1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KERR COONTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Special Session
Monday, April 3, 2006
9:30 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Te.,as
PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge
H A."BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4
v
~.9
D
U

1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
24
25
	I N D E	X	
	April 3,	2006	
			PAGE
1.1 Discuss, consider	and take	appropriate action on	
easement variances			3
1.2 Consider, discuss	and take	appropriate action on	
issues relating to	the oper	ation of Kerr County	
Juvenile Detention	Facility		12
--- Adjourned			57
3
1
7
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
23
29
25
On Monday, April 3, 2006, at 9:30 a.m., a special
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the
Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville,
Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me r_all to order this special
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court scheduled for
this date and time, Monday, April the 3rd, 2006, at 9:30 a.m.
Clock on the wall reads a little after 8:30, but, of course, I
wasn't here 2 o'clock Sunday morning to change that. I
thought Buster was going to handle that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No comment.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. First item on the agenda is to
discuss, consider, and take appropriate action on easement
variances. Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you very much. Judge,
this is -- this is what I see as a growing problem. I
don't -- I'm not sure what's causing it. We have seen it a
couple of times in our -- in my precinct, and now it's, I
~~, understand, growing out into -- or oozing out into Precinct 4,
and it appears that it's going out, so I just kind of wanted
to take a look at this problem and bring it before you all.
And I'd really -- Miguel's here to make a presentation. I
really would like to come up with some kind of a policy at
some point on how to handle this thing, because he sees it as
4 - 3 u r
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
a problem, and I do as well
and --
So, Miguel, if you'd come up
MR. ARREOLA: Sure. Good morning.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- say what you have to say.
MR. ARREOLA: What we have here is just a typical
older subdivision, small lot. And we're facing lately -- it's
coming more and more, sometimes because of older septic
systems failing in an established subdivision, and some of
them because of new construction where the lots are too small,
and most of -- most of the time the house is already in place.
What we have here is an easement all around the property that
is a dedicated easement by the plat. Normally goes from 7 to
10 feet, depending on which subdivision. On top of that, we
have a 5-feet setback from the state, so that takes a pretty
good chunk of property that, when they trying to do a new
septic or repair the existing one, is creating problems. So,
what we would like to know is, how can we handle this easement
problem? Most of the easements at least on one side; they're
not used and not utilized by any utility company any more.
Normally, the utilities are already set on one side, so if we
can grant a variance to those easements that are not utilized,
that's going to give us extra land to work on the septic.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Miguel, lay that flashlight
thing down and walk over there and put -- put your finger on
the utility easement.
e 3 ut,
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ARREOLA: The utility easement is this.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There?
MR. ARREOLA: Out around.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then where is the state
5-foot setback?
MR. ARREOLA: That line right here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The dotted line.
MR. ARREOLA: Next to it.
COMMISSIONEP, LETZ: Is the state setback 15 feet, or
is it 5 foot?
MR. ARREOLA: Five.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know, but is it 5 foot in
addition to the --
MR. ARREOLA: To the existing easement, whatever
that is, and the easement varies.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, if you didn't -- I'm just
trying to understand. So, if we -- if the County -- if there
wasn't a subdivision plat easement on this side, there'd still
be a 5-foot easement?
MR. ARREOLA: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That 5 foot, we can't get rid
I of?
MR. ARREOLA: That's right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you depicting a new or
an older house? Whir_h is the front and which is the back?
9-3-UH
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~2
~3
24
25
MR. ARREOLA: This is the front, but it does vary a
lot. Sometimes the lot -- the back of the lot has a bigger
easement. Sometimes they got a 20-foot easement in the back,
so it varies by subdivision. Normally, we have a right-of-way
in the front which takes a big chunk of the property, and not
a big easement in the back, but it changes. It varies.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you depicting a quarter
of an acre, or what are you showing there?
MR. ARREOLA: It's not to scale. And it is -- yeah,
quarter of an acre to half an acre. Sometimes we have
problems in half an acre, depending on the soil and what's
there, the slope of the property. So, it's all kinds of
things that get into play.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What's the purpose of the
wraparound easement?
MR. ARREOLA: That, I don't know. It is just set in
the -- in the plat that way, and we have no authority over it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I suspect -- and I don't know
the answer, but I suspect the reason is that when the plat
comes to us, no one really knows how the easement -- how
utilities are going to get to that lot.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So you have to cover all bases
and say here -- I mean, the utility companies, I mean, they
go -- you know, they don't know until they start laying things
9 ~,, n E,

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
out on how things get built, where they're going to actually
put things.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nor do we know the position
of the dwelling.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, now that -- if it's an
older subdivision, we've got all -- or somebody's got all
those answers and it's no longer needed, can it be undone?
I'm sure it can be undone.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it's got to be done on a
lot-by-lot basis almost, because it depends on how they -- I
mean, it's possible that cable came in one side and phone came
in on the other side.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah.
MR. ARREOLA: What we've been doing lately is trying
to determine where the -- those utilities are and which sides
are not used. And then sometimes utility companies will grant
you a -- a variance, a release of easement to -- to be there.
The question we have is, is that okay to do without coming to
Commissioners Court? Can we take it like that and record it?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I didn't hear the rest of
the story there. The issue is that you don't have enough room
to build a septic system?
MR. ARREOLA: Correct, that's the big issue.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And the question is, how do
you get some relief from the right-of-ways to do that?
~ uE
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, I think what he's
saying -- he's not talking about encroaching into the
utility -- 10-foot utility easement. He's talking about
encroaching into that 5-foot setback the state requires.
MR. ARREOLA: No, we would like to be in the utility
easement, and leave the setback in place.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In this case, particularly.
MR. ARREOLA: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think -- I think the
problem is -- or one of the major problems is -- is that
they're building a house, then they are saying, "Where is our
septic tank going to go?" And then the County is put on the
line to -- to scramble around, try to figure it out, and
that's not the right way to do it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You said it's creeping into
Precinct 4. Are we talking about Greenwood Forest?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know.
MR. ARREOLA: There's some in Greenwood Forest, and
whatever small lots come into play.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, it seems -- I mean, a
simple fix to me would be to pass a general order allowing
Miguel to grant a variance from his standpoint in a utility
easement that's not being used, that's a platted -- by the
plat, any kind of plat restriction.
9-3-niS
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We did -- we did one in
Kerrville South, and I required them to get permission from
the utilities -- written permission from the utilities before
we went in there, and then we allowed it to happen.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think that -- I think that
we need to have some kind of written permission.
MR. ARREOLA: If we can get approval from the
utility companies to be there, to release that easement, can
we just grant a variance in our office, or do we need to bring
it to your attention every time?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do it in your office, if that's
all we're doing is a utility easement. I mean, that's -- it's
-- the reason it's on the plat is because we don't know where
the utilities are going. Once they're there, I think it's up
to your office to grant that variance. I don't think it's --
I think it's a waste of the Court's time to have to come in
here all the time for that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're talking about a
variance only for a drainfield, not for a tank?
MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it would be -- I look at
it, it doesn't make any difference. I mean, I can't imagine a
situation where a tank would get there, but I guess it's
q - 3 - n n
10
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
possible, but I don't know what difference it would make. I
mean, a septic -- it's for OSSF.
MR. ARREOLA: A septic is allowed. The tank is a
lot more invasive, and it is more difficult to have there, but
the drainfield is what we're dealing with, is our main
problem.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine with what they're
saying. I still want you to run it by me in my precinct.
MR. ARREOLA: Every time?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Every time.
MR. ARREOLA: Sounds good.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's good advice,
no matter what precinct.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What's going to be the
criteria for granting --
MR. ARREOLA: That was my next point. We have a
question about the homeowner association. Some subdivision
does have an active homeowner association. They would like to
be involved. Sometimes they are the ones sending us the
approval. Without the utility company's release, is that
acceptable?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
MR. ARREOLA: Okay. Then utility company's release,
and have it recorded, of course, in the --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What he's saying is the
9-~-oF
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~l
22
23
24
25
11
homeowners' association make the decision for a government
decision. We can't do that. Okay?
MR. ARREOLA: Okay, and that's clear. Have any
other questions on that?
~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't. Do we want to pass
a --
DODGE TINLEY: I'm just inquiring if you got any
more questions, concerns, comments.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. L personally -- I think
it's clear. I don't know that we need a court order. Or do
I we?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you do.
JUDGE TINLEY: Probably be helpful.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. All right. I move
that, on this particular issue, that the Environmental Health
i Department has the authority to approve or disapprove the
encroachment into the utility easement, and request that they
all appear before each Commissioner before it's totally
approved.
MR. ARREOLA: I got you.
DODGE TINLEY: Question or issue here?
MR, EMERSON: Just a recommendation. So long as the
homeowners' association and the utilities issue written
releases.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Yeah,
4 3 - 0 b
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
c L
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: That's included as part of it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's included.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Any question or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of that motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Thank you
~ very much.
	JODGE BROWN:	Your Honor,	may I speak? Somebody's
got my p	arking place ou	t here; got	a white dog	in the back.
	COMMISSIONER	LETZ: I got	it, Judge,	'cause someone
took all	the Commission	ers' parking	places.	
	JUDGE BROWN:	Okay, that'	s fine. I	just didn't know
what was	going on.			
	COMMISSIONER	LETZ: There	wasn't any	spot, so I
grabbed	the only one I	could see.		
	COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN: Y'	all take it	out in the
I hall.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to the next item. Item 2,
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on issues
4 ~ U 6
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
relating to the operation of the Kerr County Juvenile
Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. I placed
this on the agenda because I was in receipt, as you were, and
other Commissioners, of a letter from Ms. Harris indicating
that she was resigning her appointment as the Facility
Administrator of the Kerr County Juvenile Facility effective
April 19th of this year. This being about the third or fourth
day, whatever -- third day, leaves us not too much time to
decide exactly what the future of the Detention Center is all
about. In my backup statement, I tried to identify a few
certain every Commissioner has probably added a few things
other than that, but I think we need to be talking about,
should Kerr County continue to operate a juvenile facility
knowing the cost to do so and the problems associated
therewith? And if so, what type of facility do we want to
operate? For pre-adjudicated youth only, or for pre- and
post-adjudicated youth? Males only, or males and females?
Continue to operate in the older facility, or move a
scaled-down operation into the new facility -- newer facility?
Hire another administrator, promote from within, or transfer
administrative functions to the Juvenile Probation Department?
Continue operation under County administration, or find an
outside operator? Sell the facilities or convert to other
~-_-oF
19
1
r 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-- 13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
""° 2 4
25
county uses? And after all of those I've listed, I'm sure
others have equally come up with other questions as well.
And, by the same token, I had a long discussion with
Mr. Stanton with respect to the Probation Department operating
the Juvenile Facility, doing so in the newer annex building,
and doing so as a pre-adjudicated facility only. I've asked
him to take a look at the budget as it exists today, midway
through the budget year, and determine whether or not it's a
feasible approach, and if so, what the cost would be. And he
has done that, and I believe each of you have a copy of his
preparation for his budget amendments which would allow that
to take place. So, having set the stage, Judge, let's talk
and see where this takes us.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any member of the Court have any
questions concerning the figures on the document circulated by
Commissioner Williams as prepared by Mr. Stanton?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I do. What does it mean?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Kevin -- let's get Kevin up
document that you have prepared at my request actually means.
MR. STANTON: Basically, what I did was try to
determine, if we scaled down the facility and went with a
pre-adjudicated facility only, what it would cost. Based on
the current budget, what it would cost to continue throughout
the remainder of this budget year, this budget cycle.
n- ~ uE~
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We would be staffed for
pre-adjudicated juveniles only, up to a maximum of how many?
MR. STANTON: 16.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 16. We'd be using one or
two of the dorms in the new facility?
MR. STANTON: Well, we'd be staffing -- we could use
two of the dorms.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could be using up to two?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the staffing requirement
would take us from a minimum of one kid to a maximum of 16; is
that correct?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: T.J.P.C. regulations.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What I'm looking at, the
top of it says 12-bed.
MR. STANTON: Yeah. Basically, what we were trying
to do is, originally, we were looking at using the old
facility and staffing one wing. But with the same staffing
ratios it would cost to staff the old building, we could staff
the new buildinq, and that would expand the ratio of kids up
to 16 kids.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. Then if I drop all
the way down to the bottom, it says $90,000.
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
9 ~-on
16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Does that mean that for
this fiscal year, the juvenile facility operation would take
in $90,000 more than it spends?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that does not -- if you go
up to three, four lines above that, which is titled "Revenue,"
isn't that revenue from Kerr County?
MR. STANTON: Not all of it, no, sir. Majority of
it is. What I did was took the billings that we've paid for
the past six months through the Kerr County Juvenile Facility
for pre-adjudicated only, and expanded those out for the
remainder of the six months that are left in the budget. And
if everything stays the same as it has been the first six
months, that's the estimated revenue for all the counties that
we contract for, pre-adjudicated only.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it's not real -- a real
profit. It's -- I mean, it's moving money from your budget to
the Juvenile Facility budget, part of it is.
MR. STANTON: Oh, yeah. I mean, yeah. It's the
same thing we're doing now, though. We're moving money from
my budget to --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We accept pre-adjudicated
from other counties?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
9-3-06
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
G 2
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And this would anticipate
that as well?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: From bordering counties?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: The -- the revenue aspect also
includes, it appears, over $300,000 worth of existing cash
balances or receivables.
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
DODGE TINLEY: So you're carrying that forward and
then adding the revenues --
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- to be generated, estimated during
the next six months, and then subtracting from that your
estimated costs for the next six months to come up with the
$90,000 positive?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I want to -- I've got a
follow-up question on Commissioner Letz' question. Some of
that $164,000 is our money.
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
4-~-uc
18
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, it's not new money. If
we did not have a facility, we'd still be spending that money
placing them somewhere else?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir. So far -- so far this first
six months of this budget cycle, Kerr County Juvenile
Probation Department has spent approximately $122,000 at the
Kerr County Juvenile Detention Facility to house
pre-adjudicated youth.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So far this year?
MR. STANTON: So far this year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Kevin, in the -- and this is
using the new facility? I was under the impression that the
cafeteria and some of the other facilities -- some of the, I
guess, support services are all in the old facility.
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, how -- are we going to have
to operate both facilities in part? Or --
MR. STANTON: I've been talking to Mr. Holekamp
about that issue. Initially, we would probably have to use
the laundry services, if we didn't contract or get the
Sheriff's Department to do the laundry for us. The food
preparation and that kind of thing, there's a couple different
options. At that point, we could either go through the
Sheriff's Department, like we had talked about six months ago,
or we could purchase an oven and some type of freezer and
4 3-06
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
prepare the meals like that. And Mr. Holekamp has told me
that it wouldn't be a problem to put the -- the equipment in
the building, that -- that end of the new building.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You have a full-service
kitchen in the old building, but you don't have in the new
building; is that what I'm understanding?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
MS. HARRIS: It's not plumbed -- the annex building
it's not plumbed for a gas-operating stove.
MR. STANTON: Riqht. We wouldn't want a gas --
that's true.
JUDGE TINLEY: What are your revenue -- what are
your revenue estimates based upon? What kind of occupancy?
MR. STANTON: The revenues are based on the previous
sir, months of what have been placed into the Kerr County
Juvenile Facility in the pre-adjudicated.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. STANTON: We took all the bills -- we took all
the bills from the previous six months that have been issued
by the Kerr County Juvenile Detention Facility and expanded
out over the next six months.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm talking about revenue, the
income.
MR. STANTON: Yeah, that's what I'm talking about.
Yes, sir.
q-~-nh
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2G
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. What number of residents is
that based upon? Did you --
MR. STANTON: I don't know the answer to that. What
we did was took the average billings for all the counties that
contract with the facility; we took the average billings for
each month and expanded that out over the next six months.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is pre-adjudicated
only. Is it male and female?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would leave the older
facility available to -- for the Court to look at in terms of
what it wished to do with it, but I also know from a message I
had delivered to me this morning that if we were of a mind to
consider it, there's a possibility that the T.Y.C. might
consider leasing it from us and operating it itself. I don't
-- I don't foresee that as a -- our running it as a T.Y.C.
unit. I don't see that happening, because our success rate
doing that before wasn't all that good with those folks, and
staffing up to that level wasn't that good. But it was -- in
fact, it was pretty bad. But if they wanted to consider
leasing the facility and operating it themselves, that's
another option, of course, that the Court could take a look
at.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ms. Harris, what's your opinion
9-3-06
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
on options?
MS. HARRIS: Thank you, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: First time you've ever been
asked that, isn't it?
MS. HARRIS: Well, I would like to make a remark
about the T.Y.C. You're absolutely right. Because of the
difficulty that we had before -- now, I don't know if -- if
T.Y.C. was going to approach you to lease the old building and
the new building. Just let me give you a heads-up if you're
considering leasing the old building. Structurally, the type
of kids that T.Y.C. sends to contract facilities, the old
building might not hold up. The ceilings in the individual
bedrooms in the old building are quite low, and the sprinkler
heads are just right there, and that's very tempting for
T.Y.C. kids to break those sprinkler heads on a very regular
basis and flood the room, so keep that in mind. Turning the
plumbing off -- turning the water off whenever that occurs is
-- I mean, it's done; you can get to it. But the room is
usually going to flood before you have the opportunity to get
to where the cutoff is, so just keep that in mind.
~ You know, this -- this is going to affect everybody
that works out there, and it's going to affect the kids and
it's going to affect the staff out there. Having said that, I
believe that the staff have been prepared for what the
possible reperr_ussions would be. Even if I had not resigned,
4-j o5
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
22
we were about to come up to a very difficult budget time, and
everybody at the facility, we know that. And we know that the
budget has been a bone of contention, and we know that the
budget has -- we look at that budget very closely. We all do,
the Court and us at the facility, and we know that the
facility is not a cash cow. It just does not make money.
It's not going to. It's going to be a deficit. So, I would
think that it would be very wise for the Court, given that, to
decrease the deficit as much as you possibly can. That's --
that's the name of the game. And try to figure out what
option and what scenario gets you to that point.
There are 16 pre kids out there today. Out of the
16, five are Kerr County kids. The rest of them are
out-of-county kids. Menard, McCullough, Llano, Bandera,
Mason. It's not -- that's not a steady population of pre's
every day, but I certainly agree that -- that you would have
to gear up for at least 16 kids, and to keep in mind to try to
keep your females and your males separate as we 11. I -- I
know that there's -- there's a need to keep a detention
facility in Kerr county. I know that. So, as far as my
recommendation, I recommend that you do what's best for y'all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Harris, let me ask you, if I
might. You say there's 16 out there now?
MS. HARRIS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: How many males? How many females?
4-; n5
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2^
L
23
24
25
MS. HARRIS: Four females.
JUDGE TINLEY: And 12 males?
MS. HARRIS: And 12 males, yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, we're into two phases over on the
I male side.
MS. HARRIS: Yes, sir, that's two dorms of males on
the new -- in the new building and one dorm of females, so
that's all three dorms being occupied if you had them in the
new building. Yes, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 16. And how many of them are
I Kerr?
MS. HARRIS: Five.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Question.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You can keep the males and
females separated -- I mean together under what circumstances?
MS. HARRIS: Whenever we do -- whenever we're
crowded on the post side -- we're not crowded, but when
there's not any available beds on the post side, and it's also
for programming purposes, if you can keep all the pre's
together, so what we've been doing of late is we've got the
males and the females on the same dorm, pre's, but we have a
female and a male staff on there, because the State mandates
that when it comes to hygiene time, you have to have
gender-specific staff for your kids.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Day and night.
a 3-nF
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1B
19
20
21
2 L
23
24
25
24
MS. HARRIS: Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Pos. Harris, first let me
say thank you for the work you've done for Kerr County.
MS. HARRIS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got an impression that
if this thing could have worked, you'd have made it work. But
if that's true, it couldn't work.
MS. HARRIS: Thank you. T appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've heard the answer to
this before, but I'm not ever sure 7 get it right. Most
counties -- most of the 254 counties in Texas -- 200 of them,
more or less -- don't have a juveni]e detention facility.
MS. HARRIS: Correct, the little small counties.
That's right.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So why do we need one?
Just 'cause we don't want to transport kids? Is that the only
reason?
MS. HARRIS: That could be -- that could be one
reason. That could be. I know that that is an arduous task
and that's a difficult task, and that's not something that --
that peop]e want to do. I remember in our discussions back in
the summer of '04, the fall of '04 when we -- when the Court
was discussing about going to buy the facility, not going to
buy it. If we don't buy it, you know, are we just going to do
away with the whole thing? And I remember there were several
9-3-ub
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I discussions about there were -- popular opinion from the
community deemed that we needed a juvenile facility in order
i to have a place for the Kerr County kids to be placed. Now,
Commissioner, whether ycu need -- it's imperative that you
have that facility, that's another issue, and I can't make
that decision.
I
i COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON; Just -- I don't want to
I belabor this, but I'll try it one more way. Who is the
I beneficiary of having it? Is it the children? Is it the
Sheriff's Office? It's not the taxpayers, that's for sure.
I MS. HARRIS: To have a detention facility? In my
estimation, I think it's best for the kids. They're here
locally, their services are here locally, their parents are
here. It's not such a cumbersome burden on the parents to
travel to go visit their kids. The court is here.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We've got, oh, I guess at
least three privately-owned facilities for -- for difficult
children here, abused and abandoned children --
MS. HAP.RIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- in Kerr County, and
they've -- people there have campaigned me about keeping this
open. It's a -- at least a convenience to them.
MS. HARRIS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Are a large number of our
pre-adjudicated children from those three, 3-H --
a-~ o~
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. HARRIS: 3-H Youth Ranch and Star Ranch?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And H.C.Y.R.
MS. HARRIS: Not a ]arge population, but yes, we do
qet some of those kids, and it's usually a case of a runaway
that we get those -- get those kids. But, yes, we do get some
kids from Star Ranch and from 3-H Youth Ranch, but it's not a
large population of them.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON; It's not half?
MS. HARRIS: No, sir, I wouldn't say so.
MR. WILBANKS: No.
MS. HARRIS: No. No, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's all I have.
MR. STANTON: Can I comment on one of the questions
you asked Ms. Harris? I agree with what she said, but I think
the citizens of Kerr County do get the benefit of having the
detention center in Kerr County, due to the fact that I
believe that a lot less -- fewer kids would be placed in
juvenile detention facilities if the facility was not here in
Kerr County. I believe that the -- that the police department
and Sheriff's Department might not come out and say so, but I
believe that the referrals that we currently get, where it's a
whole lot easier to place a kid out here than it is taking a
kid to a different county, and I believe that you'll see a --
maybe not a dramatic reduction, but I believe you would see a
reduction in the amount of kids that were placed in juvenile
s-~-on
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
L2
23
24
25
detention facilities that really need to be placed in
detention facilities, just for the fact that there's -- that
other --
MS. HARRIS: Transporting.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's a valid point, I'm
sure.
MS. HARRIS: The transporting, right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question. We have
-- there's 16 pre`s today, and five Kerr, and that means 11
out-of-county. What do -- what does it cost us per child, per
day?
	MS. HARRIS:	Do you know?
	MR. STANTON:	No, ma'am, I have no idea.
	MS. HARRIS:	On the pre side?
	COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
	MS. HARRIS:	I would have to put the pencil and
paper	to it, Commissio	ner, in order to give you a more
accura	te figure. It's	more than -- it's more than 83, 1 would
think,	'cause by time	you add payroll and food --
	COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN: So --
	MS. HARRIS:	-- and clothing, 'cause you've got to
clothe	those kids.	
	COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN: We charge 83?
	MS. HARRIS:	Mm-hmm,
	COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN: We charge the other counties
a-?-oE
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
2g
83, and it costs us more?	
MS. HARRIS: Probably a little bit more.	
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Costs us more than 83 to	
house them. All right. That's for 11 kids.	
MS. HARRIS: 11?	
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm just dealing with	
out-of-county --	
MS. HARRIS: Yes.	
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- people.	
MS. HARRIS: Yes.	
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: None of the treatment	
program costs are incorporated in that?	
MS. HARRIS: No, sir. No, sir, there are no	
treatment costs.	
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just incarceration costs,	as
mandated by T.J.P.C., and food costs.	
MS. HARRIS: Yes, sir. And their clothes and	
hygiene products.	
MR, STANTON: With the current budget that the	
Commissioners are looking at, the one that I worked up over	
the weekend, that actually is projected that if you needed	to,
you could house up to 24 pre-adjudicated youth, because the	re
are three -- in those projections, there's three certified	
JDO's and a control room operator, and with staffing ratios	of
one-to-eight, you could expand to the third wing if you had	to
4-3-uf,
29
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: Glenn, I know the old facility
we inherited, I think, some locks that are not real sound as
far as the electronic part of it is concerned. They work
manually, but not electronically. It -- it's strictly when
we -- we had a real difficult time when we had the T.Y.C. kids
there, because of the nature of some of their antics. So, I
think we've gotten quite a few of the issues worked out in the
old building, as far as air conditioning and that sort of
thing. Plumbing is always going to be an issue. The old
building is -- kitchen area probably needs a revamping. Sc
does the office area; those floors are in pretty bad shape.
New building is pretty sound. I -- I would say it's --
there's some lock issues, like I said, that would have to be
resolved, but the old building we pretty much have leveled
off. We have some issues there, but they shouldn't be
biq-ticket items. Kitchen is going -- has got a lot of
equipment in there that is limping along. And I think, as --
as Kevin just -- just touched on it just briefly, in the new
building they have a prep -- they call it a prep kitchen, prep
area. That could be utilized for that. I mean, actually,
e-;-~~~
30
1
G
3
9
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
microwaves; they might even have a range, you know. I
don't -- I don't foresee it to be a full-blown kitchen, no,
because as she indicated, it's not designed for that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which building, in your opinion,
is better suited for other uses, such as office space?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Probably the old building at this
point. And the reason I say that is -- is because -- and
Ms. Harris just brought it up. I don't understand and will
never understand why you put a low ceiling in a juvenile
facility with -- with sprinkler heads which can be reached.
MS. HARRIS: Yeah.
MR. HOLEKAMP: And I -- I think as time goes on,
we're going to have a mess, a lot of water in the old
building.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, has this been an
ongoing problem? We've had a lot of these sprinkler heads --
MR. HOLEKAMP: A lot.
MS. HARRIS: In the past.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Prior to October, I couldn't say.
MR. WILBANKS: Since Ms. Harris has been here, it
hasn't been that bad. We changed our population. Back when
we had the Houston kids, it was a regular thing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Glenn.
Ms. Harris? I want to say to you, thank you for your service
to our community. I've been here a long time, and I don't
9-3-UF
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
~~
23
29
25
31
know of a County employee that tried harder and worked harder
at something than you did.
MS. HAP.RIS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It was like in -- as the
storm was all about your head, your face was like flint, as
the Bible says, in trying to make this thing work, and I
appreciate that very much.
MS. HARRIS: Thank you. I appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a couple of comments I
wanted to make about the facility. What -- I wanted to just
open the ball and try to get it going, or keep it going. I'd
like to see us operate that facility as a -- as a
pre-adjudicated only, have an architect come and take a look
at that old building and tell us what it would take to revert
it into office space, move the Juvenile Probation and the
Adu]t Probation operations out there. The Adult Probation
rental today is $28,800 a year. Turn the -- transfer the
administration function over to the Juvenile Probation
Department, and staff the facility with minimum employees to
-- to meet the State's guidelines, and address Kerr County and
maybe contiguous counties. Contract with the Sheriff's Office
for meals. Or offer the thing for sale, the whole deal.
Those are my thoughts.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Essentially, a lot of what
Commissioner Baldwin says is -- is in keeping with my -- my
9-3-Oh
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
32
thoughts and the questions I outline for the Court to
consider. I think this is an appropriate time for us to make
this decision in light of Ms. Harris' resignation. And,
Becky, I want to say to you a]so -- I want to thank you for
your service. I know the situation under which you came to
Kerr County is not the situation which you leave Kerr County.
Whatever your expectations were, I'm not certain. I know
we've gone up and down a lot of roller coaster hills, but my
thanks to you particularly for the fact that you cleaned up
our act, if you will. You've enabled us to -- to look forward
knowing that we were not guilty of all of the things that the
world was, in effect, charging us with. That's behind us. It
was not your ability -- or in your ability to be able to
foresee the economic future of the building, and that led us
to -- from different administration into the operation by
Commissioners Court. Those things were totally out of your
control, but you weathered those storms as beautifully as any
human being could do. I personally want to wish you well in
all of your endeavors. You're a real sport, you're a real
trouper, and you're a class act. I thank you.
MS. HARRIS: Thank you very much. I appreciate
that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Getting back to that, now, I
think we -- we're at that point in our career as an operator
of a juvenile facility where this Court has to fish or cut
9-3-n,,
1
~.. ,,
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
"~' 2 4
25
33
bait	. We have to decide what we're	going	to do. I personally
have	-- after watching the ups and	downs	of this operation and
the	cost of it, and having listened	to 20	different pro formas
make sense, I've come to the conclusion that our interests,
and about half of the taxpayers of Kerr County, are best
served if we go to a pre-adjudicated facility. I believed the
Sheriff when he said it. I think there's value in what he
said, and I think it probably carries forward today. That was
supported again this morning by Mr. Stanton, that there is
psychological value in having a detention facility just around
the corner for those youth who, for whatever reasons, are
teetering on the brink of lawlessness. And I think that there
is -- I'd like for us to be able to continue that and be able
to look at our constituents and our law enforcement people in
the face and say, "Yes, we'll do our part."
We operate a jail at a great loss. Law enforcement
is not a profit maker. Juvenile detention was never intended
to be a profit maker, particularly if you're dealing with the
State who lays down all these rules and regulations on you,
and expectations. The State knows it, not only from the
standpoint of ma};inq the rules, but the State knows it 'cause
they operate facilities themselves, and they're part of the
problem. But I don't see them cleaning up their act, so the
n-;-ui
34
1
2
3
4
5
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
question is, how are we going to clean up our act? So, I
agree that -- I think we -- my position is we should have a
pre-adjudicated facility. I believe the newer building offers
us fewer problems in which to operate, and I believe that the
Probation Department can, or has at least expressed a
willingness to move its operation out there and office itself
in that facility. The older building, if it is vacated after
giving the counties appropriate time to get their youth home,
we can take our time in determining what is best for it. It
can and should probably be converted to some extent to office
facilities. It may also, a portion of it, be available to
assist our Maintenance people in finding dry storage for the
burgeoning county records that keep growing day by day. So, I
think those -- these are the things that are in front of us,
and at this point in this discussion, that's where I am.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I'll say a couple words.
I pretty much echo what the other Commissioners said about
Ms. Harris' performance. I think she's done a good job under
very difficult circumstances. I appreciate it, and good luck
to you in your next endeavor.
MS. HARRIS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I probably will, you know, agree
pretty much with what Commissioner Baldwin and Williams said
as to the direction. A little bit different -- I think
Commissioner Baldwin said, "or sell everything." I'd like to
~ ~-~e
1
,~
G
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,~-
24
25
35
keep that more into an analysis of selling it all in addition
to doing the preadjudication. I think we're kind of in the
middle of budget year. I would like to really evaluate the
true future potential of all that property out there and those
facilities, or just part of it. And if we sell it, what we
can sell it for, if at all. My gut feeling is that it makes
sense for us to keep it for additional county offices, as
we're growing, but I'd like to really look at that at the same
time so that during the budget process, we have a clear
direction as to we're going to operate a pre-adjudication
facility forward, and that's it.
If we're going to do that, it seems that that's a
small facility somewhere. And if we can sell this for a fair
amount of	money	or have	other	uses for	it,	it just seems	we --
this Court	has -	- for my	three	terms as	a	Commissioner,	has
inherited a building built by Recor, and it was run by the
Juveni]e Board and expanded. And we really didn't -- you
know, we -- the only time the Court has had to deal with it is
when things got bad out there and problems developed, so we've
always been kind of in a very defensive mode in the -- that
entire setup out there. Or a reactive mode is probably
better. And I'd like to see us really take some time just in
the next six months to look at what the best property use is
~-;-nu
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
out there, and also look at the best viability of a
preadjudication facility, either there or maybe a smaller unit
just to house Kerr County kids. Clearly, under the current
rules by the State, it does not make economic sense for the
taxpayers to house out-of-county kids, period, and so we just
need to figure out the best way to move forward with that in
mind. Judge, we haven't heard from you. What are your
opinions?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Haven't heard from me,
either.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I heard from you earlier.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Nicholson?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If this were September, I'd
vote to close the facility and qet out of the juvenile
detention business. And I also think we need to find, as
close as we can, a permanent solution to this issue so that
it's not being dealt with annually, or more often than that.
I don't think Kerr County taxpayers ought to be paying money
to house children from -- from other counties, and I think
that's an economic fact of life. I don't think you'll ever
get around that. The other thing we don't talk very much
about is the debt service costs. That's in addition, of
course, to the -- to the operating costs. Those are pretty
large, and I wouldn't mind if we could unload that and, for a
change, have a beneficial impact on the rainy day fund. So,
4 i - U l
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
37
all that is to say that I'll -- I will agree it's a good plan,
Buster. I will agree and vote for that now, but I may not in
July or September. I don't -- I continue to not understand
how we're smarter than those other 200 counties that don't
have one of these things. That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, you know, it's -- whether or
not we have a criminal justice system in this county is not
optional; it's required by the state of Texas. And as all of
you know, there's a -- there are two components to that,
adults and juveniles. How we go about it, of course, is a
different -- a different matter. Mr. Stanton mentioned that
having a local detention facility as being a major plus in
juvenile -- in the juvenile justice system. The enforcement
aspect of it, I think, is a much larger factor than -- than
folks might initially believe. If an officer comes upon a
child out on the street committing a felony offense, and that
officer knows there's a local juvenile justice facility, a
detention facility where that child can be detained and be
required to immediately have consequences for criminal
activity, I think that officer is much more likely to follow
through on his enforcement pursuits.
If, on the other hand, that officer knows that it's
a matter of detaining that child, and he, or he in combination
with the Juvenile Probation Department, has to get on the
phone and ring up a number of different detention facilities
-?-06
1
..., 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
""° 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
38
that are certified -- some of them may be fairly close, some
to go through that entire drill. And I doubt seriously that
going to tell you, "We're going to enforce the law if we've
got to carry that child 500 miles or 5 miles." I would submit
that that's not entirely accurate; it's disingenuous if they
say that.
That being the case, what happens to your juvenile
justice system? Well, your juvenile justice system is not
nearly as effective. And if your juvenile justice system is
not nearly as effective, you've got a bigger burden on your
adult criminal justice system, and when they get into the
adult criminal justice system, the likelihood of -- of saving
those individuals is a whole lot less than when they're
juveniles. When they're children, they're more susceptible to
change, rehabilitation. You can put them through programs
that will keep them from being permanently scarred with a
criminal record, which makes their opportunities for the
future a whole lot more expansive. If they go into the adult
criminal justice system, the likelihood that you're going to
9-3 Gti
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
""` 2 4
25
39
lose them and they're going to be in your adult jails and
incarceration facilities is much greater. Their recidivism is
much greater. The rehabilitation programs in the adult system
are slim to nonexistent. Basically, they're warehoused. The
penal people will not necessarily tell you that, but they'll
tell you they don't have enough facilities for substance abuse
programs, where a lot of this problem is.
These children that you have failed to rehabilitate
Their opportunities for employment are -- are greatly reduced.
You end up picking up their lawyer's bills in their adult
criminal cases. You end up providing social services to the
now dependents that they have; the wives, the children. It's
kind of like the Fram commercial; you pay me now or you pay me
later. Without an effective juvenile justice system, I think
you're creating a tremendous problem in the adult system. I
can understand taxpayers wanting to look at the short term and
say, "I don't care what it's going to cost three years from
now or 13 years from now. I know what it's going to cost me
today." The cost is out there. It's going to have to be
incurred sometime. I strongly believe that if you pay the
cost up front, your overall cost is much, much less if you do
it on the juvenile justice end of the equation.
I
Ms. Harris has done yeoman's work out there in
bringing about some positive changes in a whole lot of kids,
a ~-06
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~"~ 13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
r 29
25
and the people of this community and of the state of Texas who
have placed their children out there, or others who have
placed them out there owe her a tremendous debt of gratitude.
There have been children leave out there that really weren't
particularly happy to go, contrary to what you might think,
and it's because of the experience they had out there. And
that's the kind of positive things that you're trying to
accomplish in the juvenile justice system. It's not all the
children's fault. True, the children commit the acts that
bring them into the juvenile justice system, but when you look
at the overall aspect of juvenile justice, you're looking at
mostly single-parent families; you're looking at situations
where that single parent, or maybe both parents, if there's
two, are merely scrambling to make it through the day.
They're not worried about the end of the month. That's way
out in the future. They're worried about today and this week.
They may or may not have transportation. They take things for
granted -- or we take things for granted that they struggle
with on a daily basis, but they're products -- the children
are products of this sort of environment.
And Ms. Harris and her staff -- I apologize for
omitting omitting the staff, because they're an integral part
of what goes on out there -- have done a fabulous, fabulous
job. And I know Ms. Harris is going to do well wherever she
goes, because she's committed to the mission, the concept, and
9-i-46
41
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
the betterment of children, and that's her niche. She's found
it, and I don't think she's going to end up anywhere else and
be happy. But she and her staff have made it happen out
there. I hate to see -- I hate to see at least one aspect of
-- of our future, that being the children of this community,
this state, this area, be pawns in an economic battle, but
that's what it's come down to. And that's all we're talking
about, folks, is economics. And that ought not be the
measure. But apparently it's become that, and I regret it,
and I think we're going to suffer some ill effects as a result
of it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, are you saying that we --
in your opinion, we should keep it open as-is? And try to --
JUDGE TINLEY: The only way I would recommend that
we keep it open as-is, Commissioner, is if this Court will
make a commitment to fund the operation of that facility and
then back away and not continually thereafter, on a frequent
basis, try and second-guess, voice concerns on whether or not
we made the correct decision or not the correct decision.
That is what has prevented that facility from improving in the
last several months. Juvenile detention officers around the
state are not going to place a child at that facility on a
long-term -- that's six-month or longer -- program if they
keep hearing rumblings that, well, it may close next month,
two months, three months. If that Chief Probation Officer
~ ; oa
42
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
that's responsible for placing that child has any inkling that
he or she may have to come back to this facility, pick up that
child in two or three months, and then maybe re-place that
child in another program, possibly starting that child all
over in the program, we're not going to get the increase.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're not going to blame
this Commissioners Court for the problem out there, I'm sorry.
I -- I disagree with you 100 percent. And what you're saying
is it's this Court's fault that -- that that facility failed
out there. Untrue. Major untrue. We have Kerr County
children out there, and in the post program we've averaged
four a day for a year, and pre-adjudicated, we've averaged
seven. We're dealing with Kerr County kids here. Four and
seven, very small numbers. All those other numbers that come
in are out-of-county that we -- the taxpayers of this county
subsidize other counties to keep this facility open, and that
doesn't work.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In addition to what
Commissioner Baldwin is saying, I don't believe the economic
climate in this arena is conducive to -- for Kerr County to
consider running a facility on a full-blown pre-,
post-adjudicated format. I believe, and I can, in my own
mind, justify cutting it back to a pre-adjudicated facility.
I can also -- I can also see an opportunity for us to examine
our per diem cost and our charges. I don't know that it's
4-j-oF
43
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
lq
20
21
22
23
29
25
particularly unrealistic for us to tell our neighboring
counties that if they're going to send their pre-adjudicated
kids here, the cost to do so is cost plus administrative fee,
'cause costs continue to escalate, and there's no reason why
we should bear the administrative costs or we should bear the
additional cost. I believe that's quite appropriate. And I
think you can apply that on a pre-adjudicated basis only. We
can talk all we want to talk, and we can continue to talk, but
I'm going to offer a motion; we can talk to the motion.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I just -- let me say that
he almost has talked me into not supporting his proposal. If
-- if we're going to shut that thing down, we ought to shut it
down today, not in September. If there's no chance that it's
going to be economically viable for the '05-'07 year, then we
ought to make a decision now to do something different.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think it's an issue of
system to provide, you know, some sort of a setting, so I -- I
mean, I can't see the day that I will support not having a
pre-adjudicated facility in Kerr County. I'm not sure that's
where it needs to be, is out there at those two buildings. I
think we're forcing that to be our facility 'cause we own it.
That's why I'd like to look at other options for that
9-~-nE
44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
facility, and possibly selling it, getting rid of that
long-term debt that we are saddled with out there, and maybe
look at some other options for a much smaller facility that
only houses Kerr County pre-adjudicated kids. I do like --
and I would like to see -- I presume Mr. Stanton's going to be
the one overseeing this operation. I'd like to have a good
analysis of what Commissioner Williams said. I think it's
very viable. If the other counties aren't willing to pay the
costs, the true cost of that facility, I don't want their
kids. Let them put them somewhere else. It's not right for
the taxpayers of this county. If they're willing to help pay
the true cost, yeah, that's fine; I'll be glad to help the
local counties right around us. But, you know, if it benefits
us, let's do it, but if it's not a benefit to the taxpayers
and to Kerr County, I don't see any reason why we should
continue down that road.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I've got one more
question before Bill gets into the discussion here. It seems
like that everyone kind of agrees that the pro -- Juvenile
Probation Department take over the program; that means
Mr. Stanton. Do you know the feelings -- or what is the
feelings of the Juvenile Board about that happening? About
Mr. Stanton taking over the program?
DODGE TINLEY: Couldn't tell you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're the chairman of that
4-3 i G
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-- I mean, you're part of the board.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm, yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is your -- what do you
think? I mean, do you have any problem with Mr. Stanton
taking over the program?
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Stanton taking over the operation
of the juvenile facility?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
DODGE TINLEY: No, I don't have a problem with that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Okay. I would think
the rest of your board, then, would probably follow suit. I
would think they would. So -- you know, I think that's a
major deal. I'd hate to see us get too far down the road, and
then the Juvenile Board decides, you know, "Time out, we're
not going to allow that to happen." It needs to be on the
table to talk about at least.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's why I think we need -- I
mean, I think we need to set a direction and we need their
concurrence, really, because Mr. Stanton -- he's -- isn't he
one of those that kind of reports to them?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. Not to us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I mean, I think we get into
a situation that we need to either sit down with the Juvenile
Board as a whole and kind of go over how this is going to work
out. Because, I mean, I think you're very right, Commissioner
9-3 nt,
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
46
Baldwin; we don't want the Juvenile Board going one direction
and us going another direction. A number of ideas, you know,
for anything to do with the operations out there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, the operation's going
to be operated under T.J.P.C. regulations. Whether it's pre
or post, we're not going to have any say about that. And any
programming that comes down the line, it has to be looked over
by the County Judge and the two District Judges. It's going
to be looked over by those people without any say from us. I
see what our say is, is the direction and the economics of it, I
and I think that's what we're basically talking about today.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And I think
operations -- I mean, I guess the -- the relationship between
this Court and the Juvenile Board stays consistent, is what it
currently is. That's our facility, and they do their
operational part with the justice system.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Baldwin, was your
I question does the Juvenile Board -- are they inclined to want
to operate this facility? Is that what your --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Was that your question?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay, I just wanted to make
sure I didn't misunderstand.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. I ask goofy questions
9-~-n r,
1
3
4
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
23
24
25
47
sometimes, but that's not amongst them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would move that the Kerr
County Juvenile Detention Facility be converted to a
pre-adjudicated facility only, under the supervision of the
Juvenile Probation Department, and that within a reasonable
period of time, the Juvenile Probation Department move its
operation to the new annex building, and in the meantime, we
examine alternatives for the uti]ization of the old building.
The staffing would be as set forth by the T. J.P.C.
regulations, and Mr. Stanton would be heading that up and will
be making those decisions. I would also like the motion to
incorporate a complete examination of the cost to incarcerate
a juvenile on a pre-adjudicated basis, and determine the exact
cost and what, if any, reasonable addition to that cost can or
should be charged to other counties who send their children
here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Before I second that, I have
a question. Tell me more about what counties that we receive
kids from. What counties?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Typically, they're our
neighboring or contiguous counties. Is that correct, Kevin or
Becky? Whomever.
MS. HARRIS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Typically, they're our
contiguous hill country counties.
4-3-tin
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 BALDWIN: So, we're talking about Kerr
County and contiguous counties to Kerr County?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Kendall, Bandera, Gillespie,
Kimble perhaps. Where else? In the hill country.
MS. HARRIS: Menard, McCullough, Mason, and Kimble
County are all in the same judicial district, taken care of by
one probation officer.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not contiguous to Kerr
County.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Hill country.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now we're hill country; now
we're down to south Texas.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You can frame it as "same
judicial district."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judicial district? Uvalde is
not part of that.
MS. HARRIS: Uvalde and Val Verde have consistently
sent us kids, so that would be --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On a pre-adjudicated basis?
MS. HARRIS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we need to know. I'd
like to know before I vote on that, what -- exactly what we're
talking about.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let me -- do you want to second
9 - i - '1 6
49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it? I mean, we can discuss this after the second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure, I'll second the motion.
MR. STANTON: Could I say something real quick?
JUDGE TINLEY: Just a minute.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Kevin?
MR. STANTON: I don't know if it's the -- you guys
will know the answer to this a lot better than I would, but do
we need to put in the motion also something that's contingent
on the Juvenile Board's approval?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If that's required.
MR. STANTON: Or the Juvenile Board's agreement?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If they don't approve it,
this motion's downhill anyway.
MR. STANTON: I know. That's what I'm --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If that's a requirement, I'm
certainly amenable to that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess, going to Commissioner
Baldwin's question, is to me, we -- my thought is we have the
minimum staffing that we need to have out there, and then we
keep whatever -- you know, if that allows us to have 16 kids,
then I want 16 kids in there. I don't care really where they
come from, as long as they're paying their -- their cost, the
true cost. If they're not paying their true cost, I don't
want any of them. I'm not going to subsidize any county. So,
I look at -- I like -- I really want to follow what
4-3 ii h
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Commissioner Williams said. If they're not willing to pay,
you know, their -- the true costs out there, why should we
house -- I don't care if they're adjacent or not. If they're
willing to pay their -- the true cost out there, then I would
take, I mean, preference to the contiguous counties, but then
I'd want to keep it as full as possible.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Are you going to go --
what happens when the 17th kid comes in?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't increase staffing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're full.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're full.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You don't accept the 17th
kid?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hmm-mm. Then you have to add
another group of staff. I want to keep it at the minimum
staffing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which is all Kerr County needs.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Now, if they're -- if
it's full of Del Rio people, and we have a -- we have a
Kerrville kid --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Del Rio kid goes home.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Del Rio kids go home.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the Kerr County kid goes in.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I mean, is that -- I
a-~-o~
51
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
L 1
22
23
24
25
understand that, and I like it. Is that clear with everybody,
though? I mean --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It'll be clear if we make it
I clear.
MR. STANTON: I think the one thing is, if we're
I
going to -- if the juvenile -- if the Commissioners Court is
going to go by what was presented as far as the budget goes
there, that budget includes enough staffing -- levels of
staffing that you could -- if you had to go up to 24 kids,
it's one for eight. And there's three certified JDO's on
staff, so you're talking that you can realistically go up to
24 kids.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I guess my view is, we're
never going to have 24 Kerr County -- I say never. Hopefully
we'll never have 24 Kerr County kids out there, and if there's
any kind of subsidy or break-even, we're not going up to that
staffing level.
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we're talking -- if we can
make $5 a kid, well, yes, I don't mind going up to 24 then,
but we're not going to do it when we're losing money.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you, we average --
last year we averaged seven pre-adjudicated kids.
MR. STANTON: Kerr County, pre-adjudicated. Kerr
County kids, yes, sir.
4-3 0h
52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Kevin, can you come up here
closer, please?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
i COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, so, you're -- what
you're saying is your budget numbers will cover those seven,
I
and up to --
MR. STANTON: 24.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- 24?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Why not 16?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why not 16?
MR. STANTON: You have to have -- excuse me. You
have to have a male and female JDO in my -- you have to have
at ]east those two. If you're going to staff two wings,
you're going to have a male and female in each wing; you're
going to have to have another JDO acting as a shift supervisor
or something to relieve those JDO's when the they need
something, also to conduct intakes and do those types of
things that have to be done. Plus you're going to have to
have somebody in the control room, control room operator. So,
that leaves the three JDO's plus the control room operator.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, it could be staffed for
16 if it was one gender, but not if it's both genders?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If it's going to be both
genders, you staff for 24, same as 16?
u-~~-n~
53
1
3
4
5
6
7
R
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Is that right?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask one more question.
Then I'll -- let me ask you one more question; then I'm about
through.
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir, sorry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The State requires one
employee per juvenile -- per eight juveniles in the daytime
hours?
MR. STANTON: During programming hours, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Programming hours.
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And one employee per 18
during the non-program hours?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir, I believe so.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, one employee per eight
juveniles in the program hours, and we average seven a day.
MR. STANTON: Kerr County, yes, sir. Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I may have to back off
my second. I don't know that I want to branch out into this
big thing. I just -- my mind has been on Kerr County only,
and we're averaging seven people a day.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But if we're making -- if our --
if we are charging more than it's costing us or equal to what
a-~-or,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
lti
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
54
it's costing us, that's my only condition for going beyond
Kerr County kids, period. I mean, I don't want to subsidize
i any other county.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Neither do I.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I mean, I think that -- you
know, as long as that is part of the motion, I'm not --
staffing is not critical.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What was the motion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The motion didn't
contemplate staffing level. The motion contemplates changing
i our format to pre-adjudicated only. The State determines the
staffing levels. And I think part of the question is,
whatever the minimum staffing is, you're going to be able to
take from zero up to -- what is it, Kevin? Minimum staffing?
MR. STANTON: One to eight.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One to eight. You're going
to be able to take eight. Well, then, whether there are eight
Kerr County kids or two Kerr County kids and six Bandera kids,
the State's going to require you to have "X" number of people
to look over eight juveniles in the facility, so to me, it
doesn't make any difference.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, for our --
for our seven children, given that there's both, in that
seven, boys and girls, we can staff -- we have to staff for 24
a-s-ub
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
55
to staff for the seven.
~ COMMISSIONER LETZ: Have to staff for 16.
MR. STANTON: Have to staff for 16.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Have to have for -- we have up
to eight boys and up to eight girls, right?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: With a minimum staffing.
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's what I want.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And that's the way the
building lays out; am I correct?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The sleeping dorms are in
units of eight?
MR, STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's more a function of
the building than it is anything.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, to me, that's the staffing
level that I want. And then if we can, you know, break even
or, you know, make some money on the contiguous counties,
that's fine. But for Kerr County kids, unless we're doing
that, it's eight and eight, to me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. My second stands.
JODGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do we need to add the caveat
~-s-a~,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
56
that Mr. Stanton suggested with respect to the Juvenile Board
weighing in in a positive fashion, Judge? If so, I accept
that amendment.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know what difference
it's going to make, 'cause if they don't -- if they -- the
Juvenile Board doesn't go along with it, this motion's over
anyway,
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Back to square one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Meaningless. Yeah, whatever.
JUDGE TINLEY: Are you including that as part of
your motion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Zf you believe it's an
appropriate inclusion, I'm amenable to it,
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm not sure I have any belief one
way or the other. I'm kind of like Commissioner Baldwin; not
sure it'll work if there's -- I
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't need it. My only other
-- it's more of a -- I don't know; it's more of a statement.
At our next Commissioners Court meeting, I would like
Mr. Stanton to come in and kind of go over his organization in
a little bit more detail as to exactly how -- you know, what's
going on out there, and -- I mean, I know we have your
proposal, but just go over it as to this is what you've done
or plan to do once Ms. Harris' effective date's over.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's also another caveat
9-3-Ofi
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
57
in terms of the disbursement of juveniles that have to be
returned to their counties. I'm not sure what that's all
about.
MS. HARRIS: I would -- I would ask the Court, these
people are the ones that work with them and got them to this
point. I request that while I'm still here, we can get the
I post-adjudicated kids -- arrangements made to be taken back to
I their counties while I'm still here, and so the staff can have
~ closure with those kids. And by my last day, there will no i
longer be any post kids, and that way, too, the therapist can
close out their therapy files. And those files will have to ~
I
be archived, and they're archived in an annex building. So,
I'd appreciate if we were allowed to do that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's a reasonable
request.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: Absolutely. Any other questions or
comments on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify
by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. That's all we
have on the agenda, so we will stand adjourned.
9-3-or
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
58
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 9:48 a.m.)
STATE OF TEXAS ~
COUCSTY 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 4th day of
April, 2006.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
BY: _ __ ~i
Kathy nik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
9 -ot,
ORDER NO. 29623
DISCUSS EASEMENT VARIANCES
Came to be heard this the 3rd day of April, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Grant the Environmental Health Department the authority to approve or
disapprove the encroachment into the utility easement, that they all appear
before each Commissioner before it is totally approved, and as long as the
homeowners' association and the utilities issue written releases.
-- ORDER NO. 29624
OPERATION OF KERB COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY
Came to be heard this the 3rd day of April, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Convert the Kerr County Juvenile Detention Facility to apre-adjudicated
facility only, under the supervision of the Juvenile Probation Department,
that within a reasonable period of time, the Juvenile Probation Department
move its operation to the new annex building, and that in the meantime, we
examine alternatives for the utilization of the old building. The staffing
... would be as set forth by the T.J.P.C. regulations, and Mr. Kevin Stanton will
head up that and will be making those decisions. Also, incorporate a
complete examination of the cost to incarcerate a juvenile on a pre-
adjudicated basis, and determine the exact cost and what, if any, reasonable
addition to that cost can or should be charged to other counties who send
their children here.