've qot him going up $40,000 a year in our costs.
MR. TOMLINSON: What he told me was that in
an effort to try to get some cases over with, and in a
relatively real time, that he needed another prosecutor.
That's what he did. He added --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, you could add --
MR. TOMLINSON: We got problems with people
in the jail, and that was his answer.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You could add 25
9-iz-os
144
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
attorneys, but if you don't have judges sitting here hearing
them, it doesn't do anything.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, he -- I mean, he's got
as many cases in Kendall County as he does here. That's one
of the problems; he's got so many -- four counties. He has
a heavy case load.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's our percentage
share in a situation like that?
MR. TOMLINSON: It's based on the '90 -- I
mean on the 2000 population.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ours is major.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ours is a majority.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
MR. TOMLINSON: About 45 percent.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 45 percent? Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, about that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'd be inclined to
say no.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think it -- I
would agree with Commissioner Nicholson that it's hard to
approve them when we're forcing staff reductions elsewhere,
and I don't know the reason. I mean, I know the reasoning;
you just told it. But, I mean, I think that there's -- just
hiring a prosecutor isn't going to solve the problem of
getting things through the courts. I agree with what
y iz o~
145
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Commissioner Baldwin said on that. So, unless there's a
real plan to move cases through the courts, it doesn't make
a lot of sense just to hire another prosecutor.
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't think it's fair to
say no without hearing from him.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, that's what I'm
saying; I agree.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, we're here.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, he hasn't been asked to
come, either, that I know of.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: He could have sent a
piece of paper in and explained it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Would you go get the big book,
the big thick one that's on the table there? If you'd bring
that to me, I think we'll see what the backup is. That
would show that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, are we at 198th
or 216th?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 216th.
JUDGE TINLEY: 216th, yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 198th isn't increased --
I mean, not substantially. A couple thousand.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought Junction was
198th.
JUDGE TINLEY: It is.
-1'_ OS
146
1
2
3
4
5
H
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TOMLINSON: It is.
MS. UECKER: It is. 216th is Gillespie,
Kendall, Kerr, and Bandera.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. You said
Kendall; you didn't say Kimball. I'm sorry, I misunderstood
you.
JUDGE TINLEY: They've got lots of seizures
going on up in Kimble County.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Little different story
over there.
JUDGE TINLEY: While we're waiting on that,
on Health and Emergency Services, I looked at those numbers
on the EMS contract, and that's $200,157. That includes our
First Responder and Medical Director and all those other --
have you got that correction made? Okay.
MS. MITCHELL: Is this the one you're talking
about? It's got backup in there behind Tab 8.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The facilities lease,
medical director, and First Responders, correct?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But that doesn't
include first -- the First Responder budget.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ten, four.
~-1~-os
147
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
I9
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It does?
JUDGE TINLEY: It's about $10,400, and that's
part of it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: It's all part of that $200,000
figure.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not -- not just the
director's salary, but his little breathing apparatuses and
those things that we pay for?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Equipment.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think there's any
equipment in there. The funding request that we received
was broken out as operational, medir_al director, lease
expense, half of an ambulance, and First Responder. All of
the First Responder was charged to us, and that was 10,400
and change, as I recall.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: All of that was rolled into
the $200,157.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is that, under
County-Sponsored?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Probably.
JUDGE TINLEY: This isn't going to work,
~, iz ns
148
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
because that doesn't have that large increase in it. I need
that great big book.
MS. MITCHELL: You've got two other ones in
there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 198th.
JUDGE TINLEY: No wonder.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Here it is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, this thing. Is
this in here?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think so.
(Discussion off the record.)
MS. MITCHELL: These are the only two left.
JUDGE TINLEY: You got it. Bingo. It shows
a -- almost a doubling of the assistants, and it shows a --
an additional secretary, it looks like, from what I'm
looking at here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where are we now,
Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: 216th D.A.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 216th.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We pay 41 percent of this
budget.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're not hiring
another prosecutor? We're hiring another clerk?
s iz ~~s
199
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~2
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Both.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Both.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Hiring a
prosecutor --
JUDGE TINLEY: And a clerk, yes. Now, the --
the V.A.W.A. grant was just approved, Violence Against Women
Act, and we qot notification of that -- actually, last week
we got formal notification, as I recall. That is a $70,000
grant. If I'm not mistaken, that is a Kerr County grant
alone.
MR. EMERSON: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: And has nothing to do with the
other counties. Those cases could be cases in the 216th,
the 198th, or Kerr County Court at Law. That prosecutor --
and it was specifically primarily for the purpose of hiring
an additional prosecutor. Do you remember the exact number,
Rex? 70,000 is what comes to my mind.
MR. EMERSON: 70,000-something. I don't
remember the exact number.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, there -- he's
got an '04-'OS estimated actual of 230,000. He's requesting
360,000, so about a 60 percent increase, total budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you saying, Judge,
that the -- the Kerr County portion of that amount can come
~-iz-as
150
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
out of this grant?
JUDGE TINLEY: The additional prosecutor, I
know, can come out of it. And I don't know about the
support services. That will be dependent upon the actual
requirements of the grant.
MR. EMERSON: It depends on what Mr. Curry
wants to use that additional prosecutor for. The grant
covers Kerr County only, not the other three counties of his
office. And it's also limited to the scope of the cases
that the Judge discussed. So, if he's wanting a prosecutor
for all of his cases, that won't work.
MS. UECKER: Would y'all like for me to call
him, ask him to come over if he's in his office?
JUDGE TINLEY: I think it may be appropriate
to hear from him, sounds like.
MS. UECKER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I need to
clarify the First Responder issue, please. What I'm hearing
you say is you rolled the -- all the First Responder stuff
is rolled into the -- the new city EMS contract.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The City rolled it into
it, we didn't.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The summary sheet they
gave us, they had the Eirst Responder --
e-i~-vs
151
1
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: But we have a separate
budget for First Responder that we do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that money -- doesn't
that money go to the City's employee?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; No, I think -- where's
the Auditor's office? I think that on the -- on this First
Responders' county budget is -- you know, the flashlights,
the fibrillators and those kind of things that we purchase,
he purchases it and then sends -- sends the bill in to your
office. So, that's a separate thing.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, that's been true in the
past, but I understood that -- that this -- that the City
included all the expenses associated with the First
Responders into one amount.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Here's what --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- was requested of
us. County subsidy for Medical Director, 9,040; County
subsidy for EMS lease, 6,000; County subsidy for -- for
operations, 136,000; County subsidy for equipment
replacement, County First Responder program, 10,780.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I guess it -- let's
see. We pay -- we pay half -- a percentage of his salary.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, it's included in that
9 1~-05
152
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1ti
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
list.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah 9,040 each for
the Medical Directors' salary.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not Medical Director.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: First Responder salary.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: First Responder
Director.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What was the number
you're looking at?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 5,540 bucks.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there a salary item
there?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not for -- there's
nothing on this thing I'm looking at for 5,000.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, it's oxygen
refills, portable radio, that kind of stuff that we purchase
every year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I think
Commissioner Baldwin's right; I think that equipment's in a
different item.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is a county --
county budget.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm looking at two different
entries on ours dealing with First Responders. One is
v-iz-us
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Q
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
153
Coordinator, and that estimated -- the amount budgeted for
this year was 9,675. That may be where the 10,7 comes from.
Then there's a separate item, First Responders Expenses, and
we budgeted just a little over $3,000 last year.
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN; I think that is
correct, and it's gone to 5,5 -- 5,500.
JUDGE TINLEY: And that 5,500 I don't think
is in this budget. It's not rolled up into this. Now,
the -- this 10,780 is, 'cause it's within the 200,157.
COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, what I'm hearing from you
is we need to add 5,500.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $5,540 is the -- is
the budget that he turned in.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, 5,540.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that Tab 25 we
were looking at a while ago?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, the very
last -- it's the very last --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 5,540?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's it.
DODGE TINLEY: The adjustment on the
Environmental Health employees, that adjustment's been made?
Okay. The Animal Control kennel worker was added if we went
q-iz-n~,
154
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~5
to five?
MR. TOMLINSON: I took -- I took one out.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Well, I think we should
add the -- Animal Control should stay unchanged, 'cause it
appears the City's going to execute the contract, so the
employment out there should remain unchanged.
COMMISSIONER WTLLIAMS: That's what we
indicated; three employees if no contract, five if there was
a renewal of the contract. Is that right?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or close to renewal.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, what we know now
is that_ there's a high, high chance we're going to have the
same five people, so we just need to --
JUDGE TINLEY: My point -- my point was, the
kennel worker never got into the recommended line for some
reason, and there's only four on the run I'm looking at.
Did that increase to five? 'Cause I know when I -- when we
were computing the number, their 60 percent --
MR. TOMLINSON: Whatever the Court has is
what the Treasurer put on the -- on the position schedule.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Barbara, how many do we
have?
MR. TOMLINSON: My note said to take two out
of Animal Control.
9 __-u5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
L 2
23
24
25
155
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Riqht. And that's right,
but we're adding those two back in today.
COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: And you'll have to
round the revenue back into non-tax, the value of the
contract.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Animal Control contract.
Which is --
JUDGE TINLEY: 136.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- 136, whatever it is.
MS. UECEER: Judge? Mr. Curry is in a Grand
Jury; he said he'll be down as soon as he finished his
witness.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're showing, Ms. Nemec,
five?
MS. NEMEC: Five.
JUDGE TINLEY: In Animal Control, a total of
five?
MS. NEMEC: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Then we have that --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's what it
should be.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. County-sponsored. You
have Water Development included?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, I do.
JUDGE TINLEY': The KCAD contract, based upon
9-i?_n,
156
1
L
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
~,
23
24
25
the proposed numbers that they gave us? Okay. City fire
contract, are you showing that at 125? I don't suppose
anybody else has heard anything from them?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nope.
JUDGE TINLEY: One can always hope.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Try and be funny.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can reduce it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Library is 300. Okay.
Eliminated the additional deputy from Courthouse Security.
Okay. Page 58, I think. Agriculture Extension Service.
The run I have, I assume, has been adjusted in the Agent's
Salaries. What about the part-time salary? Is that still
in there? Both of those are out?
MR. TOMLINSON: Both of them are out.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd like to look back at
the -- the agent position.
DODGE TINLEY: Glad you brought that up,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that it's -- you
know, it's one that we pay -- we get a big bang for our buck
with that funding, being -- whatever, 30 percent of that
salary. I'd like to add that back in.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What -- do we have a
number?
-1~-us
157
1
3
4
5
6
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Ll
2~
23
29
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it would put it back up
to 31,370.
COMMISSIONER N7CHOLSON: That's about --
COMMISSIONEP, WILLIAMS: Current 15,860 up
to --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's about $16,000
more than it was last year, because the position's been
vacant.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My note says the
Stare pays 70 percent of that and the County pays 30 percent
of that; is that correct?
JUDGE TINLEY: And the other aspect of that
is we do not pay any of the insurance costs on that
employee. State picks that up. So, from an economic
standpoint, that position maY.es a whole lot more sense.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm fine with it.
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN; I'd like to see the
person be put back in, but not the secretary.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree, not the
secretary.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The short person or
whatever that is.
JUDGE TINLEY: FCS position is what you're
talking about, Family and Consumer Science.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
~~-1~-iis
158
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
~l
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: I took it out of the last
one.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon? What, Tommy?
MR. TOMLINSON: I said I just took it out
this morning.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I guess you have to
plug it back in.
JUDGE TINLEY: Those are the primary ones
that I -- I just wanted to touch base on. Others may have
some others.
COMMISSIONER. NICHOLSON: I've got some more.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; Well, we've got the
D.A, here now.
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, yeah. Mr. Curry?
MR. CURRY: Yes, sir. I'm sorry, I was right
in the middle of something.
JUDGE TINLEY: The Commissioners had some
questions about the pretty wide variance between your last
year's budget and your proposed budget for the coming year.
It appears as though the big items are that you're hopeful
of bringinq on a new assistant prosecutor, as well as a new
secretary; is that correct?
MR. CURRY: Yes, sir, that would be
~~-iz-us
159
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
I2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
substantial.
JUDGE TINLEY; Were you -- were you hoping to
use the V.A.W.A. grant funds for that purpose?
MR. CURRY: No. Actually, at the time I
based that, I didn't think we were necessarily going to get
the assistant; that was all done beforehand, so it was not
based on that. It was just a straight assistant situation.
We -- our docket has just blossomed, as the Court's probably
aware. We -- we're just really inundated, and that was the
purpose of that.
COMMISSIONEP, LETZ; Is there a way to use
thar_ grant to pay -- can you organize your office such that
that person would handle those particular cases?
MR. CURRY: I don't believe so. The -- we've
kind of split that up. It's really just a -- a fairly
limited use person for that. In fact, I'm -- we haven't met
yet, actually had our little final meeting on it, but I
suspect a large portion of that's going to be in the family
violence area for the -- a lot of the misdemeanor cases and
some felonies, but divided between the two courts, so it's
not going to be a -- you know, a real major -- of great
major assistance that we would really need. If it was one
person for one court, it would be, but that's not the way
it's going to be lined up. And it's for the limited types
of cases, which will keep that person busy, but it's not
3-1~'-GS
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
the -- the problem that we're really having.
JUDGE TINLEY: That money's going to be
expended generally for prosecutors and whatever other
purposes are authorized in both the 198th and 216th, only in
Kerr County?
MR. CURRY: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: As well as the County
Attorney's office?
MR. CURRY: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: In Kerr County. So, that
V.A.W.A. money of some 70,000, you were -- you have a better
handle on that figure? My -- my recollection, it was
70,000.
MR.. CURRY: It's about /1. 'That's what 1
understood, 71,000.
JUDGE TINLEY: That 70,000 will be applied
against the collective Kerr County budgets of those three
offices, will it not?
MR. CURRY: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there -- I mean,
Bruce, I'm sure you're aware of the tight situation we're
in.
MR. CURRY: I was reading that with concern.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there -- I mean, is
there any way that we could, in your -- reduce that? Or
9 ~_ i i 5
161
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
15
17
18
19
~0
21
23
24
25
reduce the clerical assistant or, I mean, anything we can do
to --
MR. CURRY: Yeah -- yes. I mean, actually,
you know, we -- if we didn't increase that, I've been
operating with basically the staff for 20 years. We've
never really increased since the task force came in, and I
think that was '97, if I recall. And so, you know, we could
continue to do it. We're just really getting engulfed.
It's just one of those problems. You know, could I do a
part-time person? I don't know. I've never had much luck
with part-time, to be honest. But, you know, that's a
possibility. Could our current secretarial staff handle
that? I should bring Ms. Brown up here to talk with you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. No. (Laughter.)
MR. CURRY: It might be --
JUDGE TINLEY: The threat will be enough to
hold off most of these folks.
MR. CURRY: The economics of it, I don't -- I
don't know. I mean, I -- but that was -- that's the
problem.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: In my mind, it's -- I
understand the need, but it's a bad year --
MR. CURRY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- to implement it. And
if we could defer it a year, you know, or go part-time, that

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
ZO
21
22
23
24
25
162
certainly would be -- make it easier, in my mind.
MR. CURRY: I'd certainly be willing to do
either of those -- I mean, try them. 'Cause I understand
the situation you're in. I -- I'm hopeful that this would
eliminate a lot of our problems, and whether it's this year
or ner.t year or partially, I -- be helpful in any event.
But --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I -- you know, I
mean, you know your business certainly a lot better than I
do as to whether it's better to defer it or try part-time.
I mean, I don't know if it's -- if part-time doesn't work
very well, no reason to throw money away, but if you think
you can, you know, improve your backlog --
MR. CURRY: I -- well, to be honest with you,
I'd really rather defer it between those two, 'cause I --
that's just a personal thing. I've never had -- you know,
you qet some person in, and that might work great, and then
if it didn't, you know, it might create more problems than
it solves, but that's it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Bruce, I'm not sure I
understand what the grant's going to be used for. Will you
explain that a little?
MR. CURRY: The V.A.W.A. grant?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
MR. CURRY: That's going to be for violence
-~~-os
163
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
against women. And I -- I foresee it to be primarily these
cases where a spouse beats up another spouse, that type of
family violence-type cases. It could include sexual assault
cases, but most of those involve children, basically, and as
I understand it, that grant will not cover it. I wish we
could utilize it; that would make a difference, but we
can't, so it's going to be mostly family violence.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, on the -- on the
family violence type, it will pay for a prosecutor? Is that
what you're telling me?
MR. CURRY: The grant?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes.
MR. CURRY: Yes. Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. LORRY: There is no support staff, as I
understand it, for that, but the -- it's a prosecutor. And
I believe there's -- office space has been provided, as I
understand --
MR. EMERSON: Correct.
MR. CURRY: -- for the prosecutor in the
County Attorney's office, who will be -- if I can twist his
arm, he'll be administering it. So -- but that's what it's
limited to, those types of cases. Fairly -- fairly limited.
Probably a little more flexibility, actually, in the County
Attorney's office, but I'm not certain. But from our
a-iz us
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
169
standpoint in the district court, that's what it would be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there a way that -- I
don't know -- I'm having a hard time understanding how this
grant is going to -- one, I guess it's not directly related
to the budget, but say you have a -- you have a case that
would qualify under the grant. Do you just bill the hours
out of a current attorney, or do you have to hire a separate
attorney? How does that -- what -- you or Rex; I don't know
who to ask the question to. I mean, can you take one of
your current attorneys and say they could bill a certain --
be reimbursed a certain amount of time -- dollars, I guess?
MR. CURRY: I would think it would just be
this new attorney that would be -- I don't think there's a
billinq situation involved. It's just a -- this person
would --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, a new attorney's
hired that will work through all --
MR. EMERSON: The application on the grant
was for a new position, and that's -- with that
understanding, that's what the grant was approved on. And
there were -- if I'm not mistaken, and I'm shooting off the
top of my head, between sexual assaults and assault, family
violence type cases, I think there were about 130 cases last
year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the grant will
-iz os
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~,
23
24
25
155
indirectly help, but not directly, 'cause you can't -- it
doesn't replace what you're asking for, but indirectly may
help.
MR.. CURRY: It -- yeah, there is a certain
amount of that. And we're just hoping the three prosecutors
can get together and coordinate and cooperate, and I don't
think that'll be a problem, but it will be diluted somewhat.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think you can designate
prosecutors, but not require them to be full-time. And I
would recommend that you not specify someone as 100 percent,
because the first time you do that and you have a need --
you've got someone out of the office temporarily and you
need to have that prosecutor fill in for somebody, you're
immediately out of compliance with your grant. And what you
may want to do is consider a partial percentage designation
of several prosecutors, maybe somewhat in proportion to
those kind of cases that they already handle now, and you've
got yourself a good deal more wiggle room when it comes to
staying in compliance with the grant that way. I think
Mr. Emerson is noted as project director, so I think it's
going to flow through his office, if -- if I understand this
correctly. But it's for the benefit of the prosecution of
all cases in Kerr County of this type. The amount -- the
total amount that we're getting from the grant is just under
$71,000.
9-1z-n5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
166
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But what -- I mean, what
I'm hearing, though, is that Bruce is willing to defer the
additional staff on his department until next year, we can
look at it. And I know there's a Sheriff back there that
would like to get some of this money, if we're freeing up --
MR. CURRY: He left before I could --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, he left?
JUDGE TINLEY: I think when Mr. Curry
mentioned that Ms. Brown may be over, he decided to leave.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I may go with him.
I've been through that one before.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you for your
help, Mr. Curry. We need help.
JUDGE TINLEY: Would -- would Ms. Brown --
would Ms. Brown give us the same answer with regard to the
additional staff?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Don't ask the question.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You're selling
beyond the close.
JUDGE TINLEY: I see. I've got myself
protected; at least I inquired.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay, let's go on.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, Bruce.
MR. CURRY: Thank you.
9-12-OS
167
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got a couple
issues.
DODGE TINLEY: Go.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. I wanted
to talk just a minute about the Juvenile Detention Facility.
Our -- we set the budget based on the number of kids that
we're going to have out there, and what I'd like to see is,
at our next meeting, I'd like to see our Facility Director
come to this Commissioners Court and set some goals of what
she intends to do as far as numbers out there. I'd like to
see her set goals for every quarter, every three months, to
-- I don't know what numbers it might be; that would be her
choice. But how many kids that she would have within three
months and how many kids are going to be out there within
six months, et cetera and so forth. And I'd like to see not
only the number that she sets, but a couple of little items
under that, how she's going to achieve that number. As an
example, you know, I'm going to have "X" amount of kids out
there in 90 days, and I want to put together a flyer of some
sort that lists all of our things that we do at this
facility and mail it to every person that -- every county or
every -- whoever she deals with, probation officers or
whoever, those kinds of things. A letter from the
Commissioners Court saying, "We welcome you; please come
9-12-OS
168
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
]0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in," whatever -- whatever those little steps that it would
take to achieve that number. And that's -- and I'm not --
I'm not trying to ding her or cause her any more trouble.
That would help her. Setting goals is always a good -- a
good thing to do, and I -- I'd like to see that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree with that. I
think it's also good -- I think we need to keep that
facility in front of us all year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think I -- when you
said quarterly, I recommend we do it_ with her -- currently,
every other month she's coming before us now. I'd rather do
it every other month.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would prefer it
every other month, but I didn't want to put a load on
anybody.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I just think we
incorporate it into her every-other-month report, 2 o'clock
report to us.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just
COMMISSIONEF. WILLIAMS: Well, I agree. I
think we need to hear that in terms of goal setting or
reporting and the status where we are, and what's in the
conduit and how we're going to get them in. I agree. I
think right now she's at about 73 percent, and we were
i_-~,5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
169
talking about budgeting at 80 percent, so she's getting kind
of close.
JUDGE TINLEY: By setting benchmarks -- by
her setting benchmarks, we are also able to see where we
stand in relation to those benchmarks.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think that's very critical.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: True.
DODGE TINLEY: Because if -- if we're
materially short of those benchmarks, we may want to be
considering what action we need to take.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly, I agree.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's exactly what I
was thinking about. You know, if a basketball team gets in
the dressing room and goes out on the court to play ball and
there's no goals out there, the game's not played. So, you
know, you got to set goals and you got to have goals, and I
think in county government, this is a perfect place to apply
that. And it would be healthy for her, as well as us being
able to keep an eye on it as well. So --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with you.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, you're the
liaison, so you're going to fix that?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I thought I was
u-1= os
170
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
1G
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
liaison by court order. I haven't talked to the woman in a
long, long time, so I think Mr. Williams can be able to
handle that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We don't need to --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll work it out.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I wanted to talk about
the Sheriff's deputies, where we are in that. How many did
we lay off, and is there any way to put anything back on?
Or did we do that this morning?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe there's two
actually gone. One was an unfilled position.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So there's actually
just one?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two -- no, there's
actually two.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, the unfilled --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I don't mean
unfilled; I mean the military leave one. The military leave
one, we're not -- it's there, but we're not funding that
one. So, there's two --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- deputies -- patrol
deputies.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You had four, gave us
one back with the cut in laptop computers, so we were two
3-i_ us
171
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
patrol short.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But no one's leaving
the payroll?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: One is -- one position
-- no, because I had an opening in the jail. But he is
getting a --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, one spot, 'cause
you have an open spot. No one's leaving the payroll, but
there's two less patrol deputies.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No involuntary
termination; we're just moving deputies.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, that's what I
was looking for. You happy with that?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only part I'm not
happy with is cutting it down to where we're going to have
three officers patrolling 1,100 square miles. I'm not happy
with that. If I've got an officer out west -- and I tried
to explain some of this. If he's out west on a call, and
the officer out east is on a call -- on a family violence
call, which are very common, then the guy in central, if you
only have three, is already backing up the guy out east, so
that guy west, if he gets a family violence call, he is on
his own. DPS doesn't work 24-hour shifts any more in this
y-~_ os
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
county. They haven't for years, okay? That one man out
west is goinq to be by himself.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You realize that --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Out west, or
anywhere?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Huh?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Out west or --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Out west, or if the
shifts -- you know, depending if it's a guy out east, okay,
and the guy on the west has a call that's family violence.
As y'all have seen, two officers go on family violence.
They're just too dangerous if you don't. Then your central
guy has to go back up the one out west, which leaves the guy
east totally by himself.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Whichever way, if you
have two family violence calls, you don't --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: At one time. Or, like,
this morning early, there was a wreck on -- on lb North,
okay. Ended up taking four officers, 'cause it was before
daylight, and we had to have red lights out there for
traffic control. This was before 6 o'clock. I don't -- I
just can't -- the chief and I have sat down and -- and I
know, you know, some people think we have too many employees
or whatever, but I honestly sat down, gentlemen, and tried
to loo}: at this, and there is no way around that it's going
~~-iz us
173
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~1
22
23
29
25
to put three officers on the road at times, and I just do
not think that's appropriate for this county.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rusty, I remember
going through budgets a long time ago when Sheriff Greeson
was here, and I can't tell you how long ago that was, but it
was a long time ago. And he did exactly that; he had three
men cover the entire county. Sometimes two.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: When I took office,
there was a lot of times that there was three, and this
Court assisted us in getting it taken care of where we
didn't have those problems. And -- and I --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How much has the
population grown in the last 10 years?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: A lot, especially out in
the county. Used to be city population was more than
county. As we all know, in the last census, the county's
population is more than the city, and a lot of their shifts
are seven per shift.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm inclined to try to
fix that. I think we found some money through the District
Attorney's office by cutting out two people there. And I
know my colleague in Precinct 2 is getting ready to hit me,
so I'm going to duck when I say this, but if we go to Page
102, Parks, can we look at that budget again?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What tab are you in?
?-~_-us
174
1
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tab 2.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I'm of a mind
to fix it, okay? I think the Sheriff has made a compelling
case, and I'd like to see it fixed. Now, the question is,
how do we fix it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And I'm wondering
if there is anything in the Parks budget, which is primarily
Flat Rock.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let's see what we
qot.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Due to some
improvements --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can probably cough
up 25,000. Will that help?
COMMISSIONEP. LETZ: How about --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We got to do a bridge
there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh,
we reduce that to 35,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If
figured back in the overtime increase,
can take that back out, part of that.
about that.
that's right. 25, so
Mm-hmm.
y'all had already
you can take -- you
Remember, we talked
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So we just -- we just
9- 1 Z U 5
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
funded one of them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we take out --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Take the 25,000 out
of Parks.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Parks goes to 35,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All right. Just
leave enough money there to do the bridge.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 102, Tab 2.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm looking for it.
Yeah, we'll give back 25. And the overtime factor? Do you
remember what that was?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We were adding 20,000 to
the deputies and 10 -- or 20,000 to the jail and 10 to the
deputies. So, it was 10 to the Sheriff's Office 20 to the
jail.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why were we adding to the
jail?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Because without the
deputies, we were going to have to have a whole lot more
jailers doing hospital guard duty and everything else on top
of all that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So you could add back
30,000.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. If Tommy had
already added that into that, you can take that and add it
9-12-GS
176
1
2
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
back, so we can get back to trying to rover it a lot better.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 'Cause right now, the
Sheriff's Office overtime is 15, I believe, Judge. And --
JUDGE TINLEY: Jail shows 15.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Sheriff's was -- we may
have upped it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff is -- if I can find it
here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, between that
and what we got from the District Attorney and the
overtime --
JUDGE TINLEY: 20,000 at the Sheriff, I
believe is what I'm showing. 15 and 20, jail and Sheriff.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Leave it at 15 and ^0,
and not add the additional y'all talked about the other day.
Is that what we did? I thought it was 13 and 16 last year.
I don't have my budget printout with me for last year.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, this is after 31 August
that this run was made.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. It was 15 and 20.
JUDGE TINLEY: Did we add some to --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah, I've got it
here somewhere.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- jail or Sheriff overtime?
~-~s-us
177
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2 V
21
G
23
'' 4
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought it was at 30;
20 and 30, I thought we added.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, at the last meeting
before this one, you added ~0 and 10.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZEP.: That's right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How much?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 20 and 10.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 20 and 10. 20 to the
Sheriff's and 10 to jail.
MR. TOMLINSON: No, it was the other way
around.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 20 jail, 10 Sheriff.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, we're going back to 15 and
20.
MR. TOMLINSON: It never has been added yet.
So --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That do it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And with those other
reductions, that basically pays for those two deputies.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I worry about three
on a shift too, Rusty, and that -- it's too big a county to
do it right that way. But, again, we're going the wrong
direction. We're an expensive, overstaffed county, and
we're --
~-1~-r~s
178
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
G S
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I understand your
feelings, but we have still lost three actual positions,
four on top of it, and all the cars that you're -- in just
this one budget.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tell the Court why we
can't use a warrant deputy?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The warrant -- my
problem with warrant deputies is -- as I've tried to explain
the other day, warrant deputies entail our outside work
program officer, okay? He's part of that division. The
civil deputy is overloaded, and we're all trying to serve
civil, all right? Charlie Witt, who is supposed to be a
warrant, is making a lot of T.D.C. transfers and helping
civil. George McHorse is the other warrants. He is making
a lot of the court duties and warrants, and Crimestoppers
he's got as part of his bailiwick, and civil, because we
just have too much. And then the last warrant is Carroll
Schultz, who is averaging right now anywhere between 6,000
and 10,000 miles a month transporting inmates. Because what
we do in this county, unlike all those other ones, is all
our warrants that are entered in TCIC and NCIC, the state
and national computer if we're capable, and then they get
arrested and we go serve them, we have to go pick them up.
That takes a warrant officer to do that transport. Those
other counties, a lot of what you see, they don't enter
y-1~-~'S
179
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
warrants in those national and state computers, just because
they don't have the manpower to go pick them up or spend
that time, so they don't do that. So, some of those may
have 5,000 warrants outstanding. We have 2,000 as it is,
and that's all deputies trying to serve them. They're all
entered in our system, but we try and keep some specifically
serving them, and other ones are on the road all the time
trying to bring them back.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty, the only thing
that I'll ask is that, since you're able to keep four
deputies on patrol if we add these two back in, and we're
going to keep one spot in the -- one position, but not fund
it, the military leave position, at some point when we --
when that is decided that person is not coming back, that
position gets deleted.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I agree. I have no
problem with that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Rusty, the one
function you have that seems to me like it's not essential,
that wouldn't -- if you eliminated, wouldn't be much
noticed, is the D.A.R.E. position.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think the D.A.R.E.
position is a very important position, now more than ever,
'cause we did away with all the S.R.O.'s, and our one
D.A.R.E, officer teaches all the school districts inside
-iz-us
180
1
°° 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
---- 13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
~~
L L
23
°° 2 4
25
Kerr County, whether it be the city of Kerrville, Ingram,
Hunt, Divide, Center Point, and that's teaching young kids
the drug resistance and that, which I think is very
important, and I know the members of this audience have kids
that have gone through that program. And I just -- you
know, that program, except for the salary -- and that's a
very expensive program, because all the workbooks, just like
textbooks and that, every bit of that stuff is always paid
for by total donation. The car she's driving is paid for by
seized money. The only thing that entire position costs
this county is that one employee's salary, and I think
that's an investment that is very good overall to the entire
county for our kids. I know my kids went through it when
they were younger, and I just think it's an important
position. And then, during the summertime, that position is
used to help do female transports, so it's not like they're
off -- we don't pay that position any overtime, although
there's a lot of it during the school year, because they do
do functions with those kids and evening functions and that.
And what we do is that that's the only position in the
Sheriff's Department that actually builds up comp time.
They get the comp time, then, during the summer; they take
it all off then. We use them for transports.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But the military
~_i~-n=,
181
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
40
~1
22
[~ 3
24
25
position, I agree with you, Jonathan, that we'd eliminate a
position if that would come back.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let's look at the
District Clerk's pages there. I got Page 24 under Tab 9.
District Clerk made a case that her employees are largely
underclassified; that the 12's ought to move to 13's, and
the 13's ought to move to 14's to be comparable to the same
level of qualifications in other departments. Have we
disposed of that issue?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't think we did.
JUDGE TINLEY: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I wasn't sure if it was
just in her department or the overall situation.
MS. UECKER: No. No, it was in the County
Clerk's, Tax Assessor, and whatever office position had 12's
and 13's.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How many do we have in
that category, Barbara?
MS. NEMEC: Which one, 13 or 12?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Twelve.
MS. NEMEC: Whole bunch.
(Low-voice discussion off the record.)
MS. NEMEC: About 16.
MS. PIEPER: I have seven 12's in my office
alone.
-1,-0,
182
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
]0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
L
23
24
25
MS. NEMEC: Okay. Ms. Rector has six 12's
and two 13's. Jannett, you said you have seven?
MS. PIEPER: I have seven 12's and I have --
and one 13.
MS. NEMEC: And then Linda's office has three
13's.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's -- I don't
think we can deal with that this year. That's too many
reclassifications.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We could deal with it
by virtue of future hires, however, if, as, and when we have
any.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's not fair.
JUDGE TINLEY: No, that would not be fair.
If we do it with some future hires, we're obligated to those
comparable employees that are already on staff; it would be
necessary that we do that then.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, one office that I
would be more inclined to try to help this year would be the
County Clerk; she gave up an employee. And I think we have
shown a record of allowing that, so if there's a way to make
some adjustments there or change -- obviously, you have to
change responsibilities around. I don't know that we can
address that with all your staff this year, but if you
change responsibilities around, I think there is an adjust
9 iz us
183
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
-- you know, an appropriate adjustment of one or two people,
possibly. And that's what we did with the District Clerk
several years ago when she reduced staff. So, if you can
come back to us with that, look at how you reorganize --
MS. UECKER: No, you gave that money to the
Sheriff, remember? That's what's you told me you were going
to do, but the Sheriff got the money.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I qot Bruce's.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You look upon the
Sheriff as just a big sponge?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah.
MS. UECKER: Yeah.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that can be done
possibly after budget.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They consider me a
leech.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you want us to take a vote
in this room, Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: I didn't think so.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just a little levity,
Sheriff.
MS. UECKER: Well, and I think that
situation, Commissioner Nicholson, has -- affects a couple
v-I~-us
189
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of people in R.usty's staff as well.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, the 12 and that
would.
MS. UECKER: The 12's.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We just don't have the
budget to do it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Can't deal with it
this year.
MS. UECKER: What about the merit increases?
I had asked for a merit increase. When will we know what
the numbers are in our budgets so we can go back and look at
them and see what --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably after today,
Tommy will make a run sometime middle -- end of the week. I
imagine Tommy would like us to quit making these changes
before he makes the final run.
MR. TOMLINSON: Already killed about siY or
eight trees.
MS. UECKER: So, does that mean we're not
going to add my merit increases at all? Or --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think there's likely no
increases, other than people who are changing
responsibilities and things of that nature. Jannett may
have some because of reduction in staff.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Quick question on
e i_ os
1
G
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
185
J.P, budgets. I have some notes here that -- something
about software maintenance; that shouldn't be budgeted,
because it's paid for out of the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which tab are you on?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 10.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 10, Page 20.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's dealt with.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You've taken care of
that?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's been dealt
with? Okay. County Treasurer's office.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner, would
you help us?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Sorry?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do I have to research
down here?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I mean Tab 13.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Item 37, there was
some question about the group insurance, 20,907, being a
very high number compared to 11,000 last year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
MS. NEMEC: That was because I was asking for
insurance coverage for my part-time person due to another
person having insurance. However, I haven't discussed this
y-i.~-ns
186
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
with my part-timer, but being that we're in the budget
crunch that we are, and being able to save her position, I
don't think we need to discuss that. We'll just drop it
back to two.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So you essentially
don't have any changes in the personnel costs, except
escalation?
MS. NEMEC: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: By definition, a
part-time person -- the reason that they're part-time is
because they don't get benefits.
MR. TOMLINSON: I'll --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait just a second,
Tommy.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait just a second.
Let me ask the question.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or let her answer the
question. Isn't that -- isn't that right? I mean, that --
if you work under 19 hours, you don't get benefits.
MS. NEMEC: My part-timer doesn't work under
19 hours. She gets retirement benefits. She is part-time
full-time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. Okay. So --
5-1%-us
187
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~,
23
~4
25
yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Forgot about that
category.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Forgot about that one.
MS. NEMEC: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: On the insurance regs, is not
the break at 30 hours a week?
MS. NEMEC: 32.
JUDGE TINLEY: 32 now?
MR. TOMLINSON: Let me answer the confusion
here. I am that person that she's talking about.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh.
MR. TOMLINSON: But when I was hired in 1990,
that was part of the consideration upon which I was hired,
that I would go to work part-time for insurance, so that's
-- that's part of my salary.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Tommy, we made a
good decision back there, and I'm glad you've been around.
MR. TOMLINSON: So, I mean -- so, I mean,
when the Judge -- when I was appointed in 1990, I was
appointed as a part-time, and that's never changed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm on Page 21 --
Tab 21, Page E2. Environmental Health. We had a request
there for additional staff and additional pay, and I think
9-iz-..s
188
1
L
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
z2
23
24
~~
L J
what we decided was to stay with the same staff, and the pay
changes would be the cost-of-living increases only.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's my understanding of
where we are.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, on our
Inspector's Salaries, that goes away?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, no new staff.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And then on the next
page, Page 63, there was some question about the capital
outlay. My note says, "Need to lease a four-wheel drive,
but wait till next year." So, does that $3,600 go to zero?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. Boy, you guys
are answering my questions --
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, it's in here.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- expeditiously.
That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Your turn.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I've done most of them.
Only two that I have -- I hate to bring up the library
again, --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We got some
information on it.
y - l ? _ ~ ~
189
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- but we have a budget.
Though I might note it came from the City of Kerrville legal
department, which I don't know that they can make budgets,
but I presume it's an accurate budget. It came from Ilse.
As I look at this, they are asking us -- well, they don't
break it out in a way that I can -- they don't really break
it out.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They don't.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They don't break it out
according to the contract they sent to us. The front page
is a summary page, but it includes capital expenditures. It
includes, I think -- I don't know how they're breaking out
certain salaries, whether -- that are oversight over things
that we're not paying for. So, I really -- I see the
number, but I'm not sure that it -- I don't see how it
equates to the contract they sent.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I have some of
your same concerns, and I had highlighted a few things
before we gave Dave a copy, and he hadn't even seen it. But
some of the ways they categorize some of this stuff is kind
of -- it's not instructive; let me put it that way. It is
difficult. But under Maintenance Repairs, we got Building
and Structures. Building and Structures is 35 thousand,
five. Under Miscellaneous Services, we have something
listed as Special Services, which I don't understand. Under
-1~-ns
190
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
-,
~~
Capital Outlay is -- we have books and records, which I
don't understand. Somebody help me.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Anyway, I think that --
I'm really bringing it up as much for Rex, 'cause I guess
Rex and Dave are the two that are trying to negotiate the
contract. I mean, if I was to open it up, look at this
budget, on the front page it says Expenditures, and it says
Operating Expenditures, and then it says $901,000. But as I
qo back through here, there's a whole lot more than
operating expenditures in Operatinq Expenditures, such as
capital expenditures. So, I mean, I'm still -- I'm at the
same loss I was at this morning; just now I have numbers in
front of me to make me more confused.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What would be really
helpful is, like, everybody else outside of our government
that wants us to share funds with them, if they'd come in
here and ask us for what they want and tell us why they need
it. I'd like to see the Library Director come in here, just
like other --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would too.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, anyway, that's --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is there a reason we
can't do that?
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz might
enlighten you.
~-iz-os
191
1
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~1
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That rule is just for
Letz.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You all can talk to City
staff; I can't.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, in the good old
days, we used to have joint meetings in which those
department heads would be available to answer questions.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Anyway, so I just brought
the library up because we did get -- I didn't want it to be
misreported that we never had received a budget. We have
received a budget; it's just that it doesn't coincide with
the contract.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think Rer, and I
can deal with the contract issues along the lines that you
advised us this morning, but I would like to see somebody
from the City explain the budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The other two items that
I have, one is a general item. I thought long and hard
about trying to bring this up again, and I decided I'll -- I
don't hate the knowledge that -- to discuss all this for
this year's budget, but 1 would like to look at, in all
departments that are elected -- or run by an elected
official, what things those offices are dciny that are not
statutory. And I'm thinking of passports, I'm thinking of
9- 1 ~- U S
192
1
._ 2
3
9
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
-- 13
19
Z J
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
""` 2 4
25
personnel, I'm thinking of Law Library. I'm thinking -- I
don't know if Jannett does any or not. Because I do think
there is a -- manpower and dollars to be saved by
consolidating some of these functions. And I think -- you
them, because no one -- that just was the way it was done.
And I don't know how much time is really being taken up by
these jobs, but I'd like to get from those departments --
and there may be some others -- sometime, you know, before
we forget about it, or before I forget, which will probably
be the next couple of months, exactly what we're talking
about personnel-wise. And the City, if there are savings
that can	be done	by	consolidating	and	moving some	of	these
things --	and Rex	is	looking into,	I	know everyone	is	quite
aware of, an Attorney General's opinion that says that
Commissioners Court, once we approve a budget and personnel
for a department, we can't change that during the year. But
that probably -- Rex is looking into it, but it may not
cover nonstatutory functions. So, those changes can be made
possibly during the year, if needed.
COMMISSIONER BALDwIN: That's an excellent
idea. And I remember, a week or two ago, Commissioner
-iz-us
193
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~3
24
25
think that's a fantastic idea. If we could start, like, in
March or April, start dealing with these issues, and just
let the -- and then just let it draw us right into the
budget process.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Pushes it off three or
four months longer than T wanted.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We can start it off
any time you want to. I don't know what off-season is
exactly. I mean, I know there's a draft in there somewhere.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other point I
have is that -- it's on a note from the Judge related to
Ms. Mitchell's, I guess, level. There was a -- at one
point, when her -- two-step increase?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It was a two-step
increase that was contemplated when there was an adding of a
supervisory position, which did not happen. However, we did
at least -- at the moment, we have added more responsibility
to that position, being booking and things of that nature.
I don't know how that equates, but I think we need to decide
what that -- what that does to that salary position.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, you're talking
about added --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Added work.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- added duties, added
G iz ~~
194
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
~3
24
25
work. Are you talking about the booking --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- issue? I'm still
not convinced that we're going to do that. I mean, are we
going to do that? Bring the booking to the Commissioners
Court?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think we
ought to have a little talk about whether it is advisable to
do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's exactly what
I'm saying. It's easy for you to say. I just think that we
need to talk abcut it. Is that -- is that the right thing
to do? Is there a better way?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think the -- 1
mean, from my view, if it's going to stay a county
responsibility, it's what needs to be done. The other topic
that has been floated is to pui it with Convention and
Visitors Bureau, and I'm a little uneasy putting that over
there at this time. I think that, you know, it's kind of --
that has not run smoothly for several years.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What hasn't?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Booking and rental of
that facility hasn't probably run smoothly since I've been a
Commissioner. But I just think that it's -- by pushing it
off on another agency when it's still our responsibility,
9-1-os
195
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
<0
21
22
23
29
25
I'm not sure that's the way to do it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, recognizing
that there are a lot of details that have to be worked out,
and I acknowledge that, I advanced that idea, because, first
of a11, we talked about getting it out of our house. We've
got a big house here. And, secondly, if we're going to do
that, why not consider putting it in somebody's house who
deals with booking facilities and knows what comes to town
and wants to come to town, or into the county or into the
city in terms of meetings and other things? So, it seemed
to me that it was a pretty good fit. Now, I recognize there
are a lot of details we'd have to work out; what would b2
expected -- what we would expect and what, in return, would,
for example, C.V.B, expect? I would hasten to say right now
that, first of all, the C.V.B. has not taken an action
approving doing this, but I have had a discussion, as has
Commissioner Baldwin, with Sudie Burditt of C.V.B., and
there's interes*_ in that. But there are a lot of details
that have to be worked out.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Basically, we would be
-- the way I see it, we would contract with them, and
they -- they take some of the money off, so they're paid to
do -- do the booking.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And there are a
couple ways to address the finances, yeah. We could either
a-_.-us
196
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
G t
L3
24
25
-- either do it by a contract or a flat fee to do the
booking, or they can take a piece off the top of the rental,
right off the top, whatever rentals there are. There's a
lot of ways to skin this cat.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I just --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You may be right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, this is just a --
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: I czrtainly have
opposed that in years past.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think it falls,
Commissioner, in the same category that you're talking about
in terms of other synergies or -- or abilities to -- to
limit our growth, and look at ways to save in terms of
manpower and expenses. It probably requires us to decide we
want to sit dcwn and talk about it and engage C.V.B. in a
discussion to see whether or not they would like that idea,
approve that idea, and what conditions they might want to
att_ar_h to it that may or may not be acceptable to us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess what I have -- my
concern is at the moment, all of a sudden, we put that
facility -- well, one, Convention and Visitors Bureau, is it
independent? My boy-dummy question.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, it is.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: But the money comes from
the city primarily.
9 iz ~,_
197
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
l9
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: St comes from bed
tax, period.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: From bed tax, okay. So,
they're funded by the bed tax.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I'm not -- I think
there's just too much to work out. i would rather bring it
up here, say that's where it's going. If we decide to move
it later during the year, we can move it later during the
year, you know. I have a hard time understanding -- I
don't -- you know, maybe I'm really wrong on this, but I
just don't see that this should take that much time, that we
should pay someone a whole lot in an outside contract to do
it, or to give them a percentage of it. It doesn't make a
whole lot of sense to me. I'm not real sure how that whole
department, then, interacts with our Maintenance Department
that has to do all the setup and cleanup and all that. All
of a sudden, we're having our staff reporting to another
agency.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, you're making a
strong case to leave it alone.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, I don't think it
belongs in Maintenance.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I had two concerns.
One was the same as your first one that you didn't quite get
v-iz-~,s
198
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
LS
to, and that is, is the Contention and Visitors Bureau --
are they an arm of the City? And I don't want the City in
that facility out there, involved in it in any way, unless
they want to rent it.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Or give us money.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Huh?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or give us money.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or give us money,
which they had the opportunity a couple years ago and chose
not to do. Or -- and, I mean, let's face it. If -- if we
contracted with C.V.B., they're going to be back within less
than a year telling us that we have to have a $5 million
facility; it's just not good enough. And that's a natural
thing, and it's the truth, but they're going to be in here
saying that. So, you know, that's two negatives, far as I'm
concerned. But the positive -- two positives is, the
headache gets away from here, and number two, they are
professionals and they can book the thing and -- and do it
right, and do a bang-up job of it, and --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do they book anything
else?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- make more money. I
have no idea.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are they responsible for
9-1.:-114
199
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
??
23
24
25
any other facilities?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not that I'm aware
of.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, I don't --
I don't know that they do it right, then. I guess my point
is, they don't have a track record any more than --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, but they're ~n
the business, though, is what I'm saying.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Their track record is
the number of heads they put in beds every year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's their track
record.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'd like to keep
it --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The number of
meetings that come to town.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'd like to keep it
in-house for now
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a deal. Anyone
want to move it to Commissioners Court? Okay. Kathy, good
luck. Now, do we have to get back to her salary thing?
That's really where we are, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We started out --
JUDGE TINLEY: That's what got us here.
y-,_-ue.
200
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: First one of you guys
that says, "Where's Ms. Mitchell?" and the answer is, "She's
out at the Ag Barn," just remember this discussion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, y'all had on the
table there, I think -- I somehow slept through this part,
but you had two steps or something.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't recall that
conversation, but that's what the note said from the Judge.
But I might have slept through this.
rOMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, this is a Judge
deal. Well, let him handle it, then. What do you want to
do, Judge? Make a motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: The reason it's on there is
prior -- prior to the run being made a week ago last
Wednesday, I guess -- last Wednesday, when there were some
adjustments being made for the run, it was anticipated at
that time there were going to be a number of functions --
personnel functions out of the Treasurer's oYfice moved
upstairs. Based upon that, and Commissioner Nicholson and I
were unlucky enough to remain behind for a few moments for
lunch, so we got tasked with giving the instructions to the
Auditor. Because of the supervisory duties that were going
to be placed on her, and there was discussion of that on
that basis, we had instructed a two-step increase to be
placed for her. And if there's going to be any additional
9 1?- 1: S
201
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
duties, you know, the Court's got to decide what it's going
to do, but it sounds to me like there's going to be some
additional duties.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Absolutely, there is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would say -- what's a
two step -- that would go from a what to a what? What's --
where are you now?
MS. NEMEC: Well, in the old schedule, so yoL
got to add 3.2 to that --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MS. NEMEC: -- right now she's a 19-6, which
is 30,310. A two-step is 31,845, plus add 3.2 percent to
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question was, if we --
and this just makes -- I don't understand what was done by
the Judge, you know, on that two-step. If we added -- and
we're not doing this, so y'all settle down out there. If we
added supervisory responsibilities, wouldn't you change it,
like, to a 20 or something?
MS. NEMEC: 19 is supervisory
responsibilities.
MS. uECKER: It is supervisory.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You just go up on --
MS. NEMEC: That is a chief deputy; you have
people under you.
~~-IZ-as
1
2
3
9
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
L5
202
MS. PIEPER: My chief deputy supervises l~
people.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Well, that's what
was done, then.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, I was just
telling you what the rationale was. And there was -- there
was discussion about if those -- if those functions were
moved and placed under -- under her oversight, and with an
additional employee, there was discussion about additional
compensation being given to her, so that was the reason that
was done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Is she going to
have someone to supervise?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: No, not now. It was after
that the decision was made that that -- that would not
occur; at least those functions would not occur.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Personnel functions.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What do we do, then?
What's your -- what's your recommendation we do with the --
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, if she's going to have
some additional duties, but not -- but not all of those, we
may need to maybe consider a one-step. Or if there's going
9-12-05
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
203
to be none, we need to put her back where she -- where she
is now, I would say.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm going to ask a
question of Mr. Holekamp. Are you back there, Mr. Holekamp?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir, I am.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Reasonably, what
amount of time every week does the individual in your
department spend with respect to booking our facility?
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. HOLEKAMP: My best estimation, what I've
logged in several weeks of monitoring it, approximately 24
to 25 hours.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 24 to 25 hours spent.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Dedicated to booking,
answering responses, writing contracts, because you also
have the Union Church.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
MR. HOLEKAMP: And you make contacts at least
twice for every event, whether it be beforehand to show it,
and then the -- to decide whether they should pay and return
keys and that sort of thing afterwards. We get feedback
from everybody as to, you know, if the event -- event went
well or they had problems and that sort of thing. So, it'll
range between 20 and 24 hours, I would say, probably
realistically. And that's -- a lot of that time is that
9 12 OS
1
2
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
204
time you spend in a vehicle going out there and doing all
these things. That's where the time comes in. If they were
out there, they probably would -- probably save five hours
or so out of the whole thing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Well, I can
tell you right now, I'm not in favor -- I'd like to see
Ms. Mitchell get an additional salary, but I'm not in favor
of adding 20 to 25 hours of work to her already extended
workload.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think something's not
being done right if this takes that much time.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, I don't know. Okay.
All right, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- I mean, it
doesn't -- the contracts -- you know, granted, maybe part of
the problems are, you know, that we don't have a good
contract and a good price -- a good schedule that we're
working on. But does the current person show it all the
time? They don't use any of the staff that's out there
working?
MR. HOLEKAMP: If they're available, we will,
yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And there's not somebody
out there a majority of the time at that facility?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, yeah, but they may be on
y-i~-os
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
2os
a tractor or -- or -- well, like today, they're changing out
a bunch of sprinkler heads. So, I mean, it's --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's -- it gets
into scheduling. I mean, people want to look at a
facility --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- but can't they say,
okay, we're going to show it from this time -- you know,
they just have to make it. I can't show up at whatever the
place is in -- the Taylor County facility just unannounced
and expect to see it, unless I've got a Commissioner with
me.
MR. HOLEKAMP: No, they normally call and set
it up. But a lot of the people that use our facility are
working people, and they like to do it during lunch or
5 o'clock or whatever, because it's -- like, for a private
party or whatever. We're -- I feel like we're in the people
business, or we try real hard to accommodate. Union Church
especially; those are people who are either getting married
or that sort of thing, and they want to look at the facility
and decide whether that's going to be suitable for them.
So, there's some time that's -- you know, and like I had
said, we could probably shave some time off of that, but I
really think, since we're in the public business, I don't
think we can say, well, I'm going to only show it, you know,
y-iz-os
zo6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
tomorrow afternoon between 3:00 and 5:00 or whatever. I --
I think that we've really tried real hard to accommodate
people, and maybe we've spoiled them too. I don't -- you
know.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes -- yeah. Maybe
that's the best way. I just think that we'd be more
structured in that, because if we're spending that much time
for the revenue we're getting, that's not -- we're doing a
poor job of managing.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, yeah. But, there again,
is -- is there's -- quite a bit of the time is spent with
4-H lining up stuff with them, their events and that sort of
thing, too. So, how do you -- you know, maybe that's poor
planning on our part, but I feel like that that's our
responsibility, to work with these people. Now, if you --
if you choose not to, you know, go to that much trouble for
the -- for the people that want to use the facility, that's
fine. We'll do whatever we're directed. But -- and I want
to change horses here. Y'all -- y'all are aware that last
Tuesday y'all approved a 48-bed facility for the juvenile
detention. With that, when I got my budget, there was a
position -- a maintenance person over there. I'm going to
take that one out, and I'm going to try to do within our --
our means. That's going to save 20,000, 25,000, something
like that. We're going to give it a try. I think we can do

207
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
>>
23
24
25
it. But all elected officials and all department heads are
going to have to understand, there is going to be somewhat
of a lag time between accomplishing after notification of
things that they wish. Because right now, we -- we pride
ourselves on our response time, but it probably will not be
quite like it was because I'm going to be so scattered out.
'Cause that facility is going to require 24 hours, 7 days a
week, maintenance person available to them. So, I -- I hope
y'all understand that we -- we cut one position out of
Maintenance in the budget. And --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Cutting a second one?
MR. HOLEKAMP: No, this is the one that I'm
cutting.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That feels right to
me. And I agree with you, your folks do a really good job
of janitorial work and maintenance, and we can tolerate just
a little bit less than that.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They do fine work,
and if they can keep -- keep at it 90 percent or 80 percent,
that's good enough.
MS. PIE PER: But I don't -- but to go along
with -- you know, with the -- you know, to go back to the
barn somewhat, one of the problems we're going to run into
there is -- is people out there are going to have less time
v lz ns
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
zz
23
29
25
208
being there. If we -- as far as setups and that sort of
thing, that's going to take longer if you only have one man
out there, so the turnaround may be affected somewhat.
Currently, I have two people that are pretty much there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. What I --
I never have understood is, you have an employee that is
maxed out with their work, and you start talking about
bringing on a new load, and so you offer that person...
If they're maxed out, what difference does an amount of money
have to do with it? See, I don't -- I never have been able to
get my brain around that. So, bringing -- bringing that
function up to the Commissioners Court and then paying our
administrative assistant more money to handle that, I don't --
I just don't see how it works.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't either.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When she's already --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Maybe this ought to
be part of our off-season work.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think it is. I
think it is.
JUDGE TINLEY: Everybody ready to go to
off-season?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm sure
Commissioner Letz is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What time do we kick
9- 1 2- O S
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
209
off?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we'll be
discussing the same thing next year, but that's fine.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We might. Well, we
have to find a solution.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think this changes the
Maintenance situation, then, too, because the -- in our
plan, that was freeing up that person to do -- that
position; not the person, but that position, to be a
maintenance person, and that person is now going to be doing
something else.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think your next
agenda item is when we'll have a long visit about that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's still --
MS. DECKER: Make I make one comment when
you're done?
JUDGE TINLEY: When we're done?
MS. DECKER: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Have we got any more on
the -- on any more of the budget items that we need to --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have one thing that
I -- I want to go bark to the Juvenile Detention Facility
and this issue of, does the Kerr County taxpayers pay for
transporting kids from one county into ours and then back
home again? Where -- where did we land on that?
5 . _ ~ 5
210
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
L 1
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think she told us
that only under very extenuating circumstances does she do
that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I have heard her
say -- at least I heard her say -- that, no, we don't do
that at all, and then I turn around last week and heard her
say that only when they need help will we do it. I just
wanted to know, are we going to pay for transporting their
kids or not? Just a yes or no deal.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with your
point, and I think we ought to establish a policy where,
extenuating circumstances or otherwise, the sending county
pays freight. The sending county pays the freight.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree 100 percent.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And I think it's
something we need to take up with Ms. Harris.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's a contract and
an operation issue that comes under the -- doesn't really
affect this year's budget, but it does need to be discussed.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's just -- I just
don't think that we've really got to the bottom of that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Are we through with the budget
items?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a couple
~-zz-os
211
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
'3
29
25
housekeeping, just so my notes reflect whether or not we
dispatched -- got rid of them or not. We talked about -- as
we have in the past, we've always accepted the State's
mileage figures -- state and/or fed. And Ms. Mitchell
confirmed today that the State Comptroller's office now is
at .405; is that correct?
MS. MITCHELL: 40.5.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And that would be our
mileage reimbursement fee for mileage outside the county,
correct? Secondly, we talked about mileage allowances
inside the county going from one to one-fifty. Did we ever
dispatch with that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mileage allowances.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We did dispatch --
MS. MITCHELL: Y'all said you were going to
go with whatever the state -- the Judge said whatever the
state mileage was going to be, that's what you were going to
go with.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm talking about
in-county allowance.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't think we
did, Commissioner. And I think, really, the only
significant issue is the J.P.'s. Should we -- should we
raise the part of their salary that's related to the -- what
used to be $1,200 a year? Which --
~i-iz-u.
1
2
3
4
5
H
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
212
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which is part of
their salary.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Raise?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Raise. Well, that
applies to more than just J.P.'s. Some of us use our
vehicles extensively. That's the reason I raised the
question, did we dispatch with it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do you know how far
it is from here to Garven Store?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's more than a
one-day deal.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not more than one
tank of gas, right, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But I think we ought
to leave that at the 1,200 that we'd rolled into the
salaries.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: On the -- on the
reimbursement, are we just going to tie that to the state,
period, with the exception of lodging, which will be actual
out-of-pocket per receipt? Whatever the state does, we just
float with it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I want to
do.
9 1' O S
213
1
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: We float with the
lodging, and we had a per diem allowance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We have a per diem and
use the state mileage.
JUDGE TINLEY: Per diem mileage, and the
state has an $80 -- $85, I think, limit on lodging. But
heretofore, we have provided whatever the actual is, based
upon the receipt that you turn in, that's the reimbursement
rate.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The State's in a
better position to drive that wagon than we are in hotels
across the state where our meetings are conducted.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, it's lodging, actual
receipt; meals, per diem as per state; mileage reimbursement
as per state. Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Got one more that
needs some clarification. On the -- on the library contract
budget, we're going to invite the City of Kerrville to come
try to give us some answers to our questions?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think that's a great
idea.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: When would that be
that we ask them to do that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Monday.
JUDGE TINLEY: 19th.
9 l J U S
214
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And that's one
issue. And then, on cleaning up the two contracts, library
and animal, me and the County Attorney are going to ask the
City to sit down with us and -- and resolve the unresolved
issues that we took note of.
MR. EMERSON: I may be able to shed some
light on that. I talked to Ilse Bailey about the Animal
Control contract, and what we agreed to was she said just go
ahead and change all the exclusions back to the old article
numbers, because technically, their new ordinance doesn't
kick in until tomorrow, if they're going to approve it at
tomorrow's meeting. So, we can go back and change the
exclusions back exactly the way they were. Then it's up to
the City to roll them over to their new numbers. And as far
as the no dead animal pickup, they were in full agreement on
that. So --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm going to want to
see what they approve tomorrow, because there may be a need
for more exclusions than the ones we earlier enumerated.
For example, I saw in that order -- not order. What do you
call it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ordinance.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Ordinance, that it
was a violation to be walking your dog on a leash and not
have the materials in your possession needed to clean up
~-i~-o=,
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
215
after them, and we're not going to enforce that. So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, but I think what I
heard Rex say, if we approve the concept in form, or not --
in content today, then we're under the old rules. Is that
what you just said? If we approve it today, that we're
under --
MR. EMERSON: Basically, we'll have all the
exclusions that were in the previous ordinances. And then,
that way, we'll have a contract in place and, theoretically,
they can approve it and budget it tomorrow.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That would be another
contract, and then just have to authorize, you know --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- the County Attorney
and Commissioner 4 to make sure the verbiage is correct.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Again, they can
choose to come in and talk about the budget or not.
Actually, it's kind of a moot point, since were not going to
pay what they're asking in any event, but I would like
answers.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't know what
they're asking, though.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I would like
answers, and Rex and I are going to clean up the language.
Okay.
9 iz ~~s
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
216
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hold it. Re::, do we need
to go back to -- should we go back and approve the Animal
Control contract, then, today? Or is it okay just to leave
it the way it is and --
MR. EMERSON: I think it would facilitate
things if you could approve it, but if Commissioner
Nicholson's not comfortable with the language, then --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, I think we
can approve it based on you all agreeing -- subject to the
County Attorney and Commissioner 9 agreeing to the language.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let's do that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can we do that for
both of them?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just Animal Control.
The language on the agenda item allows approval, so I'll
move that we approve --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Got to go back to that
agenda item.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Let
me first -- first do the cleanup on this -- this agenda
item. Are we through with budget items here?
MS. UECKER: I just have a comment.
JUDGE TINLEY: I tell you what. Let's take a
i_ us
217
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~?
23
24
25
15-minute recess, and we'll come back then, 'cause I need to
give her a rest. Let's take a 15-minute recess.
(Recess taken from 3:13 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's come back to
order. We were in recess for about 15 minutes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, before we leave
the budget, --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- two things. I would
like to bring up a conversation with department heads and
elected officials during the break. One, the Road and
Bridge budget, if Len, when he is back in town, can -- they
really want this dump truck that we cut out of the budget.
I said if they can find other areas they would rather cut
52,000 out of their budget, they can make that swap, and --
as long as it doesn't affect any roads in my precinct.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That'll work.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Should enhance your
roads.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, no, I don't want any
roads in my precinct being cut to get that dump truck.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That might help your
two roads.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, I've got one
~ iz os
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
218
update, just to make sure everybody's on the same page. Me
and the County Attorney, working at the speed of lightning,
faster than a speeding bullet, have arranged with --
informed the City that if they want to explain the library
budget, they can do that next Monday morning between 9:00
and 10:00, and we've asked the City to arrange to meet with
us to work out the details on the two contracts. That's
where we stand.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One final note.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wait, wait, before you
get back over to that one. So, Tommy, is that -- you'll
listen to Leonard's -- if he can come up with a way to --
and if he can -- and it can be done as a budget amendment;
doesn't have to be done -- the dollars aren't going to
change.
MR. TOMLINSON: I'd just as soon leave it
like it is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Handle it as a budget
amendment or whenever. The other item is that we mentioned
with the County Clerk, cutting that one position, that it
will require some adjustments, or should require some
adjustments in her staff. And I just recommend that we let
her add one step to whichever employee she feels is going to
a i_ us
zl9
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
be impacted by that reduction in staff, and that she can
just get with the Treasurer and get that worked out there.
One step to one employee.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a fair trade.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. UECKER: Can I make a comment? Just --
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You've been trying for a
long time, Linda.
MS. UECKER: I could -- no, I'm not going to
touch your sensitive spot today, okay? (Laughter.) Look
at -- I'm not going to get that stuff on my hands.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What stuff?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think you want to
go there, Bill.
MS. UECKER: Look at my budget.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What tab are you?
MS. UECKER: I have no idea. I don't even
have it with me.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: District Clerk, 9.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Nine.
MS. UECKER: I just want to call to your
attention -- look at deputy clerks.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Seven.
MS. UECKER: Look at last year's actual.
i~-os
220
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
,~
L L
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Last year's? Or this
year's?
MS. DECKER: Or this year's actual.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Estimated actual?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 153,448.
MS. UECKER: And what's requested?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 187,001.
MS. UECKER: Well, that was -- that includes
some -- a merit, and that includes the COLA and everything.
But look at -- see, this year's is down from last year's.
Do you see that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The original budget was
196 for this year?
MS. UECKER: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that the number you
want me to say?
MS. UECKER: That's the number I want you to
say. I just want to call your attention to that fact, and
it hasn't been mentioned, but my Deputy Clerks line item is
down a position. Also --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why didn't you tell us
that before?
MS. UECKER: You had the dang budget.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I gave you a gold
star; it's right here.
- i 2 0 5
221
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
]3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. [DECKER: I know. But what I'm trying to
get at is, certain people get more gold stars for doing the
same thing.
DODGE TINLEY: I gave you a gold star, too.
MS. UECKER: You did? Well, in going back to
the statutory duty, Jonathan, I have no problem with that,
but if you're going to look at the statutory duties of the
elected officials, let's make it all department heads.
Let's make it the whole county. No, I don't have to do
passports. But, as Glenn said, we're in the people
business, and we have flowed that right into our office very
smoothly without an increase in duties, but I don't have a
problem giving it up. But, like I said, we're in the people
business -- that's what Glenn said. We're here to provide a
service to the citizens. I don't know who's going to do it.
I don't care. The Law Library, I'd give you that in a
minute. I'll give you that in a flash, 'cause that is a
pain in my rear. But just to remind you, that money can't
be spent for anything else.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure. It's just -- the
only thing I'm. looking at -- there may not be a way to save
anything. It's just, overall, it seems that some of these
functions, if there's a way to consolidate some of them,
it's good to do it. If there's not, there's not.
MS. UECKER: Well, if you're going to try to
~-iz-us
222
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
;2
^^<3
24
25
eliminate statutory duties, though, I mean, you might think
about booking. You might think about airport. You might
think about all kinds of things.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's not eliminating;
we just may consolidate where they're being done. Because,
obviously, things that are -- you're required to do by
statute, you have to do that, or someone in that position.
But some things are flexible as to where they're done.
MS. DECKER: Now, there is -- the Government
Code, I think it's 51.086, does provide for the District
Clerk to do passports. It's not statutory; that's right,
but it does provide that the District Clerk can assess a
fee. And even on the passport applications, it specifies
that that fee goes to the District Clerk. Now, I know Thea
collected it. How legal that was, I'm not sure. Don't
care, as long as we got the money. But -- so --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You get the money even if
someone else collects it? Boy, that's a good deal.
MS. UECKER: I don't know. That's fine with
me. But I just wanted to call your attention that my
deputies line item is, in fact, down.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the only comment I'll
make, 'cause ha]f positions or part-time positions are not
ideal, in my mind. I think, you know, they work out
U-iz-os
223
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
sometimes, just because they work out best, you know, to
make adjustments. And it just looks to me, between -- if
there's a way that we can -- we can get rid of several
halftime positions and create a full time, it can -- I don't
care what department some of these things go into. It's
just a matter of what's the best way to do it.
MS. UECKER: Let me add to that, that this
year I don't have a part-time any more. I've given that one
up, too. So -- and because of -- of some of the plans that
we implemented last year, I was able to do that, with the
Court's help. And I've already met with Jonathan and The
Software Group, and -- not Jonathan. You're Jonathan. John
Trolinger. And, you know, we're excited about doing some
wonderful things for very little money. I mean, I'm really
excited about getting it done. So it looks like, you know,
we're going to go forward. So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the intent.
MS. DECKER: Bye.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My turn?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. Either yours or --
JUDGE TINLEY: Miguel?
MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir. Yes, just a quick
question. I want something clear to me. On my inspector's
salaries, what's the last number -- what's the number we
u i~~-ns
229
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
have there?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No change.
MR. ARREOLA: It's no change from the year --
current? Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 3.2 percent, same
people.
MR. ARREOLA: Same people? Okay, great.
Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We're through with
budget?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. No, not yet, I
want to take another run at this booking thing. And there's
a position involved in booking right now. I want you guys
to think about a half a position added in Commissioners
Court, and that half a position could take care of the grunt
work with respect to booking, be of assistance to the
administrative assistant in terms of telephone, filing, and
so forth and so on. Add half a position, and see where that
takes us. The actual showing of the facilities can be
split -- if it's the Ag Barn, there's usually somebody out
there. Is that right, Glenn?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If it's the Union
Church, that might require this individual to make a trip to
Union Church or something like that. So, half a spot,

225
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
assist Ms. Mitchell in doing that. Ms. Mitchell would
handle the contracts and so forth, and the records, and this
person would do the actual showing, telephones, clerking.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That may work. I mean, I
think it solves the problem of -- I mean, it looks like we
have half a person or a part-time position, which I don't
like, doing this somewhere. Where it's done right now, it's
ether Maintenance or up here. It's still not my ideal way
to handle all this organization, but --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I can support that.
And we -- in our off-season work, we might even find a way
to do it a little differently and add on or whatever.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly. But that
would be a -- that would be a net gain of a half spot, and 1
think Ms. Mitchell will be entitled to some bump up for
supervisory responsibilities as well.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd have to look at job
descriptions, exactly how all that works. I mean, I
don't -- I'm not sure that requires an increase. But,
anyway, we can discuss that or look at the job descriptions,
and that can be done.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where are you,
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm at the point where
we're trying to fix one thing and we're creating a problem
-iz-os
2^6
L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
LL
23
24
25
in another area. We're talking about adding a half a person
to our staff, and then adding mere salary to the
administrative assistant to run that thing. I mean, I --
what are we fixing here? What is it that we're actually
fixing? Where's the problem that we're fixing with that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, we're freeing up a
full-time person in Maintenance.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. I mean,
just -- what we're fixing is moving the booking. We feel
like that that is in such horrible condition that we need to
move it up here? And we're going to create a half a spot,
and then -- I mean, I don't see what we're doing here.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, I see
that we have a little more -- somewhat more than a full-time
job now. It's just too dif{icult chasing all the -- the
different things that she has to do. She's very often the
courthouse receptionist, directing people, answering calls,
all these sorts of things. We also have a problem with
booking, so we can solve those two problems with -- with the
addition of a halftime person.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a suggestion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we go on into
the discussion on Maintenance, which it just flows right
into.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me first inquire if we
G-1L--S
z27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
need to address the Animal Control contract, or whether
that's -- we want no formal action right now? We're going
to let you guys do your work? Or do we -- are we looking
for approval of the contract subject to some final
adjustments to be worked out by Commissioner Nicholson and
the County Attorney?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm willing to go -- I'm
at the point we can go ahead and give -- I'll make a motion
to approve.
JUDGE TINLEY: Wait a minute. Let me get
back to it, okay? Let me recall Item Number 17 on the
agenda; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on
the Animal Control services contract with the City of
Kerrville. Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion to
approve the content of the Animal Control contract with the
City of Kerrville per our discussion this morning, subject
to Commissioner, Precinct 4, and the County Attorney
resolving some language issues, and authorize County Judge
to sign same.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
conditionally approve the agreement subject to adjustment.
Any further questions or comments? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
5-i'-05
228
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
<<1
22
23
29
25
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Got one done.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's now go to Item Number
24; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on the
organization of the Maintenance Department, with possibility
of executive session, depending upon the content.
Commissioner 3.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda
largely because of the potential change of who's doing the
booking for the Ag Barn. And it -- it seems to me that part
of the goal that I had in recommending some of the changes
that we still are discussing are to improve, really, the
efficiency in that department, and basically get something
that doesn't, to me, take maintenance out of Maintenance,
and allow the person that has to do that work now to be
doing, you know, full-time maintenance work. And my -- and
that's kind of where 7 was. I'd like to hear from the
Maintenance Supervisor if that makes sense, if he agrees or
disagrees. And I guess I'll say one more thing. I don't
see -- with the size of staff and what the staff does, as I
understand it, I don't see the reason to have an oYfice
person besides yourself in the Maintenance Department. I
-iz-,,,s
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
"' 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
229
think we ought to be able to have everyone out in
maintenance responsibilities. I think we're -- you know,
this is -- well, that's my feeling. Am I off base, in your
Mx. nVLKKAMY: Well, no. No, I -- well, I
understand what you're saying. The only thing is, is when
you -- when we started acquiring all of these different
facilities to, so to speak, manage, we're constantly
dispatching people to different places. I don't -- I don't
think you can do it with voicemail. Somebody has got to
answer the phone and make a decision on repairs. And I'm
going to use the Sheriff's Office for an example. We're
required, when water is flying, somebody go. We don't know
who's going to be available to qo, so I really think that --
I think we would really lose a whole lot of productivity if
we didn't have somebody coordinating the efforts of
maintenance, whether it's delivering bores of paper, which
we do; we deliver license plates to Ingram. I mean, we do
it on a day that we do custodial work over there, but
there's constantly requests for repairs. Someone is goinq
to have to take those requests. And I differ with you --
you know, and I'll be willing to -- to work with the Court
as far as sharing the -- an employee or something to
accomplish what Kathy's dilemma is in answering phones.
Booking could be under her; I mean, that's not a problem.
5-iz-us
1
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
°°- 13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
"~ 24
25
230
But I think Maintenance is going to have --
to have a need of, say, 14, 15 hours a week to answer the
phones so I can go check on facilities like the jail,
juvenile detention. You know, that is another one. We got
major issues there to get cleaned up and straightened up,
and as long as the Ag Barn is under Maintenance, that
requires people to call plumbers, electricians and that sort
of things. Who's going to do that? I mean, that is my
question. Someone is going to have to do that. The -- the
on-site guys -- and I work with a P.O. system, a purchase
order system. The reason I do it is -- is because you -- I
have a real problem giving people blank checks with county
funds. Employees are that; they're employees, and I prefer
not to say, "If you need an electrician, call him and tell
him he can work as long as he wants." I mean, somebody has
got to make a decision, and that's what I'm there for. Now,
the -- you know, if the Court chooses to change that where
there's no -- nobody that makes those decisions, so be it,
you know. That -- that's y'all's call.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I look at it, I guess, is
that -- I mean, most people know that trying to catch me on
my phone here is about impossible, but on my mobile phone, I
conduct county business and other business all day long on
that, and all night when I'm, you know, still in the city
area. I think -- I don't see why a system can't be set up
-iz-us
231
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
where P.O.'s are used. I don't think you need to change the
system; that seems to be working. But things can be done in
the office part of the day, and then use your -- use the
cell phone almost exclusively as a contact to the community
and to your department and to elected officials. I just
think that you, obviously, have headed that department as
head. You need to be, however, at those departments at
least part of the day.
MR. HOLEKAMP: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think that -- and I
still think you should be the person to have responsibility
as to calling electricians, or say, "Don't call an
electrician; send so-and-so over there."
MR. HOLEKAMP: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think it can be
done, you know, through cell phone type work, as opposed to
having a person at a desk. And I think as short-staffed as
we are in Maintenance, or as we made you -- have made you
become in Maintenance, that the more people we can have
doing maintenance, the better.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I agree with that. No, I'm
not going to argue. But, there again, as I was going to
stand here and make the -- the offer, if -- if the Court
needs some assistance with clerical work, we'd be more than
willing to -- to help out at, you know, 50 percent of the
9-i,-us
232
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
time, 60, whatever the Court chooses. But I will say, and
I've said it before, is I think that personal touch is going
to be very difficult to replace if you're -- if you're
showing people the facility and that sort of thing. I think
part of the booking, whoever is in charge of that -- I'd
kind of like to give it away, but I think that we -- we
really need to stay in touch with those public. We've
increased the usage of that facility, and we've done it
because we're treating pretty much everybody pretty nice.
Maybe we're doing too much; I don't know.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it could be that we
may be -- and I think this will be a wise thing, is to
have -- clearly, you need a contact person in your
department in addition to yourself as to -- so it's not just
anyone's call when something's --
MS. HOLEKAMP: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A chain. And I think
that that person would be the contact that -- or, you know,
a day in advance to show the Union Church or Ag Barn or
whatever, and say -- you know, let them schedule it
themselves to a degree. But -- and it's -- the other part
of it, of sharing a position, I just don't know that. I
mean, that's something that I don't --
MR. HOLEKAMP: I made that offer, you know,
if you chose to put -- working under y'all's authority, but
ca-i~-os
233
1
3
4
G
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
2 1
22
23
24
25
I would say that Ms. Mitchell would have a very difficult
time under her current conditions to be able to do that
booking and what she currently does, because I've seen it's
pretty busy up here. And I -- you know, I'm making that
offer to help if it's -- you know, is feasible for y'all.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. HOLEKAMP: It wouldn't create another
halftime position. It would be --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. HOLEKAMP: And supervision of that
person, that wouldn't be an issue for me.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How can you make that
offer? Are you making that offer predicated on not losing
another person off your staff?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, I already gave you that
one yesterday -- I mean this afternoon. I'm already having
to double up on my maintenance people.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm talking about the
booking function, and offering some assistance like you just
offered.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would be
predicated on not losing another member of your staff; is
that correct?
MR. HOLEKAMP: No, sir. I -- I'm not going
~~-iz vs
234
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
to take back what I gave you this afternoon.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MS. HOLEKAMP: No, I don't operate that way.
I am going to tighten the belt. We're going to make it
work. I -- I may be coming back to you for overtime money,
because if it doesn't work, overtime is going to be a
problem with these people that are, like, in jail and
detention. That's an unknown. I will tell you, the
detention facility has got some ills that need to be
corrected, and it's going to take me probably 30 to 60 days
to get a handle on them, so I would appreciate some patience
with that. And it's dollars --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. I just wanted
to understand what you're saying.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah. But, no, I'm not -- I
still -- that position that I had there, that goes away.
And --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. HOLEKAMP: -- then I'm still offering.
But I'd prefer to retain some, because we do some clerical
stuff that -- and phone answering, like I was trying to
explain. That sure would be nice if I had some help with
that.
	COMMISSIONER	LETZ:	Okay. That's all I
really had.	I'm not sure I	know	any more.
Q-tz-o~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
235
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further with regard
to Item 24?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, not really on 24,
but I guess going back to the -- the budget item, I think we
-- the issue is still unresolved. I mean, I think we need
to decide today. Either we're going to leave booking where
it is or we're going to bring it up here.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me recall Item 23;
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on Fiscal
Year 2005-06 budget. Okay, we're back in that mode now.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it can be done now,
or it can be done through budget amendments later; it
doesn't make any difference from my standpoint.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Tomlinson?
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Auditor?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I would suggest that
you -- that you still have the opportunity at the budget
hearing, when the budget's adopted, to make any changes to
the budget that you want to do at that time. I would like
to see us put this budget -- this proposed budget to bed by
Wednesday.
JUDGE TINLEY: By when?
MR. TOMLINSON: By Wednesday at the latest.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we need to formally adopt a
proposed budget?
9-12 US
236
1
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: There is --
JUDGE TINLEY: Or approve a proposed
budget --
MR. TOMLINSON: There needs to be --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- at that point, and get it
on file before we can do the formal adoption, which we can
also do on the 30th?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, you don't have to --
you don't have to officially vote on a proposed budget. And
I think the statute says that the County Judge shall post a
budget -- a proposed budget for -- I think it's 10 days.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ten days.
MR. TOMLINSON: Ten days prior to the
adoption of the budget. So, any time between the time it's
filed and when it's actually adopted, you have opportunities
to suggest any amendments that you want to make. The only
stipulation is that those amendments have to be -- have to
become part of the budget, so you have to be -- they have to
be -- those amendments have to be itemized within t_he body
of the budget. But do you have an opportunity --
JUDGE TINLEY: My thinking was that we -- it
may not be necessary. I may be being repetitive, but I was
just making some notes for the 19th, would be to approve a
proposed budget on the 19th. At that point, it'll be filed,
9- 1 2 ~ 9
237
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1 G
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and then on	the 30th, when the	final	actions are taken with
respect to	the tax rate, and ha	ve the	actual adoption take
place then.	Is there anything	wrong	with that timetable?
	MR. TOMLINSON:	No.	
	JUDGE TINLEY: I	s ther	e any lack of notice
that I'm not including in that,	that	I need to include?
	MR. TOMLINSON:	I can'	t -- 10 days is all I
know -- I'm sure of.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. That's my
understanding, that -- actually, I don't think we need to
have formal court action to approve the proposed budget.
MR. TOMLINSON: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: But --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the -- I mean, if we
did it on the 19th, on Monday, how long is it goinq to take
you to get it printed? Don't you have to have ~t available
10 days?
MR. TOMLINSON: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know why we just
don't do it today. I mean, it's on the agenda.
DODGE TINLEY: We could.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We could. I don't
know why you can't, either.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That way it can be out to
the public and they can look at it. If we want to -- it's a
v-i~-os
238
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
proposed budget; we ran still make a few minor changes if we
need to, or we can do it through budget amendments after the
budget starts.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's good. Move
to approve the budget with the changes that we've noted
today.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the budget, subject to the changes being
implemented that we've noted today. Any questions?
MS. UECKER: How do we know what those -- how
do we know what that's going to be?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I'll send everybody a
page of the final number.
MS. NEMEC: And I'll send everybody their own
position schedule.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then if there's
something wrong, there's still time during that -- between
now and Monday, probably, really to do it, or we can do it
during the 10-day period. We can still make the correction.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Holekamp?
MS. HOLEKAMP: I just have a comment. And
I -- and as I've said numerous times, I work at the pleasure
of the Court. But if we're going to chop any more positions
and it goes in effect October 1, I'd sure like to be able to
~-i n=
239
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
tell somebody they won't have a job, because we're two weeks
away. So, please, we've got to treat these people, I mean,
fairly.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on the motion on the floor? 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. Let's
go to the 2 o'clock item. Reasonably timely. Reports from
departments. I.T., Mr. Trolinger.
MR. TROLINGER: Afternoon. I have submitted
to each of you a written report bimonthly from July 11th
through September 12th. Just a couple of highlights. We
brought the 198th District Attorney's local office online
this morning, actually, so they're going to be able to
access the County's database, the jail records, the person's
records and whatnot. So, we'll get them -- we'll get them
started on some training. We've reconfigured the County
Clerk's office counter operation. Looks pretty good. I
think all the people that sit there and have to -- have to
print and run to the printer now versus -- or not run to the
printer now versus having to print jobs at their desk,
9-]2-u5
240
1
2
3
4
F
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
they're going to improve some things, and Jannett's also
done some things with her seats, or is getting ready to do
things with her seats, which is going to make it much better
also. So, definitely some good things happening this past
two months with efficiency.
Last little piece is we installed a driver's
license reader for jail visitation. A little bit more
accurate -- well, some accuracy improvements, and hopefully
some speed improvements for the visitors at the jail. And
converted the fingerprint system communications from a
dedicated line -- expensive dedicated line, and rolled that
into the cable modem that we had provided him, his dedicated
Internet connection. If y'all have any questions, I'll be
glad to answer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the timetable for
the new software, or new computer system?
MR. TROLINGER: I'm sitting down with the --
with the contract people tonight at dinner, and in the
morning, I expect we'll be able to present to the County
Attorney the contracts, so it will be ready to be signed on
October 1st. And pending that scheduling, we anticipate for
the Tax Office and for financial will probably be after the
end of January; probably February lst timeframe will be the
initial -- that's because we want to push them past the tax
season and the forms and whatnot. For the courts package,
~-1,-os
241
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
the most expensive and the largest, I'd like to get a
scheduled date as soon as possible, and that's all based on
a signed contract. So, that's why I want to have those
contracts ready for you, so we can get a person scheduled to
assign -- you know, a time slot basically assigned to us
from Software Group for the Courts Odyssey package install.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there anything
noticeably going to be different with the new system? Like,
Jannett's people, are they going to be getting different
computers or PC's or anything? Or, I guess, how is it going
to -- or is it basically going to be run off the same PC's
that are everywhere?
MR. TROLINGER: For the majority of the
cases, the same equipment, with some peripheral changes;
some printers, some scanners are going to change. The
largest departments, the Clerk's and the Sheriff's Office,
we've gotten them up to the point where their hardware
already -- since February, we've gotten everything in place,
so they've got new computers; they've got the hardware they
need. I took into account a couple of places where it was
I've got that calculated so that it'll all
come together when Odyssey is installed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: When will we -- when will
be your best guess as to when the Courts package will be up
9-1^-OS
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
292
and running?
MS. UECKER: Gosh, training will be --
MR. TROLINGER: February-March. Spring,
completely. And that includes the jail, Sheriff's Office,
the Clerk's offices, District Attorney's, because I'm
bringing them into this picture too, and the J.P.'s.
There's a lot of people involved. But it all hinges on
getting that -- getting that slot reserved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You say you're cutting
a deal over dinner?
MR. TROLINGER: We're going to review the
contracts and make sure each one of the line items are
correct as we discussed; make sure that, for instance, the
Sheriff's computer-aided dispatch is included. And then
we're going to have that in a form so that all of those
pieces -- tax, financial, and courts -- all look similar, so
that when the County Attorney reviews it, it's a simple
process for him to give feedback, so when he does give that
feedback, it applies to all three. There's three separate
contracts, and we can get the process moving to streamline
the process.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be careful letting
Software, Inc., buy you dinner.
MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be careful about
s-iz-as
X93
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
takinq gifts.
MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir.
MS. NEMEC: John? Could you update the Court
on what we're going to do with direct deposit and what
timeframe, just to have it on the record, please?
MR. TROLINGER.: Okay, sure. Direct deposit,
I was asked to look at the automated -- automated data
processing -- the direct deposit issue. Currently, with the
Legacy system, we have not purchased the module that's
required to do the -- the automated clearinghouse -- the
piece that lets us send payments electronically through the
fed. In lieu of purchasing that, installing that, I'm
recommending that we wait until we install the new software
package. In the new financial package, that will -- that
will be built-in, and the Treasurer's office will receive
training at that time. But that will be after -- after
January 31st.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: After January?
MR. TROLINGER: Yes.
MS. NEMEC: And that we'd have to purchase
twice.
MR. TROLINGER: Otherwise -- I'll give you a
quote. What was it, $1,500?
MS. NEMEC: I think so.
MR. TROLINGER: Relatively not a large
9-11-US
244
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
amount, but it's $1,500 that we would spend and then throw
away within a few months.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, it's going to be a short
delay to really implementing that because of the wasted
expenditure for a short period of time.
MR. TROLINGER: Correct. And I expect with
the Legacy system, if I placed the order with Software Group
right now, it would be two months before we had that
installed. It would be the end of November in any case,
just the scheduling issue that they have in training and
implementation. So, you know, by the end of November we'd
install it, and then by the end of January, we're putting in
a new software system that covers the -- covers that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you going to get
an ironclad implementation schedule from these people?
MR. TROLINGER: Yes, and I have the
preliminary step-by-step. It's a thick document, and it
outlines each and every step and package with sign-off at
the bottom of each page. Software Group's got a very
detailed plan.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Who executes the
contract? You, Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: I assume so. Contract's first
a-iz-os
1
7
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
295
got to go to the County Attorney, and then it will come back
here for final approval.
MR. TROLINGER: My plan was -- on the
contracts was to just to make sure -- I was going to go with
Software Group, then bring it to Linda, Jannett, the
Sheriff, the Auditor, the Treasurer, et cetera, to make sure
that all the pieces -- the data conversion and whatnot were
in the contract, that we had everything covered before
giving it to the County Attorney, and then it would come to
the -- to the Judge.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else for the I.T.?
MS. UECKER: I don't know if Jonathan even
knows this or not, but effective September the 1st, we quit
using the expensive receipts. We're just doing plain paper
receipts, and we're not even keepinq one. We're just
running a report and getting the amount off of that rather
than buying the expensive computer receipts.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you talking to this
Jonathan or that Jonathan? He's not Jonathan.
MS. UECKER: Well, I don't even know if he
knows that we did that, but you might --
MR. TROLINGER: Yeah, September 1st --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Got your John's mixed
up.
0 12-OG
246
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TROLINGER: September 1st, the District
Clerk's Office came off the expensive receipts and went to
plain paper for receipts. And the County Clerk's office is
doing the same; they're in that process right now. Thank
you.
MS. UECKER: He just looks like a Jonathan,
doesn't he? (Laughter).
JUDGE TINLEY: Road and Bridge.
MS. HARDIN: Would you pass these out?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just what we need,
more stuff to read.
(Discussion off the record.)
MS. HARDIN: Since the last report, the first
list that I have here are the roads that have been paved
since the last bimonthly report, Ranchero Road being the
most fun. Goat Creek Cutoff is being done today, as we
speak. And all of these on the list should be done before
the end of September. Elm Pass should be done next week.
The stripers will be here next Monday to stripe Ranchero,
Goat Creek Cutoff, and Scenic Valley Roads. Does anyone
have any questions about the paving?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I guess there are no
roads in Precinct 3?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Three's in very good
shape.
9-1:-OS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
~~
GG
23
24
25
247
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Both of them.
MS. HARDIN: We cut them all out when the
budget went.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: When does Canyon
Springs Ranch get finished up?
MS. HARDIN: They're going to go from Goat
Creek Cutoff to Elm Pass, and then from Elm Pass they will
be going there, so probably by middle of next week.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think you ought to
pass Elm Pass and go directly... I won't get so many phone
calls.
MS. HARDIN: On the subdivision plats, one of
those changed this morning. The Mosty Pecan Grove won't be
done until the 19th. We still have four subdivisions that
still need the final -- finals on them. That's where we
marked it with "N. F." We're waiting on -- three of those
are in Precinct 2, and then we still have the one in
Precinct 4, which was that subdivision that had not been
done.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's with the
school? Another house there or what?
MS. HARDIN: We haven't heard anything more
from them sinr_e the preliminary plat, so we're still waiting
on that to be finished.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ledgestone is the one
9 12 US
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
248
on 27 coming for final?
MS. HARDIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that correct?
MS. HARDIN: Correct. And then the Waugh
Acres, they were supposed to do a floodplain study, and we
do not have that back. And the one out in Precinct 4, that
Heavenly Acres on Harper Valley Road, all of the landowners
were scattered all over the United States, so it's taking
them longer than the 90 days that we gave them to come back
with the signatures. And the next page, the list is for the
floodplain permits. We still have several of those pending.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What's Truett
Airhart? What does he need?
MS. HARDIN: He's doing a remodel on his
property, so we're waiting for them to complete the -- the
remodel so that they can do an elevation certificate on the
finished job.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I didn't know about
that. Can you -- you need a construction permit out in the
county?
MS. HARDIN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: In the floodplain.
MS. HARDIN: In the floodplain.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Oh, in the
floodplain.
~-i.-us
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
299
MS. HARDIN: These are all floodplain
permits.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I know where it is.
MS. HARDIN: Okay. We'll move on to the
employees. We have no new worker's comp claims in the last
two months.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yea.
MS. HARDIN: Yea. We did have one man out
with an emergency appendectomy. We did -- and we had -- we
lost one retiree, Archie Koennecke, who was Doug's father,
passed away on August the 18th. We've had no new insurance
claims -- well, we had one where gravel was coming out from
underneath the tailgate of a dump truck and damaged a car.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What was the car
doing underneath the dump truck's tailgate?
MS. HARDIN: It was one of those little,
bitty -- what are those? Mini Cooper? It was a Mini
Cooper, and it was too close to the tailgate.
JUDGE TINLEY: Dumped a load and gone.
MS. HARDIN: We did have some -- on September
the lst, there was some new laws that came out that our --
some of our employees were concerned about, about the
tarping of dump trucks, so I called Travis Hall and asked
him if this pertained to us, and he could not -- he couldn't
give me a definition until he went to his class to find out
9-i~-os
zso
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
how he was supposed to interpret the laws. So, in the
meantime, I called Mindy, who was -- for insurance purposes,
and she talked to TAC legal, and they said that we were not
a commercial entity, so we did not have to tarp our trucks.
We have 11 dump trucks that are not tarped. Those of
certain sizes have tarps on them, and they were sold to us
that way. I guess what we're asking the Court is, would you
like for us to consider tarping those 11 trucks, or do we
want to wait until we hear from the -- from Mr. Hall?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wait till we hear from
Mr. Hall.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait till you hear
from Mr. Hall.
JUDGE TINLEY: And if you don't like what you
hear him say, you can tell him what TAC said.
MS. HARDIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Say he's obviously wrong; go
back again.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Go back to school.
MS. HARDIN: Okay. I just wanted to point
that out. Ranchero Road was a very difficult road for our
guys to pave. And you gentlemen drive it every day, so you
know what the traffic's like. It was done without any
incidents. The constable came -- two constables came and
helped us the first day, and the Sheriff's Department did
~,-i% 05
zsl
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
come the second day and gave several tickets. It turned out
very well. And --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What was happening
there?
MS. HARDIN: The only -- pardon?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What was happening
there on Ranchero? What -- what kind of violations were
occurring?
MS. HARDIN: Speeding, no seat belts.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. Okay.
MS. HARDIN: And then on Goat Creek Cutoff,
when we were getting ready to do that last week, we had to
call the Sheriff's Department, 'cause a gentleman threatened
to kill our guys if they touched his driveway.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, what was the
final disposition?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We didn't touch his
driveway.
MS. HARDIN: Didn't touch his driveway, but
we did send a deputy out.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There was a couple Road
and Bridge workers that left. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Smart employees.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tough work. First
thing, they're going to be looking for combat pay here.
y iz-ns
252
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. HARDIN: If you get a call about a
driveway that didn't get done, it was probably that one.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: For the information
of the rest of the Court, you got a copy of a letter from a
landowner in Y.O. Ranchlands complaining that he thought
some unauthorized development was going on out there. And
that's nothing new; we dealt with that before.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was shocked.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And I sent him a
response, said we'll look into it again, and he'd get an
answer when I got one. Truby is working to find out the
details on it, so that's where that stands.
MS. HARDIN: We went back and pulled the
information. The gentleman who's doing -- selling the lots
had a letter in 2001; he had another determination in 2004,
that if he sold the property in the same configurations that
he bought them, that they did not have to plat. And, so, I
have a call in to the surveyor who's doing the work for him
and asked him to draw me a picture, so when I have a picture
of what the plat looks like, then we can set up a meeting
with the Commissioner and the County Attorney.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Isn't the issue, though,
they're putting in roads?
MS. HARDIN: But there was an easement road
there at that time.
9-12-CS
253
1
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.
MS. HARDIN: Is my understanding.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Some type of road.
MS. HARDIN: But I don't have --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We don't know the
answer to that.
MS. HARDIN: We don't really know the answer,
but we are working on it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: There's obviously a
feud going on, and it's kind of -- you can't trust what you
hear from either side.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I like this report.
MS. HARDIN: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The format.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's good. Thank
you.
MS. HARDIN: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, thank you. Facilities
and Maintenance. We've heard about you upside, downside --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Probably heard enough.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- sideways, every which way.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I have a real brief one. In
the month of September, the barn was booked 14 days; Union
Church, six. And those 14, that is not counting setup and
9-iz-os
254
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
tear-down; those are actual days that somebody was in the
facility renting it -- well, and 4-H. Wait a minute, not
all rental; it was some 4-H stuff. And in the month of
October, we're scheduled for 16 days in the barn, and I
think Union Church is going to be about six.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What are they using Union
Church for mostly?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Okay, I figured somebody was
going to ask me that. We do weddings, and I see where we
got a baby shower coming up. And the -- Schreiner College
calls it, like, Partners in Ministry; there's a group. And
the biggest problem with Union Church -- and I'll just kind
of give you -- it's not a problem, but it's a -- it's one of
those things that you have to check on quite often, is the
-- that when they use it, they don't turn the thermostat
back, so we have to go over there the next morning or
whatever and check that thermostat, see if it's sitting on
68 still. They just leave it at -- you know. And I'm --
I'm kind of hard-headed about that; I think that's a waste
of money.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can't we put one of those
lockbox --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir, we could.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Might be a way just to --
I mean, obviously --
e-iz-us
zss
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2 L
23
24
25
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah, we could.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Long as they can get to
it to shut it down so it's not --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, I understand. We just
haven't done that sort of thing. We were hoping that
honesty would -- and common sense would prevail, but it
doesn't always work that way. We've got several projects
that we're fixing to start on, and I have some -- somebody
said about goals earlier in court; I think Buster. I've got
a goal that we have this space downstairs in that hallway,
in that open space, to have it looking like something other
than a basement by early voting. I think that's a lofty
goal on my part. I've got the -- I've got the ceiling the
and the floor tile, and I'm going to try to work them out of
this year's budget, and then the scheduling of trying to get
people to do it, it's going to be from there on. But I do
have a goal of trying to get that accomplished, and there's
a bunch of air conditioning duct work that'll go along with
it, and lighting, a lot of electrical that -- we don't see
it when you walk in there because it's already lit, but that
cannot be moved down. So, that's a goal that I have. And
I'm hoping in -- and the main reason I've been using my --
my statf and trustees is because contractors are really
cost-prohibitive nowadays. It has gotten to where if I go
out and try to get a bid on something, I can expect 60 to
-iz us
256
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
65 percent of	that bid being	labor.	
	COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN:	Sure, if they have
time to do it.
MR. HOLEKAMP: If you can even get them to
call you back, right. And I well understand, you know,
that's good for our -- our community if they're busy, but it
really makes it tough to -- to get things accomplished. But
that is a goal right now for early voting -- have it done by
beginning of March.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a good goal.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Any questions?
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Thank you.
MS. PIE PER: Glenn, I have early voting
starting October 24th.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, that's for this
election. I said primaries, didn't I?
MS. PIEPER: Okay.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I meant primaries.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You said early voting,
but we'll go --
MR. HOLEKAMP: I meant primaries in March --
isn't that March?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right, let's cut
his salary.
9-~: us
257
1
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. PIEPER: They start February	20th.
	MR. HOLEKAMP: February 20?		
	JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Do we	have	anything to
go into exec	utive session about now? Okay,	let	's --
	MS. NEMEC: Judge?		
	JUDGE TINLEY: -- talk about	the	bills.
	MS. NEMEC: Judge?		
	JUDGE TINLEY: I'm sorry.		
	MS. NEMEC: Ms. Uecker left,	but	she informed
me that she	-- as she told y'all, that she	had	cut a
position and	was moving those duties up to	one	of her other
employees, a	nd wanted to know if she could	do a	s Ms. Pieper
is doing and	giving her that one-step increase.	
	JUDGE TINLEY: I sure think	she	ought to be
here to ask	for it if she's that interested in	it.
	COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think	the	answer is
yes.
MS. NEMEC: So, should I go ahead and include
that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's fine. Fine in my
opinion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's a last-minute
adjustment?
MS. NEMEC: Yes, sir.
MS. PIEPER: I have another question on that.
0-12 ns
258
1
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: Uh-oh. Get Linda Uecker back
down here.
MS. PIEPER: Well, if our gas allowance is
going to go up -- the only time I put in for reimbursement
on gas is just when I go to conferences. When I travel to
the county or bank or, you know, voting places, I never put
in for that, but for my conference line items, I do. I seek
reimbursement for my mileage, so I just kind of wonder --
and I think Linda Decker's the same way, and I just wonder
if we need to kind of up that amount a little bit.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I'm -- I do -- I
think most of the Court does the same way. I think I'd
rather -- rather than try to change all those line items,
let's just see how we go through the year.
MS. PIEPER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if we get a little
bit short, we can do a budget amendment, if that's the
reason. Hopefully fuel prices come down.
MS. PIEPER: Okay, that sounds good.
JUDGE TINLEY: What a dreamer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. Maybe they will.
Probably overestimated this year.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I guess we're down to
the approval agenda. Mr. Auditor?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we pay the bills.
~-_~-r~,
259
1
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: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
pay the bills. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is there any indigent
health care in here?
DODGE TINLEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can't seem to find
it.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'd say there is.
MR. TOMLINSON: No, we didn't have -- we
didn't have any
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Didn't have any?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I want to ask a
question about paying indigent health care bills, anyway.
Who sets -- who actually sets the criteria for paying for
indigent health care?
MR. TOMLINSON: The State of Texas.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does the State of
Texas actually say that we will cover undocumented aliens?
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't know -- I don't know
the rule on that one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I'm
talking about, is those kinds of criteria.
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't know -- I don't know
the criteria for qualification.
v-iz-os
z5o
1
Z
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I had -- the reason
I'm asking -- I'm not fussing or complaining or anything.
I've just heard about another county that the Commissioners
Court actually sets the criteria of what kind of individual
qualifies.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: As I understand it, I
thought it was -- Sid Peterson was doing that for us.
MR. TOMLTNSON: Well, they are, but there's a
set -- there's a set of regulations that they have to
follow.
COMMISSIONER LETZ; Right. And I don't know
what those regulations are, but, I mean --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; And that's set down by
the State, I'm sure.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah,
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They just follow
state rules when an applicant shows up, right?
MR. TOMLINSON: And it`s the same -- they
also set the -- the amount that we pay for certain
medications, surgical procedures. That -- that is actually
the most difficult part of -- of administering the Indigent
Health Care program.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; Yeah.
MR. TOMLINSON: 'Cause each and every drug

261
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and each and every procedure that's allowed has -- has a
price attached to it, and we -- we can't pay more than what
that price is. There's -- so -- and, as a matter of fact,
there's some -- there's some cases that -- I don't know how
current this is, but I have seen at times where we've paid
actually more under the State's rules than was actually
billed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Doesn't surprise me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And they set things,
too, like -- I mean, part of it would be, you know, to see
if a person's been through Medicaid/Medicare before it ever
arrives at Indigent Health Care.
MR. TOMLINSON: I think that that's -- that's
the real reason that we have contracted with Peterson
Hospital to do -- to do that, is that they -- they know all
-- I mean, they have a way to know if -- if the applicant
has already been through Medicaid or Medicare or any -- any
other -- any other benefits that are available to them
before they actually go on the Indigent Health Care rolls.
I mean, that would be difficult for someone, you know, in
the courthouse to -- that kind of information would be hard
to obtain. So, in my -- in my mind, I think that's a plus
for -- for us that we have somebody that's already in the
social services business --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
~+-ice-us
262
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TOMLINSON: -- to do this qualification
part of the system.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My only -- I agree
with that 100 percent. I can't imagine one of us trying to
figure all that out. But I'm concerned about the
undocumented alien thing, if we're required --
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't -- I don't know the
regulation.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to continue
looking into it, see if I can come up with it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
amendments. Budget Amendment Request Number 1.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Number 1 is for the
Courthouse and Related Buildings. The request is to move
$2,023.31 to Utilities, 1,314.23, from Leasehold
Improvements and 709.08 into Repairs -- from Repairs and
Maintenance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
a iz c5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1G
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
263
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 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: The motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 2.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's from the District
Clerk. Her request is to transfer $38.11 from her Part-Time
line item, $30 into Conferences and $8.11 into Employee
Training.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or comment? 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. Budget
Amendment Request Number 3.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 3 is from the Sheriff
y-~.:-us
264
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
L G
23
24
25
for the jail, to transfer 12,000 trom Jailers' Salaries to
Utilities and $203.48 from Capital Outlay to Operating
Equipment.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JODGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just tell me again,
Rusty, how we got $12,000 in Jailers' Salaries we don't
need.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I had openings.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Same answer as last
time. Thank you.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They won't be there
long. We about filled all but two now.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any -- any other questions or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actually, I think the
real question is, how did we underbudget utilities in
everything?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See, there's $14,000
right here.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Oil and gas prices,
maybe.
9 iz-u~
265
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Propane. It's high.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It did go up in the
budget from year before last to this year; we added a
certain percentage, Tommy and I did, and now at the end, I
-- all I can say is gas and oil -- they haven't changed
anything out there. It's got to be just the cost.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $19,000 in these two
offices.
DODGE TINLEY: Any other questions or
comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
DODGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 4.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Number 4 is for the
216th and the 198th District Courts. The first part is for
the 198th -- I mean the 216th court, to transfer 11,184.10
from Special Trials, 198.10 to Office Supplies, 10,846 to
Court-Appointed Attorneys, and $140 to Court Transcripts.
Bottom half of that is for the 198th court. The request is
to transfer $538 from Special Trials, $338 in Interpreters
and $200 in Special Court Reporters.
-i~-os
266
1
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 moved, with a comment.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second, with a
comment.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded.
Questions or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My comment is, is this a
typo under the interpreter? Shouldn't that be 10-436?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, actually, no. I --
that 434 department is for jury -- juries.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: That Interpreters line item
is in that jury department.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Same comment as
before. It's just awfully dangerous to have these big pots
of money laying around that are easy to tap.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We'll find out what
happens when we don't have them, 'cause we don't have them
in this year's budget.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Stay tuned.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
comment? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
i JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
~-,z-us
267
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 5.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 5 is for the County
Clerk. She's requesting a transfer of $750 from Software
Maintenance to Lease Copier.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or comment? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 6.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 6 is for Rabies and
Animal Control. The request is to transfer $10.77 from
Office Supplies to Lease Copier.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or comment? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
e-ia-ns
268
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 7.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 7 is from the Sheriff
for the jail and the Sheriff's Department. He's requesting
a transfer of 2,165.12 from Jailers' Salaries, 47.30 into
Office Supplies, 407.85 into Vehicle Gas and Oil, 1,702.98
to Operating Supplies, and $6.99 to Radio Repairs. For the
Sheriff's Office, he's requesting a transfer of 6,722.26
from Deputies' Salaries, 309.90 to Operating Expenses and
6,412.36 to Vehicle Gas and Oil.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Question. Vehicle Gas
and Oil. We'll do it again at the end of this month?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Did you cover enough to
go through the rest of it, Tommy? Or is it just for this
bill?
MR. TOMLINSON: I -- I think so. We --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Estimate what that will
leave. Our monthly bills in gas and oil for the Sheriff's
Office is -- last month was almost 9,000.
y-ia-oa
269
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't think we did budget
for nett month, no. So, this is --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We'll do it one more
time.
MR. TOMLINSON: This is for just this bill.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We'll go through it one
more time.
DODGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
DODGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 8.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Number 8 is for
Nondepartmental. We need to transfer $600 from the Computer
Telephone line item to the Pauper Burial.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or comment? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
n is os
z7o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~5
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 9.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 9 is a request from
Judge Brown to transfer 85.67 from his Telephone line item
to Office Supplies.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or comment? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 10.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Number 10 is for the
Auditor's office to transfer $500 from Part-Time Salary line
item to Office Supplies.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or comment? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
a ~_-u5
271
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
DODGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Any
further budget amendments?
MR. TOMLINSON: I have one. You don't have
Number 11?
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No.
MR. TOMLINSON: I guess they didn't make
copies. Number 11 is for the Treasurer's office and -- and
the Auditor's office. The Treasurer is requesting an
addition of 3,166.63 for her Part-Time Salary line item,
with $190.56 from Postage, $500 from the Telephone line
item, $140 from the Lease Copier line item, 936.98 from
Conferences, $124.07 from Capital Outlay, and 1,275.02 from
my -- from the Auditor's Part-Time Salary line item.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Move for approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of Budget Amendment Request Number 11. Any
question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. How did that
happen?
MS. NEMEC: How did -- that we need part-time
9 - 1 ? - 0 S
z7z
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~l
-~
23
24
25
money?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
MS. NEMEC: Is that what -- okay. I had told
the Court several times throughout the year that that was
going to happen with our training, you know, with my new
employee coming in in January. We just got behind, and
Jackie had to work extra hours. And then she also had some
vacation accumulated from last year that she hadn't taken,
and she took vacation, and so I knew I was going to be
short.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So it's very likely
this kind of thing wouldn't happen next year?
MS. NEMEC: No. As a matter of fact, I said
whatever vacation she's qot has to be taken within the
budget year so that, you know, if there is a chance that she
needs to work over, then it won't impact us this bad the way
it did.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And there won't be any
training with new employees.
MS. NEMEC: Yeah. Yeah, everything is
smoothing out in the office, and things are getting better,
so she hasn't had to work the overtime any more. And I
don't see it happening. I had offered for -- instead of it
coming out of the Auditor's office, to come out of my salary
line item, but they saw that they had money in that, so they
<~ iz os
273
1
2
3
4
5
H
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
suggested that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or
comments? 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. Do we
have any late bills?
MR. TOMLINSON: I have one. It's for $23,900
for postage in the Tax Office.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: I assume you need a hand check
to U.S. Postmaster?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Motion made and
seconded for approval of late bill and hand check, $23,900
for Tax Office to the U.S. Postmaster. Any question or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It'd just be stupid of
me to ask if that's a budgeted amount. Of course, I'm -- if
I were going to ask it -- which I'm not, but if I were going
to, is that a budgeted amount?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
9-12-OS
z~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 BALDWIN: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
comments? 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. I
don't see any monthly reports here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any reports from
any of the Commissioners in connection with their liaison
assignments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me get back to the reports
section.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see
JUDGE TINLEY: I've been tendered reports
from Justice of the Peace, Precinct 3; Justice of the Peace,
Precinct 2; County Clerk, with a notation, "August, General
Fund"; Sheriff's, with a notation, "Civil"; and Justice of
the Peace, Precinct 1. Do I hear a motion that these
reports be approved as presented?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
~-iz na
275
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded 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: The motion does carry. We're
back to the reports from the Commissioners and their liaison
assignments or otherwise. Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I've been too busy
with budget. I don't have anything, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two things. One --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- remember to come to
Hermann Sons Bridge Wednesday morning, and two, now that we
have budget, I think, behind us, I can concentrate on
Subdivision Rules and get those up here very soon.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What time is that
Wednesday?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 10 o'clock in the
morning.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We got the governor
(a-1?-q5
276
1
2
3
4
G
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
coming.
MS. PIEPER: Where is everybody going to park
at?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's what I want to
know.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You won't have any
deputies down there to direct traffic?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I will have somebody
down there.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I got a budget
meeting tonight at the Hunt Methodist Church, and you're all
invited.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Man, you're a glutton
for punishment.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think I'll pass.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other reports from elected
officials? Department heads? Any other business? We stand
adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 4:47 p.m.)
~a lz us
1
G
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
z77
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF KERR
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as
County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County,
Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 21st day of September,
2005.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
BY: __~(_ ~~ ___ _______
Kathy Ban k, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
~-i~-os
ORDER NO. 29355
ANNOUNCE OCTOBER AS TEXAS ARCHEOLOGY MONTH IN KERB
COUNTY
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the announcement of October as Texas Archeology Month in Kerr
County.
ORDER NO. 29356
APPROVAL FOR THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS TO USE ONE
OF THE DISTRICT COURTROOMS FOR VOTER EDUCATION ON
SEPTEMBER 20, 2005
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
approved by record vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the League of Women Voters to use one of the District Courtrooms
for voter education on September 20, 2005.
ORDER NO. 29357
APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR RIVER ROAD RANCH, PCT. 4
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The
Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the final plat for River Road Ranch, Precinct 4.
ORDER NO. 29358
SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR OCTOBER 24, 2005 AT 10:00 A.M. TO
APPROVE REVISION OF PLAT FOR THE RESERVE OF FALLING
WATER
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
approved by record vote of 4-0-0 to:
Set a Public Hearing for October 24, 2005 at 10:00 a.m. to approve the
revision of plat for The Reserve of Falling Water, Lots 34-37, Vol. 7, Page
215-217, Precinct 3.
ORDER NO. 29359
APPROVE FINAL REVISION OF PLAT FOR WHISKEY RIDGE
RANCHES
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the final revision of Plat for Whiskey Ridge Ranches, Section 2,
Lots 17 & 18, Precinct 3.
ORDER NO.293 60
APPROVAL OF FINAL REVISION OF PLAT FOR KERRVILLE
COUNTRY ESTATES
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
approved by record vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve final revision of Plat for Kerrville Country Estates, Section Two,
Lot 34A, Precinct 1.
ORDER NO. 29361
APPROVAL OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN KERB 911
AND KERR COUNTY
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the Interlocal Agreement between Kerr 911 and Kerr County.
ORDER NO. 29362
AUTHORIZE EXPENDITURE FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO
MEET REQUIREMENTS OF TWDB FOR REGIONAL WASTEWATER
FACILITIES PLANNING GRANT
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The
Court approved by record vote of 4-0-0 to:
Authorize an expenditure not to exceed $5,000 for Professional Services to
meet the requirements of TWDB for a Regional Wastewater Facilities
Planning Grant for the community of Center Point.
ORDER NO.293 63
APPOINT BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR KERR COUNTY JUVENILE
DETENTION FACILITY
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
approved by record vote of 4-0-0 to:
Appoint Commissioners Court as members for the Board of Trustees for
oversight of the Kerr County Juvenile Detention Facility, as provided for in
Human Resources Code, Title 3, of the State of Texas.
ORDER NO. 29364
ADOPT POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL FOR KERR COUNTY
JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The
Court approved by record vote of 4-0-0 to:
Adopt and put in place, current Policy and Procedures Manual as provided in
Human Resources Code, Title 3, State of Texas (that has already been
adopted by the Juvenile Board in January, 2005), to be determined at a later
time if Amendments need to be made.
ORDER NO.29365
APPROVE REAFFIRMATION OF SUPPORT OF DEVELOPMENT OF
THE HILL COUNTRY SHOOTING SPORTS COMPLEX
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The
Court approved by record vote of 3-2-0 to:
Approve and reaffirm Kerr County's support of the development of the Hill
Country Shooting Sports Complex.
ORDER NO.29366
APPROVE ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH THE
CITY OF KERRVILLE
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
approved by record vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve Animal Control Contract as to content per discussion, subject to
Commissioner Nicholson and the County Attorney resolving language issues
and authorize County Judge to sign same.
ORDER NO.29367
APPROVE FY 2005-06 BUDGET
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
approved by record vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the FY 2005-06 budget with changes as noted today.
.,_ ORDER NO.29368
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, came to be
considered by the Court various Commissioners Precincts, which said
Claims and Accounts are:
Accounts Expense
10-General	$	116,929.27
14-Fire Protection	$	11,891.55
15-Road & Bridge	$	51,032.16
18-County Law Library	$	2,652.50
19-Public Library	$	26,944 08
20-Road Districts	$	9,055.08
21-Title IV-E/AACOG Grant	$	2,126.45
._ 26-JP Technology	$	228.99
31-Parks	$	170.00
76-Juvenile Detention Facility	$	7,688.60
Total
$ $228,718.68
Upon motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner
Williams, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to pay the
claims and accounts.
ORDER NO.29369
BUDGET AMENDMENT
COURTHOUSE & RELATED BLDGS.
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-510-440	Utilities
10-510-470	Leasehold Improvements
10-510-450	Repairs & Maintenance
Amendment
Increase/QDecrease
+ $2,023.31
- ($1,314.23)
- ($709.08)
ORDER NO. 29370
BUDGET AMENDMENT
DISTRICT CLERK
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the
Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following
expense codes:
Expense Code Description
10-450-485 Conference
10-450-216 Employee Training
10-450-108 Part-Time
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
+ $30.00
+ $8.11
- {$38.11)
ORDER NO.293 71
BUDGET AMENDMENT
COUNTY JAIL
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-512-440 Utilities
10-512-104 Jailer Salaries
10-512-569 Operating Equipment
10-512-570 Capital Outlay
Amendment
Increase/QDecrease
+ $12,000.00
- ($12,000.00)
+ $203.48
- ($203.48)
ORDER NO. 29372
BUDGET AMENDMENT
216`" DISTRICT COURT
198`" DISTRICT COURT
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
10-435-310	Office Supplies +	$198.10
10-435-402	Court Appointed Attorneys +	$10,846.00
10-435-497	Court Transcripts +	$140.00
10-435-417	Special Trials -	$($11,184.10)
10-434-496	Interpreters +	$338 00
10-436-494	Special Court Reporters +	$200 00
10-436-417	Special Trials -	($538.00)
ORDER NO. 29373
BUDGET AMENDMENT
COUNTY CLERK
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-403-461 Lease Copiers
10-403-563 Software Maintenance
Amendment
Increase/QDecrease
+ $750.00
- ($750.00)
ORDER NO. 293 74
BUDGET AMENDMENT
RABIES & ANIMAL CONTROL
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-642-461 Lease Copier
10-642-310 Office Supplies
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
+ $10.77
- ($10.77)
-- ORDER NO. 29375
BUDGET AMENDMENT
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
COUNTY JAIL
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Amendment
Expense Code Description Increase/QDecrease
-^ 10-512-310	Office Supplies	+	$47.30
10-512-330	Vehicle Gas & Oil	+	$407.85
10-512-331	Operating Supplies	+	$1,702.98
10-512-453	Radio Repairs	+	$6.99
10-512-104	Jailer Salaries	-	($2,165.12)
10-560-330	Operating Expenses	+	$309 90
10-560-331	Vehicle Gas & Oil	+	$6,412.36
10-560-104	Deputies Salaries	-	($6,722.26)
ORDER NO. 29376
BUDGET AMENDMENT
NON-DEPARTMENTAL
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-409-404 Pauper Burial
10-409-420 Telephone, Computer
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
+ $600.00
- ($600.00)
ORDER NO. 29377
BUDGET AMENDMENT
COUNTY COURT @ LAW
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-427-310 Office Supplies
10-427-420 Telephone
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
+ $85.67
- ($85.67)
ORDER NO. 29378
BUDGET AMENDMENT
COUNTY AUDITOR
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-495-310 Office Supplies
10-495-108 Part-Time Salary
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
+ $500.00
- ($500.00)
ORDER NO. 29379
BUDGET AMENDMENT
COUNTY TREASURER
COUNTY AUDITOR
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-497-108'	Part-Time Salary
10-497-309	Postage
10-497-420	Telephone
10-497-461	Lease Copier
10-497-485	Conferences
10-497-570	Capital Outlay
10-495-108	Part-Time Salary
Amendment
Increase/Q Decrease
+ $3,166.63
- ($190.56)
- ($500.00)
- ($140.00)
- ($936.98)
- ($124.07)
- ($1,275.02)
ORDER NO. 29380
LATE BILL
TAX ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR
Came to be heard this the 12th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to issue a hand check in the amount
of $23,900.00 payable to United States Postal Service.
Amendment
Expense Code Description Increase/()Decrease
10-499-309 Postage + $23,900.00
Postage (for mailing statements).
ORDER NO. 29381
MONTHLY REPORTS
Came to be heard this the 13th day of September, 2005, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 the following monthly reports:
J.P. #3
J.P. #2
County Clerk -August -General Fund
Sheriff's -Civil
J.P. #1