1
2
4
b
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
I6
17
18
19
20
21
22
2 J
24
25
Y:ERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Regular Session
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Teras
PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge
H.A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4
C~
~^
V
L
1
C
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
-- 2 4
T N f1 W Y
October 11, 2005
--- Commissioners' Comments
1.1 Appoint Presiding Judge/Manager, Tabulation
Supervisor, and Assistant Supervisor for
November election
1.2 Authorization for advertising of proposals on
electrical, plumbing, HVAC and pest control
1.3 Authorize County Judge to sign TCDRS No Plan
Change Notice & Rate Acknowledgement for 2006
1.4 Authorize appropriate action on cash flow problem
in the Juvenile Detention Facility 12,
1.6 Discussion/approval of encroachment of septic
system drainfield lines into 7' recorded utility
easement at Lot 15 of Cedar Ridge Subdivision
1.5 Authorize appropriate action on ASO Appeal Review
request
1.7 Concept plan for The Heights at Greenwood, Pct. 4
1.9 Consider/discuss concept and proposal by Kerr
County Mounted Peace Officers Association for
construction of multi-use facility adjacent to
Kerr County Law Enforcement Center
1.8 Set public hearing for revision of plat of
Kerrville Ranchettes, Tracts 8, 9 & 10
1.10 Set public hearing for Revision of Plat for
The Horizon, Section One, Lots No. 21 & 22
1.11 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
reserve the name of "Las Colinas of Kerrville"
for a community planned in Pct. 1
1.12 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for
subdividing a 2-acre lot into two 1-acre parcels
with shared driveway
1.13 adopt the National Incident Management System (NIMS)
as the standard for incident management
1.14 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
Memorandum of Understanding between AACOG, Kerr
County Sheriff's Department, and Kerr County
Commissioners' Court to establish 'guidelines for
AACOG Regional Law Enforcement Academy Distance
Learning Site
1.15 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
acceptance of RFQ's
1.16 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
rescind Court Order No. 29414 adopting Kerr County
Tax rate for FY 2005/2006, such order having been
superseded by Court Order No. 29915
PAGE
5
8
10
11
173
30
32
33
53
70
71
72
79
89
88
95
104
25
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
	I N D E X (Continued)	
	October 11, 2005	
		PAGE
1.17	Consider/discuss nominations to serve on the	
	Library Advisory Board and make appointments to	
	the Library Advisory Board	104
1.18	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on	
	problems with new air conditioning at the Hill	
	Country Youth Exhibition renter	114
1.19	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to	
	Authorize County Treasurer to prepare bid package	
	of Employee Health Benefits for provision of	
	Insurance Agent/Services	124
1.20	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to	
	engage Pressler Thompson & Co. to perform audit	
	for fiscal year ending September 30, 2005	152
1.21	Approval of contract between Office of Court	
	Administration and Kerr County	154
1.22	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to	
	nominate up to 5 candidates for submission to	
	Kerr Central Appraisal District	158
4.1	Pay Bills	162
4.2	Budget Amendments	168
4.3	Late Bills	---
5.1	Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee	
	Assignments	187
4.4	Approve and Accept Monthly Reports	194
1.23	Reports from the following Departments:	
	Animal Control	---
	Extension Office	---
	Environmental Health	205
	Juvenile Detention Facility	209
---	Adjourned	218
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
lb
17
18
19
20
21
~,
23
24
25
4
On Tuesday, October 11, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., a regular
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the
Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County courthouse, Kerrville,
Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, ladies and
gentlemen. Let me call to order the regularly scheduled
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court scheduled for
this date and time, Tuesday, October the 11th, 2005, at
9 a.m. It is just past that now. Commissioner Nicholson?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Join me in prayer
and then the pledge of allegiance, please.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. At this time, if
there's any member of the audience or the public that wishes
to be heard on any matter that is not a listed agenda item,
this is your opportunity. If you wish to be heard on a
listed agenda item, we would ask that you fill out a
participation form. Those forms should be at the back of
the room there. And if you'll fill one of those out and see
that it gets up here so that hopefully I won't miss you when
that item comes up and we can be sure and recognize you, but
at this point in time, if there's any member of the public
or the audience that wishes to be heard on any matter that
is not a listed agenda item, please feel free to come
n-~t-n=
5
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
forward at this time and tell us what's on your mind.
Seeing no one coming forward, we will move on to the next
order of business. Commissioner Nicholson, do you have
anything for us this morning?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Got good rain in
west Kerr County; probably got as much as Kerrville did, at
least. And I think all four precincts now have lifted the
burn ban. People need to be careful. We had a fire after
the first rain out at the Bass Ranch, so it's -- grass is
still dry and ground is still cracked. Other than that,
everything's okay in west Kerr County.
DODGE TINLEY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Dittos in the south
part of Kerrville. Had good rains starting early this
morning, and lifted the burn ban. People can burn,
including myself. That's about it, other than Tivy won,
Texas won, and the Cowboys won. It doesn't get any better
than this.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Spurs lost, though.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Spurs lost, yeah. So
what? (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That all?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I echo all that,
to-ii-ns
6
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
Judge, but I do have something here, a little presentation
for my colleague on Precinct 4. It's from the Office of
Rural Community Affairs, and it's a check for $1,652 to go
to the Y.O. Ranch Volunteer Fire Department.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Turn it around.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Turn it around.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think I see your
heavy hand in that, Commissioner. And we appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whatever.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, sir, that's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: You can't top that one?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I can, but I'll
do it tonight.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONEP. BALDWIN: What about us? What
about the other precincts?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm going to take
care of those other fellows down the street tonight.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Nicholson noted
that he thought he saw Commissioner Williams' heavy hand in
that coming out of Office of Rural Community Affairs.
Commissioner Letz, what do you got for us this morning?
iu-ii- ~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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The only comment I have
is more to the Commissioners, probably, than the public, but
I think it's interesting that Ambassador Slutz will be in
Kerrville Friday night. I would encourage everyone on the
Court to attend. And it's been not well publicized, that
I've seen, but the reason she's coming is that -- she's the
Ambassador to Mongolia, and that will explain why I'm
somewhat familiar with why she's coming, because my wife
serves as the administrative -- or head of the office for
the Mongolian consulate in Comfort, which is -- there's one
in Comfort, one in Houston --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We have a lot of
traffic in that consulate.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Actually, there is a lot
of traffic, a lot of foreign traffic in the Comfort
consulate office in Mongolia. And Ambassador Slutz
requested some western art, which is very similar to what
the terrain in Mongolia is, when she was appointed by
President Bush. And the Cowboy Artists Museum loaned her
western art, and she's coming -- that's kind of the reason
she's coming, is kind of a thank you, and maybe get -- maybe
e~;changing out some art; I'm not sure. But -- and I believe
she's working on -- or they're working on doing a Mongolian
art exhibit here. So, anyway, I encourage everyone on the
Court to go. I think it's not often we have an Ambassador
iu-ii-;~
8
r'-..
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
1b
19
20
21
L2
23
24
25
come into k:errville, and this is an interesting
relationship.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When is that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Friday evening at 6:00.
And I asked Kathy to look into it a little bit more. We
received invitations, but they're kind of, I mean, very --
it's been under the radar screen, from what I can see. And
I don't know if it's a -- you know, if they're trying to get
a large -- or it it's a relatively small group, but I know
members of the Court were invited. I encourage all to
attend.
JUDGE TINLEY: That it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good rains.
JUDGE TINLEY: The Museum of Western Art, I
believe, is the one that's actually sponsoring that
particular reception, and as Commissioner Letz says, it has
a -- has a connection to the -- an exchange of art idea. I
think the -- the Executive Director of that Museum of
Western Art, for some reason, was in Mongolia, and the --
through the consular office and the Ambassador's office,
received an extraordinarily warm welcome and a lot of
courtesies extended to him, and so they're wanting to
reciprocate on this end, ma}:e sure that that same warm
reception is given to -- to those individuals.
Let's get on with the business at hand. The
t^ ~; ~~
9
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2~
first item on the agenda is to consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action to appoint the presiding judge or
manager, the tabulation supervisor, and the assistant
supervisor as per Texas Election Code, Chapter 127, for the
November election. Ms. Pieper?
MS. PIE PER: Gentlemen, this will be for the
central counting station election night. I believe I gave
you a handout that is recommended for me for presiding
manager and the judge, Nadene Alford for the tabulating
supervisor, and Cheryl Thompson for the assistant.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
DODGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: One question. What's the
resolution board?
MS. PIEPER: That's in case there are
over-votes. Then the ballot goes to the resolution board
and they try to determine the voter's vote. If they cannot
determine the voter's vote, then that over-vote is
completely taken out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
~~- s
10
1
2
3
9
5
b
7
s
g
10
11
1L
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's
move to Item 2; consider, discuss, and authorization for
advertising of proposals on electrical, plumbinq, HVAC, and
pest control. Is Mr. Holekamp here? Yes, sir.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes. I think the notice is
pretty much self-e:;planatory. This is the same thing we did
the last two years. I have a deadline or dates that -- to
publish in the newspaper to -- for 5 p.m., to be in here on
November the 10th, to be opened at 10 a.m. on the 14th,
which is the, I think, first meeting of November.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll move that we
authorize the Maintenance and -- or Maintenance Supervisor
to go out for bids -- annual bids for electrical, plumbinq,
HVAC, and pest control services.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
authorization and approval of the agenda item. Any question
or discussion? A11 in favor of the motion, signify by
raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
i,_~-! i-o=,
11
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. The
next item is to consider, discuss, and authorize the County
Judge to sign the T.C.D.R.S. No Plan Change Notice and Rate
Acknowledgment for the 006 plan year. Ms. Nemec?
MS. NEMEC: Yes. Good morning. I have the
original No Plan Change Notice. Our contribution rate for
this next coming year will be 7.60 plus .28 for the
supplemental death benefit that is in place. And we just --
just a formality for the County Judge to sign.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Move approval and
authorise the County Judge to sign same.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Any further question or
discussion?
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1G
13
l4
10
1E
li
1~
1~
2(
2
2:
~.
2
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question,
Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Barbara, the
contribution rate, the employee -- the 7.60, what is it
presently?
MS. NEMEC: 7.92.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
~ MS. NEMEC: Plus .28 percent for the
i supplemental, so it's at 8.1 -- 8 total.
-,~ ,
1^
1
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~,
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Does that include the
cost-of-living adjustment that we made for seniors?
MS. NEMEC: That was only approved last year.
That was just for last year. That was a one-time
cost-of-living.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That doesn't carry
forward?
MS. NEMEC: Hmm-mm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONEP. BALDWIN: Okey-dokey.
JrJDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
DODGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JiJDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. The
ne::t item on the agenda is to consider, discuss, and
authorize appropriate action on cash flow problem in the
Juvenile Detention Facility.
MS. NEMEC: Okay. For the last payroll, the
transfer payroll -- transfer for the Juvenile Detention
Facility was a little over $81,000. The balance in that
fund is right now, and was at that time, at 32,000. The
iu-~i-ns
13
1
3
4
5
6
7
3
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
is
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
employees did get paid. There -- and the reason that they
were able to get paid is because we have escrow checks that
aren't due, insurance payments and things like that that
aren't due till the 15th of this month, so their checks were
able to clear our account. But once those checks go out,
then there is isn't going to be enough funds in the payroll
account, and so we need to transfer some money to take care
of that payroll. And then accounts payable, today, they
have close to $5,000 in bills that need to be paid today.
And then, of course, we have another payroll on Friday that
will have to be met also.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you know, what's
the amount_ of accounts receivable due to the juvenile center
for August and September?
MS. NEMEC: Becky might be able to answer
that.
MS. HARRIS: I turn that in to the Auditor at
the first of every month. I know what it is for September.
I don't remember what it is for August, but I know what it
is for September.
MS. NEMEC: Do you have that figure, Mindy?
MS. WILLIAMS: No. I can go get it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, I
think the other part of this is, in the Treasurer's note, is
this is going to be an ongoing problem. We've budgeted a
iu-tt-c°
14
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
13
19
20
21
22
23
2q
2 J
deficit for that facility for about 279,000, I think we hope
to be. You know, I would think that we would put in, you
know, half that amount -- an amount so we don't have to do
this every meeting. I mean, we've budgeted it to be a
deficit. Why not fund that deficit?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Seems to me we
should, yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean -- you know, and I
wouldn't say we do the whole amount, but I think, you know,
maybe do 100,000 or something -- you know, 120,000 or
something, you know, maybe close to half of it now. Then we
can look at it in again in six months.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't think I
understand the accounting process. Is the Juvenile
Detention Facility different than other departments?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We have other
departments that have revenues and costs, so if we have a --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's stand-alone. It's
run as a stand-alone facility, as I understand it. Mindy
can probably --
MS. NEMEC: It has a separate bank account
also, so that's where the cash flow problem is created, that
it's not supported by the general fund receipts.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. For it to get

15
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
money out of our reserves, it's got to go -- we have to put
money into it from the reserves. Whereas -- I mean, it
probably doesn't exist in other -- I mean, we don't --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The Sheriff doesn't
have a similar situation?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. No, he just has
money that just comes out of reserves for operating the
jail. Or any -- or any department. I mean, it just comes
out of our account.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What Barbara said
deserves a follow-up question. Why -- why is it separate?
Is that a throwback to before it was under the Kerr County
Commissioners Court?
MS. NEMEC: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or we just never
changed that?
MS. NEMEC: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS
change that?
Well, why don't we
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd rather keep it
separate.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, we want to keep
it separate so we can track it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Keep an eye on the
i ,-ii-,-
16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
numbers.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand that. I
agree with that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think the -- I
mean, I look at this as -- I mean, we budgeted it this way
in this year's budget, so we should -- you know, it
shouldn't be a surprise that we're going to have to fund a
deficit --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- every month.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's a cash flow
problem, is what it is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because at the end of the
year -- and if the projections that we received were
corre~~t, that total deficit that we should have budgeted
should been 270,000 or 280,000. Wasn't that the number?
MS. HARRIS: 288.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It should be 288,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or less.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or -- well, or more.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Hopefully less.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Getting back to the
accounting issue again, is -- is the debt service paid out
of that account, or is it paid out of the general fund?
MS. WILLIAMS: The debt service will be out
iu-ii-ue
17
1
2
3
4
5
F
7
ft
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
77
23
24
25
of a different account. This is strictly the operating
account. And I do not have a copy of the September billing
summary. I think Mr. Tomlinson has it, but I didn't get a
copy. I think it's somewhere in the range of $80,000 to
$85,000. August, it looks like we've got maybe $25,000,
$30,000 that we haven't collected yet off the August
billing.
MS. HARRIS: The September billing is over
$100,000 for the month of September. It's in y'all's report
that I sent you on Friday.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, got it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, to me, the issue
is, I mean, do we -- what is the amount we're going to
transfer in?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We don't want to be
dealing with this every month.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Now that this is totally under
the -- the Commissioners Court purview, we budgeted funds,
so the funds are available for the operation. I can
understand, from an accounting standpoint, we want to be
able to, at any particular time, look at what those figures
are that are applicable to that facility. But from the
standpoint of the payment of -- of the bills, as long as
it's within the budget that we authorized, I'm -- I'm having
In 11-n5
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
?~
23
24
25
a hard time understanding why we're having to work on this
as a separate item.
MS. NEMEC: Well, I can't just take money
from the general account and transfer it to the Juvenile
Detention account without a court order. And there's --
it's a cash flow problem; it's not a budgeting problem.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, what is the
amount you need in terms of --
MS. NEMEC: I'm going to say at least --
approximately 140,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, going
back to what -- and I don't think -- I think I may agree
with the Judge. When we approved the budget, we approved a
$288,000 deficit for that facility, with that money to come,
I mean, from our reserves. It would seem to me that that
action on the budget transferred that money. But, I mean,
you know --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We need an opinion
from the --
MS. NEMEC: I prefer a court order, myself,
but it's up to y'all and the County Attorney if he feels
that's appropriate.
JUDGE TINLEY: The -- it's funded out of the
general fund, tax and non-tax revenues that --
MS. NEMEC: We haven't collected those yet.
_u _! ~s
19
1
2
3
9
5
F
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
L~
~3
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I understand that. And
that's a cash flow item. Is -- is it uncommon that -- that
there weren't enough funds at the end of a fiscal year to
cover specific departments? Is this the first time that's
happened?
MS. NEMEC: No. No. We -- we've never had
-- as far as maybe budget line items, but not as far as the
cash in the bank account. That's why we're having the
problem, is the cash that is actually in that account at
Security State Bank.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's the
payroll account you're talkinq about?
MS. NEMEC: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's not the
general operating account; that's the payroll account.
MS. NEMEC: Right -- well, it's their
operating account. It's Fund 76, operating account that
gets transferred into the payroll account for those checks
to clear.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: If I'm hearing you correctly,
you're relying solely upon the revenues that come into the
Juvenile Detention Facility operation to pay funds -- to pay
er:penses, payroll and otherwise, applicable to that
operation; is that correct?
L e i ~ i U S
zo
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
MS. NEMEC: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Notwithstanding the fact that
the budget was approved beginning October 1 of this year in
which we allocated certain funds for that operation, as
opposed to certain anticipated revenues with a net operating
deficit?
MS. NEMEC: Right. I mean, the cash is just
not there. We just need to transfer the cash from
somewhere.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is the cash in the -- in the
general fund?
MS. NEMEC: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. NEMEC: The cash is in the general -- I'd
say yes, the cash is in the general fund, in that the Court
knew that there was going to be a deficit and that deficit
was going to have to come from somewhere.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
MS. NEMEC: And I guess at this time, that
deficit needs to come from the reserves in the general fund.
I mean, I don't know where y'all had planned to take that
from. I would guess tkzat would be the only place. And in
order for me to do that, I need a court order.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And you -- what's the
amount that you --
~u _~ u~
21
MS. NEMEC: I'd say approximately 140,000
would cover last payroll, this coming payroll, and the
accounts payable for today.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Does last payroll go on
-- it goes on las*_ year?
MS. NEMEC: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Last budget year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, that's two separate
things. One is for last year. I can see where you need to
do a transfer for last year. That's a budget amendment,
because that's not -- but for the current year, the next --
the payroll due Friday is under the r_urrent budget. I think
we need to separate any transfers. So, what do we need for
-- to cover last payroll?
MS. NEMEC: Last payroll? I'm sorry, I need
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1~
1E
li
lE
L
2C
2:
2'
2
2
my notes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Am I thinking logically
here?
JUDGE TINLEY: I think so.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I think you're
right. We're slopping over two budget years here.
MS. NEMEC: Okay. If someone has a
calculator up there, the balance -- well, this is today's
balance. It is $32,426.40. $32,926.40. The payroll
i transfer for the end of the year was $81,304.72.
~n-i~-oe
zz
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1~
16
17
18
19
20
21
G2
23
29
25
JUDGE TINLE'i: ftl,iD4?
MS. NEMEC: 81,304.72.
DODGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, why don't we wait
and let the Auditor and Treasurer come up with an exact
number during -- and we'll do it at the end of the meeting
or when we do budget amendments. I mean, we need to make
sure we're doing the enact right amount, and there's also
money coming in that needs to be balanced against this, I
belleVe.
MS. NEMEC: Well, there's money coming in,
but are we going to get it by Friday?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, but it's going to
balance. It's accrued. It's coming.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're talking about last
year.
MS. NEMEC: Oh, for last year?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's going to be some
money accrued to that, I think. I mean, I don't know how
y'all -- I don't know how the Auditor's --
MS. WILLIAMS: The only problem I can see is,
with waiting on the revenues for August and September, we're
not going to get them in time to put them in the bank
account in order to cover the accounts payable transfer, the
payroll transfer, or the new payroll checks. Yes, the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1J
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
23
money's out there, and yes, we will get it, but we don't
know when we're going to qet it. If we had written the
payroll transfer check for the 30th of September's payroll,
that check out of the Juvenile Detention Facility account
would have bounced, biq time.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Mindy, when we get the --
if we transfer whatever the cash amount -- I guess I'm
having a little bit of a problem understanding what we need
to keep from -- in the account from a cash standpoint versus
the budget amount. Now, we -- I can see we put the cash --
and I can understand we need to have the cash in accounts so
all the checks clear for the juvenile facility, but once the
revenue comes in, it seems that the money needs to come back
out, back into the general fund again for last year.
MS. WILLIAMS: If they ever build up enough
of a surplus, yes. But at this point --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we transfer funds
right now, at some point, the -- we're going to zero out
last year.
MS. WILLIAMS: Once we do all the
encumbrances, yes. In fact, accounts payable, the almost
5,000 that we've got right now, is all of last year's bills,
and we still have bills coming in for August and September,
so we won't be finished with that probably until the middle
of November.
iu-ii-n,
1
2
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
~~
~3
24
25
~4
DODGE TINLEY: I get -- my question goes to a
broader scope. Are we talking about cash flow just in this
one function, or are we talking about cash flow generally in
the general operating account of the county?
MS. NEMEC: No, just the Juvenile Detention
Facility.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, insofar as having
adequate funds in the general operating account for cash
flow purposes, there's absolutely no problem?
MS. NEMEC: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Never has been?
MS. NEMEC: No.
DODGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That goes back to my
accounting question, Judge. I agree with Commissioner
Baldwin; we want to keep a record of the costs and revenues
so we know how we're doing here.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sure.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But I question the
necessity of having to have a separate payroll bank account
to do that. We can -- we can do both. We can treat the
juvenile facility like every other department and still know
where we stand on costs and revenue.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Frankly, I do too. I
think that doesn't make a lot of sense to have it separated.
i~-ii-~°
zs
1
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2s
We ran still do the accounting. It can be broken out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 'Cause, I mean, they're
County employees.
JUDGE TINLEY: So there's never been an
occasion where you have had to utilize separate segregated
accounts for -- for general accounting purposes?
MS. NEMEC: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We've done it. We've
never done it for employees. I mean, like -- I mean, like
the Schreiner Trust and things, we don't keep a balance in
that account. We transfer -- as I recall, we transfer money
into the bank and the trustee transfers it over, and then we
can spend it, you know. So -- but we don't ever have
employees in a situation like this anywhere else in the
budget. Or in --
MS. WILLIAMS: I think at one time there was
discussion about taking the Juvenile Detention Facility cash
account, the bank account, and rolling it into the
Treasurer's account, which encompasses a lot of different
departments and funds. The only problem I see with that is
you can't keep real good track of it. If it's separated you
can, but the only problem is, we run into this same problem
where there's not enough money in the bank account and we
have obligations that we have to meet.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: But don't we -- I mean,
~0 11 ns
2 6
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
through the accounting system and our fund system, you know,
everything that gets paid out gets charged to a fund, and
that -- if the juvenile facility has its own fund numbers,
it's going to get charged to that on the revenue side and on
the expenditure side.
MS. WILLIAMS: I mean, if it's the Court's
intention -- or if it's what y'all want, we have to have a
court order to consolidate the detention facility account in
with the Treasurer's.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Did you have -- Barbara,
is there a separate -- is the payroll account different than
all the other accounts or any other account, or is it just
one account you have?
MS. NEMEC: The payroll clearing account is
just one account.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean for employees --
for -- you know, for all other employees, not counting the
juvenile facility, do you have a payroll clearing account?
MS. NEMEC: Yes, I have a payroll clearing
account that includes everybody's payroll, and when checks
are generated out of that payroll clearing account, then I
have to take money from the funds that pertain to that
payroll and deposit them in the payroll clearing account for
those checks to clear. And that's why I'm having a problem
with Fund 76.
i0-1]-GS
z~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
b
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
?~
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. So, we just need
to move -- I mean, to me, the long-term solution is to move
the employees in the juvenile facility into that same
system.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think they're already there.
Don't they come out of that same payroll account?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a different payroll
account.
MS. NEMEC: No, they come out of the same
payroll account, but it's a different cash account than all
the other -- than the general fund. It's the cash account.
The money that -- the money is budgeted for this next coming
year. That's not the problem. The problem is that the
revenues in the juvenile detention facility aren't coming in
fast enough to pay the expenses.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, but if they're
paid out of the same payroll account, why can't you make the
same transfer out of the budget -- I mean, using the budget
that we've adopted?
MS. NEMEC: 'Cause there's not money there.
The cash is not in there.
MS. WILLIAMS: It -- excuse me. If I may, it
would be like the employees for the 216th District
Attorney's office; they are paid through our payroll
clearing account, but the funds for their payroll and fringe
i;-i~-os
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2Q
21
22
23
24
25
28
benefits and whatever come out of his separate checking
account. We have to write a check out of that to deposit it
into the payroll account in order to cover the payroll
checks and the fringe benefits that go along with it. The
detention facility is the same way as the 216th D.A. We
have to -- we have to write a check out of this account and
put it in the payroll clearing account so everything's
consolidated in one place.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where do the revenues
-- where do they go?
MS. WILLIAMS: Into the Juvenile Detention
Facility checking account at Security State Bank.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you have to do a
physical transfer out of that for all -- everything else?
MS. WILLIAMS: For accounts payable and for
payroll.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Isn't that a bit
cumbersome?
MS. WILLIAMS: It's the way it had been set
up.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's because it was
a separate operation before?
MS. WILLIAMS: Correct. Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would it behoove us
to change that?
i~-ii-us
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2U
21
22
23
24
25
29
MS. WILLIAMS: If that's what the Court
wants.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I mean would it
make sense to change that?
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, I think it probably
would.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Then I think we
should change it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, let's get back
to the point of how much money do they want, and where are
we goinq to get it? Let's let them put their heads together
and come back and make a recommendation to us on exactly how
much money and where it's going to come from.
MS. NEMEC: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll do it under
budget transfers later.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: However, I don't care.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Nemec, the -- what I'm
hearing from you, the cash flow only arises on this one
particular situation, and it's not a matter of having
reserves tied up in -- or additional funds tied up in timed
deposit accounts rather than over in operating accounts or
something like that.
MS. NEMEC: Right.
i;:-ii-~,;s
30
1
G
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
?~
DODGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay, we'll come back
to that, I suppose, at the end of the -- end of the meeting.
Let's go to a timed item. We had it at 9:30; it's a bit
past that now. Item 6, as requested by property developer,
discussion and approval of encroachment of septic system
drainfield lines into a 7-foot recorded utility easement on
Lot IS of Cedar Ridge Subdivision. Mr. Arreola?
MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir. Good morning.
JUDGE TINLEY: Morning.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Morning.
MR. ARREOLA: The developer of this property
has requested approval to encroach into that easement. He
got already approvals from the utility companies to do so,
but it's a recorded easement, and if you guys feel good with
it, we can continue on.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess the question --
explain to me, is this something that's in the -- the state
rules that we've adopted that says you can't encroach into
an easement?
MR. ARREOLA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, state law says that.
Is there --
MR. ARREOLA: Yeah, we stay away from it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You have to stay a
certain --
in-ii-ns
31
1
2
3
9
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~5
MR. ARREOLA: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- a certain -- and the
benefit -- the reason for that is for the utility companies.
MR. ARREOLA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if the utility
companies that use that easement don't have a problem with
it, then I don't have a problem with it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct.
That's basically the only way the septic system's going to
fit on the property. So --
JUDGE TINLEY: And it's already there?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They're doing a good
job in this.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So --
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Bledsoe?
MR. BLEDSOE: Yes, sir?
JUDGE TINLEY: Did you wish to be heard on
this item, please, sir?
MR. BLEDSOE: Well, I just wanted to --
JUDGE TINLEY: Come forward, please, and give
your name and address, if you would, please.
MR. BLEDSOE: My name's Kenneth Bledsoe. I
lo-~i-,,^.s
32
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~4
25
work for Bledsoe General Contracting, Incorporated. I'm the
developer and owner, and I appreciate the consideration
here. I know Miguel has worked with us along with
Mr. Baldwin quite a bit on this project, and -- and that is
true; this is only way the septic tank is goinq to go on
this property, is if we have this variance. And we're only
asking for just a portion; it's not the entire property
line. And utility companies have cooperated with us as
well, and so I appreciate your consideration. That's it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
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.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let
me call Item 5, if I might. Then I'm going to make inquiry
of the County Attorney. Consider, discuss, and authorize
appropriate action on ASO appeal review request. It strikes
me that that may be a particular matter that needs to be an
executive session item. Do you concur?
i~~ ~i ns
33
1
3
9
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
l~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~4
25
MR. EMERSON: That's correct. Under
551.0785, it's confidential medical records.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, we will return to
that under the executive session portion of the agenda.
Let's move to Item 7, if we might. Consider, discuss, and
take appropriate action on a concept plan for The Heights at
Greenwood within the city ETJ located in Precinct 4.
Commissioner Nicholson?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm going to ask
questions of our Subdivision Rules expert. What we have
here is a 143-acre lot; he proposes to put 50 lots in, and
the question arises as to -- and there is water available
through the system -- Aquatech, I think, or whatever its
current name is. And the question is, again, the
interpretation of the 5-acre rule. The language provides
for -- requires a 5-acre average on subdivision lots, and
then it goes on to say that if system water is available,
those lots can -- individual lots can be smaller than that.
So, the question is, does the 5-acre average rule apply to
this kind of a subdivision?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two things. First, I
think there's -- part of the confusion is -- relates to
water availability requirements. And a while back, you
know, a year, two years ago, we suspended enforcement of
water availability, and I think there was confusion with
~~~ ~~ us
34
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
~4
25
that, the -- what we -- the intent of what I had, and why I
brought that to the Court was to suspend the drilling of
wells and that portion that we have an exhibit attached and
to suspend that action, because Headwaters didn't feel that
was beneficial. We get our -- our lot size making ability
comes under water availability. That's how we get that
authority. It's not under Chapter 23" and we get it
because we're in a priority -- we have different rules than
most of the states because we're in a priority groundwater
management area.
All that being said, the -- my opinion is
that the current rules state there's a 5-acre average -- I
mean a -- yeah, 5-acre average, but a 1-acre minimum lot
size. Now, this issue has come up and we've discussed it
before the Court before, in that the draft that we're
looking at to adopt changes that in this area. We -- it's
because if we have -- you know, we divide it up into -- or
propose to divide up into high-density development areas,
and it depends on where you are, you have a little bit
different average to encourage and enable developments like
this. Under that proposed rule change, there would be a
2-acre average within the ETJ of city of Ingram and city of
Kerrville. Eut under the current rules, it is a 5-acre
average, 1-acre minimum.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I forgot where the
~q-~t-ns
35
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
developer -- Mr. Richard Davis. Will you state your name
I'm from Leander,
Texas, and I'm here to represent The Heights of Greenwood.
It's approximately a 5-acre proposed residential development
off Goat Creek Road, and has an average lot size of about 1
and a half acres. As y'all are aware, in 2000 Kerr County
adopted the ordinances regulating subdivisions, and then
under Ser_tion 1.05, Kerr County has been designated as the
county to be under the groundwater management area. And it
says that, as such, the Commissioners Court has been granted
the authority under Section 35.019 to require a person to do
two things; to comply with the water availability adopted by
the Commissioners court, which the Commissioners Court did
in July of 2002, but they also suspended this in January of
this year, of 2005. And, number two, 35.019 asks that we
supply -- show adequate supply of water of sufficient
quality and quantity to the number of lots platted. With
the suspension of the water requirements in January of this
year, it appears that the 1-acre lots are legal. That's
under Section 1.05 of the Subdivision Rules -- codes. So,
I'd like to pass out some correspondence from Aqua Texas at
this time which addresses the number two item required under
section 35.019.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: While you're doing
_ u _ 1 U 5
36
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
~0
21
22
~3
24
25
that, Mr. Davis, I have one question. Is this proposed
subdivision in the Ingram ETJ?
MS. DAM S: No, sir, it -- it's in Kerrville.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's outside the
ETJ?
MS. DAMS: It's in the Kerrville --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Oh, it's in
Kerrville.
MS. DAMS: Mm-hmm. It just barely touched
it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess a comment, also.
I visited with Mr. Davis by phone several weeks ago at some
length, and I thought another option of this is, if we could
ever get the state law -- or in compliance with state law
required in the ETJ and Subdivision Rules, which we're
basically waiting on the City of Kerrville, this issue would
be -- should be handled by the City of Ingram and City of
Kerrville. It shouldn't even be before this Court, in my
opinion. But with City changes -- and we're waiting,
really, more on the City of Kerrville, not City of Ingram.
City changes. That still has not been approved, though we
again point out to the Court that we now have three months
to be in compliance with state law on something that this
Court's been trying to move forward for the last two or
three years. Another approach to this is for us just to put
i~-ii-a~
37
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1 G
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
this under the City ~f Ingram and City of Kerrville, you
know, where it should be.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But there are others
coming up, Commissioner. I have one in Precinct 2 that's
coming up very -- very similar in nature to this, where a
property owner has about 30, 35 acres of land and wants to
subdivide it into what I think are parcels, and has -- and
it's in proximity to a public water system. So, you know,
there are others out there that are going to hit this desk.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, and that being
said, I mean, I think there is confusion about the way we
suspended the water availability requirements. I think that
can be easily cleared up today too, or it can be cleared up
at our next meeting with the -- at least the intent that I
had when we had that discussion was not to let -- pretty
much go bark before the 19 -- into the early 1980's and how
we do subdivisions in this county on lot size. And all you
do is suspend the certain particular sections, which would
be 1.09, 1.05, 1.06 -- well, leave that one. Actually, I
thought we did it that way. I didn't know that we suspended
the full rules. I might look at the minutes from the
meeting. I thought we were more specific in how we
suspended those, but I could be wrong.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, when
you propose changes to allow 2-acre average versus 5-acre
iu-ii-os
38
1
3
9
5
F
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
~0
21
?3
24
25
average, that will just be in certain specific areas?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's in the ET J, and
within -- and would allow for the same or similar type of
development near the city of Ingram and the city of Comfort
-- or the community of Ingram and community of Comfort,
'cause they're not incorporated. We took a point and went a
2-mile -- I think it was a 2-mile radius, or 1-mile radius
from that point, a 1-mile radius from a specific point in
that area, you have that same density.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: There are -- are
those who are knowledgeable about water and aquifers, such
as yourself, who think that the 5-acre average rule is -- is
a key thing to protect the aquifer, so there would be at
least some opposition to relaxing the 5-acre rule, I would
quess.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think there is some
opposition to it, but I also think the intent with that is
to get -- you know, I think you have to -- when you're
looking at water, you have to balance the number of wells
and water systems and -- and a number of different things.
And I think most people feel you're far better off with
fewer penetrations into the aquifer, which you can only
accomplish through water systems. And I think that the --
when you get into the areas around -- right around Center
Point and Comfort and Hunt, probably, and Kerrville, a

39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
5-ar_re average, the economics is real, real difficult. And
we're pushing -- I think we're having a counter-effect. I
think we're pushing the development for these 1-acre or, you
know, higher density developments away from where they need
to be. They need to be near the city, the communities,
rather than get all these little satellite high-density
developments. So, that's why I came up with this -- the
proposed, you know, ETJ is one -- one average, and other
rural areas are a greater average.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, back in the
olden days, once, the -- what we concerned ourselves with
when we talked about size of lot was simply, is there enough
room on this property to have a water well and a septic
tank, and where they won't blend into each other? We've
gone to the 5-acre deal, and now we're talking about having
a -- and I've got one very similar to this coming up on the
agenda today where you have a central water system, so that
takes away the problem with the personal water well. And so
I -- you know, I just -- I -- I scratch my brain trying to
think why we want to go to the 5-acre average. I mean, the
-- the problem -- the problem is sewer and water, and you
take care of that problem with a community water service,
and the problem's gone. So I don't see what the -- you
know, I -- the way I read the rules -- and I know it refers
back to 1.004, whatever it is; I don't have mine in front of

40
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
me. But it clearly says in there that if you're on -- if
you have -- if a water system is available to you, you can
go down to 1-acre lots.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The -- I'm not
making this argument, Commissioner. I'm reporting an
argument that I hear, and that is that the 5-acre average
rule, the purpose of it is to hold down population. That if
you believe that there may not be enough water in the
aquifer, you control density of population by having a
5-acre rule, and that -- the argument goes on -- it doesn't
make any difference if you got a one big well serving 50
households or 50 wells; they're still taking the same amount
of water out of the aquifer.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See, I would never say
it in public, but I'm among those people that kind of think
that way.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It has some appeal
to it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. The other -- the
other option is -- I mean, and I've had long -- spent many
hours with Headwaters on this issue, and they were
uncomfortable with the rules that we had in place, but
they're equally uncomfortable in that they don't have
authority to set lot sizes. They do well spacing. So, if
we don't -- if we go to the 1-acre lot size, we're going to
i~~ ii os
41
1
2
3
4
5
b
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
?~
23
24
25
have wells every 1 acre, because they can't regulate that.
We can. They -- their view is that we need a -- you know,
whether it's a 5-acre average or it's a 3-acre average,
somewhere in there, it depends on what studies you look at.
We still don't know enough about the aquifer, though we're
gaining on knowledge of the aquifer. So I think, you know,
Headwaters is going to -- they're kind of the ones that
we've looked to to give us advice on water availability and
-- and give us input on lot sizes. I think if you -- you
know, you end up going down to -- I guess undoing what we
have done with Headwaters over the last 10 years.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But the restriction's
still there. There has to be a public water system that has
an adequate supply if you go down to the 1 acre, not just
Willy-nilly drilling wells everywhere.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think you'll have
a real hard time. I mean, who has -- no one has the
requirement to make the people hook up to a water system.
You can buy a lot and drill a well, and Headwaters can't
deny it.
COMMISSIONER NICHnLSON: Economically --
economics makes them hook up, doesn't it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: A well's expensive.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- I don't know. I mean,

42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
??
23
24
25
I know some people that are on a water system that are
getting ready to drill a well out in your area,
Commissioner, because the water supply from the water system
isn't adequate.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, Mr. Davis'
request here, he's brought us a concept plan. He's
following the process. The next step would be to hold a
public hearing; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, not for him. On his
-- the next process for him, he needs guidance from us as
to -- get back to specifically as to whether we would allow
a waiver to an acre and a half density.
MS. DAMS: Could I ask the Court a question?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure.
MR. DAM S: In January this year, the Court
voted -- it says Water Availability Requirements, kerr
County Subdivision Rules and requirements. The Court voted
to suspend the water availability requirements on county
Subdivision Rules and Regulations, and that's S.O1.D,
acreage required to meet water availability requirements.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. No, water
availability requirements are another whole attachment.
MS. DAMS: Talking about --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Water availability
requirements is an exhibit. It's a one, two, three -- I'd
1u-~i n5
93
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
say a five-page attachment. That's a separate whole entity.
But, I mean, for you, I guess, under your request, you know,
my personal feeling is I'd have no problem going with 2-acre
density, because that's what I think we have discussed and
have committed to doing that, even though we haven't got
there yet. Just give a waiver on this case, and that's the
direction I think we're going to go, or are trying to get.
Or the other option is for us to just say there is -- it's
in the ETJ; let him deal with the City of Ingram. I don't
have a problem with that approach either. Those are the two
options that I see that we need to look at. Or -- unless
we're going to go back and just -- and totally, I guess,
start over again on our rewrite of the Subdivision Rules.
Because if we don't follow one of those two options, to me,
we're saying, well, let's go back to the drawing board and
start over.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think going
to 2 acres is fine, and going -- and throwing this over to
another jurisdiction if it's in the ETJ is all right as
well. But I think we have to have some clear definition of
where we're going for those situations that are not within
the ETJ, so we're going to have some. We do have them
already.
JUDGE TINLEY: Doesn't it -- doesn't it all
fall back on the pumping rules as set by Headwaters as to
~ ii 1 1 u 5
94
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
what -- based on their pumping limits, rules, ratios, what
an acre or 2 acres will or will not support in the way of
water usage?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not going to get into
how Headwaters came up with their pumping limits. I think
there's -- if you ask different people, you get different
answers from Headwaters on that point, and I think it's a --
the State has dealt a hand where counties have authority to
set the lot size, but Headwaters is the one that gives us
the information as to how we do it. And that's just kind
of -- it's not a real -- a great system. They don't have
the ability to do lot sizes. They can do well spacing and
pumping limits, and we ran do lot sizes based on water
availability, which we get from Headwaters. So, I don't
think it's that simple. I think the idea -- hopefully, we
can come to an agreement as to -- you know, with Headwaters
and working with Headwaters as we have tried to do up till
now.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, my point is that the --
the pumping limits is based upon the acreage.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think so.
JUDGE TINLEY: If my understanding is
correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I didn't think it was
on -- I don't know. I mean, I'm not sure of that. I think
in-ii-ns
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
^_4
25
it's -- because they'll -- the difference on pumping limits
is permitted or not permitted. You can go out here anywhere
you want and pump more than that; you just have to have a
permitted well to do it, as I understand their rules.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Davis, what
average lot size are you proposing?
MS. DAMS: This was with about one and a
half acres.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I got to tell you,
I -- being an old-timer here, I dislike seeing 50 lots at an
acre and a halt. I hate it. It's ugly. I mean, there's
nothing pretty about your program. However, the way I see
it, if there's a water system provided to it, I don't -- I
don't see why we would want to stop it, other than it's
ugly.
MS. DAMS: Could I make a comment?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's not a very good
reason to stop a project.
MS. DAMS: Could I make a comment on that?
The --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you'll speak up.
MR. DAMS: The original Greenwood,
Section 8, --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
MS. DAMS: -- it was 48 lots and 28 acres.
iu-ii-os
46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1L
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2~
23
29
25
That's about a half-acre average.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
MR. DAMS: Per lot.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think the answer
to Commissioner Baldwin's -- the reason is, they're using
groundwater.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if we get a higher
density, then we're going to get -- we're just extending the
problem that is currently in the city of Kerrville when we
go to higher density developments out there. We know how
much water people use. We know about how much water we
think, you know, a good -- best guess in the aquifer, and
there's no one that I know of that thinks that we can have
wells on 1-acre density on a large area.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. So, I think that
the -- I mean, the reason for a larger -- or an average is
-- I have no problem with a 1-acre minimum. I think it's a
2-acre average, 'cause you're drawing -- that well needs to
be drawn from basically the area near the subdivision, and
usually the amount of withdrawal is the issue.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, sooner
or later we're going to make a decision on changing the
rules to allow this high-density development, and when we
is ii ns
47
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
talk about that, how are we going to explain that you can
use one or one and a half acre lots where you have a public
water supply near Ingram, but you can't do it where you got
a public water supply near Hunt?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- the reason
is there is a contemplation where -- well, the nature of the
four areas we're talking about, ETJ of Kerrville, ETJ of
Ingram, and around Comfort, around Center Point, long-term,
there's a very likely option that those water systems will
have surface water available to them. City of Kerrville
already does; most of their water is surface water. And
city of Ingram and city of Kerrville are -- and I think that
-- so they're -- we're going down a road to that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That makes sense.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Another part of that
answer might be in this letter from Aqua Texas, in which
they state, to whomever this is addressed -- I guess to
us -- that in this particular instance, Aqua Texas has
permission to withdraw 210 million gallons per year, and
they're 18 and a half million gallons under their limits
right now, so there's plenty of reserve, according to the
Headwaters statistic.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's probably not
Headwaters; that's probably T.C.E.Q. statistics.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could be.
iu 11-us
48
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because that's another
issue to have -- and where Headwaters and the City of
Kerrville has an issue on water, because public water supply
companies come under T.C.E.Q. completely, not under any
local --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're probably
right, but he says Headwaters in his letter.
MS. DAMS: Gentlemen, Tom Myers with Aqua
Texas is here if you want to address any questions to him.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't. You know, going
back to what I said, I mean, to me it's -- I have no problem
with giving a waiver to a 2-acre average.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't either.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or letting the City of
Ingram and City of Kerrville decide. Those are the --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't have any
problem with it being built as proposed. I've got a concern
about setting a precedent. I would rather take some action
to -- to allow Kerrville and Ingram to approve these kinds
of subdivisions in their ETJ than I would grant a waiver.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, that'll -- I mean,
as of January, that will be the law. They will -- they have
this jurisdiction in this area. Now, if we ~~ould ever, like
I said --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If we get an

49
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1G
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
agreement worked out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think we'll be in
noncompliance with state law if we don't have an agreement
come January.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, if we granted a
waiver, it would only be a problem between now and January.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: In the ETJ, yes. And
there are parts of the ETJ that we're going to retain -- and
there will be parts of the ETJ we'll retain control. But in
this area --
COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN:	Dream	on.	
COMMISSIONER	LETZ: No,	that'	s --	the City
wants that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: ,Ion and I have only
been working on that, what, seven years? Six years? Trying
to get it done.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Time's running out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, I think I'll
make a motion to -- to accept the concept plan, with the
understanding that it'll require a waiver. And the next
step is to set a public hearing on it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, no public hearing.
New development. 1t will just go into preliminary --
preliminary plat.
i~~~~_iz-os
50
1
2
3
4
5
ti
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2G
21
22
23
24
25
MR. DOOM: Preliminary.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Come through this way.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Then we'll set --
yeah, okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think the -- go
ahead.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This -- agreeing with
this today agrees with his plan of acre and a halt -- 50
lots at an acre and a half. That means -- the way I
understand it, anyway, is that by agreeing with him, he'll
move forward with this plan, and then the next step would be
the preliminary plat with this plan built on it. So, I
mean, if we're going -- if we're going to say no to this
guy, we need to say no today.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if we say -- well, if
we say yes on doing this, we've just established an acre and
a half lot sizes in the county.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's probably true.
MR. ODOM: Acre and a half -- no, an acre.
You have one -- there was a concept plan presented to Buster
and I -- I'm sorry, Mr. Richards. May I -- Len Odom. We
have -- Buster and I have had a concept plan back in August
in the ETJ of Kerrville on Sheppard Rees up there. And

51
1
2
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that -- of course, it was a concept. We went through at
that point, and the City of Kerrville told them that they
could have 1-acre lots. As a matter of fact, they could go
down to 6,000 square feet, was what was implied to us, and
there was enough water. So, I really need -- I need a
direction as to one and a half, one in the ETJ, and
Kerrville signing off on it. They came to us for the
construction of the roads. Kerrville said they wouldn't do
the roads, they just go to the County. So we discussed --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, that's what I'm
saying. I mean, the ETJ issue has got to be resolved with
the City of Kerrville, and the County's been trying.
MR. ODOM: I know, but we have other people
out -- you know, out there hanging. And I --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's right.
MR. ODOM: And we need to resolve it, where
we stand.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My opinion is that we
adopt our -- we can't do it today. We adopt what we've
proposed and the Court has signed off on; you know, the --
the 2-acre average in the ETJ and around Comfort and Center
Point. I mean, if we're -- if we go to 1 acre and a half,
then we might as well go back to square one on Subdivision
Rules again, and we'll be a while. I may just hand it off
to another Commissioner this time around, because, I mean,
io-~~ ~,s

52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~5
you know, we have -- we all voted to go with 2 acres -- or
discussed to go to 2 acres. I don't think we voted on it.
We decided we're going to 2 acres, so if we're not going to
do that, why did I waste my time bringing it to the Court
previously?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll withdraw my
motion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, go back to the --
go bac}: to this issue here about the 2-acre theory.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think this is --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Somebody make a
motion, though, to approve something so that he'll know what
to do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion to
grant a waiver so that The Heights at Greenwood can be
developed on 2-acre average, 1-acre minimum.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded.
Discussion? Questions? 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 carries. We have

53
1
2
3
4
5
H
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
another timed item that we're a little late on at 9:45,
consider and discuss a concept and proposal by Kerr County
Mounted Peace Officers Association for the construction of a
multi-use facility adjacent to Kerr County Law Enforcement
Center for emergency operations, law enforcement training,
and other law enforcement and emergency functions and
purposes. The recent events of Katrina and Rita, I think,
bring squarely into focus the need for emergency operations
in times of natural disaster or things of that nature, and
possibly terrorist attack, biological situations, and also
the -- the collaboration with law enforcement that -- that
that necessarily has. And I was contacted by some of the
members of the Kerr County Mounted Peace Officers
Association with a very interesting and intriguing idea
concerning this agenda item, and I'd like to call on
representatives of the Mounted Peace Officers to give us a
presentation on that. Mr. Bock? Mr. Backor?
MR. BACKOR: Would you mind if the Sheriff
goes first so you can see his position on this? And then
we'll --
JUDGE TINLEY: Come ahead, Sheriff.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, first, I think
that they definitely need to get up here in just a few
minutes and give y'all an idea of what the Hill Country
Mounted Peace Officers Association is all about and their
~u-li-us
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
29
25
history. They have been an extremely valuable tool to all
law enforcement in this county on numerous occasions
already, whether it was the fire out on Sheppard Rees Road
and bringing their command center and just a lot of
different things I'll let them go into. I know back when it
first president of it, and I was one of the vice presidents.
I'm not a current member; haven't been for a number of
years, just 'cause of other duties. But this same issue
came up a couple of years ago, the -- them wanting to lease
some land out there at the adult detention facility to be
able to build a training room. At that time, there was also
the consideration of having stables out there and horses and
different animals, and it kind of fell to the wayside
because of that. I really wasn't totally in favor of that.
But what they're talking about is land -- a
portion of the land that would be -- if you're standing
facing the adult detention facility or facing the building,
it would be on your right-hand side, off kind of across the
driveway from J.P. 2's office, where that holding tank is or
that pond is. There's some area in front of it that would
face the road. In my personal opinion, this is a total
win-win situation for the County. They can explain to you
what their -- what they're requesting exactly, but it would
solve a lot of problems we have in the county, at least at
~.-ii ~ s
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
14
19
20
21
~2
23
24
25
that facility, number one problem being the administrative
office area, of course, is running out of room. The next
room that I have to be able to just close in or make office
space out of is our current training room, and this would
take that current training room out of that building, but
put it in an area that's not behind our secure area. As you
know, walking in, we have secure doors, but it would put it
in another -- another building totally. That would allow
access to it from all law enforcement agencies, and that's
what part of their agreement is, is that it would be a very
large training room for all agencies.
One of the nett agenda items you're going to
look at is an AACOG agreement, and that would also get moved
over into that facility and make it even more beneficial to
all law enforcement in this area and Fredericksburg,
everywhere. I think it's win-win. The other thing is the
storage area. The bays that they're talking about putting
on and having out there would house their trailers, which
are very valuable trailers, but they would also house our
trailers, which we have a communications trailer and a
supply trailer that are housed up in that storage area
behind the office as it is now, and it's really very tight
room up there for them, mainly heighth-wise. I think one of
them clears it by less than half an inch. It's getting that
trailer in and out, so it's very hazardous as far as that
1n-ii ~ s
56
1 I goes.
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~^ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
°' 24
25
But the idea -- I talked to Re r. about this
idea. He didn't see any problem with it. It's just that
there would have to -- our County Attorney and their
attorney would have to get together on a lease agreement
type for the land, but I think this would be one of the
adding to cooperation, and adding to just every aspect you
can see, and even in the future, possibly being turned into
the emergency operations center, because it is separated.
It takes politics out of it. Right now the emergency
operations center is the training room at Kerrville P. D.,
which is smaller and in worse shape than our training room.
But it would take it directly out of both departments and
make a very good stand-alone EOC center for county-wide
functions and disasters, and it just gets all your equipment
gathered together and keeps it in the same place. So, at
this time, I kind of said mine, and Steve Backor and Ronnie
Bock are both here, both members of that organization. I
think, Steve, if you'll let him have a few words first.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Backor?
MR. BACKOR: I gave a lot of speeches in the
last 30 years, and this is probably going to be the toughest
one. On behalf of President Mark Chapa, who is on special
assignment in east Texas, and all members of the Mounted
in ii os
57
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Peace Officers Association, I would like to thank Judge
Tinley for inviting us this morning to speak before all of
you. I am State Game Warden Steve Backor, and have been a
member of this association since 1991, and was president
from 1997 to 2000. The association was formed in 1987 by
state, county, and city peace officers who are associate
members, and also voted in local citizens, civilians, as
honorary members. The association was formed to support law
enforcement agencies in any way it could, and mostly to have
horses available for such things as manhunts, missing
persons, and whatever the members were called upon to do.
In the beginning, money was very tight, and if there was
money spent, it came out of the members' pocket. And they
were glad to donate to a worthy cause.
The last decade, the association has grown in
membership and in equipment, such as our command post
trailer, which we are very proud of. It has been deployed
out on many occasions, such as plane crashes, manhunts,
homicides, tornadoes in Gillespie County, kidnappings, the
Labor Day fire which we all remember and will never forget,
and even the county fair. Radios were purchased for our
members to have contact with other officers in case of an
emergency. A utility trailer was also purchased and stor_ked
with emergency supplies to be deployed with our command
post. The last decade, the association has continued on
0 - „ - 0 5
J (J
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
with the Kerr County Wild Game Dinner in Kerrville that was
started by the Texas Game Warden Association, which this
year will be the 25th game dinner.
With money raised, we have been able to do
more for our law enforcement community. Money was given to
Kerr County to help purchase bulletproof vests for our
deputies here in our county so they might have a better
chance of safely returning to their families at the end of
their tour of duty. Radios were also purchased for our
constables to have better communications with other officers
when needing help and helping others, whir_h, in fact, I know
they do. Honorary members have begun training in different
situations. They might have -- they might be asked to
perform in case of a disaster in our community, such as
floods, fires, terrorist threats to our community.
Thousands of dollars have been given to families over the --
families of fallen officers over the state of Texas. This
association has joined in with the Kerrville Police
Association in giving to Blue Santa for many years. The
association raised over $5,000 for Julie Beasley, the
Schreiner student that was shot outside of Center Point.
The following year, the association raised --
money was raised by this association and people that
attended our game dinner for the fallen soldier James Kiehl
of Comfort. Up to $1,000 scholarships have been given to
In-ii-us
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2q
25
our three local high schools by this association to students
wishing to go into criminal justice. Many other events,
such as the 9-H and Youth Awareness Day that is held every
year for all fourth graders in Kerr County and other
counties that have participated was started by this
association. This association continues to donate $3,000 to
our local game wardens for youth camps here in Kerr County
to learn more about the great outdoors. With our
fundraiser, the association has well -- raised well over
$lOn,000 in the last decade to support our officers, and
well -- as well as our citizens of the Hill Country. With
all we have accomplished, we are known from Florida to
Dallas to Midland to Austin and now into east Texas, where
this association's equipment is being used to keep radio
communication towers going after the -- can be used after
the hurricane.
This is a short vision of how far our
association has come since 1987. At this time, I would like
to turn it over to Ronnie Bock, honorary member, to tell you
where the Association wants to go in the future.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Backor.
MR. BOCK: Thank you, Steve. I want to thank
y'all this morning for having us here. I'd like to -- if we
could, to simplify this. We just want to give you an
overlay concept of what our plans are. We're not asking you

60
1
°' 2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
-^ 13
19
15
16
17
lfl
19
20
21
22
23
"~ 24
25
today to sign an agreement. We just want you to tell us if
you have this in your favor; then we can move to stage two.
What we'd have liked to do for a long time is this building,
and the -- the land has always been the problem. The
Sheriff, in his vision, came to us about a week ago and
asked if we'd be interested, if we could get it done, to put
it right next to the fail. In today's world, it is the
responsibility of the people themselves to protect ourselves
and to train. This particular building would not solve all
of our problems. It's simply a start. There can't be a
staginq area in all of the -- that we've had with the
hurricanes around every town. This building would have a
multi-use. It would be owned by us, and if you had an
instance to where there was going to be some flooding at the
camps, we could get them -- bus the kids back down to a safe
area and have that place for the kids to stay for the
parents to -- to head for. We plan to have beds there. We
plan to have a pantry there. We plan also for it to be
completely self-contained, so that if we're out of power, we
have -- we have a generator backup.
Now, what we're asking of you today is if you
would consider a lease, a long-term lease that you would
agree to. What we plan to do is, this is going to be a
one-year type deal. We feel like the need is so urgent, we
actually had to have this yesterday. What we plan to do is
10-11-J5
61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
29
25
to set our fundraiser into motion after the first of the
year. We'd have a calendar year of January 1, '06 through
December the 31st, 'OF. We would pay for the building in
full. There would be no building on your property that
would have a lien. I know that would be one of your first
concerns. And the nice thing about this is, if we can't
have this done within a one-year period, we're going to
completely refund everyone who -- who gave. But this is a
project that is not for any individual or for any group. It
is for the people, by the people, and of the people, kind of
like government. We're asking for you to consider this, and
I'm glad we picked today, because this is an item that's not
going to cost you anything, and from what I've heard prior,
this has to have your interest.
Let me see what else I wrote in my notes. If
you would consider that, we'll move back to where we wanted
to go with the agreement. We'd like to have it done and
signed before the end of the year. Everybody's concerned
about one thing, and I think you can understand this. We
don't want any of the politics involved in this. We
understand there's an election just around the corner.
Because this isn't about state, county, or city; this is
about all of us, and we want to take the politics out. And
if you will give us some direction today, we have a concept
plan already drawn. We're goinq to get us an architect to
i;; ii us
62
1
2
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
77
23
24
25
come in and have this tweaked. It will be built with a
style to match what you've qot out there. We -- we haven't
found an attorney yet to -- to meet with Rex. We have a lot
of them in town that are good, but we're going to try to
find free, so that may take us just a little bit. But if --
if you will guide us today, we'll go to stage two. We'll
get the agreement done, then we'll go to the City. We'll
make sure that what we want to do will -- will fit with
them. And just remember this, it will be a debt-free
building, one-year type deal, so this isn't goinq to be a
five-year plan. 'Cause we need this now. We don't know
what we're going to have to have tomorrow. So, if you will
be so kind to give us some guidance, and if you have any
questions, I'll do my best to answer.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ronnie, I have a
couple questions.
MR. BOCK: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're talking about
a ground lease, I understand -- I take it?
MR.. BOCK: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How big is the
facility and how much ground are you talking about leasing,
and will the building, after it's constructed and paid for,
as a condition of the ground lease, will it revert to the
County over -- over a period of time?
i~-ii-ns
63
1
2
3
9
5
ti
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
G G
23
24
25
MR. BOCK: What we would like to do is to
have something along the lines of a 25- to 30-year lease at
a dollar a year. Obviously, you have to have a clause in
there that if, for any reason, we default on taxes or we
should happen to not keep the building up, there has to be
some sort of default clause that generates the property back
to you. But as long as we are in compliance with the
agreement, it stays with the Association forever.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It stays with the
Association for the term of the ground lease?
MR. BOCK: That's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How big a facility
are we talking about, Ronnie?
MR. BOCK: As it is right now, it's
approximately -- we had to add on the -- it's about 8,000,
isn't it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's about 75 by 90.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, 75 by 100,
somewhere in there.
MR. BOCK: So, say, by the time it all got
tweaked down and down, about 8,000 square foot. You're
looking at a project -- with the current price of materials
today, you're probably looking at close to $800,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whoa. I notice the
Sheriff made mention of training. This would have space for
1 ~~ - 1 1- U S
64
1
2
3
9
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
training. And we are about to engage in a lease
arrangement -- the contract arrangements with AACOG.
MR. BOCK: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: To set up the first
distance learning center in law enforcement.
MR. BOCK: Yes, sir, we're aware of that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In this part of
Texas, which I think is a real -- real plus for Kerr County.
And so this facility would be able to contain that and the
access necessary and so forth and so on; is that correct?
MR. BOCK: Yes, sir. What our -- our plans
are, as we've done in the past with the whole history, is
that we cater to all the law enforcement. There -- there
might be a time that -- that the City has a need for the
same thing. There is no boundaries on who can use it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ronnie, if I can follow
up on that a little bit, so the facility's open to all area
law enforcement, and you had mentioned Gillespie County, so
I presume other counties it they need it as well. Who is
going to -- and y'all own it. Are y'all going to have staff
out there for leasing, or are you going to let the Sheriff
kind of take care of -- his secretary or assistant? How is
it going to work? And it may be too early even to figure
thar_ out.
SHEF,IFF HIERHOLZER: We11, the preliminary

65
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that we have talked about, even in our current very small
training room, we do try and keep a schedule. My secretary
keeps a schedule of people wantinq to use it and times,
'cause sometimes we have mediations out there, and what
we're all kind of in favor of in just our talks is that it
would be kind of done on that order. It wouldn't be a
staff. It would be locked if nobody was there. They would
have access to it 100 percent of the time, but the training
would be scheduled. And a lot of it that I would see, that
multi-purpose meeting room that you see that's very large is
going to seat between 75 and 100 students or people in a
classroom, and then what with that distance learning stuff
set up in there, it would be just an unbelievable training
center for all law enforcement around this area, whether
you're at Junction in the different COG's or whether you're
at, you know, here or Fredericksburg in this COG. And one
of the reasons that I was totally in favor of this, besides
what I just had told y'all before, is this is one
organization -- this is one association that's been in
existence since '87, and has never failed to meet needs for
law enforcement, and has never showed any prejudices or
biases towards any certain law enforcement group. They've
stayed independent, but yet, you know, we've had plane
crashes that they went on where they're calling us for help.
We've had bulls get out on the interstate and call them
1 '.1 1 1- 0 5
66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
1 ti
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
because one or two of their members will have horses and
trailers, and we've used them for that. I mean, they will
bend over backwards doing things for law enforcement, and my
understanding is -- and I hope it never ever happens, but if
the organization did go under durinq all this, that all the
total ownership of that building that they built and
everything would revert back to the County.
MR. BOCK: Also, if you look -- and, again,
today I don't want to tie up your time in the building,
'cause we're not there yet to have you a plan, but if you'll
look there where we've added on for all the -- the stuff
that the Sheriff has, when all the trailers and equipment is
moved out, that area could also be to house people.
JUDGE TINLEY: The garage area, you're
speaking of?
MR. BOCK: Yes, sir.
DODGE TINLEY: Essentially, what -- what
you're asking us today is for a conditional approval of the
concept, and giving you a period of one year beginning
January 1 to obtain the necessary commitment of funding to
put the facility in place, and if you're able to do that,
we'll put the conditional agreement in place ahead of that
time, and then you guys go to work to get the funding, and
once that's committed, go forward with the construction
pursuant to the agreement.
in ii o5
67
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR.. BOCK: That's correct. All -- all we're
asking you today is if you like the idea, authorize the --
Rex to get with whoever -- whoever we get, if you will, to
draw up an agreement that you agree to and that we agree to,
and it's not going to be complicated. It's very simple.
It's -- these type agreements are done all the time, so then
we can move to stage two and stage three.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One final question I
have, Ronnie. All the reference today has been to law
enforcement. I assume you're also talking about other
emergency services as well?
MR. BOCK: All of it, sir. All the above.
There's no way to predict what the building could be used
for. That would be left to our complete discretion. But
what I'm saying is, it's a need we should have had a long
time ago. We don't have it yet. And if you agree, then
we're going to move ahead, and it'll be the people doing it.
There's no tax dollars. So, all we're asking for is -- is
the lease.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The win-win -- a
win-win issue is a good thing.
MP.. BOCK: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONEF. BALDWIN: For all of us.
MR. BOCK: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I appreciate you
io ii-os
ti~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
2z
23
24
25
guys, unlike some of the other functions in this community
that -- that they can't open the doors without the
government being there and providing all -- everything. I
really appreciate you guys a lot. And if I were to vote
right now, which I'm not, I would vote in the affirmative,
big time.
MR. BOCK: Well, it is a -- it's very
important that every community realizes that we must take
responsibility for our own lives.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely.
MR.. BOCK: If we don't do that now, at some
point we're going to wish we had. And I think the
educational and the -- the funds that might be here, there
are a lot of good causes. None is more important than --
than the next, but when you have an item like this that's
going to serve everybody for all needs, then we feel like we
can raise the funds. If we can't, it didn't cost anybody
anything. We're going to give all the money back. We have
no need to have a bank account. We're looking for a
building.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is not styled as
an action item, but I can tell you I favor it. I think it's
a great idea.
MR. BOCK: Thank you so much.
DODGE TINLEY: I haven't heard any negative
in-ii-os
69
1
~,
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
It
1i
lE
1~
~(
2:
2:
2
2
comments, Mr. Bock.
MR.. SOCK: It's free.
JUDGE TLNLEY: That ought to be your
guidance.
MR. BOCK: Thank you, sir. Thank you, folks.
JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate you gentlemen
being here today.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just got one
question for the Sheriff.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER. NICHOLSON: He said that this
building would free up some administrative office space.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Definitely.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You're not planning
on adding staff, are you?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Sooner or later, this
county will grow, as it has. When I first started with the
County 25 years ago, there was nine employees in the
Sheriff's Office, counting the jail, and 1've got 95 now.
So --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: At least --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- it will grow.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: At least wait a year
and a half.
~I SHERIFF HIER.HOLZER.: I hope we wait more than
in-il-os
~o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
y
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that. More employees, more problems. Thank you, gentlemen.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Why don't we see
if we can get a few more items out of the way. Let's go to
Item 8, if we might. Consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action to set a public hearing for revision of
plat of Kerrville P.anchettes, Tracts 8, 9, and 10, in Volume
3, Page 79, Plat Records, located in Precinct 4.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Good morning.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ynu just need a public
hearing?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir, I need to set that. I
ask the Court to consider setting the public hearing for
November the 14th, 2005, at 10 a.m. for the revision of
plat, Kerrville Ranchettes, Tracts 8, 9, and 10, and in
Precinct 4.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Nothing unusual
about this one, is there?
MR. ODOM: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: We're taking four and
making two?
MR. ODOM: Yes.
COMMISSIONEP, NICHOLSON: We usually like
that.
JODGE TINLEY: We already have a 10 o'clock
item, I'm informed, Mr. Odom. Would you like to try for
1'J-11 OS
71
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
10:15?
MR. ODOM: Ye
JUDGE TINLEY
COMMISSIONER
DODGE TINLEY
COMMISSIONER
public hearing for revision
Tracts 8, 9, and 10, Volume
that public hearing be held
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
's .
All right.
NICHOLSON: 10:15 when?
11-14-05.
NICHOLSON: I move that we set a
of plat of Kerrville Ranchettes,
3, Paqe 79, in Precinct 4, and
at -- 10:15, did you say?
LETZ: Second.
NICHOLSON: On the 14th of
November.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
set the public hearing as designated in the motion. Any
question or discussion? 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: That motion does carry. We'll
go to Item 10. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action to set a public hearing for revision of plat for The
Horizon, Section 1, Lots 21 and 12 in Volume 6, Page 323
through 326 of the Plat Records, located in Precinct 1.
it-ii-os
7z
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2~
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. I would ask the Court
to consider the public hearing for November the 14th, 2005,
say at 10:20 a.m., for the revision of plat for The Horizon,
Section 1, Lots 21 and 22, Volume 6, Pages 323 through 326
in Precinct 1.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the public hearing being set as designated. 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: Judge, Number 11 is
going to be short and sweet.
MR. ODOM: Very short and sweet, I would
assume.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Let's call Item
11, ~~onsider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
reserve the name of "Las Colinas of Kerrville" for a
community planned in Precinct 1.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Odom?
i~~-11-us
73
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
9
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
~4
25
MR. ODOM: Yes. Dur office received the
enclosed request to reserve the subdivision name. This name
is not unique. There is a Las Colinas recorded in Volume 5,
Page 4" Kerr County Plat Records, and another unrecorded as
Las Colinas. Mr. Richards, who represents McRae Energy or
Mr. McRae, has asked the Court to consider allowing this
name -- reserving it for his client, "Las Colinas of
Kerrville." So, we're sort of caught -- you know, we're
being asked to do that. I think Mr. Richards is here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right over here, the
one with the glare off his head. You both have glares off
your head.
MR. ODOM: Won't hurt anybody for him to
stand up here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Makes me blind.
MR. ODOM: So, really, what I would like to
know from the Court, and that's what he would like to know,
is can they reserve that name? Is that too much similarity,
Las Colinas of Kerrville versus --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Greg, why don't you
come up and -- I think maybe there's some confusion here
over -- when we go back to the 9-1-1 issue of duplication of
names of roads is kind of where we may be hung up there.
So, he borrowed my phone this morning and we put him in
touch with the 9-1-1 folks and had a discussion. Tell these
i,-i~-n=
74
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
1'8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
guys what --
MR. RICHARDS: In talking with the 9-1-1
folks, what they've told me is that the subdivision names,
even though there is an existing Las Colinas and we're
proposing Las Colinas of Kerrville, even though those are
similar, they didn't have any problem whatsoever with that,
as long as the street names that were ultimately chosen were
not in any way similar to what exists. I asked her if --
if, when 9-1-1 calls come in, if any -- any of the
information that comes up on their screen references a
subdivision name, and the answer was no, it's just a street
name and street number in the community, whether it's
Kerrville, Comfort, Center Point, et cetera. So, we are
totally in favor of trying to pick a name that's not going
to be confusing as far as the roadways are concerned, but
would like the subdivision name to read "Las Colinas of
Kerrville."
	COMMISSIONER	WILLIAMS:	That was my concern,
because I	do have a -- a Las	Colinas	address in Precinct 2,
and so I'	m glad you found ou	t that in	formation.
	COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN:	Sure.
	COMMISSIONER	LETZ: I	don't -- it doesn't
make any	difference to me.	It seems	-- I mean --
	COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN:	Would there be any
other --	would there be any	other rea	son, like postal
,n-i~
~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
service or anything like that, that may cause some
confusion? I mean, I -- I don't see it, but --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think there's -- I
think it creates a confusing situation, and I think there's
other things, and I'm sure Mr. Richards can look into it,
from name usage and assumed name certificates and Secretary
of State's office and all that, but nothing to do with us
from my standpoint.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Unless it's a street
address.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Street address is the
only thing that we have. Doesn't bother me one way or the
other.
JUDGE TINLEY: Does the County Clerk have any
concerns relative to plat filings?
MS. PIEPER: I'm thinking somewhere in the
Property Code it states that we're not supposed to duplicate
names, but right off the top of my head, I cannot think of
that statute. But as far as our indexing goes, I don't
think that's going to be a problem. If we put in the name,
you };now, for a -- if we're searching the subdivision, then
both of them will pop up.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This one's actually
different. It's Las Colinas, Kerrville.
MS. PIEPER: Right.
~o-ii-,s
76
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: So --
MS. PIEPER: But normally, whenever we're
searching a record, we will put in just, you know, like "Las
Colinas," and then both of them would pop up.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actually, what I -- I
think the appropriate thing to do here today -- I mean, I
don't -- passing a court order I don't think is appropriate,
so just kind of nod our heads.
MR. ODOM: A direction.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. I mean, it's
fine with me.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I think, to me,
the unusual request part of it is reserving it. And I --
you know, I don't -- doesn't make any difference to me if we
reserve names or not.
MR. RICHARDS: Well, the only -- my client's
criteria that he put in front of me was to reserve the name,
as opposed to someone else being able to use that name, so
that's what I'd ask the Commissioners for action on, is
under, you know, the conditions that we've discussed, that
the name's ultimately -- that's going to be part of the plat
process. But in terms of use of the name, that -- that
nobody can get ahead of us.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, who's the
watchdog on this?
in-ii- ~_
i__~_~~ • _..___ ~ ___J._~-..
~~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~3
24
25
MS. PIEPER: Well, gentlemen, even if -- even
if somebody files assumed names, we do not police that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my question.
Who's the watchdog?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I don't know -- I
mean, if someone did an assumed name certificate, "Las
Colinas, Kerrville," and y'all don't have one already on
file and you don't have one, like I said, with the Secretary
of State, that's -- that's another issue. I mean, we don't
have any control over it. And if so, and y'all want to come
in and say "Las Colinas of Kerrville South," well, we'd
probably let it go through, or "Las Colinas, Ingram," you
know.
MS. PIEPER: If they file the assumed name
certificate with us, we do not police that at all.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's up to the
individual, 'cause I've been through that before. Once you
get it filed or you get yours filed on this, it's up to you
to keep someone else from doing it.
MR. RICHARDS: Sure. Well, I don't have any
concerns about d/b/a records.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Now, if the clerk -- if
there's not a legal prohibition, that may be something that
the County Attorney needs to take a look at, or maybe
Mr. Richards, if he hasn't already. But --
1J-11 US
i L. ._ ~~ ...__._S_ ____~._... ~ _ ~ ~ _,
~a
1
3
4
5
6
7
R
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
2n
^1
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How long are you asking
for it to be reserved, I guess?
MR. RICHARDS: I anticipate that a concept
plat will be forthcoming in the next four to sir, months.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: County Attorney?
MR. EMERSON: The only thing I would say is
that county government's limited to the specific statutory
authority granted by the state, and I don't know of any
statutory authority offhand that allows y'all to undertake
reserving a name.
COMMISSIONEP. NICHOLSON: I don't think it
does either. If there was a conflict in names, I think it
would be a civil matter.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think, I mean,
to protect your name, you ought to file a concept plan, let
us act on a concept plan, and then it's there. I mean --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One way to protect it
is to copyright it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And he's -- he should
be pretty close to a concept plan. I mean, you should be
ready to go. I saw it, what, a month ago?
MR. ODOM: We saw it in August, but I don't
believe he's bought the property yet.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh.
MR. ODOM: And so the question comes up with
io-ii ns
~~ L. _. ...-.~~-- . J.. _Y_a_. -~._..
79
1
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
L V
21
~,
23
~4
25
the 1 acre versus 2, which has to be, I assume --
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: Yeah, that's the
same -- this is the same one that -- the city issue, ETJ
issue on lot size.
MR. ODOM: In their ETJ.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, y'all can go
downstairs and leg-wrastle, although I don't recommend it.
But --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He just said we can't act
on it, so we just -- we have no problem with it, I guess, is
the only thing that we can say.
MR. RICHARDS: Okay, fair enough.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: What about this next item?
How long is it going to take, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't think long.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let me go ahead and
call Item 12, consider, discuss, and take -- I assume no one
else has anything to offer on Item 11? I'll call Item 12;
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for
subdividing a ~-acre lot into two 1-acre parcels with a
shared driveway located in Precinct 1.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Again, this is t_he one
I was referrinq to earlier that we're down to 1-acre lots,
where the water is provided by -- who are they?

__..__.._. ___..._.._...._..~._. . _-r...... - _.._...r...._.
80
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
L 1
~2
23
2q
25
MR. LAMBERT: Aqua Texas.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Aqua Texas. And road
frontage, et cetera, and with soil that I think -- and I'm
not going to speak for Miguel, but I think there's probably
soil there for a standard septic system. And this -- this
thing fits -- in my mind, this thing fits our Subdivision
Rules and Regulations, that it can be a 1-acre -- 1-acre
lots with a water system. Take it away, Leon -- or Leonard.
MR. ODOM: Or Leonardo or anything like that;
depends where we're at. Mr. -- Mr. Lambert came in last
week to talk to Buster and came to us. And basically what I
have, before just passing out what we received -- in the
packet was the information that you received, and I just got
this today, which is just for your information, because it's
not correct. I talked to Brandenburg this morning, but it
gives you some insight. Basically, what Mr. Lambert has is
a piece of property that's on Town Creek. It's 2 acres, and
he has two structures on it. What he wishes to do is do an
alternate platting, divide it in half, 1-acre, two lots.
And my understanding is that it's contingent on him selling
to an individual, these two residences basically going to
one lot. He has community water from the Horseshoe Oaks
Subdivision, and I believe he has a letter to that fact,
that they will supply him water, and already have meters
there if it is possible for him to hook up. What we looked



81
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
at, his problem has -- and I told him last week, as the
Court directed me several weeks ago, that it would be the
5-acre minimum or possibly 2 and a half to 3 acres. What
we've discussed today is a 2-acre minimum. Therefore, you
could not subdivide it. However, he's got a unique
situation. He's got 2 acres. What we looked at was 270
foot of frontage. He would have a variance of 130 feet with
a shared driveway, and to control access. And that's the --
that discussion basically is what he's bringing to the
Court, is to try to see if the Court would give him a
variance and take a '-acre lot, divide it into 1 acre with
community water and have a shared driveway, 40 foot, which
would control access on Town Creek, which concerns me.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Quick -- okay, Leonard.
First of all, I'll just make a comment. We didn't change
rules this morning. Our rules are the same as they are. We
just granted a waiver this morning. We have not changed our
subdivision rules. Our subdivision rules are as they're
written, and as they're written, this is perfectly fine. If
you're under 5 acres, if there's -- I mean under five lots,
it says, clearly, water --
MR. ODOM: One to four.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Water
availability requirements in the paragraph are not
applicable for any subdivision with five lots or less.
io ii-n5

82
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
MR. ODOM: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So that means you don't
have to require any kind of averaging. You go down below
it, 1-acre lots, if you're served by water and O.S.S.F.
MR. ODOM: But we would need a variance on
frontage.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, on frontage. But
on the lot size issue, this is in total r_ompliance with our
current subdivision rules.
MR. ODOM: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's just a variance on
frontage, which we've done numerous times.
MR. ODOM: Numerous times.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the frontage, how
many feet are we short? 30?
MR. ODOM: 70-foot -- we need 200 foot
frontage.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right.
MR. ODOM: But we're 130, so that's 70 foot
on each lot. But we're -- we're taking a combined entrance
to be shared and split that, and we control access. And I
would -- I would approve the variance. I think is this is
the way to do it without having two separate driveways.
We've got one driveway.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, this is good.
l i - 1 1 n 5
~ a_.._ s. -`_--_a....... ~ _.~_ -.
83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
R
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It works.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is a good thing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It actually works.
MR. ODOM: It works.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
MR. ODOM: So Mr. Lambert really needs to
know, can we do this? And the answer sounds like that he
can.
COMMISSIONEP. LETZ: So, I make -- do you want
to make a motion? Want me to make a motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. I move that we
-- well, let's see. Are we here for -- yeah, we do have
appropriate action.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A variance on --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Want to grant a
variance on the frontage issue with the driveway down the
center, and approval of the --
MR. ODOM: Two 1-acre lots.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's about it,
actually, is granting the variance on the frontage footage.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JULGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
the granting of a variance with regard to the frontage issue
on the plat as presented. Any question or discussion? All
in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
~n ii-n~

84
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,G
L J
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
INo response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Why
don't we be in recess for, oh, about 15 minutes.
(Recess taken from 10:42 a.m. to 11 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order
after our mid-morning recess. The next item on the agenda
is Item 13, consider and discuss and adopt the National
Incident Management System, commonly referred to by the
acronym NIMS, as the standard for incident management.
Mr. Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, quick and simple.
And there's been some talk about this, that the County may
have already adopted it years ago, but I can't find that
anywhere and haven't seen it. And all it is, is that FEMA
and the federal government has come out with a way to set up
a standardized incident management system, which is a very
good idea in this case, because what it is is more of a
common language type system. What you have is -- say there
is an emergency management incident here, and it brings in
officers from other counties, other jurisdictions like in
Louisiana or anything that have to all communicate on the
same radio system and are trying to help out. They do away
Z n- 1 1 I l j

85
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
with most of the codes -- what we call 10 codes. Because
one good example is, in Texas, a 10-50 on a 10 code means
there's an automobile accident. In Maryland, a 1n-50 means
there's an officer in trouble. So, without everybody being
on a common language type deal, it can get very confusing
when you're using help from different jurisdictions. So,
this takes care of that. It kind of sets everybody -- plus,
in an incident command situation, you may have the Chief of
Police being your -- your incident commander. You may have
the Sheriff under that chief doing a r_ertain division,
'cause financially, everything's divided out, and they do
away with calling them "Chief" or "Sheriff" or anything to
get the title stuff away; that we're all actually working
one incident, one command, and it's just broken down that
way. And so it's -- I think it's needed. I think it's a
very good idea. Plus the other little thing is, a lot of
your federal grant money and everything on Homeland Security
is tied to having this in place. And all of our officers
have pretty well been through the NIMS training already.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move Kerr County adopt
the National Incident Management System as a standard for
incident management.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion?

86
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
??
2_'
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. I -- just a
simple question here. Going -- talking about the 10
signals, now, is that -- does that mean that you -- we
trash-ran all 10 signals and go to a --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. The -- the head of
Homeland Security, just a few weeks ago at the National
Police Chiefs Association, backed off on -- on trashing all
of them, 'cause they were going to -- and part of it was
total plain English talk on the radios. And I think they
got a lot of objections to it in every situation, 'cause
some things you do need coded on there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But in an incident
command type situation, you will primarily try to use plain
English. Now, in our -- we're redoing our policy and
procedures manual now, and I know the City of Kerrville has
already done some of theirs, which we will go most of the
time now to more of a plain English system and do away with
a lot of the codes that you would hear on the radio, just to
get everybody in that same habit. Now, there will be some
things we all use codes on, but most of it will be plain
English so everybody knows what you're talking about.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: During the time of a
national emergency, right? Not all the time?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This is day-to-day
iu-i ~ ~~s
87
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
operations, because, unfortunately, what you find is you do
as you're trained. And if officers are trained in the 10
codes all the time and don't use plain English ever, then
when you get in a national situation, an emergency
situation, they'll go back to doing the 10 codes. So, you
try and train them on both.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty, is this tied in
with -- at all with the emergency management system?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is part of the
emergency management?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Part of that?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My recollection is based
on what Mark Beavers, the representative for the Chief at
our last meeting, said, was that that really had -- the
I organization of that is as it was set up in -- '83?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: '87, '83, something like
that. '83.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This -- if you would
think about that, to me, it seems a lot has changed from
'83, and we should look at that reorganization.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I would be the very
first one to agree with you on that. I don't know that it's
I n 1 1 O S
88
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1H
17
18
19
20
21
~^
G
23
24
25
my place or -- or my deal to even start trying to change or
come to any changes, but just dealing with this last one, I
think it's something mainly the County Judge would need to
instigate and start and see if there's any changes that
y'all want to make in our response and preparedness and how
that's done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're going too far.
Okay. That's part of the FEMA -- it's part of the thing.
JUDGE TINLEY: Bottom line is, if we want to
get Homeland Security funding, we need to adopt this, right?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You're correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's what I thought. Any
further question or discussions on the motion? A11 in favor
of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We'll
move to Item 14, consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action on Memorandum of Understanding between AACOG, Kerr
County Sheriff's Department, and Kerr County Commissioners
Court to establish operating, maintenance, training, and
security guidelines for the AACOG Regional Law Enforcement
Academy Distance Learning Site iii the Kerr County Sheriff's
Department training room.
~~n ~~-ns
89
1
2
3
9
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
I6
17
18
19
20
21
2~
23
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And that's pretty well
it. We've talked about it quite a bit. This would be one
of the first one of these in the state. I think it will be
of great benefit to everybody as far as training, and it is
a visual training. They're puttinq in all the equipment.
We'll install it all. We'll train. They want two people
that are trained to be kind of monitors, so that when there
is a training class going on, these two people will know how
all the equipment works and be able to work the equipment.
And what I have suggested to them on that aspect is that one
of those people be from my department, and one of those
people be the training coordinator for the Kerrville Police
Department, because I think both of us are the two major
organizations that will be using it the most and getting it
set up.
I think it's a fabulous deal. The
contractors that will be installing the equipment came down
and looked at our room the other day. We've made some
adjustments in there, got things ready for them, and
everybody's excited to get this going, but we do need this
agreement. Now, this agreement was sent to the County
Attorney, has been reviewed by the County Attorney. Rex had
one concern on it, which was under duties under Number 6,
under the Kerr county Sheriff's Department deal, and Number
F is, "Obtain written approval for use of the equipment by
.n-ii o=.
90
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
the Regional Law Enforcement Academy Coordinator or his
designee." And R.ex's question on that was, who is that?
Well, under that type of deal, there is a person that is
designated; Mr. Stephen Ramirez right now. So, I don't
think we need to have a name put in there. It's a position,
'cause it does change with AACOG --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- from time to time.
So, other than that, I think he had no problems with it. It
does protect the county, as he put in the memo back to me.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think it's a great
deal, Rusty, and I know that the Academy's very happy about
it and excited about it. I want -- one question. You have
a T-1 line in your budget?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It is a T-1 equivalent.
No, it is not a T-1. Part of our broadband connection; it's
already been there. We've talked with Mr. Trolinger about
it. He's talked about it with the AACOG people, and
everything's up and ready to qo at no additional cost.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval of the
Memorandum of Understanding between Kerr County and AACOG
for the Sheriff's Department for establishing operating,
maintenance, training, and security guidelines for the AACOG
Regional Law Enfor~~ement Academy Distance Learning Site in
Kerr County Sheriff's Department.

91
1
2
3
4
J
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
L
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. I assume that includes my
authorization to sign?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: With the Judge's
authorization to sign same.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any question or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Question.
DODGE TINLEY: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How is it paid for?
Does AACOG -- is AACOG going to charge us for the services?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The -- all the
equipment, everything, setting it up and installing it is
all AACOG's. They've gotten a grant, a couple hundred
thousand -- 100,000 to do it a11. We won't have any of
that. And the big benefit to us will be, in talking with
Mr. Ramirez, our charge for sending an officer through a
training course will actually drop, particularly because
he's not going to San Antonio. He's not going to be using
up their distance -- it's a distance deal to where, like, a
lot of their courses now cost $100, just for an example, for
an officer to take. If he takes the same course here in
that room, it may cost $25 just for paper processing.
COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: The tuition will be
io-ii-a.

92
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
paid by the sending -- by the sending county for any officer
coming into training, just as it would be now? As the
Sheriff points out, it's a lesser amount because they don't
have to go to San Antonio.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is this strictly
TCLEOSE certification, or is there some specialized
training?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This is all the
specialized training, different law enforcement courses they
have to take. This will not cover a law enforcement
academy, where -- where a civilian person gets certified to
be a peace officer. That's about a nine-month course.
Right now, TCLEOSE and the State has given them permission
to do all the in-service, all the updates, all the normal
training, but not a full-blown academy to the distance
learning deal.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But this would be a
part of a full-blown certification. I'm reading here, "Law
Enforcement Academy."
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. Right. Say I
have an officer that takes their crime scene -- crime scene
search, okay, or crime scene reconstruction. Those can be
in intermediate, advanced and everything else, or
fingerprints. All those kind of courses will be here. But
~r-ii a=
93
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
.l
22
23
24
25
for an officer to get certified as a state-certified peace
officer, he has to take a basic academy, which lasts about
nine months long and is a constant -- one continuous course
all the way through it. It will not do that full-blown
academy. It will do a lot of the small courses.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I got some more
questions, Rusty.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: To make sure I
understand what we're doing here. This is a remote distance
learning program for all of the law enforcement officers
under the AACOG governments, like Kerr County.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: City of Kerrville.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct. Ingram.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And you go to school
sitting at a PC over the Internet?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct. You go
to school -- actually, you're not necessarily just sitting
at a PC, okay? This is a large screen thar_'s in the front
of our training room. There are microphones in there that
each one has on a large screen. It shows -- actually, it's
a split screen. It will show students in San Antonio and
i~,~~-ii-~~5
94
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the instructor, okay? And then our -- from their end, it
shows our students, and the screen which also -- it's a
total interactivity -- you know, interactive type.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So it's not a
set-your-own-pace kind of thing? You have to be there at a
specific time?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There is an instructor,
you know, standing there teaching the course in San Antonio,
so it's those that are actually taught.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've had occasion to
do something like this, maybe even a step further, in the
past, and it -- the savings were huge. Somebody in Norway
and somebody in Houston could be going to the same school at
the same time, and I think we found that the training was
better.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, also, the
behind-the-scenes advantage and just future thoughts about
all this are, with the other item y'all discussed earlier
this morning, with the Mounted Peace Officers' proposal, is
this system will also have the capability of communicating
back and forth with San Antonio with, like, their emergency
management. If there were a disaster in San Antonio at some
time, this system can be set up to where, like, in our
training room, if we had our incident command system or EOC
operating, they have direct visual communication between the

95
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
two, 'cause San Antonio's our biggest jeopardy, and which
would make it just a fabulous system for everything.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Good point.
JUDGE TINLEY: Also could be utilized as one
segment of a more comprehensive video teleconferencing
system.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: This is kind of the beginning
of that. Any further questions or discussion on the motion?
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. We'll
go to Item 15, consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action on acceptance of RFQ's. MR. Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, I didn't bring
them all over here. As you can tell by the list, we did get
a fabulous response from different architectural firms that
did send in their RFQ's. It takes up most of one of my
closets at the office, so -- because they each had to
provide so many copies, so they are still at the office in a
closet. Most of them have not been opened, and I'm just
needing some direction. We're getting calls on, "Where do
i_~ ii-us
96
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
we go from here?" What's the pleasure of the Court? I know
that there has been some talk and consideration and that on
whether we'll need to go forward or not. And I will remind
the Court that y'all got a study on the jail and a facility
needs analysis done by the Jail Commission which recommended
immediate preparations to add at least 96 beds, and that
recommendation was because of our projected population and
where it was going. A lot of it is dealing with female
population.
I did pull up some statistical data.
Starting for the year of 1998, we had an average daily
population at the jail of 106. For 1999, it went to 119.
In 2000, it went to 142. In 2001, it went to 152. In 2002,
it dropped back to 192. In 2003, it was at 142. In 2004,
it went to 157. And the average daily count so far is 150.
Our 80 percent population, which is recommended to be able
to classify them -- we have had some of those problems -- is
153, and we're averaging 160 this year. The last time this
Court took action in the current jail we built, I think most
of y'all will recall that it started in '91, and we didn't
open our doors until '95 or '95, so it took about a
four-year process. In fours years, I think we're going to
be in a very serious situation with housing inmates, and I
think we will be housing somewhere, because we will not have
the capability of housing them in our facility unless we
iu-~i-os
97
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
~4
25
start taking action and do somethinq about it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: One of the things that
was brought up at our last meeting, but I'd like to get
clarification from the County Attorney on this, the freeze
we put on 65 and over, if we put before them a bond issue of
this or any other t;~pe for the voters of Kerr County and
they vote for that, does that -- what -- how does that vote
to increase taxes affect that tax freeze?
MR. EMERSON: The answer to that is I don't
know. I'll find out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, and I don't know
if the State's -- I don't know that you'll get an answer,
but I'd like to find out what -- to your best knowledge at
the moment -- not today at the moment, but what the answer
is, 'cause I think it has a -- it has a big impact. With
23 percent, plus or minus, of our citizens frozen, I just
don't see how we're going to afford to do it with that big
of a freeze. I mean, you know, and that -- and that has a
big impact to me as to what step we take next. You know, I
think we need a jail, but we may have to house them all out
of county until -- I mean, permanently, I just don't see how
we can put that much of a tax increase on the -- that small
of a segment of the population.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Common sense would say
to me that you have to allow everybody to vote.
i~~ ii-n5
98
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
??
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You have to allow
everyone to vote, but the question is, can -- does that
freeze -- are they voting for this increase on top of their
freeze, or is their freeze frozen?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Their freeze is
frozen.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I want him to tell me
that. I think that's right, but I think that's -- it's an
important point, because it'll greatly change how we do any
kind of a --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, how did it work
when K.I.S.D. floated a $38 million bond issue?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it's different.
They have a different -- what froze their taxes is totally
different legislation. That's why I want Rex to look into
it, 'cause at the last meeting we said it was frozen, I was
quoted in the paper as sayinq, "Well, then we're not getting
a jail." I'd like to find out what the answer is, because
it has a big impact on this.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER.: Well, there's a couple
things that I think -- one, your quote in the paper, you
were quoted -- this is a jail expansion; it's not a jail.
Two, I always want to make it very clear that I will be the
first one to stand here and tell you that, as Sheriff right
in ii-o°
99
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
now, I don't want a bigger jail. I don't want more
employees, okay? It's nothing but problems for a Sheriff.
But I will also stand here and tell you that going through
this before with this county a couple different times,
whether it was expansion or building the entire jail, is it
is a long process. It will take us a while to get
everything figured out to go. I do believe that we will
find ourselves in a serious housing situation. I don't know
of any Sheriff around, except maybe Milton right now, 'cause
he doesn't want to add onto his, and he is housing a bunch
out of county. But just the fact that you ship inmates out
of county to be housed, it does not alleviate the Court, me,
or Kerr County from any liabilities associated with that
inmate. If that inmate gets beat up in that jail, commits
ii suicide in that jail, or has a problem with -- one of their
employees beats them up, it is still the liability of Kerr
County. You cannot put that off on any other county under
housing inmates. You're still totally responsible for that
inmate, and I don't like being responsible for something I
can't control.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I understand. And the
other side of that on that same line of thinking, Sheriff,
is that we have to pay to send them out of county, and we're
paying for it one way or the other. It's just as to --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Except that liability
1C 11-^.`~
100
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
part, to me, is -- is a very large part. I don't know what
to tell -- I have been told that if there is a next step to
this, that the next step would be to go through all the
RFQ's, start kind of putting them in a first preference,
second, third, fourth. You actually label them with a
number before you ever even look at costs or -- or anything
else. You figure out which one you think is the best, and
then second, third, and fourth, and then after that process
has been done, then you r_an pick your first one. You have
to go by the number, sit down, negotiate with that one, see
if you can come to an agreement over costs or how things are
done or -- or anything else with it. If you cannot, then
you put that one aside and you have to go to number two.
And that's what I had been told and explained by someone as
the process.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe that's correct.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZEP.: Not being directly
involved in this, I don't know.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: These are the 13 that
responded?
SHERIFF HIEP.HOLZER.: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: From all your
invitations for RFQ?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the way to
1o-ii-os

101
1
2
3
9
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
ZL
22
23
24
25
proceed is to narrow it down to three, four, five, and then
under some criteria -- I mean, you probably -- you're going
to be the driver on this, Rusty, as to what the criteria
are. If they meet criteria, bring the criteria to the Court
and let us talk about it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I would like to -- if
we're goinq to do that, I would like -- and I don't know if
the Court can do it under it -- I think it does take
appropriate action to at least put a couple of the
Commissioners on a committee, maybe, along with myself to
review these and try and put them in that kind of order, if
that's what your desire is. I just don't know enough
about --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think I'm --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we probably
accept them today, and then we can come back and -- and take
care of that item at a future -- next meeting.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me ask, could --
why isn't the next step deciding whether or not we want to
take a bond election to the voters? Shouldn't we make
that --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Don't know the
amount, for one thinq.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's steps.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we have to be --
u-ii !~s
102
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
IG
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We don't know the
range or amount.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Number one, you don't
know the amount right now, because we haven't decided on the
number of beds you want to add. Number two is, I would
recommend that if that choice is made -- and I think several
of us have seen this, that we set it out at a possible
future date so that we can actually have time to show the
public -- have drawings, educate the public on the reasons.
I think there's going to be a lot of questions on it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, that's what
I'm thinking about. A political reality is that sometime in
the next couple years, we may be asking the voters to vote
on whether or not they want to raise their ad valorem taxes
for a jail, for a library district, for an EMS district, and
maybe something else. I don't know.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're right. That's
a political reality that -- you're right.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't have any
sage advice on it. I just know that it could be a whole lot
for us taxpayers to swallow.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're absolutely
right. But the beauty of it is that we get to vote, make a
decision whether we want to be taxed or not. But I think
the step today is accepting.
,n-,~ us
103
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know about all
13, but seems like to me you would accept all 13, and -- and
then you put together a smaller list to come back with.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I'll --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'd rather we put
together a smaller list that we can come back with.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Unless I've been removed,
I'm still liaison to the Sheriff.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you the liaison to
the Sheriff, or is the Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm not.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You do it, then.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Letz, do your job. My
god, German.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that
we accept all RFQ's that we received related to the jail
addition.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
accept the RFQ's as submitted. 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.
_ - 1 _ i 5
104
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(NO response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Item
16, consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
rescind Court Order Number 29414 adopting Kerr County tax
rate for Fiscal Year 'OS-'06, such order having been
superseded by Court Order Number 29415 on October 3, 2005.
Commissioner Baldwin.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. This is
simply a housecleaning deal, and I move that we rescind
Court Order 29419.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
DODGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
rescission of Court Order Number 29414. 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. We'll
move to item 17, consider and discuss nominations to serve
on the Library Advisory Board and make appointments to the
Library Advisory Board. Commissioner Nicholson.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think y'all recall
that the contract that we negotiated with the City of
i~~ ii-ns
105
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
?~
23
~4
~5
Kerrville redefines the role of the Library Advisory Board
and restructures its membership. And it provides that the
City will appoint a member of its Council and two others to
the board, and the County will appoint a member of its
Commissioners Court and two other members to the board, and
that Friends of the Library will name a member. I think
that's it, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And so the purpose
of this is for us to name a member of the Commissioners
Court and two others to the newly reconstituted Library
Advisory Board. Among the -- I'm currently serving as
liaison. Not a member of the Advisory Board, but
Commissioners Court liaison that attends meetings, ad hoc
member -- ex-officio. Ex-officio. I'm willing to serve on
it, or I'm just as willing for somebody else to serve on it.
It -- and it's probably not a matter of interest or
willingness as much as what's in the best interest of the
board. What -- who could best function in that role? So,
we need to discuss that, and we need to get any nominations
on the table for the two other members. And I have one
nomination to make, and that's Al Schultz. Al is a current
member of the Advisory Board. And I somehow think that some
continuity is important; that somebody -- some of the
members of the board who are there now would be valuable

106
1
L
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
as -- as the board changes its role and its mission. And my
experience with the board is that Al is -- has got the
quality we loo}: for. He cares about literacy. He's got a
variety of different experiences, including being a Marine
and a prison chaplain and a pastor. And I also have seen
that Al is probably the kind of person, working on a team
like that, that brings things together; can help the team
perform better than it might otherwise. So, I'm -- I'm
making that nomination of Al Schultz. I think we have some
others.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd like to throw a
name into the hat, if you don't mind. This lady also
currently serves on the Advisory Board and would look
forward to another opportunity, particularly with -- with an
enhanced role that we envision of the board, and so I would
place into nomination the name of Kay Mosty Hayes. She is a
lifelong school teacher, very much interested in the
library, had a sister who was the head librarian there for
many, many, many years. So, I would ask the Court to
consider Kay Mosty Hayes. Could I also inr_lude in that
motion, Judge, that the Court nominate Commissioner
Nicholson to continue to serve representing Kerr County
Commissioners Court?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're making an
actual motion?
;n ~i-ns
107
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, a nomination or
whatever.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whatever is proposed.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Might be best if we -- if we
bifurcate this thing and do the Commissioners Court rep in
one piece of business, and then --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- these other individuals,
citizens selected by the Court, in another.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. I had
recommended Mr. Baker, as you see in the backup in our --
behind our item here, but I am withdrawing him -- his name.
I had a conversation with him yesterday, and -- and feel
like this continuity issue that Number 4 just brought up
is -- 1 think that we're kind of in a critical time right
now with the library, and I thin Y, it was -- ~t would be --
wouldn't be real conducive to throw brand new blood into it
at this point, so I want to withdraw Mr. Baker. But I --
I'm with DSumber 2 here. Again, because of the continuity
issue, that Commissioner Nicholson is much more in tune with
this thing than we are, and I would appreciate him serving
on that board as well.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the -- I agree to
xo-ii-o,
los
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
support Commissioner Nicholson from the Court. On the
nomination side, I have another name. John Huddleston,
who's a member of the Friends, so he's familiar with the
]ibrary. He's spent a lot of time. I visited with him
several times about, you know, the library. He certainly
is, I think, qualified from his previously serving on
Kerrville City Council. But, I mean, I don't have a problem
with Reverend Schultz or Ms. Hayes either. I mean, I think
any of them would do a good job. I -- I would, in any
event, whether -- any of those three, in my mind, would do a
good job. But while I think it's good to have continuity,
and I think there's some continuity with all three of those
names, because they've all been associated with the library,
I think new blood is also an important factor here. And are
these terms one year? Two years? Staggered?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They're staggered.
We start off with some one-year and some two-year, and then
we'll get into sync after that.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: Yeah. I mean, I think
that the -- you know, and I don't. want to, you know, offend
people down the road. I think that, you know, I would like
the continuity issue right now, but I also like the idea of
bringing new people on. So these may be -- I don't -- I
want it real clear to the people that we choose, any of
those three, that they may be only there for one term,
~~-_.-ns
109
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
G1
22
~3
~4
?5
because I think. we do need some new blood into the --
potentially into it. Not that --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are they going to
draw straws for terms?
COMMISSIONER NICHULSON: We don't spell that
out in the contract. I suppose they'll --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Whoever gets the short
straw --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I haven't thought
about that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ; Whoever gets the short
straw gets two years? (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Drawing of lots.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could be.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Benham was motioning to be
recognized.
MR. BENHAM: With permission, gentlemen, for
the record, Joseph Benham, 5~2 Rolling Green in Commissioner
Williams' precinct, and here on behalf of the Friends of the
Library. I can't think of a better person than John
Huddleston to be on this new board, but you do need to know
one thing. He is an officer of the Friends, and our current
bylaws prohibit an officer of the Friends from also serving
on the Advisory Board. We're in the process of getting that
changed, but our annual meeting isn't until the third week
io-ll-ns
110
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1 L
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in November, so John would -- if he came nn board as a
member of this board immediately, he would have to resign as
an officer in the Friends. And I can't speak for which he'd
zather do, be on this board or be an officer of the Friends.
That's his call, but I thought you should be aware of that
situation. Up to now, the -- under the old board, the
president of the Friends was automatically an ex-officio
member of this board, just as a member of the County
Commission, a member of the City Council were. But the new
structure, of course, calls for a representative of the
Friends to become a voting member of the board, and
therefore, we'd have to change our bylaws. But which one of
the jobs Dr. Huddleston would choose to -- would choose to
accept, I -- I don't know. And I can't call him out at
Schreiner 'cause he's in class at the moment, but I did
think you ought tc be aware of it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Benham, is -- assuming
that your organization makes the appropriate changes that
appear to be necessary in order to designate a Friends
representative on the board --
MR. BENHAM: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- certainly one possibility
would be that Mr. Huddleston could serve in both capacities.
MR. BENHAM: Sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: With those changes.


111
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
~3
29
25
MR. BENHAM: Sure. Once we've changed our
bylaws, it would be -- anybody on the board could serve in
both capacities, and I would, in fact, see some merit in
that. Sut I don't like to make that call on behalf of the
organization.
DODGE TINLEY: I understand.
MR. BENHAM: I like what you had to say
personally. But thank you for your time. I did think you
ought to be aware of that situation.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you going to meet --
excuse me -- in November?
MR. BENHAM: The annual meeting is the third
week in November, yes. There will be a board meeting
between now and then to approve the bylaws -- new wording
for the bylaws to be submitted to the Friends membership,
but it will be voted on at the annual meeting in November.
COMMISSIONER. BALDWIN: The -- I just wanted
to say that Dr. Huddleston has voiced some interest in
serving on this board, and let him make the decision.
MR. BENHAM: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If he wants to resign
or --
MR. BENHAM: Well, you won't find anybody
who'll work any harder than he will, I can guarantee you
that.
io It n~

112
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
~2
~3
~4
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: True. He is --
MR. BENHAM: But, again, it's his call.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He is, and he's been
around that library a long, long time.
MR. BENHAM: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- like I said
previously, I don't have any problem with Ms. Hayes and
Reverend Schultz, so it may be just as simple to make those
two appointments, and let Mr. Huddleston represent the
Friends, or they can rotate at some -- at a future date. I
mean, 'cause he won't be able to serve until after November
now.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. I'll make a
motion that we nominate -- that we assign Kay Mosty Hayes
and Al Schultz as our two citizen members of the Library
Advisory Board.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that
our citizen representatives on the Library Board be
designated --
COMMISSIONER PSICHOLSON: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- as Kay Mosty Hayes and Al
Schultz. Any questions or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of that motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
is-~i os

113
1
3
9
5
6
7
3
9
10
11
1G
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll notify
Mr. Schultz, Commissioner, if you'll notify Ms. Hayes.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think we need to
notify Reverend Schultz.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Already got my job
done, Commissioner
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll take that
responsibility and do that.
MR. SCHULTZ: Pardon me, sir. One question.
Which one of us is one year and which one of us is two
years?
JUDGE TINLEY: fall are going to draw lots
over there, probably. And I'll trust you, with your good
luck that you possess normally, to come out on top of that
arrangement.
MR. SCHULTZ: In other words, I'm going to be
shot. Okay.
COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: Judge, I've got to
introduce a motion on this agenda item for the Court to
appoint Commissioner Nicholson as its representative --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
~u ~ -us

114
1
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: -- to this board.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
designate Commissioner Dave Nicholson as the Kerr County
Commissioners Court representative to the Library Advisory
Board. Any question, discussion on the motion?
MR. SCHULTZ: One quick question. I know
what the public thinks by the newspapers, all the rhetoric,
but really, Mr. Nicholson's going to make a good
representative fox you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. 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: That motion does carry. We
will move to Item 18, consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action on the problems with the new air
r_onditioning at the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center. Mr.
Letz.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda,
and I see Glenn here. I'll turn it over to him. I put it
nn because I received several complaints about the air
conditioning wasn't cooling. Granted, they were -- granted,
they came when it was pretty hot outside, but I just thought
io-:~-oe

115
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
1~
13
74
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
that considering we just have spent a lot of money on a new
system out there, I wanted to make sure that while we're
under the warranty period, that we make sure that
everything's been addressed and is working appropriately.
Glenn?
MR. HULEk:AMP: Yes. And I appreciate the
opportunity to come before y'all. There's -- I did a little
written explanation and handed it to you. Didn't get it
completed until yesterday, so I was unable to give it to
you. But -- and I'll go over this for the... The outside
temperature on the 29th of September during the Hill Country
District Junior Livestock Show fundraiser, the temperature
outside was right at 100 degrees. That was that Saturday
before the Sunday that we broke all the records. Indoor
arena was about the same temperature, which was rather
oppressive because of the humidity in there. Doors were
opened into the indoor arena and outside wash rack area for
caterers to bring -- cook and bring food into the exhibit
hall. Inside the exhibit hall, several heat lamps were
placed above the food by food caterers. Thermostats before
the event were set at 70 degrees -- and possibly they should
have been lower, but that was my fault -- and were holding
until the event started.
And the event starting is when -- I'm saying
is when they started opening doors, and they chose to play
.. ii-as

116
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
l9
20
21
22
23
24
25
some kind of -- some kind of game called cow patty bingo,
which was in the indoor arena, a large area where they had a
cow running around. So -- and I think she was required to
make a deposit in a certain area. (Laughter.) So, a County
Maintenance representative asked the event organizer's
representative if there was anything he could do to help
them, and he was told that somebody knew how to unlock the
lockout codes on the thermostats, and they started changing
settings, which you go downhill once you start doing that
when it's already warming up. And, as I wrote in here, I
choose to blame no one but myself, and -- and I mean that,
is that I -- I've learned to try to trust people to do what
is prudent. Obviously, we are going to have to go with
another kind of locking device on these thermostats, and
possibly have security make sure that they're not touched by
anyone other than us. So, okay, that's on that one.
So -- well, of course, it started warming up
in that building at that point, and there was -- it was too
late to turn back then. So, all right. Then on October
3rd -- and I got a heads-up from Commissioner Williams, S
think it was, on approximately the 25th or 27th about, well,
we have a big event coming on October the 3rd, which was the
telephone annual meeting, Hill Country Telephone. Well, I
made some adjustments and I documented everything we did.
We set the thermostats at E8 degrees at 2 o'clock in the
i;i ii-, s
r
117
1
3
9
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
]3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
?2
23
7q
25
afternoon. Temperature at 5 o'clock in the exhibit hall was
68 degrees. Doors were opened to the indoor arena at 5 p.m.
to register and serve dinner until 8 p.m. Doors were closed
with more than 800 people inside until 9:30 p.m., and then
the temperature averaged on the unit 75 degrees when the
people began to leave that evening, so it had warmed up
approximately 7 degrees with doors open and 800 -- over 800
people in there. There's a letter in here I got from Hill
Country Telephone; it's the second page, explaining their
issue. And then the summary of it, the door management,
heating devices, exhibit hall, and outside temperature of
over 100 degrees, plus tampering with equipment. I
personally think that's a recipe £or failure. This was not
an equipment failure or inadequate equipment problem. It
was -- it was several errors made. The number one is -- is
we need to have total control of those thermostats. We
cannot allow people messing with them.
COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: Glenn, two weeks
prior to the Hill Country District Junior Livestock Show
fundraiser --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- 9-H had its
meeting out there, Extension.
MR. HOLEKAMP: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And what was the
in-~i-os


118
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~l
L L
?3
24
25
problem that night? Because it was unbearably hot that
night as well.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Air-conditioners were turned
on as normal prior to the event. I think it was, like,
2:30, 3:00. They were set at 70. Everybody becomes an
expert. They went along and they pushed buttons thinking
they were lowering the temperature, but what they did is
they turned off the air conditioners but left fans on. The
fans were running, but no air, so all it was doing was
circulating the air that had been cooled. So -- and as I
said, is -- is I'm not blaming. I'm -- I'm willing to --
we've -- in fact, I've ordered some lockboxes. I know
they're easy to get into, but everywhere there's
thermostats, everybody becomes an expert, whether they are
or not, And as y'all understand, volunteers -- you know,
they mean well, but these -- these systems nowadays are real
sensitive. Once you shut them down, you get behind the
curve, so to speak. It doesn't really matter what you do;
it's too late once that's been tampered with.
So, I -- I think that after the hill -- or
before the Hill Country Telephone, I took it seriously on my
part ro manage it. I made everybody aware that -- the
organizers of the Hill Country Telephone, that we're going
to set the temperatures; that you manage your doors as best
you can, to -- to not leave them open any longer. Now,
i-„ ~i a-
-__ _. .__,____W..__~ - - »-_~__
119
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
71
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
granted, it was not quite as hot that evening. I think it
was 80's or something like that. But any time you use the
indoor arena, you're either sucking the hot air out or
you're blowing the cold air in, and that is way too many
cubic feet to handle, even those air-conditioners. The
air-conditioners, we've had some warranty stuff done. We
call them. They show up, and they've corrected it. We've
had some drain line issues, condensation line, because we've
had to use a pump to -- to take that water out of those
pans, and we've had some issues with that. But, overall,
they have performed -- I thought the way they performed for
the Hill Country Telephone annual meeting -- I was
impressed. I did not know, with that many bodies, we could
maintain even 75, 7b. I was amazed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess my question I
have is that the -- sounds like we figured out what was
causing the big problems, but while 100 degrees is unusual
in October --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- it's certainly not
unusual for July and August. And it sounds t_o me like that
we need to really let the -- whoever's running that facility
be aware that in hot periods, if they're using more than one
door, I mean, it's likely not going to stay very cool.
Because it seems to me that, I mean, the problem -- the Hi11
1D-]1-OS
_.,_._.___.....a-. _. _. ~
120
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
Country Telephone Co-op meeting, it was such a function
where it could be pretty much locked down, where the -- it
was. Well, you go to some of these other fundraisers --
events that use this, like trade shows, they're walking --
doors are going to be open there. So you're saying there's
really no way to keep it cool during events when the
arena -- when there's a lot of traffic going in and out
throughout the event, especially if it's 100 degrees?
MR. HULEKAMP: Well, I'd like to think at
some point in time, we can do a little better job with the
door management, and door management is -- is a key. You
know, like Walmart or -- and I'm dust using that as a --
banks. They use a two-door lock system where you open one;
the other one is still closed, and people come and go. We
may get to that point where we put glass doors at the
entrance to the restroom area, and then put one on the other
side where there's a -- a roll-down door past the restrooms.
What I'm saying is, there -- there are mechanisms that we
might be able to use. It's money. But door management, I
think, was probably a lot of our problems. And I'm not
talking about the front doors. The front doors, you let
people in and the door closes again. But when you leave
them open for two or three hours or whatever it is, I -- I
had a person stationed at the door at the Hill Country
Telephone, and as -- as soon as they were through
~ _ 1 ~ _ ~
121
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
registering those people, we closed them. And -- and I
think -- I think door management, whether it be -- and I
think you said it properly. I think the people that
organize these events and stuff really need to listen at
times, you know. We don't like to muscle everybody,
because, you know they're paying rent or -- well, in the
case of Hill Country Youth Exhibit -- I mean the stock show,
they don't, but they have a right to that facility, to
utilize it, and the air conditioning too. So -- so, I
guess -- and then 4-H, they have so many events in that --
in fart, now we're doing BB gun two evenings a week. It's
very impractical for me to -- to keep people over to watch
them. I mean, we're talking about a lot of overtime hours,
staff -- personnel, if we have to be there for all the 4-H
events too. We normally tell the event organizers, if you
wish to call them that, or coordinators, "Air conditioners
are set; just leave them alone and we'll turn them off in
the morning." Which is fine. I mean, they work off
thermostats anyway.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I got a couple of
questions.
MR. HGLEKAMP: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: First one is to
Gerard. When you -- as a reporter covering the city, did
in i~-n,
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
q
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
122
you ever have conversations about cow patties and deposits?
MR. MACCROSSAN: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. "NO" is the
answer, right?
MR. MACCROSSAN: Definitely not.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Welcome to home. Man,
this is home stuff.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, I found it to be a
rather interesting game.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It is a very
interesting conversation.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, what I'm hearing
you say, we don't have an air conditioning problem?
MR. HOLEKAMP: In my opinion, there is no air
conditioning problem. It is a --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I wanted
to hear.
MR. HOLEKAMP: It is -- I'm taking the
responsibility of not managing those thermostats properly --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Lock them up.
MP,. HOLEKAMP: -- indoors.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Lock them up, put a
cage on them. Put somebody out there with an AR-15 to guard
them.
iu-il-u5

123
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Two items.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir?
JUDGE TINLEY: What I'm hearing you say is
that the equipment is operating properly?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Secondly, did Kerr County get
what it paid for in the equipment that is there operating
properly?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir. In fact, it
exceeded the -- the amount that we went out for bids. It
exceeded it. We went out for bids for 50 tons, and we got
55.
JODGE TINLEY: For the 50-ton price?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess, I mean, I don't
-- I'm not -- I never was making the issue whether we got
what we paid for. My question that I had was that -- was it
a wise use of taxpayers' money to air condition a building
that's very hard to -- I mean, the reason was so we could
use it during the summer months, and what I'm hearing is
that we now have a problem; we've spent however much money,
and we haven't totally solved the problem. And it's not
because of the air conditioner. It's because maybe we
should have done some more thinking before we spent that
io-ii-os

r.. .. .._....,...,_.r._. _. i
124
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~3
~4
25
money on the air conditioning, because it was -- like some
members of the Court, I think, voiced, it was a good thing
to spend a bunch of money on at that time without fixing the
real problem, which is the building, and we found out that
that's correct.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I'd like to ask a question,
though. Do -- as part of our -- our rules and stuff, do we
have the authority to tell people to keep their hands off?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think so.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I mean, we try to verbalize
that to them, but obviously they don't hear or don't care to
hear. So, you know, I -- that -- that's going to be a
problem.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We do. We also lock
them up and make them unaccessible.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes. In fact, those lockouts
-- those lockups have already been ordered.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. HOLEKAMP: To place on those poles. All
right?
DODGE TINLEY: Anything else on that
particular item? Let's go to Item 19, consider, discuss,
and take appropriate action to authorize County Treasurer to
prepare a bid package of employee health benefits for
provision of insurance agent-slash-services. Commissioner
1~,-tt-ns

125
1 I Baldwin.
~" 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
--- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
."` 2 9
L S
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, sir. You
remember a month or two ago, I brought this issue to this
table to see if we couldn't streamline our process some.
And I want to say at the outset again that I have no problem
with anybody that's doing business with us today. I just
believe that it would be easier on all the county family to
have someone -- an agent that is local that can physically
come to this building when needed to help us in all of our
insurance issues. I have -- I really am really
uncomfortable with County employees talking to people about
insurance options. I know we're not selling insurance, but
I just -- I'm uncomfortable with that. It just doesn't seem
like the right thing that County employees should be doing.
So, to -- to fia that, I think that -- that we need to have
a local agent that can meet those needs, and when I brought
this up a month or so ago, whenever it was, Mr. Wallace was
kind enough to -- to come to Kerrville and hire -- hire
someone inside the City of Kerrville to assist us as his
employee, to assist us in that -- with that issue, and to
help -- help us with the new hires and all those insurance
type questions. Now, in our backup there's some notes here
from the County Treasurer's office to me talking about all
these things. And second page, in Item Number 3, it says,
"Our office does not know the name of the agent Mr. Wallace
1 ~~i - 1 1 - i~ ri

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
126
hired to help us locally." So, Mr. Wallace was nice enough
to hire this person, but it's -- by reading that, what that
says to me is that that person hasn't been over here to do
anything. I mean, we don't even know who it is. I remember
the name and I remember seeing it in the -- in the minutes
when I read them, but it appears to me that the County
Treasurer's office does not know who that person is. So,
again, what that says to me is that this system is not
working. I just think that we owe it to the taxpayers to go
out for bids and see what the different pricing is, see what
kind of services would be offered by a different agent.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm confused.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me finish my
sentence. I just think it would be good for the -- to the
taxpayers for us to go out and find out what the -- the
pricing would be and what the different services can be
offered by different agents in this area. Now, if
Mr. Wallace comes in as the best price and the best service,
so be it. I just think it would be a fair thing to open it
up and take a look and see what's out there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My confusion is, your
agenda says to authorize County Treasurer to prepare a bid
package. I thought we hired Mr. Looney to do that. That's
my confusion as to -- I'm trying to figure out what we're
trying to do.
-ii-os

1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
~~
24
25
127
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. "Bid package"
may not be the proper terminology. I don't -- I don't know
what the proper terminology is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, what you're trying to
accomplish, you want us to get information to Mr. Looney
for --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. No, I'm not
asking Mr. Looney to do anything.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, if we're going to
bid our insurance again, we need to decide -- and if we want
the insurance company that's going to take -- that we award
that contract to to do these things, this has to be in the
-- Mr. Looney has to tell the people they're bidding on
doing this work.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're not bidding
insurance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Aren't we?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm talking about --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Items 1 through 5 up
here on this letter.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm talking about --
aren't we going -- aren't we rebidding insurance this year?
The coverage?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He recommended not to.
MR. LOONEY: Well, we may rebid portions of
1.~ ii us

1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~,
23
24
25
128
it, yes, for the process of insurance coverage.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not talking about
insurance. I'm talking about our agent that handles
different things for us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I look at it as
we've hired Mr. Looney. I'm just trying to -- the procedure
is that the Treasurer's doing this, or is Mr. Looney doing
it? Because we've hired Mr. Looney to do this type of
stuff, to me. And if we're trying to amend -- get a package
that makes us have a local agent and do all this stuff, I
have no problem with that, but I think Mr. Looney is the one
that needs to tell us what to do and how to do it. I don't
think it's -- I think we're going to get very confused if we
have the Treasurer doing part of the insurance bidding and
Mr. Looney doing part of the bidding. I just think it needs
to be --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Doesn't have anything
to do with insurance coverage. It has to do with the agent.
What -- what are all the -- what are the duties that our
insurance agent does?
MS. NEMEC: He's here, if he wants to answer
that question.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm asking you.
MS. NEMEC: What are the duties that we do?


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
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Uh-huh, that we want
our agent to do.
MS. NEMEC: Oh, that we want our -- that they
do?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Want.
MS. NEMEC: I would just -- I would just like
to see -- I would just like to see any interested insurance
agent that would like to be the County's agent to give us a
list of services that they're willing to provide with a
price and compare what our best options are. I mean,
there's everything from enrollment to -- to COBRA, HIPAA,
terminations, inquiries.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, what you want to do
is contract out the entire portion of insurance that your
office currently handles?
MS. NEMEC: We already do that. It's already
contracted out. It's just other insurance agents are
interested in -- in bidding on it. Agents, not insurance
companies. The agents. There have been several agents that
have notified us --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What I'm saying is, you
don't want your office to do this work?
MS. NEMEC: I'm not sure what you mean by "do
this work."
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, you're saying that
ie,-ii-os

130
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
agents are going to do -- you want -- you're saying that
right now you're having to do this stuff, and you want to
find an agent that will do it for you?
MS. NEMEC: No, I just want to know what
services are out there that is best for the taxpayers of
this county.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, I'm
not arguing with anyone. I'm just trying to understand what
y'all want. And I don't --
MS. NEMEC; We want to see what options are
out there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So you want someone else
to do this -- to do COBRA and HIPAA and enrollments and
that?
MS. NEMEC: If it's within the reasonable fee
that we're paying now. If someone can do all that for what
we're paying now someone not to do it, then of course I do.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask the
question.
MS. NEMEC: As we were doing before.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we -- are we paying
our agent to do these things, in your opinion? It's
12 o'clock.
MS. NEMEC: In my opinion --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Barbecue's calling.
in-11-u[
131
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. NEMEC: -- I mean, we're paying him, but
they're not doing it. They're -- it's not under their
contract to do this -- these things.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. NEMEC: To where it is available. That
is --			
	COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:	Why	aren't they?
	MS. NEMEC: That is what	the	proposal was.
That's what --	we're paying them to be	our	agent, but this
agent -- this	particular agent does not	pro	vide those type
of services to	where I have been told t	hat	other agents are
willing to.			
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mr. Looney -- I think I'd
like to hear from him, 'cause he's the person we've hired to
handle our insurance.
MR. LOONEY: Judge, Gary Looney, consultant.
If I can give a quick civic lesson, then I can -- which is
the wrong thing for me to attempt to do to begin with, but
that's not mine. But we have elected officials. Elected
officials, by statute, are given direction on pretty much
how to manage their different departments. Part of that
function is hiring and firing of employees based on job
descriptions that they create. Again, partially by statute.
We have an Auditor then that oversees the budget
responsibilities of those different offices to make sure


132
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
•-- 13
14
15
16
17
18
1P
20
~' l
22
23
"° 2 4
25
that those job positions are completed and they're paid
properly in that area, and then we have a payroll function.
The payroll function is not necessarily the result of a
statutory direction. Therefore, payroll functions become
the direction of the Court, since it's not by statute.
So, the payroll functions include the process
of maintaininq the payroll in relationship to any deductions
or reductions that are made by contributions by employees
for various insurance plans, so you end up with two
different concepts. One, you have voluntary insurance
products for employees where employees are selecting a
product based on a presentation by an agent that is selling
a product on a salary deduction or salary reduction basis to
your employees. You also have an employer-sponsored
product, which is the Mutual of Omaha group health insurance
plan, which is inclusive of the life insurance plan.
Maintaining all of those deductions, or maintaining those
salary reductions or whatever is the responsibility of
payroll. Payroll then has been delegated to the Treasurer's
office. Is that -- that's correct.
So, you have one agent that is dealing with
the Mutual of Omaha relationships of employee relationship,
and then you have various other agents that are dealing with
voluntary plans, so, Mr. Baldwin, I'm not sure who you're
asking to replace or substitute or -- or change. So, you
is-ii ns
133
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1 Fr
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
have multiple agents that are currently dealing with the
organization itself. Now, there's some things that you
cannot delegate. HIPPA administration and COBRA
administration are things that are statutorily -- federal
statutes -- an employer law. It's an employer regulation,
employer law. Now, you can hire someone to perform that
service for you, which is what we've done with HIPAA and
COBRA under Mutual of Omaha, but under our contract for
hiring them, they assume the liability and the risk for
handling those COBRA notifications and COBRA -- HIPAA
certifications properly.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask -- make
sure I understand what you're saying here. That federal law
says that we're required to --
MR. LOONEY: Employer -- employer law.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand that.
But we have hired someone to handle the HIPAA and the COBRA
issues for us.
MR. LOONEY: Part of the -- part of the
contractual agreement with Mutual of Omaha is for them to
manage the COBRA and HIPAA certification process. The
responsibility of the employer is to notify of the
employee's termination on a timely basis.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. LOONEY: That's what the employer is


134
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
required to do.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that what we're
doing?
MS. NEMEC: Well, we are -- we hadn't been
when we had the other agent. The agent was doing it, and
there are local agents who will do that for us, and they
will put in their contract that they are responsible, which
takes the responsibility -- liability out of the County to
perform those services for us.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But our responsibility
-- it's our responsibility.
MR. LOONEY: It's an employer regulation.
And the one thing that you have to do is notify whomever is
the administrator, whoever accepts that liability, and the
-- the County has to notify them of the termination.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh-huh.
MS. NEMEC: And with the previous insurance,
our local agent was the administrator.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. So, it's
primarily our concern to take care of the HIPAA and the
COBRA issues?
MR. LOONEY: Very much so.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But we can -- we can
contract with someone else?
MR. LOONEY: You can contract with someone
1 _~ - I L l i c~
J...~.... _... _. _ ~ ~.
135
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
else to do it, but you still have the obligation of
notification of termination.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Notification to who?
MR. LOONEY: To whomever --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: To the insurance --
MR. LOONEY: To whomever you're delegating
this COBRA authority.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We have to notify Mutual
of Omaha currently.
MR. LOONEY: Currently, you're notifying
Mutual of Omaha on a COBRA circumstance involving an
employee who is terminated under the medical plan.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. So, is Mutual
of Omaha administering COBRA and HIPAA, or is Kerr County
administering COBRA and HIPAA?
MR. LOONEY: Two different -- two different
obligations. One is notification, one is administration.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. LOONEY: Notification --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We are not
administering.
MR. LOONEY: Notification by the County,
administration by Mutual of Omaha.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. NEMEC: And the administration is only if
in-ii-as

136
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
someone chooses to elect COBRA.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. NEMEC: And I don't know that we have
anybody that has chosen that. Maybe one employee.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that clarifies
that. That's good. That's good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions for
Mr. Looney?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess, evidently,
there's confusion somewhere, 'cause it's on the agenda. And
we're going to -- and we're going out for bids, I thought,
though I'm not sure about that any more. Is there something
that we can do to make this simpler or make it clearer, or
-- or solve the problems? I mean, I don't -- I still -- I
don't understand -- the Treasurer is doing something that
she doesn't feel she should be doing.
MS. NEMEC: No, that is not correct.
Commissioner Letz, that is not correct. I have been
approached -- this is the problem here, and it's not even a
problem. I have been approached by local agents who wish to
bid on our insurance as agents. They have told me the
services that they can provide the -- where we need to come
from, and we owe it to the taxpayers to see if other agents
can provide more services than what we're gaining right now
for the -- for what we're paying. Simple as that.
io-i~-os
i.
.~
137
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1G
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I'm trying to
figure out -- what are you --
MS. NEMEC: That's where -- that's where the
bid process --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What are the services?
MS. NEMEC: That's where the bid process
comes in. Earh local agent should send us what services
they are willing to provide and how much the cost is going
to be, and let the Court decide on who to award it to.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I'm -- I don't
know why you're mad at me, but I'm trying to find out. You
keep on -- you -- by your tone, something's not being done,
or something --
MS. NEMEC: No. I want to see options. I
want to see options to see if -- if these local agents are
going to provide services that we were being provided before
Mutual of Omaha and Don Wallace --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What are those services?
That's what I'm trying to figure out. What is not being
provided by Mutual of Omaha that was being provided that
agents want to provide?
MS. NEMEC: An enrollment office, to where
employees can go across the street or two streets down --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They want a local agent?
MS. NEMEC: Yes.
iu-ii-ns
138
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it?
MS. NEMEC: Employees want to deal with a
local agent. They want to be able to go into someone's
office the minute they have a problem and the minute that
EOB comes in, and they want to be helped. They don't want
to have to talk to 50 different people every time they call
Mutual of Omaha. They want one person to -- you know, the
Sheriff's Office -- we get employee calls from them all the
time, and just employees around the county that --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you want us to put in
our bid package that you have to be a local agent?
MS. NEMEC: Not have to be, but --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Jonathan, I think I can
explain somewhat. The biggest problem -- and my department,
being one of the biggest, suffers a lot of it. My employees
feel lost. If we hire somebody new, they're trying to
have -- their options and all that are trying to be
explained by the Treasurer. They don't have anybody they
can sit down with. Not that they don't want Mutual of
Omaha. That's fine, but they don't know -- what option do I
take? Is this better? Is this worse? An employee is not
an insurance agent to be able to explain the pros and cons
of each different option, or the HIPAA stuff. It's --
before -- and I'm not saying yea or nay to anybody. Before,
when I hired a new employee and they had an insurance -- you
is-ii ~~5
139
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
--- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2~
23
""' 2 4
know, they had to get insurance, they were given a certain
deadline, an amount of time to go by to a local agent and
sit down with that agent, and that agent explained all the
options, what they're going to enroll in, what the County's
going to enroll in, what they can take and can't take, and
made it very simple for the employee to understand.
If they had a bill come in from a hospital,
you know, that said we're not paying this, okay, the
insurance company has rejected it, they had somebody they
could go sit down, take that bill, call and talk to and ask,
"Why aren't they paying this? What's the deal?" It may
just be their deductible wasn't met, but employees are like
that. Right now, they -- they -- and not knocking Mr. --
okay, they call on the telephone and they get -- not really
a run-around, but it just goes through -- they may have to
make four or five calls; they may have to talk to four or
five different people. It's gotten very confusing, and a
lot of people don't know what their actual coverage is,
'cause they have nobody they can sit down and talk to. And
it's the local -- it's not the insurance company. It's just
having somebody locally that can help them get through all
this process. And it's not just new hires. It's a
continuing deal. It's the HIPAA deal; it's the COBRA part.
And it's just to be there for them when they need a question
25 answered.
1r_.-ii os
- -_ _ .~ __i _ ~ _.i.....- -_ _._~ _
l90
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
~5
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I said. You
want a local -- you want us to say you have to be a local
agent.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, not have to be. But
I --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, what?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What I'm understanding
-- what I'm understanding, Jonathan, is -- is he can still
be the agent, but there is a local representative that deals
with Mutual of Omaha that actually sits down and helps them
by keeping the employees satisfied, and not a long distance
phone call and all that.
MS. NEMEC: Which Mr. Wallace offered to do.
We just hadn't to};en any action on it, so that never came
through. But, however, now there are other local agents who
would also like to bid on it. That's the only reason we're
here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm not understanding
your last comment. Mr. Wallace offered to do it; we didn't
take him up on it. How does that comport with Number 3 in
this thing that "our office does not know the name of the
agent that Mr. Wallace hired to help us locally"? I'm --
MS. NEMEC: Okay. Because --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Something's missing
here.
is-n-ns
._.. - _. -__---_ __.. ~.. _. ~ -y_--. a
141
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
]1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
?0
21
22
23
~4
25
MS. NEMEC: We were -- well, Mr. Wallace had
called and asked us -- or asked me to have a meeting, but at
that time the Court -- when we discussed it_, the feel that I
got from the Court, and then I talked to Commissioner
Baldwin, was that we were going to wait until the bid
process to -- to hire someone either locally or, you know,
under Mr. Wallace, or qo out for bids. And that just --
that just never was done.
COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: Unless I was not at
the right meeting or missed that particular part of the
meeting, I was under the impression that Mr. Wallace advised
the Court that he was going to employ or engage a local
agent.
JUDGE TINLEY: I was under the impression he
stated he had engaged that individual, and he was a bloc Y.
down the street, and I believe he identified him on the
record. That was my understanding.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're on the same
page.
DODGE TINLEY: And the guy was in place and
available. Before you depart there, Mr. Looney, let me ask
you a question. If a third party agrees by contract to
perform the employer's COBRA function, does that relieve the
employer -- the County in this case -- of its obligation
10-]1-n5
142
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
~5
under federal law?
MR. LOONEY: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Same true of HIPAA?
MR. LOONEY: You still have the obligation of
notification to the individual that's providing the
administrative service.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. LOONEY: Fight?
MS. NEMEC: I have a different -- we went to
that class, and there is a section that you can put in there
that will relieve the employer Lrom that and put it on the
person that is administrating that, but I'll have to look
that up.
MR. LOONEY: If the individual -- if the
individual that's doing the administration is not made aware
of the termination of the employee, they have no ability to
notify the employee. The obligation then reverts back to
the organization that failed to provide the notification to
begin with.
MS. NEMEC: And the organization, if it's
contracted correctly and worded correctly, can go after the
person that is -- that has been hired to do that if they
fail to do so.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: That makes sense. How
can -- how -- if the administrator's never told whether the
10 L1 n5
143
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
]3
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
person is employed or not employed, it's -- we're the only
people --
MS. NEMEC: Oh, yeah, we still have to notify
them, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what he's saying.
MS. NEMEC: We have to notify them of -- of
who needs to be -- yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. NEMEC: Definitely.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No one else to do
that.
MS. NEMEC: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Except us.
MS. NEMEC: Exactly.
MR. LOONEY: Again, you've got multiple
contracts that you're dealing with. You've got AFLAC
contracts, you've got other contracts.
MS. NEMEC: We're not talking about those,
though.
MR. LOONEY: I'm sorry, why are we not
talking about those?
MS. NEMEC: Because those people service
their contracts. The agents that sell those contracts
service them. I have nothing to do with those.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They come in and offer
iu ii-~,=
144
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
71
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~l
L L
23
24
25
it to the employees and sit down and talk with the employees
themselves.
JUDGE TINLEY: Those are the voluntary
products you're talking about?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: That doesn't fall under our
responsibility, the County's responsibility.
MF.. LOONEY: Falls under your responsibility
for payroll reduction processes.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
MR. LOONEY: It's a payroll function.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. But insofar as any
administration --
MS. NEMEC: They send me the numbers, and I
put them into our payroll and deduct, and that's it. Just
like any other deduction.
JUDGE TINLEY: Work seamlessly?
MS. NEMEC: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question of
Ms. Nemec. Barbara, is your office aware that the
administration of COBRA and HIPPA is provided by Mutual of
Omaha?
MS. NEMEC: The administration, yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Doesn't say that in
this memo here.
io-ll-us
195
1
L
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
]8
19
20
21
22
~3
24
25
MS. NEMEC: I don't know what memo you're
looking at.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It says that,
pursuant to your request -- this is a memorandum to
Commissioner Baldwin -- Treasurer's office has compiled a
list of requirements for the Kerr County insurance agent,
and there are things listed. And four of those things
listed have an asterisk, and the notation says that these
things are not currently provided. Two of those asterisks
are COBRA -- administration of COBRA and administration of
HIPPA. The writer of this memo has indicated to
Commissioner Baldwin and the Court that they didn't know
that Mutual of Omaha administers these functions.
MS. NEMEC: I think probably "administers" is
the key word there. She probably got confused with --
because they do administer when there is someone on COBRA
and HIPAA, which they get paid for whether there is or there
isn't. But we are the ones that send all the notices out,
so she was probably thinking that when she wrote that
"administers.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: When we went through this
last time, it was agreed that all you were going to do is
notify the agent, Mutual of Omaha, that the person did or
didn't work, and they were doing it.
MS. NEMEC: Doing what?
ir,~-tl-n e.
146
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 LETZ: Administering it. A11
you did was send one letter -- a form letter that said this
person is no longer employed. That's all you have to do.
MS. NEMEC: And then send letters to the
employees and everyr_hing, and that's not a problem. That's
not a problem.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- well, it is a
problem, 'cause this letter goes down further and it says
that isn't being done. This memo clearly says --
MS. NEMEC: Again, my --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- Treasurer's office is
handling all HIPPA-related cases. Well, no, all you're --
all you should be doing is sending a letter to Mr. Wallace
or Mr. -- wherever it goes, Mutual of Omaha, that says this
person is no longer working or this person has a HIPPA
situation. I don't know what to use. 1 guess that's -- I
don't understand. The letter is making a -- when I read
this, it says that Mutual of Omaha andjor the current agent,
Mr. Wallace, isn't doing anything. It says that they aren't
doing anything related to COBRA and HIPAA.
MS. NEMEC: Y'all doing anything related to
COBRA and HIPPA? No, because we don't have anybody on COBRA
and HIPPA.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What are they --
MS. NEMEC: But yet we still have to send our

147
1
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
notices out to every employee that's terminated. And that's
not the issue here. The issue is we have local agents who
want to bid on our insurance, bottom line.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm missing something.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Wallace?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't mind them bidding
on it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't know what it
is you're missing, but -- but there must be at least 100
employers in Kerr County that provide employee health
insurance, and they don't have a local agent. I'm a member
of one of those plans, Aetna. That's administered out of
Atlanta, Georgia, I think it is.
MS. NEMEC: It --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't need a local
agent; I got an 800 number.
MS. NEMEC: It's a]1 whether you would
like -- if this Court wants r_o provide this benefit for the
County employees that are asking for it, and to give a
chance to other agents who want to bid on our insurance.
That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Wallace, do you presently
have a local representative assisting you?
MR. WALLACE: I have a local agent standing
by to assist me anytime. I have called Ms. Nemec. We had
1u-1t-55
148
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
]7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
one meeting set up to visit and sit down and work out
details with her nn what this local agent would be doing for
this county. She called and cancelled the appointment, said
she was too busy. When she got time, stZe'd give us a call.
We're still waiting on that call.
JUDGE TINLEY: You have a local
representative?
MR. WALLACE: I have Todd Peters. I gave
each one of you a card when I told you that I had a local
agent in place. And until -- if it be a good thing, I would
like Mr. Baldwin and Ms. Nemec to set an appointment,
whenever they would like to meet, and we'll bring Mr. Peters
and myself and we'll work this thing out and move forward,
rather than sit here and hash all this out and say this and
that and the other. But my opinion is, let's move forward
from here. You want a local agent. I've got one standing
by. But until we tell him what his responsibilities are, he
can't do anything.
MS. NEMEC: But, Mr. Wallace --
MR. WALLACE: Until we sit down with
Ms. Nemec or -- and I would like one Commissioner,
Mr. Baldwin or whoever, to be at that meeting so we can all
work these things out so the County employees and the
Commissioners can get the service that they think they're
not getting now.
10 11 OS
149
1
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
]0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think that's an
excellent idea.
MS. NEMEC: Mr. Wallace?
MR. WALLACE: That's what I would like to do.
MS. NEMEC: I have a question Por
Mr. Wallace. Did you not also tell me and Commissioner
Baldwin that this agent -- that we would not be able to send
our employees over to this agent for the enrollment process
so that their benefits could be explained? Is that not what
you told both of us?
MR.. WALLACE: That is correct. Now, he can
come over here and enroll them. But I don't think,
liability-wise, that I want a person that's working for me
to have people come over to his office. I would prefer that
they come over here and sit down in your facility -- it's
your health insurance plan -- and enroll your employee over
here. And that's why I said that.
MS. NEMEC: So, if they have inquiries, are
they gcing to be able to go to his office?
MR. WALLACE: After they get enrolled, they
can -- we'll sit down and work that out, okay? If we can
just have a meeting, we'll sit down and work all this out.
COMMISSIONER BALDWSN: Sure. Y'all get
together and let me know.
MR. WALLACE: Rather than try to hash all
iii-ii n~
150
1
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
2J
24
25
this out right now, if Mr. Baldwin and Ms. Nemec will --
I'll be gone from the 25th of October through November the
2nd. I'd prefer to have the meeting next week so we can get
things rolling for you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Y'a11 set something
up.
MS. NEMEC: I have a question for the Court.
When other agents call, do I tell them it is the Court's
wish not to go cut for bids?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We are going out for
bids. I can't -- I'm confused. We can't change -- I don't
want t_o change mid-year. I don't want, every time an agent
calls --
MS. NEMEC: Okay, that's what I should tell
them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're going out for bids,
are we not, Mr. Looney?
MR. LOONEY: We're going out for the stop
loss.
MS. NEMEC: For stop loss, not our agent.
And I'm telling this Court --
C4R. LOONEY: The agents -- the agents will be
able to offer a bid on the stop loss insurance. It will be
open to any agent that wishes to bid.
MR. WALLACE: And I get a commission on the
,n _.-us
151
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2I
22
23
24
25
stop loss insurance. That's how I get paid. So if you got
a local agent that wants to bid on the stop loss
insurance --
MS. NEMEC: I don't -- I have local agents --
not an agent, local agents that have called my office that
would like to bid on the County's administration portion of
the insurance.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are we going to do
formal RFP's like we've done in the past?
MR. LOONEY: For the stop loss, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which would include
agent services as well?
MR. LOONEY: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not administration.
You're saying -- your nod was we're not going to bid --
MR. WALLACE: Not Mutual of Omaha.
MR. LOONEY: Not Mutual of Omaha, the
administration, but stop loss insurance.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand. But
that would include agent services -- local agent services?
MR. LOONEY: Yes, sir, for that stop loss.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When are we going to
do that?
MR. LOONEY: I spoke -- we're going to try to
put it out for the -- by the end of next week.
i,-~.-us
152
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's your answer,
Ms. Nemec.
MS. NEMEC: Okay, that's what I need to know.
MR. WALLACE: By the way, we do keep a log on
every call, every e-mail that comes into our office, and
everything that's said and done for this county.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought you didn't
want to hash this stuff out right now.
MR. WALLACE: I'm not. I'm through. I just
wanted you to be aware that we have records of everything we
say and do.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further on that
agenda item? Why don't we have lunch? Does that --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Talked me into it.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- make everybody happy? Why
don't we come back about a quarter till 2:00? We'll stand
in recess till quarter till 2:00.
(Recess taken from 12:25 p.m. to 1:48 p.m.)
(Commissioner Letz was not present.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's come back to order, if
we might. We were in recess for the lunch hour. We'll pick
up on Item Number 20. Consider, discuss, and take
1 I i 1 1-~ i. i
153
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
appropriate action to engage Pressler Thompson and Company
to perform audit for fiscal year ending September 30, 2005.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move we appoint
Pressler Thompson and Company to perform the audit for the
year ending September 30, 2005, and authorize the County
Judge to sign the letter of engagement.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item and authorize County Judge to
sign letter of engagement. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Has the County
Attorney looked at it?
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: He's nodding yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: No complaints or --
MR. EMERSON: Just looks like a standard
engagement letter, nothing extraordinary.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 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. Next,
iu-i!-ns

154
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
Item Number 21 is consider, discuss, and approval of
contract between Office of Court Administration and Kerr
County. This has to do with the administrative judge, and
it has been signed by everybody except me on behalf of Kerr
County. This is actually for a two-year period. The only
question I would have is, by it being for a biennium, a
two-year period, how -- how does that affect us, Mr. County
Attorney?
MR. EMERSON: I think you can approve the
funds out of the current budgeted -- I forget what the
proper wording is, but basically you can approve the
expenditure of current funds from the current budget year.
Then you have to do it again next year. I don't mean you
can preapprove next year's contract based on next year's
funds.
JUDGE TINLEY: That was the reason for my
question. That was the reason for my question.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, probably, the
State -- the State goes in two-year terms anyway.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So the money would be
there next year, too. This is --
MR. EMERSON: It's -- I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, go ahead.
MR. EMERSON: It's really -- I mean, it's
1n-11-n,
155
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
reimbursement from the State to the County, not from the
County to the State.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right.
MR. EMERSON: But I assume there is going to
be, providing that the County approves the position next
year. That's really what it hinges on, the second year of
the contract hinges on.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is an
administrative assistant to the --
JUDGE TINLEY: Presiding judge.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The Administrative
Judicial Region Judge, which would be the honorable Stephen
B. Ables?
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, of course, it's
none of my business who that is, but I'm assuming that it's
the same person it's always been, and -- well, don't answer
that. It really wasn't a question.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I have a
question. It talks about -- under statement of services to
be performed, that Kerr County agrees to provide an employee
or employees for the Sixth Administrative Judicial Region,
and then it talks about going to pay us $37,878. I think
that's, as noted, a biennium. That's for a two-year period
of time.
~o-!i-pie
156
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Either we're getting
an employee very cheaply or this is another state unfunded
mandate. Which is it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, it's -- let me
-- let me try. The employee is already a County employee.
This is just extra duties on that person.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. All right.
Well, that explains it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that --
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, it's the administrative
assistant to the Presiding Judge for the Sixth
Administrative Judicial District.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Somebody's
already there, compensated to do other things, and this is
on top of.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It feels a lot like
an unfunded mandate.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It has the outward
appearance of it.
iu-ii-us
157
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: When you go through
the budget looking for ways to cut costs, you find a lot of
those places where we're underwriting the cost of
employment.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And we don't have
much say.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly.
(Commissioner Letz entered the courtroom.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is there a motion on
the table?
JUDGE TINLEY: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not yet.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the contract. And I assume authorize the Court
to sign the same?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any question or discussion?
All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
in ~i u5
158
1
2
3
4
5
F
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. The
next item is consider, discuss, and take appropriate action
to nominate up to five candidates for submission to Kerr
Central Appraisal District for board member of Kerr Central
Appraisal District.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who is that person
today?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Chuck Lewis.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Who?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Chuck Lewis. I think
the -- I was thinking about this on the way in this morning.
The practice is that we get one, K.I.S.D. gets two, City of
Kerrville gets one, and it's kind of worked out that way as
a gentleman's agreement among the board. It's the decision
of the Appraisal District, which is to get all of the
entities that, you know, I guess fund that entity, get their
representation. But I don't know, and I can't recall in the
past -- I mean, I think we -- and my recommendation from the
Court would be that we keep Chuck Lewis out there. I think
he has -- he's only been there several months. I don't
think we should make a change at this time. I think he's
done a real good yob for us on anything we've asked him to
do, but I don't know if we just nominate Chuck Lewis. I
think we just nominate one person.
JUDGE TINLEY: And cast -- and --
~o-ii
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
l~
20
21
22
23
24
25
159
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Cast all our votes.
DODGE TINLEY: -- cast all of our votes
there. That's the only way we're going to be effective,
because --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- otherwise, if we spread it
out, I think we're going to end up with zero.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's the
way we've done it in the past.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion we
nominate, or we -- nominate or appoint?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Appoint.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It says here nominate,
but I thought we appointed.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, wasn't there
somewhere in here that -- I don't know about in here, but
I've seen something recently that --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Nominees.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- that you nominate,
and then the Appraisal Board themselves still has the
authority to --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- accept or reject.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I thought
in-ii-n,
160
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
,~
23
24
25
they said.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know if it
says that in here, though.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Here it talks about
selecting a director.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I know if there's
a vacancy, the board fills it -- the Appraisal Board fills
it, but I'm not sure during an annual time when it's done
once a year. I thought we appointed.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well the opening here
from Mr. Coates said time to nominate and elect Appraisal
District Board of Governors.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I make a motion we
nominate Chur_k Lewis and cast our 888 votes towards
Mr. Lewis.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
nominate -- actually, it's Mr. Charles Lewis.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Charles Lewis, correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: As the nominee of Kerr County,
and that for balloting purposes, all 888 votes which Kerr
County has for the election of the Board of Directors of the
Kerr Central Appraisal District be cast for Mr. Lewis.
Right?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct.
~u-il-as

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1L
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
?~
23
~4
25
lhl
JUDGE TINLEY: Any question or discussion?
All in favor of the mction, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The mction does carry. We
have two options, gentlemen. We have one executive session
item, or we can go to the approval agenda and come back to
the executive session item.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We still have Number
9, Judge, open.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're going t_o talk about
that. one yet,
JUDGE TINLEY: That's a budget amendment
item.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, it can be
treated as a budget amendment.
JUDGE TINLEY: Unless you want to come back
to it and handle it as an agenda item.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, that's fine.
JUDGE TINLEY: My understanding was we wanted
to take it up as a budget amendment.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine,
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, what's your pleasure?
,~-i1 ~~,
- ~...._ .~ ..__~._... i
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1G
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
162
To go into executive, or go straight to the approval and
then come back to the executive?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do approval and then come
back.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thought so. Where's our
Auditor? Want to bring us your bills?
MS. HARRIS: That's okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: While we're waiting,
did y'all approve using Pressler Thompson again in my
absence?
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: You didn't think we were going
to get to you that quickly?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: She was hoping not at
all.
MS. WILLIAMS: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. On the approval agenda,
Item 1, payment of bills. Ms. Pieper, the website interface
for the deed records, that -- we're not doubling up with the
new Odyssey system on that, are we?
MS. PIEPER: Not that I'm aware of.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. PIEPER: I think in time, the one place
will qo down and then the Odyssey will pick up, but I'm not
in-ti ~~,

163
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Ll
21
22
23
24
25
for sure how that works.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval of the
bills.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
pay the bills. Any questions or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. I've got a
couple of questions, Mrs. Auditor, junior. Page 18,
Indigent Health Care.
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The last two with
VeriClaims.
MS. WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN:
billing?
That's the third-party
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, our third-party
administrator.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. That we're
going to no longer use.
MS. WILLIAMS: As soon as we get a system
in-house where we ran start doing that process, yes. But at
the present time, we don't have a system, so --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. WILLIAMS: -- we're going to have to

___,__.. ._. __ _. _-_. _.._.~._.._._._w.~.. - _.
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
164
continue using her for a while.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Gkay. Do you have any
idea what that time frame was?
MS. WILLIAMS: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It was part of the
deal of hiring a third member --
MS. WILLIAMS: Right. I need to check with
Tommy again. He's supposed to schedule a meeting with the
hospital, us, and a gentleman that has the program.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Gkay, that's fine. In
these bills, I have looked several times, and I can't -- I
know they're here, but I can't find them, the bills for the
Juvenile Detention Facility.
MS. WILLIAMS: They should be in Fund -- oh,
okay. No, they're not going to be in this batch. Reason
being --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. WILLIAMS: -- we didn't have the funds to
pay them. We did, but let me clarify that. We didn't have
the funds to make the payroll transfer on the 30th of
September. That, to me, is a priority, and A.P, comes
second. So, we have a list of encumbrance bills for Fund 76
that need to be paid. But that, I think, was going to be
considered when we talked about transferrinq funds to cover
payroll and our encumbered accounts payable for the
n ti ~ 5
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
b'
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
165
department.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This Item Number 4?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: These bills would be
included into this Item Number 4 that we're going to do?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My understanding.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's what my understanding
is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. WILLIAMS: And I prepared a listing for
you gentlemen.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: At the time that we
vote to pay some, then we'll be able to see what that --
okay, thank you.
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all the
questions I have.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Page 2,
Nondepartmental. creative Awards and Trophies. What's that
all about?
P~1S. WILLIAMS: It's a youth leadership award
that we do every year for the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I got it, okay. It's
4-H.
MS. WILLIAMS: Yeah.
2u-ii-~~s
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~l
22
23
24
~G
~~
166
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions? Page 9,
middle of the page, County-Sponsored, $1,300 for an iron
fence at Garden of Memories?
MS. WILLIAMS: They are purchasing the old
fence that was here on the courthouse grounds many, many
years aqo. It -- I believe what Mr. Schellhase told me was
that when the original courthouse burned down, they pulled
the fence down. Garden of Memories got the fence. They are
now in the process of buying the fence back from Garden of
Memories to put out at the Union Church building.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. WILLIAMS: And this is only a portion of
it. They're still working on the rest of the money.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Appeared to me like we
were putting up a fence at Garden of Memories, and that's
what I was having a problem with.
MS. WILLIAMS: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other questions?
All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
1~-11-~5
167
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
amendments.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, before you qo on,
I'm sorry, I had a question, if we can go back real quick.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: First item, Other
Revenue, Junior District Livestock Show, various months
listed,
MS. WILLIAMS: What it --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Please tell me that's not
the total revenue for those months.
MS. WILLIAMS: Oh, no, no, no, no. No, this
is just a -- one-third of the indoor arena proceeds. The
agreement from many, many, many years ago --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is part of the stock
show deal?
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. WILLIAMS: Whatever we bring in as indoor
arena --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They get part.
MS. WILLIAMS: They qet a third of it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is money we pay the
Stock Show Association?
U- 1 1- p 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2J
168
MS. WILLIAMS: Hill Country Junior District
-- yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. The way it said
Other Revenue, I was hoping that that wasn't proceeds.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, budget amendments. I
don't -- there weren't any in my package.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You got any?
MS. WILLIAMS: You have one.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have one?
MS. WILLIAMS: Do you want to do yours first?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why don't do I mine
first?
MS. WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mindy was good enough
to help me prepare some proposed budget amendments to assist
in perhaps finding some funds for the Butt-HOldsworth
Library. I've identified one, two, three, four, five
different categories, and the Court needs to discuss them
and see if they're amenable to those. In each of these
cases, there are funds that probably could be -- the
amendments could be made if we are of a mind to do so. The
first one is under Professional Services, all functions,
Commissioners Court. That would be reducing the
Professional Services line item from $20,000 to $15,000.
The second one, Detention Center Maintenance Repairs, it
io-ii- 5
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I69
would be redu~~ing it from 30 to 25.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that the Juvenile
Detention?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe so. That's
my understanding, yes. Airport, we had overbudgeted by
about 9,000. This would change our allocation from 283 to
259, making a $1G,G00 reduction, actually, 'cause we had
overbudgeted 9,000. The nett one was County-Sponsored
Trapper Contract, reducing it back to its prior level of --
by $5,000. And the last one was Parks, Flat Rock Lake, the
moneys we were going to -- or will be using for the bridge,
reducing that by $10,000. And I'm there for your
discussion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bill, what is -- you
said the Trapper contract issue.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe it's --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You reduced it back to
the original --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Back to what it was.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We -- what we did
there --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did we increase it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We increased it 5,000 to
try to aet Kendall County Trapper to share some of the time
with Kerr County. And that's -- that's an unknown, whether
-_1-os

1
3
4
5
6
7
fl
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
?~
23
24
25
170
that, money -- if we can work out that agreement with Kendall
County. l still -- I would like to leave that in, and in
lieu of that 5,000, I would look elsewhere, which would be
Water Development. Take that to zero. I think that Water
Development's an important issue as well, obviously, but
that's a -- I look at that as a -- I don't know, an area
that I would rather cut that this year. The Region J plan
and all that is -- is being completed; there's not going to
be a whole lot going on in that area for the next year. I
think that Headwaters and O.G.R.A., they're the primary
funders of water development operations and things in the
county, and they're both able to lower their taxes, so they
must have a little bit more available funds than we do at
the moment.
(COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's acceptable to
me.
	COMMISSIONER	LETZ: I	would switch that.
	COMMISSIONER	WILLIAMS:	So, you would be
substituting th	at one?		
	COMMISSIONER	LETZ: Wa	ter Development for the
Trapper, 5,000.	And there'	s a chance	the Trapper may not
have either --	we'll find t	hat out in	the next six weeks.
If not --			
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm cool with that.
rOMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We had a joint
;n ~~ ~~,

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
meeting with the City, and one of the things that came out
of that was that the -- I thought that the library
administrator or the City was going to come back to us and
tell us how they could operate for less. If we make these
changes, is it contingent upon getting the report, how
they're going to do that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think our -- as I
recall, we were going to come up with what we could, and
then they were going to look at what the impact of that cut
would be, and then they were going to come back with an,
"Okay, this is what that means."
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Which comes first?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, this doesn't
get us up to the 416 level. This gets us up to 350.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: One other area that I
think that we could add another 5,000 to this, not a
substitute, would be the Family Service Agent. As I
understand it, Ms. Spenrath declined that position, so it is
now open. I would still leave it in, but I think if we just
basically wait till four months go by before we fill it,
that will give us about $5,000, too.
DODGE TINLEY: If it takes as long to fill it
this time as it did to till it, we thought, this last time,
we'll make four months easily.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. So, I mean, I

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
think that's at least a two-month process if we have a
candidate. We don't have any candidates, so I think we can
add 5,000 out of that line item, and that's less than --
actually, I think it's, like, three -- a little over three
months at $5,000, our portion of that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If it's vacant for a
couple years, we may decide that we don't need that job.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, 55,000, then, total.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That gets us 55 --
gets us to 55.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think the other
thing, I think your approach to the airport is correct, and
I concur with the amount right now, but after our next
Airport Board meeting, that number may be -- there may be a
little extra there that we can put into the library as well,
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd move the budget
amendments as discussed, and -- and amend it -- you got the
amendments, Mindy?
MS. WILLIAMS; Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Substituting 5,000
from Water Development fund, leaving the Trapper Contract as
originally budgeted at 26,6, and taking 5,000 out of
whichever line that is for the Extension Agent, the --
MS. WILLIAMS: We're talking Extension Agents
out there? It's 10-665-102.
io-ll-us
~_
1
2
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
1Z
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
?0
21
~~
23
24
25
173
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Total -- total
reductions of SS,000?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And that 55,000
would be for the library funding.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I moved it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the budget amendment request as indicated and
amended. Any question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raLsing your right hand.
(The motion r_arried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Any
other budget amendments?
MS. WILLIAMS: Are we going to discuss the
Detention Facility one?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
MS. WILLIAMS; Okay. I've prepared a couple
of little handouts. There we go.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWiN: Wait a minute. We
were at 140 this morning, weren't we?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're just on Page 1.
MS. WILLIAMS: This one that I'm giving you
1C. 11-iii
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
174
is only for the encumbrances. It does not include the
payroll that's coming up this week. You gentlemen said you
wanted to keep them separate.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. WILLIAMS: Right?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is year-end?
MS. WILLIAMS: This is strictly September
30th, year-end.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. WILLIAMS: I believe if you'll look at --
I believe it's the second page, there's a small recap I did
showing how much money was in the bank account on
September 30th, showing what the payroll expense for
September 30th was, and a list of encumbrances that we have
right now on-hand that we need to pay. Comes to 60,156.48,
is what we actually are short being able to meet these.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: To cover all the checks?
MS. WILLIAMS; Yes, sir. And that's
strictly -- like I said, that's strictly last year's
expenses.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you believe that
this is sufficient to get us through the budget year?
MS. WILLIAMS: No, sir, this is only for what
we have right now. We'll still have bills coming in for
September, accounts payable. We don't have them all in yet.
i~ it-os
175
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~2
23
24
25
We don't know exactly how much we're going to need for those
either.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You have receivables
coming in also?
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, we have receivables
coming in, so my hope is that the receivables will carry
some of the accounts payable that we still have outstanding.
JUDGE TINLEY: Balance of accounts payable
that are not yet in through 9/30? Any ballpark estimate?
MS. WILLIAMS: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Based upon what the normal
A.P.'s are?
MS. WILLIAMS: No, there's no way to give an
estimate on what we still got out there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What we have -- I mean,
all this -- this clears up last budget year.
MS. WILLIAMS: Up to a certain point, yes.
It will clear up the payroll through September 30th. It
will clear up some of the accounts payable, but we still
have bills that we haven't gotten all the paperwork in, so
we don't really know how much they are.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On those bills, will they
be -- will you --
MS. WILLIAMS: We encumber them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We encumber them.
is-ii-ns
176
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So it will come out of
last year's budget still?
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, because it's not
really fair to take them out of the new budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure.
MS. WILLIAMS: It was last year's work.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And you, likewise, will
accrue all ttie -- any revenue?
MS. WILLIAMS: Right. I believe the Auditor
does that. We do not actually encumber the revenues. He
handles that on his end.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval of the
budget amendment as presented.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the budget amendment.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I guess --
JUDGE TINLEY: Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess there's also --
MS. WILLIAMS: I have one request. Can we
also, in the order, give us the authority to go ahead and
pay the accounts payables that we have on-hand right now
that are on this list? Because they're not included in the
fund requirements report that you gentlemen approved
in ii os
177
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~2
23
24
25
earlier.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, my motion does
include paying the 9,600 -- 640?
MS. WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, actually, it goes
to $7,809.63.
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I presume we need to
declare an emergency to do this, 'cause those funds are
coming out of reserves.
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, it needs to come out of
surplus.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, the court order is
going to read that you're transferring 60,156.48.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: From reserves to Juvenile
Detention Facility.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that -- that
covers the encumbrances as well as the payroll?
MS. WILLIAMS: It will cover the payroll and
the encumbrances we have on-hand at this point in time. We
may have to come back at the nett court meeting in two weeks
and do the same thing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
In-_~-U$
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
25
MS. WILLIAMS: By that time, we'll have some
of the bills in for September and we'll have a little bit
better idea what we're looking at.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the payroll numbers,
this will be the last payroll?
MS. WILLIAMS: For September. Yes, for
September 30th.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Okay.
MS. WILLIAMS: Now, there was also a question
-- I mean, we're through with that one, right?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We haven't voted.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Haven't voted on it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't have a second, I
don't think.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I seconded.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, we got a second. Any
further question or discussion on the motion? All in favor
of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry.
MS. WILLIAMS: Okay. Now, this is the one
for the payroll coming up this week. It -- the estimate --
and this is strictly an estimate -- may seem a little high,

179
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1£s
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
but without knowing exactly what the part-time hours are and
what those wages are going to be, we are erring a little bit
on the side of caution, I think. With the new payroll
salaries and stuff that went into effect October 1, it's
sort of difficult to get an exact ballpark figure of what
payroll's going to actually be for the 14th, but I feel
comfortable, if we do the 75,000, that will be more than
enough to cover the 14th's payroll and still possibly give
us a little bit of a surplus to handle any bills that come
in that are due actually out of this new budget. You could
be looking at utility bills, phone bills.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This one, we're back to
the -- the philosophical discussion as to why we're even
doing this?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: As to why we can't treat
that department like every other department.
MS. WILLIAMS: We can, I think, later, once
we decide to combine it into the Treasurer's account. But
it's going to take a little bit of time to get that done,
and this is one of those things we don't have the time right
now. We have to have the moneys or else we're going to be
in the same boat we were at September 30th.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rex, too, would this be
considered a -- from the Commissioners, something the
1~~ 1 1- V S
180
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~2
23
24
G J
Commissioners Court has to do to change the way we're, I
guess, keeping track of the funds? Does that need to be an
agenda item to change that, or is that something that --
MR. EMERSON: You mean take it from a
separate account, consolidate it as a county subaccount?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, It's just -- we
need -- it's obviously not posted that way as a separate
agenda item, so do we need a separate agenda item to change
that type of a policy, or can we just do it?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was going to ask
the same thing. Is that something the Auditor would come in
and recommend to be done, or we just do it?
MS. NEMEC: I'd have to close a bank account,
and S won't close a bank account without a court order.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Well, that's a
good reason.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with her.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good reason.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we need to get this
on our next agenda to discuss this policy as to how we're
going to handle that.
MS. WILLIAMS: Actually closing that account
and moving it into the Treasurer's account.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MS. WILLIAMS: Might be a good time frame,
1P!-11-OS
181
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
~3
24
~5
too, because I think we'd be better off if we waited closer
to the end of the month so we don't have an overlap.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure, okay. Then we can
get -- fix that issue. But we just -- well, we still need
to do this transfer?
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. Declare an
emergency and transfer it out of the general fund over to
376.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know why it's an
emergency. We've budgeted this money.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's my question.
Why isn't it just coming out of the 'OS-'06 budget?
MS. WILLIAMS: We don't have any tax revenues
for 'OS-'05 yet. Tax statements haven't even gone out, it's
my understanding.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How are we paying
anything else?
MS. WILLIAMS: With our surplus, basically.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But this -- I don't
see -- we've approved a budget that shows a deficit out
there, which obviously means we're funding up to that amount
at the deficit. And, I mean, I can see maybe that we need
to move -- maybe -- I don't think it's a budget amendment.
I think we may need to -- a directive of moving cash from
this account to the account that Barbara needs it in. I can
ir,-1~-a5
1B2
1
2
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
~l
~~
23
24
25
see that. I can see why she would want that, but I just
don't think it's a budget amendment.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not in the
traditional sense.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Am I hearing from you that in
the county general operating account, that we have a cash
flow problem there?
MS. WILLIAMS: No, sir. What I'm saying is,
when you budget -- when you figured the budget for the
detention facility, it started October 1st; is that correct?
And isn't it based on tax revenues?
JUDGE TINLEY: Some is based on tax revenues.
Some is based on the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Accounts receivable.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- accounts receivable, the
income.
MS. WILLIAMS: We don't have the accounts
receivables coming in at the present time.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the only reason --
the only reason this is an issue is because we have a
separate bank account for that facility.
MS. WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we don't have a
separate bank account, we don't have a problem.
u i ~ n
183
1
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. WILLIAMS: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, we have a problem
because we're losing money, but we're -- don't have this
issue on transferring the funds.
JUDGE TINLEY: What -- what are we using to
pay the County Clerk's bills?
MS. WILLIAMS: General fund.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Does that include the
reserve funds? Or -- or is that --
MS. WILLIAMS: Or in the Treasurer's account.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, if we've got the
money in the general account, how come we can't just
transfer that money over to take care of this, since that's
included within the budget?
MS. WILLIAMS: If that's what the Court
wishes to do, then I guess you'd have to instruct the
Treasurer to transfer the money.
MS. NEMEC: If that's included in the budget,
then it should have been set up as a transfer-in,
transfer-out, with a certain amount of money there for me to
be able to do that, which is what I do with Fund 83.
There's county moneys in the general fund. Per budget,
there is a transfer-in amount, transfer-out, and that tells
me how much money to transfer. But in this case, I don't
think that was done.
~, i
184
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: You're saying that --
so -- I think I understand what you said. Let me restate it
so I can make sure I understood. Like, in the 216th -- that
was an example used this morning -- in our budget, we
transfer money -- it shows transferring money in, and then
it comes back out in the --
MS. NEMEC: There's a line item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's a line item for
transfer-in, transfer-out in our budget book that does that,
but there's no transfer in from the Juvenile Facility into
our general fund.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Was that a question?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Was that a question
or a statement?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It was a statement to
make sure I understand what she's saying.
MS. NEMEC: I think the Auditor and I looked
at it from an accounting standpoint. When the outside
auditors come and audit us, they're going -- when they see
that I've transferred "X" amount of dollars from the general
fund, they're going to want to see the backup that
authorized me to do that amount.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And this would be
cured when we finally close that ar_rount and meld these
things together --
1 0- ~_- u 5
185
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. NEMEC: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- with the
Treasurer; is that correct?
MS. NEMEC: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, this may be the
last time we have to do this?
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: So, I guess the other
side of it is, to be optimistic, if we end up with a -- a
positive balance at the juvenile facility, the County
couldn't get that money until we transfer it to the general
fund.
MS. NEMEC: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, now you hit the
nail right on the head, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it needs to be
consolidated, personally.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, it does.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But to get through the
next two weeks until we can have an agenda item for
consolidation, I move approval of the agenda item --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Transfer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- transfer. Agenda
transfer of $75,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I second it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
io-ii-os
15' 6
1
3
4
5
F
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
approval of the budget amendment.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I think we need to
make clear what we're doing here. We're authorizing the
transfer of $75,000 from our general --
JUDGE TINLEY: Fund.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- fund to the juvenile
facility payroll account. Or general -- juvenile facility
account. We're talking bank accounts here.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. That make sense,
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. But --
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it makes sense to me
now.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Makes sense.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a motion and a
second. Any question or discussion? All in favor of that
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion carries.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What else, Mindy?
MS. WILLIAMS: That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any late bills?
MS. WILLIAMS: No, sir.
1u-ii-r=
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
187
DODGE TINLEY: I see.
MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you.
DODGE TINLEY: I don't have any monthly
reports. Any Commissioners have any reports to render at
this time with regard to their liaison assignments or
otherwise?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A brief one. I'm not
sure -- have we brought the -- has Commissioner Williams or
myself brought the Court up to date on the terminal at the
airport?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN:
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN:
Not in a while.
Go ahead.
I've got three extra
hours; go ahead.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It won't take that
long.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're -- the bids came in
real high, as I think everyone recalled. Commissioner
Williams, myself, and the Airport Manager and architect all
met with TexDOT. We talked about the process. Part of the
reason for the bids being that high was there were some
aspects of the bid documents that caused it to come in high.
I have a meeting at 4 o'clock today, so we're not going to
talk for four hours here, with the -- a subcommittee on the
airport to relook at the construction documents and see what
i -ii-n=
188
1
2
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
modifications can be made to lower the cost of that, because
Commissioner Williams and I have made it very clear that the
amount that came from E.I.C. -- 600,000 was the amount?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Three. Three from
E.I.C., three from TexDOT.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's right. So they
can't look to the County to increase our ante to that at
all, so it's goinq to have to be within that budget. And if
that means a smaller facility, it will be a smaller
facility.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I was
going to ask. Does it change the structure?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It may change the size.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, but it will not
change the location or the basic purpose. I mean, some of
the nice things that -- like the fireplace will probably go
by the wayside, you know. It's going to be much more of
a -- much more of a functional building.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, there -- Judge,
there was a fireplace.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There was a fireplace in
it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think you ought to
leave the fireplace in there.
io-ii-ns
1
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
189
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No fireplace, I'm saying.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: There went the bar,
too. Going to have to fly sober. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It will be a slightly
reduced scope, and to make sure that it comes in within
budget. And then it will be rebid, I believe, sometime
later this year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does Fredericksburg
have a fireplace?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think so.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't -- no, they
do not.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Need to rethink this.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Anyway, it's going to
get smaller; it's not going to have a fireplace. Also,
we're -- our subcommittee is going to be reviewing the
engineers for the -- the engineering work on the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- the runway.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The tar,iway.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Taxiway relocation.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Did I miss that meeting?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought we
appointed you chair.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was appointed chair? I
190
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
could have been; I'm not sure.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know. There
is a subcommittee that's meeting on that, reviewing
engineers for services for --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm -- yeah, that project
is going. And I'm not on that -- that exact meeting is not
this week, so it's not on my radar screen yet.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, I've got a
report on Animal Control -- are you through?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Janie was scheduled
to be on the departmental reports, but she's on the way to
the airport taking her National Guard husband there this
afternoon, so I'll go ahead and make a report to cover what
she might have said and what I'm going to say. We're moving
along on the -- the addition to the Animal Control facility.
It's goinq fairly well, I think. And I'm going to leave
these engineering drawings with the court coordinator. I
don't think you want copies of them, but if you do, she can
make them for you. They're -- the contractors have been
selected by the donor. It's a -- the building size will
double our capacity. It will double from approximately 19
or 20 animals that we currently can handle to 20 -- we can
handle 20 more. It will allow us to re-engineer our -- our
process, and we're still thinking that through, but we're

191
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
going to use the old facility for intake, and then we'll use
the new facility for -- we'll move the animals over there
that are healthy and adoptable.
And it will allow us, for example, to use
volunteers over in that new facility to -- unpaid volunteers
to help us manage the adoption process. It will give us
flexibility to hold onto good animals, adoptable animals,
longer than we've been -- we've always held onto them the
minimum amount required by state law, but sometimes we have
animals that we'd like to -- can't place with one of the
other facilities and would like to hold onto longer. So,
this is really -- oh, and I've -- I've met with the
contractor that was -- the general contractor is Feller
Fabrication, Danny Feller. And we've got an application
over there for a building permit, 'cause it's inside the
city. I've talked to the Interim City Manager about waiving
the $500 building permit fee, and he -- he's checked around
and found out that needs --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Council.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- Council approval.
So, I've written them a letter at his request, requesting --
formally requesting a waiver. I told the -- the contractor
that I'm the go-to guy. If he needs help from the County on
something, any questions or whatever, to see me. I'm not
going to micromanage that. I'm not going to be out there
t.._11 0~
192
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
helping pour concrete, but at least he'll have one contact
in the county. So, this is a great deal. If we hadn't
gotten this, we'd be looking at coming in and asking for
some money to expand the facility one of these days.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only question I have, and
you -- the agreement to do all this has gone through Rex,
correct? So there's no issue on --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're checking now
to make sure that the court order authorized the County
,Judge to sign it. It's been signed by the donor, and he
signed the agreement that Rex prepared, so when we check the
minutes and find out that the Judge has got the authority to
sign it, that'll be a done deal.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is the donor's name
ever going to come out in public? Are we going to put it on
the building itself, or --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Oh, he doesn't
want --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, it's a he, huh?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. I slipped up
there, didn't I? (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We got that much out,
didn't we?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You know, if
somebody wants to dig out his name, it's under the Open
io-ti os
193
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
zz
23
24
GJ
Meetings Act; it's not hard to do -- Open Records Act. But
I'm hoping that doesn't happen, 'cause he doesn't want it to
happen.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's great. It's
the type of thing, you know, we love to see happen. Maybe
this is something that can happen with the library.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hmm?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe the same could
happen at the library.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or the Ag Barn.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or the Ag Barn.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Or the jail.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or the jail, yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I have one
other quickie. Later tonight I'll be presenting two more
checks on behalf of O.R.C.A. to the City Council, one for
three-quarters of a million dollars, which is Texas Capital
funds through the Department of Agriculture, which goes to
Mooney Airplane Company for whatever it's doing out there,
or applied to be doing. And the other is a quarter of a
million dollars -- sure wish I could give you that for Kerr
County. That would be nice, wouldn't it?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I wish you could,
too.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's for the sewer
11 11-~5
194
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
project for -- Community Development Block Grant for that
small sewer project that the City is doing between here and
Ingram.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good news.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Keep bringing money in
from San Antonio, Bill.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You bet.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we ranked it where it
made the cut, and so he brings it in.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You bet you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me go back to Item 4 on
the approval agenda. I've been presented with monthly
reports from the District Clerk, Sheriff, Justice of the
Peace, Precinct 2, County Attorney, and Justice of the
Peace, Precinct 3. Do I hear a motion that those reports be
approved as submitted?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the listed reports as submitted. Any question
or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by
raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
iu ii-,~,
195
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
lE
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Okay.
Any other reports?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Who's making
presentations today?
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me get back to it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Environmental Health.
JUDGE TINLEY: Animal Control -- and I think
we've just got the update from Animal Control.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can I go back to the
other reports, the County Attorney report? Rex, how does it
stack up with prior years on your -- I mean, it looks like a
huge amount of volume to me.
MR. EMERSON: You're talking about the number
of cases?
	COMMISSIONER LETZ: Number of	cases filed is
1,691 year-	to-date, which it'	s basically end	of the year,
or -- is th	at calendar year o	r fiscal year?	
	MR. EMERSON:	Calendar.	
	COMMISSIONER L	ETZ: Calendar	year? I mean,
has your --	you may not have	enough time in	that office to
be able to	answer as to what	that --	
	MR. EMERSON:	I can tell you,	historically,
from what I	can gather, it's	running about 5	percent.
io-ii vs
196
1
L
3
9
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
1Z
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER. LETZ: 5 percent. So --
MR. EMERSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 5 percent more?
MR. EMERSON: Correct. It's also not in that
report, but we just received the numbers, for anybody
interested in knowing this. Last year, on mental health
billings, the County billed out about $68,000 in
prosecutorial attorney's fees, and with the new contract
attorney position set up to handle that, assuming it stays
the same, we'll bill out 68,000 and it will cost us about
12.
JUDGE TINLEY: And we're hopeful that the
number of cases that we have to handle are going to
increase, because the number of beds we have available for
acute civ°il commitments are up 50 percent than what we had
previously up until September. And, secondly, that we're
going to start, because of legislative changes, to hear
medication petitions for the forensic patients. We don't
know how much that's going to be. Those will probably
trickle in a few at a time as they -- as they come up on
that patient load out there.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZEP,: Are you saying they did
up the number of civil beds out there?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, they did. You know, we
had 10 on an interim basis.
zn i~ as
197
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
Z5
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'm just wondering,
because it seems in October -- last half of September and so
far in October -- of course, you know, the City and our
department has an agreement on transporting these ones to
San Antonio, and we have made more in the last three weeks
than we've probably ever made during any time period like
that. So, I don't know if they're already full or whatever
they're doing, if they've upped them, but I know our
transports back and forth to San Antonio are real close to
being a daily, if not twice-a-day event, and that's drawing
officers off the streets to make those transports, both from
us and the City.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't have any real recent
numbers. I know at one point in time -- this, I think, was
before September 1; may have been after September 1 -- they
were already on diversion. They very well may be on
diversion again, Every time -- we're still part of the
diversion system. We don't get to hold onto these 16 beds
solely for our own cachement area, unfortunately. I wish we
could. But when other facilities in the state are full,
they divert acute civil commitment patients down here,
SHERIFF HLERHOLZER: Well, I know there was
one night a couple weeks ago we looked at transporting three
in one night at different times, and that pretty well takes,
you know, a person totally out of the county all night long.
io-i~-os
198
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
ZO
21
~2
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: To do that, 'cause you
have to go through the admittance part and all that kind of
stuff once you get down there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. That's --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So it's Starting to have
a serious impact on keeping officers on the street at the
levels that we want to keep them on the street at.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it could be worse. We
could have --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- no civil commitment beds
out there, which was the initial proposal back in January of
this year. And through the efforts of a whole lot of
people, we were able to initially get 10 beds, and we worked
with those 10 beds. We didn't have but 43 before they went
all forensic in January. A lot of folks thought we had all
civil commitments. They were mostly forensic even before
that, but --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, where it affects
us, I think, a lot is a lot of the civil commitments we get
at night or during the day are from the emergency room or
things like that, is -- is under the J.P.'s emergency
commitment deal. They stay the 24 hours; they get evaluated
by a physician out there, and then they're released. And
!o ii vs
199
1
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
L 4
25
they wouldn't affect their -- their initial count problem
any, those bed spaces, but you still have to do something
with them for that first 24. So, our -- our amount of the
transports and the City's has gone up drastically, you know.
I just didn't know what had happened, if something had
changed out there, 'cause we just are constantly running
back and forth to San Antonio.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, like I say, even though
we got the additional beds, we're still part of the
diversion system, and if they get filled up, then we have to
haul ours. I wish we could reserve them for our use, but
that --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I wish we could, too.
JUDGE TINLEY: Part of being able to get any
beds at all was we had to be part of it. Now, we are
continuing to work on putting together the separate unit out
there which would handle, on a stretch, approximately 40
patients. But there's a lot more that has to go into that,
and we couldn't gei_ it this session, but we're going to try
and get it, because there's some discretionary budget funds
that -- that are still in the -- in the state system that we
might be able to use Eor that, so we're still working on it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Appreciate the work.
COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: 55,000, Joe, You
missed it.
in-iz-os
1
3
9
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2
23
24
25
zoo
MR. BENHAM: Well, you're through with the
budget amendments?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
MR. BENHAM: Oh.
JUDGE TINLEY: What you just heard was 55,000
was the number that it got increased.
MR. BENHAM: Okay. I did have one request to
make that is not a dollar amount, but I think it's
important, if that's -- and it would affect the budget if --
if that could be heard. I apologize. I was told you
weren't going to get to the amendments until after 2:30.
That obviously was bad -- bad advice.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He wants us to come
over and mow the yard, is what he wants.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think I told you after lunch
the comment I remember.
MR. BENHAM: I didn't mean I heard it from
you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay.
MR. BENHAM: I wasn't blaming you, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's $55,000 in
cuts in other budgets in order to step up the library
fundinq by $55,000, and it's contingent upon someone from
the City or the library giving -- explaining the plan to us
i ._ n=.
zol
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1L
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
about how they're going to meet -- or reduce the budget.
MR. BENHAM: Okay. The concern I had was one
that Commissioner Letz pointed out after your joint meeting
with the City that I feel should be addressed, as it --
perhaps a budget amendment or some sort of action on the
part of the -- of the Court, and that is that the -- excuse
me -- that the agreement between the City and the County
needs to be modified in some way -- and I'm not an attorney,
so I can't tell you how to do it -- modified in some way
that -- that takes into account the fact that -- the federal
requirement that books be capitalized. That should not
be -- which should not mean that the library loses
50 percent of the revenue that they need to buy books,
simply because the contract says that you folks are not
required to put capital investment into the library. And --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Benham?
MR. BENHAM: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think we altered
the contract wording to --
MR. BENHAM: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- give us the
flexibility to not look at books as capital.
MR. BENHAM: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We put an adjective
in there before "capital," and I can't remember right now
iu-iz-os
20<
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
what it was, but --
MR. BENHAM: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- anyhow, the
contract's okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- and if it's not,
I'd look at the Library Advisory Board. Library Board is
the one to make recommendations to that contract.
MR. BENHAM: I see. Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I went back and
looked at the contract, and we've got the flexibility to --
MR. BENHAM: I am grateful.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- interpret it that
way, and we intended to.
MR. BENHAM: I appreciate that. If you'll
allow me, I want to commend you gentlemen for all of the
work that you have put in on this library issue. I know
it's perhaps not as important to some people as it is to me,
but you found out it's important to a lot of your
constituents, too. I think the spirit that I've seen
develop in the last few months of interest in the library,
interest in cooperation between the City and the County, is
a very healthy thing, not just for the library, but for
everybody in Kerr County, and I want to commend you
gentlemen for what you have done to bring that about. I'm
lu-il-r5
203
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
going to tell the City Council the same thing this evening,
by the way, 'cause I think they deserve some credit. But
you folks have come a long way in a few months on -- on a
meeting of the minds, a -- a constructive spirit, and
hopefully a diminution of the hostility that has existed
between the City and the County lately. And, again, I think
you're to be commended for that, and I hope the public
understands how much you people and the City have
accomplished in that regard. And I appreciate your letting
me share those thoughts with you, 'cause I think they're
very important, not just for the library, but for everything
you folks do, and I thank you for it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate those kind words.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Judge? There's one
other comment I'd like to make. It's something I think that
-- 'cause we all do care about the employees. It's just
something I think that I would like for y'all to keep in our
prayers. We have one of our deputies, this weekend, just
out of the clear blue, wasn't feeling good. Went to the
hospital Saturday	morning --	he's	young.	He's in ten times
better shape than	I'll ever	be in,	and he	is in extremely
critical condition	right now	with	double	pneumonia, but they
don't know what the cause is. In fact, he's not even
breathing on his own right now. And it's just something I'd
like, since we're all their employers, to keep him in our
~o-ii-os
204
1
G
3
4
5
b
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
prayers that he gets better, 'cause he's also the sole
caregiver for his elderly mother, who's crippled, and trying
take care of her.
MR. EMERSON: No names, guys.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I didn't say names.
I wouldn't give any.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He didn't even give us
his age.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Just an information
deal.
MR. BENHAM: I'll be happy to get him on the
prayer list at our church.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Appreciate it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Other than the
executive session item, do we have anything further on the
information agenda?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Reports.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. We've just gone
through --
COMMISSIONER. WILLIAMS: Environmental Health
is supposed to report.
DODGE TINLEY: Excuse me, yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Environmental Health and
Juvenile --
JUDGE TINLEY: A thousand pardons. I wasn't
io-ii-os
205
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
A
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
looking	at	the timed	item.	The	Extension	Office; of course,
we qot	the	report on	that.	We	got no new	hire.
Mr. Arreola? Thank you, sir.
MR. ARREOLA:
JUDGE TINLEY:
MR. ARREOLA:
Thank you.
My apologies to you.
Not a problem. I'll make it
short and sweet.
JUDGE TINLEY: If I would have completely
missed you, you would have been happy to just go on out the
door, probably.
MR. ARREOLA: I was ready to do that. This
is the end of the year -- fiscal year report. Okay, and
it -- just basically, the first graph, it shows how we did
compared to the year before, which is fiscal year 2004, and
how we're projecting fiscal year 2006 will be. We're a
little lower on revenues in 2004, and that also prompts
everything else to be a little lower.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What's the
definition of permits, authorizations, and applications?
MR. ARREOLA: Okay. Permits is the final
document that the homeowner receives. That's the end of --
end product. Authorizations is the permit that we issue,
that written permission for them to construct an O.S.S.F.
The applications is the ar_tual application that a homeowner
brings in.
io-ii-os
206
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I probably knew at
one time. It appears that 250 applications for systems, but
only 160 or so permits. What -- what's the disposition of
the difference?
MR. ARREOLA: That is because a lot of the
applications received this year, they're not processed
thoroughly; they're not completely done. They do have up to
one year to finish the process, so it's not reflected on
that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And at the end of --
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Go ahead.
JUDGE TINLEY: In terms of chronology, then,
probably applications is the first step, authorization is
the second step, and permit is the --
MR. ARREOLA: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- the ultimate --
MR. ARREOLA: Is the ultimate -- yeah, is the
latest.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And at the end of that
year, if it's not resubmitted or --
MR. ARREOLA: Finalized.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- finalized, then --
and then they want to go on anyway, they have to go through
i 0 _ _ - u S
207
1
L
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1Z
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
the fee process and application process, everything?
MR. ARREOLA: Start all over again. A few
times we have extended the application period when they need
to, but normally it's -- if it's not done within a year,
they have to reapply. Second page is a report on Solid
Waste. That is what happened from January lst through the
last day of September. We did receive a pretty good amount
of cases. 68 percent are closed, done. 8 percent of those,
we have to get the assistance of the court or use citations.
And we have 24 percent pending, still working on.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Miguel, have you
ever had occasion for -- ever gotten a request to waive
fees?
MR. ARREOLA: On O.S.S.F., yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What kind of
rationale does someone give you to --
MR. ARREOLA: It's only from Commissioners
Court.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What?
MR. ARREOLA: To waive fees on O.S.S.F.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We've done it. We
did it on the Kerrville South wastewater project.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That was a
hypothetical question. Thank you.
MR. ARREOLA: You're welcome.

1
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~,
23
24
25
208
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Miguel, in the solid
waste side, do you have any idea, breaking them down, like,
how many of them are just junk cars or trash where rats and
mice breed, those kind of things? And, really, where I'm
going with this, are we still seeing illegal landfills on
people's property? Are we still seeing some of those?
MR. ARREOLA: We're still seeing that. Not a
big percentage.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a big
percentage?
MR. ARREOLA: Not a big percentage. Probably
10, 15 percent of the cases are that type of situations.
Most of them are back yard trash.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But we're still
seeing --
MR. ARREOLA: Yeah, we're still seeing it,
yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Landfills, wow.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought it was
interesting, over the weekend, visiting with someone who's
familiar with Gillespie County government, they asked me a
question; they said, well -- we were talking about O.S.S.F.,
and they said, "Well, how many waivers do y'all issue on
O.S.S.F.?" I said we don't issue waivers. I said we
just -- pretty much, it's not part of policy. They were
in ii as
209
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
astounded, but thought it was a good policy. Pretty much
the rule's the rule. So, we went down the road of issuing
waivers a while back, and we decided we're not going to
repeat that, so I think it works.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Miguel, without
getting into names of your -- your people, to what extent is
your solid waste -- are your solid waste investigations
impaired at the moment by reason of illness or other
factors?
MR. ARREOLA: I've been taking care of most
of them. It's kind of early in the year to tell how it's
going to go, but we have been receiving about the same
amount of complaints to be investigated. We're looking into
it with what we have. There's been a little bit of illness
in the department, but it's okay this week. So --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? Thank you,
sir.
MR. ARREOLA: Thank you.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Juvenile Detention.
MS. HARRIS: Good afternoon.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good afternoon.
MS. HARRIS: For September, our average
in-~~-us
210
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
population was 35, so that's a substantial increase from
what the average population was in August. Of the 35, 24
was postadjudication. Of those, there were four Kerr County
residents in September. Preadjudication, 11 -- an average
of 11. Expenditures was 160 --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait just a second,
Becky. Let's -- postadjudication, you had 24, and four of
those were Kerr County?
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And preadjudication,
you had 11?
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And zero Kerr County?
MS. HARRIS: No, the majority of those 11 are
Kerr County.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. Okay.
MS. HARRIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Majority, like eight
or nine or something like that?
MS. HARRIS: Yes, I would say so. On an
average, yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
MS. HARRIS: Mm-hmm. Expenditures was
$169,189.58, which was an increase of 19,788 from August.
Now, our revenue was $100,762.62, which is an increase of
in-ii-ua
211
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1~
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
$27,647.97 from August. Now, you can add the very first
small little paragraph at the bottom of the page of the
report that you have, the 26 juveniles from Nueces County as
a result of Hurricane Rita. We charged those residents for
two days while they were here, and that is not reflected in
the revenue, and that was $9,315 additional that you can add
to that $100,000. We had 53 intakes in September; two from
Wilson County, one from Bexar, one from Medina, 26 from
Nueces, and 23 Erom T.Y.C. Because the T.Y.C. intakes
occurred on the last day of September, so they were part of
that, of the statistics. We had six discharges; three from
Bexar County, one from E1 Paso, one from .7im Wells, and one
from Guadalupe. And then pending intakes are four; one from
Ward, one from Hood, and two from Guadalupe.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Becky?
MS. HARRIS: Yes?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Did you not tell us
that T.Y.C. was contracting with Kerr County for 24
residents?
MS. HARRIS: Up to 24, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Up to?
MS. HARRIS: Yes, sir. 'Cause that would
be --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a solid 29?
MS. HARRIS: Right. That would be the
io ii- ~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
212
capacity of the annex building.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. I thought it
was a solid number.
MS. HARF.IS: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not a solid number?
MS. HARRIS: No, sir, there's 23 in there,
and from the indications that we're getting -- T.Y.C.
representatives came twice last week, and they were here
yesterday, and the indication is that the 23 that we have
are going to be there for a good three months, if not
longer. 'Cause those kids --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the facility
in Beaumont?
MS. HARRIS: For two reasons -- yes, for two
reasons. The facility in Beaumont, the roof caved in.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
MS. HARRIS: When they first approached us to
contract, that was not the case. And then, like, the nett
day or two days after they had visited with us, the roof had
caved in, and sun was shining in that building and the
bottom floor had water standing in it. They say that there
is mold growing on everything.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll bet.
MS. HARRIS: And so it's going to take quite
a bit cf renovation for them to get that building ready.
to-ii os
213
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
But the other reason is that the kids that they sent us,
T.Y.C. has their juveniles on a phase system similar to our
level system, but it's a little bit more intricate and a
little bit more complicated. There's different categories
that they have to get different phase numbers in, and I
won't go into a lot of detail. Whenever they had to
evacuate the Beaumont unit and some other units along the
coast, T.Y.C. central office in Austin had made a directive
that kids that were Phase 3 across the board in all their
categories could possibly be released early if they had
served their minimum sentence. Normal]y, the kids have to
be Phase 4 across the board as how they get out, plus serve
their minimum sentence. The indication was that these kids
-- and what the kids were told at Beaumont, that they were
going to get out if they had 3's all the way across the
board. T.Y.C. people told them Thursday, no, y'all didn't
fall in that category; y'a11 have to have 4's straight
across the board.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which means to us?
MS. HARRIS: Which means to us we get to keep
them longer, be~~ause it's not an easy thing for those kids
to get their phases. It's pretty complicated.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Bet that makes for
some happy residents.
MS. HARRIS: Oh, yes, it was Lovely Friday
1~~-Li-os
214
1
Z
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
lz
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Zl
22
23
24
25
after	they left	on Thursday afternoon.	It was lovely.	They
were	not happy.			
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll bet.
MS. HARRIS: No. Anyway --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the enrollment out
there right now?
MS. HARRIS: T.Y.C.?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, total,
MS. HARRIS: Total? 55 today.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 55 today?
MS. HARRIS: 55 today, yes, sir, 33 in the
old building and 23 in the annex. Also, if you'll see in
the second paragraph, we've billed T.Y.C. for the one day in
September, and that's an additional $2,185 that is also not
reflected in that $100,000 figure that I gave you. We had
sent them a bill for $83 a day, and we caught it. Went,
"Oh, no. No, it's supposed to be $95." So, we sent them a
new bill. We're trying our level best to hire temporary
people for the annex building. We -- we -- we had a good
roll going last week. We interviewed -- I bet we
interviewed over 20 people, and out of the 20 people that we
interviewed, by the time we weeded out those that didn't
pass the drug test and didn't pass the criminal background
check, then that narrowed the number down. And then we got
those people started, and we had one temporary person that
tc-ii-^5
zls
1
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
15
17
18
19
20
~1
22
23
24
15
was going to fill a full-time vacancy. He was
three-quarters of the way through with his training, and
over the weekend he was working, doing some more OJT, and he
took a break and never came back in the building. I --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You sure Rusty didn't
get him?
MS. HARRIS: So, this is the dilemma that
we're facing, is getting people in there that are qualified
and that pass all of our screening, to get them in there.
And my full-time people, I mean, they're -- they're pulling
their weight and then some. They're working their heads
off. But some of our full-time people there, they're
getting tired, 'cause some of them have worked seven days
straight here lately. We've got three people -- we've had
illness strike us too, and home injuries. I've got three
people that hurt themselves -- full-time people that hurt
themselves at home, that are out, so the full-time people
are having to fill in those gaps. And the most reliable
full-time people that will come in at the drop of a hat, of
course, are the shift supervisors and maybe one or two of
the other full-time people. I've been hiring and
terminating people for many, many years, and I can honestly
say I don't think I have ever run across the difficulty that
-- that we're having in hiring people and keeping them.
It's like a revolving door, and just abcut the time you

216
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1L
13
14
15
16
1~
18
19
20
21
~2
23
^4
25
think you have somebody trained and that they're going to
make a good staff, they never show up for work again. So,
anyway, we're working really hard trying to get enough staff
so we can relieve our full-time people.
The amendments -- the contract addendum that
we sent out, we're starting to get those back. We've got,
like, four or five sec, offender kids right now that would
qualify for that $115 a day. We're waiting to get those
amendments so we can start charging those counties for that,
and they're starting to trickle in. And I believe, Judge
Tinley, ycu've got E1 Paso's contracts on your desk, and
those are the contracts that have already --
JUDGE TINLEY: Kathy's got those. I've
approved all the contracts --
MS. HARRIS: Okay.
DODGE TINLEY: -- that were here last week.
MS. HARRIS: Okay. I just got an e-mail this
morning from them, just wanting to know where their copy
was, 'cause I think they've got some kids in the pipeline
for us, So --
JUDGE TINLEY: They're approved.
MS. HARRIS: Okay, I'll pick them up. That's
pretty much it.
JUDGE TINLEY: You had mentioned that -- in
your reports that there was really not much in the way of
1n-11-i.5
217
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IJ
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
comment about the -- the increased --
MS. HARRIS: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- level for the specialized
treatment.
MS. HP.RRIS: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: What about the transporting
costs? Are you getting any comment on that?
MS. HARRIS: I'm not getting any comments on
that --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. HARRIS: -- one way or the other.
Nobody -- a county has not said anything. And the counties
have -- have not said anything about the increased per diem.
The only thing -- like I indicated in the report we just
did, we have one county who was concerned about our clothing
policy that we changed in order to cut costs. So we didn't
have to buy so many uniforms, the postadjudication coming in
with their own clothes was approved by us. We only had one
county that didn't particularly care for it, but I explained
to the chief -- 'cause we already have the resident. I
explained to the chief that if -- if that child -- if the
county can't pay for the clothing and the parents can't pay
for the clothing, we get donations -- we get clothing
donations, and a lot of times it comes from the staff. The
staff donate clothes, and we make sure those kids who can't
io-ii-o~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
218
afford it, whose parents can't afford ~t or the county will
not buy it for them, that they receive the donated clothing
items. So -- but that was not going to be a problem.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions? Thank
you, ma'am.
MS. HARRIS: You're welcome.
JUDGE TINLEY: We are where I thought I was a
while ago, apparently.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Executive session.
JUDGE TINLEY: At this time, we will go out
of closed or public session at 3:07.
(The open session was closed at 3:07 p.m.,
and an executive session was held, the
transcript of which is contained in a
separate document.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We will come back into
open session at 3:20. Gentlemen, it appears that we've
handled all the items on the agenda. Is there anybody that
has anything further? Hearing nothing, we will stand
adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 3:21 p.m.)
iu-!i-os
219
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
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 20th day of October,
2005.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
Kathy ik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
in-t~-~~s
ORDER NO. 29416
APPOINT PRESIDING JUDGE/MANAGER, TABULATION
SUPERVISOR AND ASSISTANT SUPERVISOR FOR NOVEMBER 8,
2005 ELECTION
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the appointment of the Presiding Judge/Manager, Tabulation
Supervisor, and Assistant Supervisor as per Texas Election Code, Chapter
127 for the November 8, 2005 election.
Presiding Judge/Manager Jannett Pieper
.._. Tabulation Supervisor Nadene Alford
Assistant Supervisor Cheryl Thompson
ORDER NO. 29417
AUTHORIZE ADVERTISING OF PROPOSALS ON ELECTRICAL,
PLUMBING, HVAC AND PEST CONTROL
Came to be heard this the 1 lth day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Authorize Maintenance Supervisor to go out for annual bids for electrical,
plumbing, HVAC and Pest Control.
The deadline for receiving bids will be November 10, 2005 at 5:00 p.m.
The bids will be opened on November 14, 2005 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDER NO. 29418
TCDRS NO PLAN CHANGE NOTICE & RATE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR 2006 PLAN YEAR
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve of and authorize County Judge to sign the TCDRS No Plan Change
Notice & Rate Acknowledgement for 2006 Plan Year.
ORDER NO. 29419
APPROVAL OF ENCROACHMENT OF SEPTIC SYSTEM
DRAINFIELD LINES, LOT 15, CEDAR RIDGE SUBDIVISION
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 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 encroachment of septic system drainfield lines into 7' recorded
utility easement on Lot 15 of Cedar Ridge Subdivision.
ORDER NO. 29420
DISCUSS CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE HEIGHTS AT GREENWOOD
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Grant Waiver for the Heights at Greenwood, allowing development on 2-
acre average, 1-acre minimum.
ORDER NO. 29421
SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR REVISION OF PLAT OF KERRVILLE
RANCHETTES, TRACTS 8, 9 & 10, VOL 3, PAGE 79, IN PCT. 4
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Set a Public Hearing for November 14, 2005 at 10:15 a.m., for the revision
of Plat of Kerrville Ranchettes, Tracts 8, 9 & 10, Vol 3, Page 79, in Pct 4.
ORDER NO. 29422
SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR REVISION OF PLAT FOR THE
HORIZON, SECTION ONE, LOTS NO. 21 & 22, VOL 6, PAGE 323-326,
IN PCT. 1
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Set a Public Hearing for November 14, 2005 at 10:20 a.m., for the Revision
of Plat for The Horizon, Section One, Lots No. 21 & 22, Vol 6, Pages 323-
326, in Pct. 1.
ORDER NO.29423
DISCUSS SUBDIVIDING A 2 ACRE LOT INTO TWO 1 ACRE
PARCELS WITH SHARED DRIVEWAY IN PRECINCT 1
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Move to grant variance on the frontage footage issue with driveway down
the center.
ORDER NO. 29424
ADOPT THE NATIONAL INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
(NIMS) AS STANDARD FOR INCIDENT MANAGEMENT
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Move for Kerr County to adopt the National Incident Management System
(NIMS) as the standard for incident management.
ORDER NO.29425
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN AACOG, KERB
COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND KERB COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS' COURT
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve Memorandum of Understanding between AACOG, Kerr County
Sheriffs Department and Kerr County Commissioners' Court to establish
operating, maintenance, training, and security guidelines for the AACOG
Regional Law Enforcement Academy Distance Learning Site in Kerr County
Sheriffs Department training room, and authorize County Judge to sign
.,.. same.
ORDER NO. 29426
ACCEPTANCE OF RFQ'S
Came to be heard this the 1 lth day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Accept all 13 RFQ's received relating to jail addition.
ORDER NO. 29427
RESCIND COURT ORDER NO. 29414 ADOPTING KERB COUNTY
TAX RATE FOR FY 2005-2006
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Rescind Court Order No. 29414 adopting Kerr County Tax rate for FY
2005-2006, such order having been superseded by Court Order No. 29415
on October 3, 2005.
ORDER NO.29428
DISCUSS NOMINATIONS TO SERVE ON LIBRARY ADVISORY
BOARD
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Nominate/assign Kay Mosty Hayes and Al Schultz as the 2 citizen members
of the Library Advisory Board.
ORDER NO. 29429
DISCUSS NOMINATIONS TO SERVE ON LIBRARY ADVISORY
BOARD
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Designate Commissioner Dave Nicholson as the Kerr County
Commissioners' Court Representative to the Library Advisory Board.
ORDER NO. 29430
ENGAGE PRESSLER THOMPSON & CO. TO PERFORM AUDIT FOR
FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2005
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0 to:
Approve appointment of Pressler Thompson & Co. to perform audit for
fiscal year ending September 30, 2005, and authorize County Judge to sign
the Letter of Engagement.
ORDER NO. 29431
APPROVE CONTRACT BETWEEN OFFICE OF COURT
ADMINISTRATION AND KERB COUNTY
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0 to:
Approve Contract between Office of Court Administration and Kerr County,
and authorize County Judge to sign same.
ORDER NO.29432
NOMINATE FIVE CANDIDATES FOR SUBMISSION TO KERB
CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT FOR BOARD MEMBER OF KERB
CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Nominate Mr. Charles Lewis and cast our 888 votes for Kerr County for the
election of Mr. Lewis to the Board of Directors of the Kerr Central
Appraisal District.
ORDER NO.29433
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, came to be considered
by the Court various Commissioners Precincts, which said Claims and
Accounts are:
Accounts Expense
10-General	$	240,121.88
14-Fire Protection	$	8,113.69
15-Road & Bridge	$	66,244.09
18-County Law Library	$	2,583.86
20-Road Districts	$	3,600.00
21-Title IV-E/AACOG Grant	$	878.44
26-JP Technology	$	3,650.21
50-Indigent Health Care	$	35,915.55
Total
$ 361,107.72
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. 29434
BUDGET AMENDMENT
PUBLIC LIBRARY
GENERAL FUND
PARKS
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 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 $5,000.00 allocated to
water development and take $5,000 from the line item to fund the Family
and Consumer Science Extension Agent for a total reduction of $55,000.00
(contingent to the Library going over their Budget with the Commissioners'
Court), by transferring the following expense codes:
Expense		Amendment
Code	Description	Increase/()Decrease
19-659-491	Public Library: Oper Expenses	+ $50,000.00
19-390-015	Public Library: T.I.	+ $50,000.00 *'
10-401-486	Comm Crt: Professional Svcs	- ($5,000 00)
10-515-451	Det Maint: Detention Repairs	- ($5,000 00)
10-595-450	City/County Oper Airport	- ($25,000.00)
10-660-447	Co Sponsored: Water Develop	- ($5,000.00)
10-665-102	Agr Ext Service: Ext Ag Sal	- ($5,000.00)
10-700-015	GENERAL. TRANSFER OUT	+ 45,000.00
31-662-486	Parks: Flatrock Lake	- ($10,000.00)
31-700-015	PARKS: TRANSFER OUT	+ 10,000.00 **
**New line item numbers.
Budget amendment proposed by Commissioner Williams.
ORDER NO. 29435
BUDGET AMENDMENT
GENERAL FUND
JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY
Came to be heard this the 1 lth day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to approve the Budget Amendment
and pay the $7,809.63 Accounts Payable Invoices and transfer from the
Reserves to the Juvenile Account to cover payroll and encumbrances to date
as follows:
Expense Code Description
10-700-015 TRANSFER OUT
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
+ $60,156.48
76-390-015 TRANSFER IN
+ $60,156.48
*Balance of amount needed to cover 09/30/05 PR ($81,304.72) +
encumbered A/P invoices on hand ($7,809.63) for payment on 10/11/O5.
Funds to be transferred into DETEN bank account.
Balance in DETEN-Bank Account @ 09/30/05 was $28,957.87.
ORDER NO.29436
BUDGET AMENDMENT
GENERAL FUND
JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 2005, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to declare an Emergency and
transfer the following expense codes:
Expense Code Description
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
10-700-015 TRANSFER OUT
76-390-015 TRANSFER IN
+ $75,000.00
+ $75,000.00
*Estimate only for 10/15/OS Payroll to be paid on 10/14/05.
ORDER NO.29437
MONTHLY REPORTS
Came to be heard this the 11th day of October, 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:
District Clerk
Sheriff
JP #2
County Attorney
JP #3